I find there are different kinds of texts; those that are straightfwd/literal, vs those that need be "eaten-digested" and thus absorbed (not to "figure-out" but the process of going through, allows its meaning to seep-in and rise-up).
This text I find to be the one published by BALG like this (much as the works of Castaneda, and even Crowley, are glossed in this way).
[quote=āBarskevilles Dog, post:1, topic:5592ā]Iam really interested and I think Ill try to find one copy of Necromantic Sorcery.
Has anyone tried any type of rite from Danteās Book? If so give us a feedback.[/quote]
Interestingly I was just recently going over the book again- outlining parts from. [on a skim-level, it could almost seen that there are different-parts, like chapters were written in different "author's voices".. and then pasted-stapled together.. but not only are there different layers/lvls/contexts.. but the weaving of them, the <shift>s hint towards what if just taken each literally.. would miss. -both in the bk, as well as in the interviews/videos, it is mentioned explicitly that the rites are not merely a metaphor, but not to do-them-literally as presented.. ]
anyway- just happened to sign back in forum, and saw this, and some other posts (like one on the Necronomicon... stories about the stories, tapping the current-flows is tricky.. and can have movement in the dark-depths.) in Dante's text, there are a couple of tales-legend/myths? which provide an interesting key(s)...
So I am glad for my copy, and Iād be curious someday to speak with the author about itā¦ but my own experiences have gone on a few pathsā¦
Iād be cautious about combining it with else (especially the other straightfwd, walk in and do methods- āintroductionsā easing in Iād say is necessary), and also be cautious about assuming what is meant from a word usedā¦ then relating that to other ideas for that wordā¦ and then linking a āunderstandingā (although Iād hope those might be taken in to mind in more cases.) - (~i.e. sorcery can be said to be a "full-contact sport)ā¦
< above may not be the sort of tales-of-power sought, but may be of more use? -I find some thing that is more distinctly recognized, and integratableā¦ is a smaller change; while a true-change, sort of knock the box, disrupts the house. >
for ex- Climbing the Treeā¦ is ānotā the usual recent books that re-work/re-present the K.Grant related QLpht āladder-stepsā ā¦ rather a Lwa which itself is what links realmsā¦
-also the Invocation of Death Essence, also being (becoming- more of a singularity expression of an Other) different than may be assumed.
(oft it is figured, just translate the common-meaning of the words used to describe, and that reveals- if so, why need all the words in chapters and description? in most cases a "special use of words" SophisticatedCode to use the Rhetoric vocab.. - but, perhaps I'm reading into it? but the using of a word, and then defining it differently, that contrast creates an AHA itself than can reveal another pt-of-view (perspective-reveal)
the perfect possession by a 1,000 (Many of these chapter-names and/or the ritual-working names, I think were hyped a bit to sound 'epic'.. ie- that one doesn't seem to be imply actually a thousand... rather an uncountable number- many, and yet a distinctly finite.. like a crowd, a mob.. seeing them, as they see out through you(r eyes), and 'they' each see into-you, and each other (not sure about that last sentence, writing this recalls the internal-morphing each triggered, and re-triggers)
the first section- has some pop-necro type writingsā¦ but within that first part are a few āformulaeāā¦ but otherwise I think that was just to āget-goingā and smoke-screenā¦ then it enters Order of the 13th Judgement (which steps are demanding quite a bit of prereq skill- able to see in Vision/exper in Rapture, in the Xrds and in the Room at once-- as a beginning to link āhereā and āthereāā¦ and not lose that focus, when contacting and inviting in, the Being involvedā¦ each in seq) -just that section alone is curious (espec. depending upon if one just takes some of the more extreme items as literalā¦ and yet if challenge some of the more extreme to re-interpā¦ then likewise re-interp/under-stand the whole likewise).
anyway- just to affirm prior comments here- it is different than, but also less accessible perhaps?
(like giving a Divination method of Ouija, or even Skrying in fire or water or āmirrorāā¦ letter and visuals- largely literal; if can see (could be tricky) then just interpā¦
but contrast that to Divination of Runes, or even Tarot (if understood as image-Arche), even Astrologyā¦ not just how-toā¦ but then they need become alive (both Tarot and Iching, as Iāve learned, have this skrying/gateway peeking through the āwindowā as well as a āportalā whence Visitor-guest/informants? pass to you throughā¦ although some writings teach each as look up the meaning of the Tarot or hexagrams (respectively) in a glossary and assemble -to each their ownā¦ (that way though one can sit down and try itā¦ the other way, takes a while, and even once you get-it, you canāt then explain it to another in literal words)
anyway- perhaps this was way too many words- just a poem in the night cast to the listening shadows.
==========
(edit: part of comments in above is in ref to some of the described actions I would not do- others, seems more is impliedā¦ either way- I have actually benefited each time Iāve gone back to itā¦ more layers to peelā¦ I like the writing style also (not only āread-ableā but very different styles, almost, but not quite, as if different authors- at least in diff. writing-head-space(s))
good luck in your seeking-hunt for a copy (I know Iāll be holding mine) -cheers