Talk:Shemhamphorasch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Creation
User:Johngagon 2006 07 26 Created.
[edit] Citations Needed
To keep this a quality, neutral informative article, I need to rate and cite appropriately. I'm still in the process of rating my sources and looking for consensus and congruence amongst the myriad of sources on this topic. I am only one of many students on the topic but I am one that is not associated with any particular group practicing with it. I would like to take out some of the organizational ties and opinions separate or linked instead of embedded and conform with wikipedia standards here.
[edit] Comment re tarot section and sources
The attribution of Shemhamphorasch to the tarot is not due to Crowley.
Crowley lifted the attribution from the Golden Dawn's Book T (renamed Liber 78 by Crowley when published in the Equinox).
The Golden Dawn were not first to attribute Shemhamphorasch to the tarot - Eliphas Levi did it before them, in Clefs Majeures et Clavicules de Salomon (http://www.tarot.org.il/Library/Levi/Clavicules%20de%20Salomon.pdf)
[edit] Redirect
Thanks to Ricky for getting a mergeto on the other page. I didn't want the redirect to negate the presence of the other article. (still new). I would like to make redirects for the other spellings though since those spellings articles don't exist. The mergefrom I added needed that other page to get a mergeto but I had a hard time finding it after my accidental redirect. Thanks again.
[edit] Eliphas Levi's Decans
Regarding origination with Eliphas Levi...I agree and thanks for adding that.
It isn't clear to me whether or not the Aces or 10s were removed. Based on the table added to the article, the aces were removed but based on one of the sources I listed, it says that Eliphas Levi removed the 10s. Either way, there are 4 suits x 9 minor arcana cards to assign to half the Shemhamphorash (attributing 2 angels to each decan). http://www.tarot.org.il/Seventy%20Two/.
(a note to self: get all the spellings mapped/forwarding to help all other 'seekers' of the shemhamphorasch) Johngagon 08:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Corrupted angel names?
The table under Shemhamphorasch#Angels and Demons gives the angel names as transliterations of the three-letter names, without the endings -el, -iah, etc. That's fine, but in a few cases the transliteration seems obviously wrong. These cases are:
- 27: YLTh → Yereth (shouldn't it be Yeleth?)
- 48: MIY → Milah (shouldn't this be Miah?)
- 55: MBH → Mabeth (shouldn't this be Mabeh?)
- 61: VMK → Vameth (shouldn't this be Vamek?)
- 67: AIO → Asau (shouldn't this be Aiau?)
- 70: IBM → Yekem (shouldn't this be Yebem?)
Does anyone have an explanation? Or should I correct these?
I also note that Menak (66) has transliterated Quf as a 'k', not as a 'q' as elsewhere in the list. I would suggest the spelling "Menaq" for clarity and consistency. Fuzzypeg☻ 21:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- By the way, what are the stars on some of the names for? There is no note down the bottom to explain this! Fuzzypeg☻ 21:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] J. J. Hurtak's god-names
INFORMED1212 has edited the angel names and please do not place back on this the names from Adonai Yahweh to Zohar Haddah ... as these are not angel names but names illegally taken from a book from by J.J. Hurtak. These are not names that are traditional nor are they simply names in the Bible (as is) so to continue to place them on this page is not only incorrect as they do not represent what you are saying but they are illegal. If I see them on there again I will try to reach the editors of Wikipedia directly. Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Informed1212 (talk • contribs).
- Right. From what I can see Hurtak is a fairly ideosynchratic author and these names are not representative of any significant tradition, but are based on his own experiences. Rather than adding the names back with a citation I concur that it is more appropriate to leave them out. Quoting information and ideas from a book is not necessarily illegal. In this situation it wouldn't be illegal, although it would require a citation. But I don't think it's notable information, so we'll leave it out of the article. Fuzzypeg☻ 01:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. The actual "Names of God" are primarily the angel derived names. It could be noted perhaps as a citation footnote that "other names of God" in the same "quantity" can be found and are sometimes mentioned (I've seen) offline amongst some members of the occult when discussing this topic. Johngagon 10:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removing columns
Please don't remove large amounts of detail without first discussing. Thank you.
Johngagon 16:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
