/lit/ - Literature

>>22713513
Its important to conceptualize that occult has been more of less fraudelent for at least a few hundred years. A lot of people who have been elevated in the status of an occultists were at best larpers, at worst well poisoners; and unlike today, when you can practically tell that it's a grift or some CIA-create-more-noise-to-signal-ratio goon, it's way harder to see the fraud in older works. I guess old Vatican should get some credit for that, they really did make CIA's current job seem almost sloppy and second hand, and that was centuries ago - back when people were supposed to be "simpler".

First of all:
>>22717658
>>22717744

People like these are either well poisoners or are useful idiots who've bought into the fraud. The names, the jargon he's talking outs him as such. You should absolutely not start there. It's up to you of course, after all I can't walk this journey for you, but if you're truly serious and want to use it as an actual learning experience rather than some fedora-tipping-atheist "dabbing" on them 'foolish' non-materialists, then symbolism and deep history is where you should start. There are hidden meanings everywhere, even in most mundane things, it's a sort of secret language that you need to understand.

>What do I read then?
If you want a true introduction into occult, there isn't one - you're supposed to wander lost in the woods for years if not decades before it finally clicks. The closest thing that will somewhat bring you up to speed in a practical fashion is "Spirit Whirled: Dead Phoenecians" by Dylan Saccoccio. Do take note that it's somewhat advanced and a lot of it will fly over your head, but it does shed some light on actual meat and potatos; not this kiddie "drink your own pee" or draw circles of blood and fecal matter to summon some demon entity to sell your soul to. I haven't read his other books since most of it was something knew from before, but he managed to cram it nicely.

It ain't what you think it will be.