The Necessity Of Planteary Hours In G.d Based Work. Options

Not sure if I got that Poll thingy right... online democracy is a fickle business (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Anyway... have been back at the J.Lewiski books again, namely Kabbalistic Handbook, after a brief talk with a friend of mine about the use of planetary hours resulted in his saying that they're not nessary although perhaps useful for Planetary based work, not element based or basic stuff.

The more I read into J.Lewiskis stuff the more I warm to his critique of the G.D and what he calls, ''new age'' schools of thought. As I take my practice VERY seriously I would like to keep my practice within the relevant hours but find that I can't and it irks with me. Since being told that they're not nessary my ego has taken to this advice in order to supplment my twice a day morning and evening practice which wasn't possible before and I regret it. Still, I have noticed that I have had many sucessful rituals outside of given P.Hours and the fact that theres no given system for their calculation only detracts from their importance.... there no mention of their use in the G.D text and no one seems to mention them at all, not Regardie or any of the others.... so... how nessary do people feel they are?

Peace
.M.

This post has been edited by Mchawi: Dec 13 2008, 08:11 AM

Okay, let me say first of all that my ceremonial magick is a kind of bastardized Golden Dawn variety based around the same essential premises but modified to be more kabbalistically oriented - both G.D. and Lisiewski's kabbalah is internally inconsistent in my opinion, I prefer Suares' kabbalah personally, however the application element of G.D. I find elegant to a point. I use a system similar to lisiewski's, but in the past I've thought of it in two ways.

Now, that said, I think that planetary hours are not critical, but certainly very useful. I've done my work on the hour, and off the hour and seen a wide difference in results - and there is a system, the chaldeans had one. It's based on a sun dial, so it is about dividing the day light into 12 equal parts, like Lisiewski suggests. As for the planets, it is nearly impossible to say if, cosmically, there is a correlation between the days of the week and the movement of the seven classical planets of the chaldeans. So, I think of it like this - whether the moon-day and monday are chronologically consistent or not, a single Lunar cycle (remember that ancient cultures were mostly moon based) is 28 days long. 28 is divided into equal parts by... 7. This is going from New Moon to New Moon and not counting the night of the new moon itself - 28 days between them. Although there was more than likely heavy significance on the full moon, you might imagine that the absence of the moon would preclude any assignment of a planet to that day. The following day would mark the return of the moon and would have been celebrated by making that day the day of the moon - monday. Then, the order probably continues according to the apparent distance of the heavenly bodies. Moon, mars, mercury, venus, jupiter, saturn, with the sun both next to and at the opposite end of the order, being opposites principally and yet the two most visible objects in the heavens. The hours would more than likely follow the same order, and begin with the rising of the moon rather than the rising of the sun. See, the moon may give light, make crops grow, but as far as the chaldeans can tell, the moon governs everything from the mentstrual cycles of their women, to the timing that crops can grow, to natural disasters and almost everything else. This is a sort of speculation based on general principles found in most ancient cultures - different as they might have been, the same cosmic events were significant to everyone, many times in the same ways.

Now, there is a second view, which doesn't alter our calendar so much, which is that it is a matter of the 'tone' of the human psyche collectively from day to day, and the sympathy that psyche creates with the archetypal planetary energies - for so long Monday has been associated with the moon that deep down people's psyches, for the most part, tend to simply sympathize with the lunar current on that day, making that energy more available on the day of the moon. And so on with mars and tuesday, etc. There is no logic to planetary hours in this paradigm, however there is the idea of a sort of fractal dynamic going on - a cycle, broken up into cyclicle parts reflecting the greater cycle, and probably so on down to a point that you could practice in the day, hour, and minute of, say, the moon. This does suggest that the 'planetary hours' are basically an invention of the human imagination, however, supported by that imagination in turn.

Best way to tell which is more accurate is to observe people. These were the two views that I struggled with initially. How do you feel today, if you simply allow yourself to open up to and move in harmony with the ambient energy of the day? Compare what you feel with the energy to identify as that of mars. Also, compare it with the energy of saturn. Which one seems more present today? As impossible as it sounds, I believe it is possible to sympathize with one or the other - in other words, both currents may be present. There may be a system, and the ancient cultures with their various - but very similar - systems may have had it right and that order of currents may persist through today, and there may also be the tonus of the collective psychic field living beings generate. They may interact. And, an individual may be more sympathetic to the 'system' of the ancients, or to the collective of the living beings here.

Now, like I said the system I use is similar to lisiewski's, partially because of eclesiastes chapter three, the one about "a time to plant and a time to reap, etc." - there are seven times mentioned, associated with seven doubles of the hebrew alphabet. There are also twelve elementals in that alphabet, and three mothers, as you're probably familiar by now. Seven doubles - seven days and nights. Twelve elementals - twelve months. Three mothers - Three kinds of seasons. Following a typical kabbalistic current, it seems to me that these show an 'outward' expression of time, but that there is an inward expression implied as well, as all kabbalistic elements involve a dual energy flow. Hence, seven days, twelve hours, and three phases of the hour. As it happens, the system of the tattvic tides in the Vedic tradition recognizes a 'tidal' shift every 20 minutes. Interestingly, while the Vedic tradition recognizes 5 elements, the Kabbalistic system only recognizes 3 - fire, water, and air. All this just to say, kabbalistically there is a logic to the system of planetary days and hours, although the hours I would associated more with the signs of the zodiac than the planets. I tend to look at the 'appropriate' hour, and the astrological weather of that hour.

Now the important part is the difference in results. Using the kabbalistic system similar in principle to lisiewski's, I can say that in my own practice, I find working with the planetary hours to be the difference between lighting a fire in dry kindling, and trying to do the same on a foggy day using fresh moss. The conditions simply 'feel' right, the intention behind the work is more easily expressed, and I find myself more 'in the mood' for that particular kind of work. Not only this, but the results I get tend to be, shall we say, more in harmony. When I work outside the astrological currents and philosophical system of days and hours, I find that I have to 'force it' more, and that perhaps as a consequence of that, or perhaps all together as a consequence of working outside the system, I find that the results I get tend to be choppy, unfocused, and sometimes violently erratic.

After several attempts both ways I decided that depending on the nature and magnitude of the work in question, for me personally I prefer to use the planetary days and hours, although I spend a great deal of time analysing the days and hours and looking into the various traditions among ancient cultures reflecting that, so far as they have been preserved or rediscovered. The system that I finally settled on is more related to the hebrew alphabet than simply the seven planets, but works quite well for me. Perhaps it is simply one aspect of my 'subjective synthesis' as lisiewski likes to call it, others call it a paradigm, which makes the facilitation of that transformation from intention to reality more smooth.

However, I do not believe that this necessarily makes it universally necessary. I believe a more structured system can benefit from structure such as this, but a less structured system, perhaps would be hindered. Difficult to say.

peace