Learning about ritual magic

[Kal Eldritch]

Henry Dorsett Case

Sovereign of Darkness

I didn't see the Zohar there though confused

I can see a few reasons for that. First off, the Zohar is not a work on magic or Judaic occult - it's a (likely pseudepigraphic) mystical commentary on the Torah. It's no more a work on ceremonial magic than Pseudo-Dionysus' treatise The Celestial Hierarchy involved the evocation/invocation of the angels it described.

Second, some Kabbalists reject the Zohar, as it cannot be definitively dated past its "discovery" in the thirteenth century (and in fact, apparently shows traces of having been composed in the 13th century), though it gained widespread acceptance in many circles. Unless you're Rav Berg, in which case the Zohar was composed over 2,000 years ago and had nearly disappeared from the world until you single-handedly brought it back to light. I do have to admit I'm appreciative of the fact that what appears to be the whole thing is available online, though, Berg's twitchiness aside. But yeah, it's a controversial and not necessarily essential text (rather like the Slavonic Enoch in Christianity).

Third...have you ever seen the Zohar? It's freaking huge. The English translation is 23 sturdy volumes.

No, I can't say that I've seen the actual unabridged version of the Zohar. The only reason I included it is because I know that a lot of people consider it to be a part of Kabbalah. If you're going to understand a faith's rituals, it's important to understand the faith, isn't it?  

[TeaDidikai]

Sovereign of Darkness

Henry Dorsett Case

Sovereign of Darkness

I didn't see the Zohar there though confused

I can see a few reasons for that. First off, the Zohar is not a work on magic or Judaic occult - it's a (likely pseudepigraphic) mystical commentary on the Torah. It's no more a work on ceremonial magic than Pseudo-Dionysus' treatise The Celestial Hierarchy involved the evocation/invocation of the angels it described.

Second, some Kabbalists reject the Zohar, as it cannot be definitively dated past its "discovery" in the thirteenth century (and in fact, apparently shows traces of having been composed in the 13th century), though it gained widespread acceptance in many circles. Unless you're Rav Berg, in which case the Zohar was composed over 2,000 years ago and had nearly disappeared from the world until you single-handedly brought it back to light. I do have to admit I'm appreciative of the fact that what appears to be the whole thing is available online, though, Berg's twitchiness aside. But yeah, it's a controversial and not necessarily essential text (rather like the Slavonic Enoch in Christianity).

Third...have you ever seen the Zohar? It's freaking huge. The English translation is 23 sturdy volumes.

No, I can't say that I've seen the actual unabridged version of the Zohar. The only reason I included it is because I know that a lot of people consider it to be a part of Kabbalah. If you're going to understand a faith's rituals, it's important to understand the faith, isn't it?

I tend to include it myself. Learning to think in the context of mysticism can be a huge boon to people who work in CM, especially any tradition that stems from the Jewish faith (which- let's face it, even the most barstaridzed CM does stem from Judaism).