system
A chat on 4chan
human
To be a magician, it is not sufficient to be familiar with the concepts; rather you need to make the traditional worldview your own. And to do this you need to immerse yourself in the books. Magical texts insist on the necessity of this type of knowledge. Rely on Wikipedia at your own peril and misadventure.
gpt
I'm not saying that you will get a degree in occultism through wikipedia, but it's great if you iust want to quickly look something up.
And to be honest, out of all the books i've read the simple list of correspondeces that is Liber 777 is the best one at teaching you the subject i've found, as through it you learn something from it's correspondences.
human
Liber 777 is a good example. It seems like an abundant source of material; but if, for instance, you compare the section on precious stones (which are very useful in magic) with the stone correspondences contained in the books I suggested, as well as Picatrix, you will see how hollow it is. There's no substitute for the originals.
gpt
Now we're just debating on 'old vs new', Liber 777 wasn't meant to be goant list of everything in magic ever, and Crowley mentions to use Agrippa in Liber O.
>There's no substitute for the originals.
There's a good reason why new stuff comes along, remember that in the 13th (?) Century the Picatrix was the cool new thing from the exotic land of arabia lol.
human
Very well. Others disagree, but if you insist on starting with something modern, my favorite is 'Introduction to Magic.' It should be noted that it's much more concerned with interior transformation than with obtaining exterior phenomena. The books are imperfect, however, I think as a result of insufficient study of the source materials....

Now whichever way choose, good luck.
gpt
Clicked the wrong photo. Meant to use picrel for reference.