Why only nine?

[Deleted]

Did Grant not think of continuing the se ries?

[Michael Staley]

Soon after the publication of The Ninth Arch, I asked Kenneth about future plans, and he said that after having completed three trilogies, that was a substantial body of work, and that it would be for people coming after to continue the work.

[azrael2393]

Jul 14, 2013 21:40:21 GMT Michael Staley said:

Soon after the publication of The Ninth Arch, I asked Kenneth about future plans, and he said that after having completed three trilogies, that was a substantial body of work, and that it would be for people coming after to continue the work.

do you think there's anyone doing that kind of work at the moment?

[Michael Staley]

Not at present, no, but I have no doubt that there will be. Grant's body of work is a substantial one, and will inspire a development, just as he developed work that had gone before him.

I used to think that the continuation of a body of work depended on people who came after, keeping the flame alive for others to pick up on. For example, there were a handful of people keeping interest in Crowley's work alive throughout the fifties and early sixties, until the more propitious times of the mid sixties fanned the flames. However, more recently it has seemed to me that if a body of work has substance, then it will fertilise the collective imagination and perpetuate itself. We see a similar thing with the work of Spare, and I'm sure for many others such as Blavatsky, Massey, Ramana Maharshi, and many more. It will be - is - like that with Grant's work.

[jcurwen]

Michael Staley, I was wondering, what did Kenneth Grant think of Soror Nema's book Maat Magick? And do you find it to be a good  representation of the Typhonian Current?

[Nalyd Khezr Bey]

I can't speak for Mick but regarding Nema's Maat Magick Grant seemed to have thought highly enough of it to write the introduction to it. Hints at what he may have thought about it are there. Grant doesn't just come out and say "I love this book" though. He stays true to his style and expounds upon the context which gave birth to it and very subtly gives it his stamp of approval.  

Is it a good representation of the Typhonian Current? That I can't really say. I'd say it's compatible. I've worked extensively with Nema's system over the years and I think the book is a good representation of Maat Magick.  I also think it is one of only a handful of quality Thelemic outpourings to roll out in the last couple of decades. At least it had a few innovations and some new perspectives to offer. 

[jcurwen]

Thats good to hear, because I ordered it a few days ago. I didn't know that Grant wrote the intro until after I ordered it; I just figured Soror Nema would have something of value to say.

[Nalyd Khezr Bey]

If you're interested in the 93/696 current and want to take it up a notch you might also enjoy Don Karr's more recent Approaching the Kabbalah of Maat. It covers several perspectives and most of the usual suspects associated with the promulgation of Maat like Achad, Grant, Nema, etc. Also includes reproductions of some relevant documents and diagrams. It's not exhaustive but it does supply a few springboards to jump off into further exploration.