In the comment section of Tuesday's post, Wolf posted the following:
Robert, could you describe your experience with God-form assumption technique and the results you go from it? Although it's often included in teh GD curiculum and initiation ceremonies, it's kind of overlooked in practical applications. Do you think that is can be alternative to evocation, in some cases?
I claim no expertise. The random way I practice offers little in the form of true comparison. So, I only speak from how things have impacted me.
The GD god form invocations are solid practice. While many will say the GD have incorrect god-forms due to the nascent state of Egyptology at the time of its founding, I disagree. For while the statement that they misattributed appears to be true, those whom make this claim ignore the import of the egregore. Somehow, the gods and the egregore work together towards a result. In that context, the GD god forms would just fine as is.
That said, aside from one or two, they leave me flat and generally uninspired. I cannot recall if any of them specifically introduced in a grade helped me with that grade. Though, the repeated invocation of them allowed me to grow the more subtle bodies that allowed me accept such activity at a future time. Wax on. Wax off.
As far as practical applications, I would like to do a bit more of that with gods. The one practical impact a GD god had for me was accidental. Anubis, called more for an experiment than anything else, plucked from my mind the fact that my ex-wife had a stalker. Anubis kicked his ass.
My more tangible experience with invocation of gods comes from my work with the Greeks. Perhaps because they are more culturally significant or more human or because I resonate with them, the Greeks manifest much more strongly for me. I need no ritual at all just a short meditation. The best way I can describe their theurgic impact is through a story.
I met a man once that ran one of the first ISPs (Internet Service Provider) back in the days of small local providers offering dial-up service. He had a staff of three computer 'geniuses'. Two of them worked a forty hour week. One of them was never seen but received the same salary. The first two complained at this treatment. Why do you pay him if he is never here? We do all the work. Besides, he is rude, crude and sometimes doesn't shower! The owner smiled. That bit is literal. The man didn't shower much.
One day, they lost service to an entire region. The two full time techs did everything the knew how to do. So did the owner. Finally, he gave up and called the third tech. Number three walked up to the 'big board' which displayed nothing but rows of ones and zeros. He stood silently watching them pass by. Finally, he pointed and said, "That is your problem." He punched a couple of keys which restored the service. Then number three left without saying a word.
The owner looked at the other two and said, "That is why I pay him."
The Greeks have worked for me that way. They seem to know the binary code and replace a 0 with a 1. Obviously, this is a very intimate procedure.
Evocation is more akin to meeting someone that has the skills you need. S/he does that work and leaves. A bond can be formed but for me the relationship isn't as tight knit as for god-form invocation, at least for me.
Acts of thaumaturgy, can be done either way I suppose. Though, calling on a god for that doesn't really sit well with me and my moralistic view of things, which is utterly silly. That said, gods can appear to human eyes to be capricious. The evocation of "lesser" beings is more likely to produce thaumaturgic results to the magicians liking.
To contradict myself for the thirtieth time in this post. The thaumaturgical results I get with Hermes are impressive for their completeness and speed. This may be because I use simply prayer and don't ask for the moon to be laid at my feet.
I have no idea if I actually answered the intent of that question or not. Sometimes I go on tangents. If I missed, let me know.