Welcome to The Beast Bay General Thelema Science Art Scholarship The Beast Bay website
 up a level
 search
 main


  Magick in the Physical World
Magick Posted by Xnoubis on December 13, 2000 @ 07:08 PM
from the hocus-pocus-focus dept.

It is generally held by non-magicians that magick does not effect the physical world. I would assert that most everything that makes magick worthwhile would remain even if it doesn't effect the physical world: self-realization, self-knowledge, integration of the personality and the spirit, engagement with the mysteries of being, etc.

Nonetheless, I'd be interested to know the opinions of practicing magicians on the subject. Do you believe, for instance, that you can influence the roll of a die while under the observation of an impartial witness? Does it matter whether or not you can?




<  |  >

 

  Related Links
  • Articles on Magick
  • Also by Xnoubis
  • Contact author
  • The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.


    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Rafael Kitover on Wednesday December 13, @07:47PM
    I'm not a practicing magician, except of the armchair variety :P There is good reason to believe that humans can effect things through the mind. For example:

    http://www.psiresearch.org/para2.html#ninea

    As for whether or not it matters. On the one hand, Crowley wrote that every action is magical.

    If all things "inter-are", action must cause effect.

    From my own experience, fascination does seem to work.

    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Tim Maroney on Thursday December 14, @02:55PM
      The best psi experiments I have seen is the PEAR study, described in the book "Margins of Reality", but it is highly flawed.

      First, it has never been reproduced.

      Second, it postulates an ultraweak effect which can never be observed directly and only appears as a result of statistical analysis of a very large number of observations -- ultraweak effects appear in all the lists of recipes for bad science.

      Third, it is impossible to exclude every source of systematic bias when dealing with an experiment this large and emotionally charged, which makes the ultraweak effect even more suspicious -- it's quite possible the tiny remaining effect is simply the bias that couldn't quite be stamped out.

      Tim


    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Tim Maroney on Thursday December 14, @03:27PM
      Your reference calls meta-analysis "a widely accepted method of assessing repeatability in experiments". In fact this is a highly controversial statistical technique which has suffered blows to its prestige over the last ten years. You might take a look at this page on Controversies About Meta-Analysis for more information, especially the page on Publication Bias, which is particularly applicable to parapsychology.

      Another page worth looking at is In Praise of Failure.

      Tim


    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Tim Maroney on Thursday December 14, @02:49PM
    It is, of course, offensive to refer to psychological magicians as "non-magicians."

    Tim

    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Xnoubis on Thursday December 14, @04:25PM
      It certainly would be!

      And I hope that those magicians who are skeptical of magick's influence upon the physical world aren't necessarily referred to as "psychological magicians."


      • Re: Magick in the Physical World
        by Tim Maroney on Thursday December 14, @09:45PM
        There isn't really a name for the movement -- if it can even be called a movement -- but I've rarely seen such a skeptic object to the "psychological magician" label.

        In the spirit of inquisitive nitpicking, I would also like to deal with this phrase "magick's influence on the psychological world," which is similar to a statement in the main article. Nervous systems, printed materials, and electronic media are part of the physical world, and magick as a human activity has a great deal of effect on them. It is the basis of this discussion board, for instance. The effect of magick on matter is empirically observable in that sense.

        The reason I think this is worth discussing, and not simply harping on an idiomatic phrase, is that it shows how the hypothesis of "magick" is not very well-defined. What exactly is the class of processes and phenomena into which we are inquiring? It includes influencing the roll of a die, apparently, but what is it about these postulated phenomena that makes them "magick" or "paranormal"?

        Tim


        • Re: Magick in the Physical World
          by Xnoubis on Friday December 15, @08:18AM
          Maybe I should first try to outline my own position. I am skeptical of magick's influence upon the physical world. I am also critical of the tendency to consider the matter closed (not that I am saying you exhibit such a tendency, but I run across it a lot). There's so much that we don't know. But our culture has a more or less shared understanding of what the physical world is, and what the rules are for determining the facts regarding it (i.e., science). So until assertions of physical magick can stand up to scientific investigation, they remain unproved.

          (I do feel that such considerations have no part in the temple, where I must hold myself to be omnipotent, and not be hemmed in with considerations of what is or is not possible. Reason can resume afterwards, while examining results.)

          I would not feel comfortable with the term "psychological magician," though, because I find psychology as a way of understanding inner experience to be an intrusion of the scientific model beyond its proper domain.

          > The effect of magick on matter is empirically
          > observable in that sense.

          By considering all acts as magick (which of course is Crowley's broad definition), yes.

          > What exactly is the class of processes and
          > phenomena into which we are inquiring?

          In this context, I intend magick to mean those actions that do not involve our physical participation, only our experiential participation. I'm not including, for instance, extending my aura to make someone feel warm. But I would include extending my aura to raise the mercury in a thermometer.


          • Re: Magick in the Physical World
            by Xnoubis on Friday December 15, @08:29AM
            > I'm not including, for instance, extending my
            > aura to make someone feel warm. But I would
            > include extending my aura to raise the mercury
            > in a thermometer.

            Doh!

            I meant to say: "By magick which influences the physical world, I'm not including..." etc. Both of my examples would obviously be considered magick.


          • Re: Magick in the Physical World
            by Tim Maroney on Tuesday December 19, @08:06PM
            No issue is ever closed, given the intrinsic uncertainties of reason, but I consider this one provisionally settled by the lack of any good evidence for (and the fuzziness of) the hypothesis. At such time as there is a reproducible experiment demonstrating otherwise, then I will re-evaluate this position. This is the same criterion I use in considering other bizarre assertions for which there appears to be no convincing evidence. In the absence of evidence, a working hypothesis to the contrary is reasonable; otherwise we would all believe that purple unicorns are spitting in our food.

            As for "psychological magician," thank you for noting your distaste for the phrase. For myself I consider psychology the only thing that holds any promise of rescuing religion from the dreadful intellectual malaise which has always afflicted it.

            I was not referring to the consideration of all acts as acts of magick when I noted that magick's effect on matter is sometimes empirically observable. I was considering "magick" as a restricted class of human activities, involving, for instance, spell-casting, cosmological speculation, and other related matters. This activity we call "magick" has an effect on matter which is evident from observing the movements, statements, writings, and other behavioral traces of people who practice it.

            Defining "magick" as actions that are not "physical" does not make a great deal of sense to me, as I do not understand what is meant by something that is not physical. I also think approaching the definition as a negative begs the question to some extent.

            Tim


            • Re: Magick in the Physical World
              by Xnoubis on Wednesday December 20, @11:29AM
              Let me acknowledge that my use of "magick" here is quite distinct from the usual sense of the word, even my own usual sense of it. What I'm trying to get at is: some magick is completely internal, some magick changes the world through changing our view of it, and some magick changes the world by changing our behavior, including effecting our relationships through changes in subtle and not-so-subtle communication, which can branch out to create large-scale effects. Obviously, magick that changes our physical behavior changes the physical world. But what about magick that doesn't? Magick that we might say works through mind alone, or through subtle agencies postulated by magick yet unknown to science. (One might say that such subtle agencies might someday become known to science, but I would include them for the sake of discussion.)

              I'm not myself so much interested in whether or not magick can do this as I am how other magicians view it, by the way.

              > I also think approaching the definition as a
              > negative begs the question to some extent.

              [grin] There we go!



              • Re: Magick in the Physical World
                by Tim Maroney on Wednesday December 20, @02:04PM
                I think once we get into postulating "subtle agencies" and other spiritual causes then we are starting to get into more positive definitions. We are then faced with new questions. Do these subtle agencies exist? What are these subtle agencies, how do they work, why are they so hard to see, how could they be measured, what technologies can be built on them if they do exist, what is the relationship between them and the nervous system, and so on?

                For my part, since there doesn't seem to be any strong evidence for such "subtle agencies," I adopt the working hypothesis that they don't exist. I will re-examine this at such time as there is a reproducible experiment demonstrating their existence.

                Now, of course, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence for the existence of such, as well as what amounts to scriptural evidence. I have plenty of anecdotal evidence of my own -- coincidences that seem too unlikely to be completely non-causal, visionary trances revealing fine structures behind the world of sensory appearances, magick spells that seemed to work or fail with startling clarity, etc. I have decided that these do not constitute evidence of anything beyond a tendency of the human mind to create structure in interpreting the world. This disbelief is a mental discipline that I have adopted as a working magician.

                The reason I want to mention this is that I find most believers never consider that it would be possible to have these compelling personal experiences without becoming a believer. What I usually get from believers -- most recently just a few days ago -- is a simple and condescending statement that obviously I have never experienced much spiritually.

                Tim


                • Re: Magick in the Physical World
                  by Xnoubis on Wednesday December 20, @04:45PM
                  The "agency" avenue is less interesting for me than acausality. I occasionally have the experience of causality not being so much inherent in our existence as imposed, and sensing the potential to exercise choice in an acausal realm. (I've thought of Tesseract Magick as possibly being a specific instance of this.) It's also something described by many practitioners of magick and mysticism. As I think you'll agree, there's no reason to view it as having scientific validity unless it can be demonstrated under laboratory-like conditions. On the other hand, there's no reason for practitioners to shy away from such potential just because it doesn't conform to scientific standards of validity.


    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Mordecai Shapiro on Thursday December 14, @05:48PM
      Where exactly did you see such a reference? It could only be found in Michael's post by the most strenuous of efforts at "reading in".


      • Re: Magick in the Physical World
        by Tim Maroney on Thursday December 14, @09:55PM
        Well, "reading in" is what we all do. The meaning I constructed in my reading of this article was based on two statements which seemed to take as a background assumption that "practicing magicians" believed one thing and "non-magicians" believed another. It is true that the statements can be read in other ways, but I wonder why one would say "It is generally held by non-magicians that magick does not effect the physical world" rather than "It is generally held by non-magicians, as well as some magicians, that magick does not effect the physical world". It does seem to me there is a discernable assumption there, which might be more apparent to "psychological magicians" rather than paranormal believers.

        I would like to apologize, though, if pointing out this seemingly exclusivist usage was offensive. I would never want to be accused myself of something so terrible as making an offensive statement.

        Tim


        • Re: Magick in the Physical World
          by Mordecai Shapiro on Sunday December 17, @12:58PM
          That's okay, I didn't "read in" anything offensive. :-)


    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Maozim on Thursday December 14, @06:04PM
    I never truly believed that "magick" could effect the physical world. I often glimpsed very odd phenomena, ones that seemed unlikely to be pure chance, but I never believed that any direct alterations of materia were possible.

    On then 27th day of the 11th month of the 999th year of this milleneum, I had a thought about the date, and it was quite literally the 11th hour. I had taken the medicine dlysergicaciddiethylamide in a moderately high dose, and my thought pertaining to the date was manifest as the attaining of a closer glory.

    I was with my beloved, my chele, and one who was uninitiated. I had the feeling that the latter party was about to have a conversion experiance, which happened to some degree, and I had mentioned to her the beauty of keeping accurate notes, and had suggested that we take a walk, in case "something happened worthy of note taking". I had no idea where the night was headed, really.

    We arrived on the dock near the temple I and my partner resided in. I was at this time having the peak experiance of the entheogen I had ingested. I proclaimed the date, and it . . . took an almost tactile shape.

    A moment later my chele remarked; "This is either the best fucking acid I've ever taken, or somethings happening." I didn't understand what he meant. He then indicated to me that the deck was moving. It was exactly what I was seeing on the lsd, but actually manifesting. The cement pillars were rising up, and the boards were bending. We observed this over the coarse of several hours, taking every note we could. We lowered glowsticks into the water, no current. We tried to observe any wind, and could find wind neither by a wet finger nor by the disturbance of a flame. The tide was moderate, and on the low side of moderate.

    The next day the deck was still bent. Some of the foundation was raised several feet, other parts were pushed downward. Boards were bent up, and down, none broken. But I could still see the line my vision had drawn when I realized what was happening. My peripheral vision was distorted, and the pattern was exactly the same.

    When the maintenance department that managed the dock fixed it, I was sure to ask what had happened. The answer I was given was that high winds had done the damage. There were no winds when the damage occurred.

    Some friend of mine took pictures of the dock, I do not know if any of them have been developed, or if the film exists. I often persue the answer, and hope one day to have the photos.

    The only answer I could come up with as to physical reasons/media was a sinkhole, which do occur in the general of the event. But I checked into that and the geology of the earth in that secific are makes that unlikely.

    No answers, no reason, but it happened.

    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Tim Maroney on Thursday December 14, @10:04PM
      I appreciate your mention of sinkholes. It should be possible to empirically investigate the possibility that the ground was actually moving due to a geological phenomenon.

      I also find that I am not inclined to consider tripping people the most reliable observers (myself included). In particular, false visual observations of movement are part of my own experience and I have also seen them frequently reported. How could we exclude, for instance, the possibility that the dock was already bent, and that you misperceived it as bending around you?

      Tim


      • Re: Magick in the Physical World
        by Maozim on Saturday December 23, @06:34PM
        The deck was not bent, I was at the dock earlier in the day, and much aroun the time (I liked doing rituals near the water, and people always get in the way at the beach).
        The deck groaned as it bent. The boats moved. The sand moved. The whole deck moved position.
        The lsd was "street", and I ca't know what strength it was, and I think it was a full moon, which could have had a synergistic . . . In other regards, it was good acid, certainly not weak, but it did not seem strong enough to cause sucha vivid, and prolonged, phenomenon. The deck moved in every sense (except gustary). I could feel the motion in my body, hear the sound . . . at one point, a board snapped loose and hit my freind, who felt pain. Unless the dose was HUGE, and insidious, I can not believe that the phenomenon was completely drug induced.
        I am certainly not claiming that this phenomenon is (yet, ahem) recreatible. If I could twist reality at will "Thelemite" would be a household word.


    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Verbius on Friday December 15, @02:38PM
    I don't know about "in the presence of an impartial witness", but back in the day, a certain friend and I (who also used to play Bach preludes together on electric guitars) had a propensity for using fairly high quanitities of Cocaine Hydrochloride and Methamphetamine Sulfate. It was a tradition of a crowd that we hung with, especially around holidays, to drink large quantities of beer and liquor, and play a game of dice called "five thousand". The goal of course was to be the first to reach a total of 5000, with a variety of secondary and tertiary rules. The two of us would dose up fairly high on the central nervous system stimulants and sit down with the crowd to play the game. We found that the ratio of our scores to others was around an order of magnitude; others would have 300, we would have 3000, and we would often be the first two or near the first two out (of course one or two others had caught on to this same principle). When we found our scores slipping back down into the range of mere mortals, we would take a short break, fuel up, and come back to enjoy the fascination of this strange principle of the control of the outcome of apparently random events by the application of CNS altering chemistry.

    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Charles H on Monday December 18, @03:34PM
    "It is generally held by non-magicians that magick does not effect the physical world. "

    I'd completely disagree with this statement.
    Granted, not everyone thinks Magick, as a default, affects the physical plane, however, I'd say most people either think it's a (potentially)dynamic or dangerous means of affecting the physical world, or they think it's a bunch of nonsense. Now, YOGA, for example, or MEDITATION; that's a different story...

    As for my view on the matter, There is a Micocosmic and a Macrocosmic element to the Art of Magick. I seek the balance, even in these two extremes. I think one of the greatest transgressions is that, consistently in the Western World as we have recorded, when a Magician's efforts yield a consistent result the tools (s)he uses are afforded the credit of being the cause of the event.

    Were it to be popularized that the Abramelin Working could enable you to quit smoking, subdue a receding hairline, and impart solid advice in e-trading, there would be an infomercial advertising it. Were it the cure for cancer, conclusive research would be done with a pointed demonstration that pronouncing "bararous tongues," in fact, promotes cardiovascular usage we don't recieve with our 1-3 syllable vocabulary, and within Three months, no one even remembers the book (though they may vibrate YFRETHBOOANTH!!! in Thirty-five reps of Ten every morning)

    Can a Magician affect the physical world?
    Xnoubis, you knew Ebony Anpu, didn't you?
    Tesseract, much? ;)
    I say better to ask the question if (and how) a Magician can control the effect they have upon the physical world.

    Love is the law, love under will.
    Ch

    Love is the law, love under will.
    Charles H

    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Xnoubis on Monday December 18, @03:58PM
      > most people either think it's a (potentially)
      > dynamic or dangerous means of affecting the
      > physical world, or they think it's a bunch of
      > nonsense

      Yes, and what I'm saying is that, not counting magicians, the people who think it's a bunch of nonsense outnumber those who don't. Are you saying that you don't agree with that?

      > you knew Ebony Anpu, didn't you?
      >
      > Tesseract, much? ;)

      For those unfamiliar with Ebony's Tesseract magick, the key point here is that Tesseract workings are held to change the world for everyone except the participants. However, everyone else in the world remembers this new world as the way it has always been. Ursula K. LeGuin's novel, The Lathe of Heaven, uses a similar concept.

      Giving Tesseract magick the benefit of the doubt, though, it still doesn't necessarily qualify as changing the physical world in a scientific sense, because the scientific observers, not being participants, would not detect any difference as a result of the working. For the Tesseract participants, the scientists have unwittingly become part of the transformation. But for the scientists, the Tesseract participants emerge with erroneous memories of the world's history that can be disproved by access to the pre-existing records within the current timeline.

      What I would assert here is that by using the term "physical world," we are playing by the scientists' rules, and that the perspective of Tesseract magick doesn't impinge on those rules.


      • Re: Magick in the Physical World
        by Tim Maroney on Tuesday December 19, @08:16PM
        Are only the memories of the participants retained from the "old world"? What about their bodies, clothes, possessions, etc.? There may be a way to address the question of Tesseract Magick's effectiveness even if only memory is preserved -- I'll have to think about it -- but if bodies, clothes, and other highly measurable objects are preserved, then it should be possible with a little ingenuity to set up a Tesseract working in a way that would allow for an experiment. This would consist of measuring some fixed characteristic of the object both before and after the working, and comparing the two. If the Tesseract worked, then the measurements should be different, since the stored results of the prior measurement would have been modified by the working.

        (Or I suppose we could just ask Madeleine L'Engle.)

        Tim


        • Re: Magick in the Physical World
          by Mordecai Shapiro on Wednesday December 20, @03:39PM
          I'm not sure, but I think part of the Tesseract "paradigm" is that whatever is within the participants' "circle" is, indeed, unaffected, but how would that allow one to design a repeatable experiment? How could one even know that the "stored results of the prior measurement" would necessarily change? It's not like we can predict the results of a Tesseract working ahead of time (according to the "paradigm", that is).


          • Re: Magick in the Physical World
            by Tim Maroney on Wednesday December 20, @04:39PM
            You mean it's just a random change? That would make empirical inquiry more difficult; it would also make the working seem rather pointless.

            Even so, the experimental outlook may not be hopeless. Sixty Minutes ran a story a few weeks ago on a new forensic technique for determining whether a person remembers something. It might be possible (if this technique holds up to scrutiny) to compare the memories of a tesseract participant about a supposedly changed event with those of a non-participant.

            Tim


            • Re: Magick in the Physical World
              by Mordecai Shapiro on Thursday December 21, @12:09PM
              The idea, as I understand it, is not that the change is random, but that it is not generally controlled. This does indeed make scientific investigation more difficult, but the idea of comparing memories may be workable. Certainly, it could demonstrate the existence of an effect, even if it is not clearly an "objective" one.


    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Xnoubis on Wednesday December 27, @07:47PM
    I've had a couple of more thoughts as I've reflected on this subject. One is that there isn't much about disrupting laboratory work that would be appealing to a magician, whether or not it could be done.

    The other thought seemed to enter my head from nowhere: "No one capable of such a thing would want to do it to us at this point in our development."

    Re: Magick in the Physical World
    by Omenraine on Friday February 02, @03:47PM
    I'm young, and traditionally uninitiated. All I have to offer is a few scattered thoughts, that have formed as baggage on my travels towards answering the question of magick's capacity to affect the physical world...

    Every change that occurs within the world, from one millisecond to the next, works according the principles of magick. Whether or not people consciously realise it, birth is the inception of the mage. Every point of focus manipulates the course of manifestation.

    People have talked about 'psychological magick'... When I first started reading into the subject of the occult, this would have confounded me, or if I would have understood what was meant, I would have been disappointed... Now though, I understand and completely believe in the axiom that the practice of magick can only affect one's self. This is the self-realization, self-knowledge, personal empowerment and development and what not... Or at least, that is how my definitions were limited before samadhi. Magick is about affecting only one's self, but once your mind is no longer confined by limiting dualistic notions, the self upon which magick operates is the entirety of .. well.. everything... The wind is my breath, the sun a moment of warmth running shivers upon my galactic spine...

    I'm not sure where I read it, but the quote reads something like this, " With ultimate power, why would I bother with something so trivial as localised manipulations".. in reference to this bent towards deliberate and immediate molding and shaping of physical reality that for some reason seems to occupy the focus of many of our more developed minds. Focus determines reality, and if even if these things are not within our capacity at present, continuing to hold focus in this way, with this bent, will assure that one day our children will take classes in school learning how to harness and control the force of will.

    There are a few instances in my life that I'll share, though I'm not sure the results could be reproduced.

    Science will tell us that energy cannot be created to destroyed. The energy responsible for any manifestation of any event already exists, on some level. All these experiences seem to coincide with this. Holding intent within my mind, (lower self), then releasing my focus from that intent and entering samadhi, allowing the energy of that intent to be released from it's imprisonment within the lower self to manifest within the physical world. What I'm struggling with, is whether these experiences followed this principle.. i.e. if these events transpired because of my own will, or if they were simply forseen.

    It started with a dog, a rotty, that terrified me everyday I had to walk by him on his shoestring tether on my way to work. I was under the habit of being mindful during this walk (and every other possible moment), and some times he wouldn't notice me if I was absorbed enough. But other times, he would seriously disturb this peaceful restful mindfulness by charging at me, his tether stopping him but not his drool just inches short of me on the side walk. One day, coinciding with this break in mindfulness, I fancied the thought of him dying a sudden death; Collapsing upon the floor of his house just moments after his owner returned home. I caught myself thinking this, disturbed at my malevolence, and proceeded to banish the intent by slipping back into mindfulness. A few weeks later, I met and dated a woman who happened to know the owner of that dog, and in conversation one day she mentioned that the dog had died, collapsed on the floor as her owner returned home from shopping. I felt terrible, but something inside me seemed to click.
    The principles as mentioned above began to invade my focus more and more often, and in intoxicated states I was fond of playing with them. I had been practicing 'psychological magick' for a while
    at the time of this next instance. I was sitting in my car with a friend, and we got on the topic of fear being an intensely powerful agent in inducing altered perception. Anyone who has ever heard the death howl of cats facing off will agree that it is a very disturbing noise. I mentioned to my friend how disturbing it would be to be completely stoned (paranoid) and have a cat begin its howl underneath my car one day while I was sitting alone on that same street at night. I mentioned it echoing in the grate, and mentioned the magnificence of stature of the creature as I'd glance over my shoulder while driving speedily away from the terrifying experience. Norwegian forest cat (i.e. freakin big) but silky grey in color. We nodded in squinty eyed mutual agreement, then I realised my mind's wandering and brought it back that mindful one-ness.
    A few weeks later, a little upset that all my friends were otherwise engaged, and seeking to quell that upset with some green, I stopped on that street late at night and rolled up a fatty. An hour into it, as I was dazed in meditation and intoxication, at that really supple and relaxed state, that insanity bearing howling began to erupt under my car. I thought it was a demon or some bloody thing, threatening me to let in it. My heart raced and my hands trembled as I sought to start my car and drove as fast as I could away from that spot, my mind reeling. I looked timidly back over my shoulder and saw that grey norwegian forest cat, sitting on his haunches all regal like, regarding me with a knowing gaze. Was this foresight incurred upon my drifting mind of a few weeks prior? Or had the intent been built up within my mind at that time and released as I had returned to mindfulness, to sit and wait for the right conditions to allow it to manifest. Either way, I was quite right about terror inducing altered perception.

    I moved from Canada to Ghana, Africa about five months ago, and again by way of these same peculiar set of principles. Before I left, in drug-addled states, I spouted a lot of crap and rambled endlessly about the things that would happen to me and people I would meet. This was foresight. A picture that I would take, down to the very minute details of it. The email address of a girl I would meet. The name of the man that would interview me for a position at one of the high commissions. The circumstances of my relationships with various locals. The lines between foresight and intended manifestation become blurred though. Was my unbending assurance that these things would come about foresight or willed manifestation? With regard to other people, I'd say foresight. But other things... One of my fondest memories of Canada was of a huge old house that was called home by about a half dozen of my musically inclined friends. We spent a lot of long nights mixing drums and didges and guitars and flutes and what not into some collective expression. I'm always seeking to leave my mark upon something, and this tendency saw the uglier side of itself as I proceeded to criticise the way one of my friends was playing various songs. Finally someone pointed out what an ass I was being, and I apoligised. Immediately afterwards though, I told the group that once I got to africa I would remember the 7 songs he played and learn them and come to be able to play them the way I thought they should be played. this raised a lot of eyebrows and doubtful remarks, but I insisted and acknowledged the presence of complicated solos within a couple of the songs. There was also some tablature for a flamenco song that he played and I loved (though criticised). I told him that I would meet a techie named Al who would give me the magazine that the tablature came from. They asked why a techie? The magazine was european, and would only be available to me from a person who would have had need to travel to london.
    I remembered all the songs together with the solos and met the techie named Al who gave me two of those magazines, one of which was the one that contained the tablature for that song. This is one of those instances in which the lines between foresight and willed manifestation become blurred. It seems that recalling the songs must have been an act of will, but what about meeting the techie? Foresight or willed manifestation?

    One of the instructions for designing a pantacle, is not whether or not the symbolism reflects the world as it is, but as it you would like it to be. One of the instructions for designing our beliefs and other intellectual dependancies should be similar. Given the choice between saying magick can not affect the physical world and binding myself to that limitation, or believing whole heartedly that such is possible and leaving the way open for my focus to shape the future manifestation of my reality towards this capacity, I make the obvious choice.

    Light and Life

    • Re: Magick in the Physical World
      by Xnoubis on Friday February 02, @03:57PM
      That was beautiful. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.



     
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.


        "As St. Paul says, 'Without shedding of blood there is no remission,' and who are we to argue with St. Paul?" -- Aleister Crowley
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster.
    [ home | search ]