Krabtastic Insomniac Adroanzi

Greetings agent.

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Magic - the philosophical side

I have the impression that magic and even the most secular spells will in the end inevitably lead you to insights and learning. Whatever you do as a sorcerer it will as a side effect bring confrontation with something you didn't know before - sooner or in some cases later. That which wants to teach you can be very patient with you until one day it will stick your nose into what's to learn. And I don't think that's something to be afraid of. Some might close themselves to insights which will be on the way. But having the insights is actually the more bearable alternative. My advice to every practicioner: Don't light a fire and run away!

Comments

  • For me this is the real purpose of magic, results orientated practical magic is far too dangerous lol

  • Well, I still like results magic, but agree that it is fucking dangerous. Maybe I just like my magic like an extreme sport...

    That said I see the philosophical/illumination/wisdom/mysticism side of things as an essential ingredient in surviving or riding the waves and turbulance that results magic can bring into your life.

    It is all very well trying to control your surf board, but learning how to control to best effect is wisdom.

    Similarly with results magic. Casting spells to change things is all very well, but learning to recognise the right spells to cast takes wisdom.

  • That can be a damn good technique. I remember reading something similar in Jan Fries. The subconscious often has a better idea of what we need than anything the conscious can decide upon. What is more, if we give the spell/subconscious/spirits that flexibility, they can adapt automatically as the situation unfolds and new information comes to light, rather than blindly pursuing an outdated and sub-optimum goal. Like people voting for mainstream political parties.

  • An insight like the ones Anton hints at is the one I have now: that laws of chance and natural laws and IMO the intent of others are always active factors whether you hit it with your magic or not. I kept doing this lottery a bit - it's a daily one - and the most improbable results came up, yesterday two correct numbers and three -/+1, one +2 and one +3 (which looked incredibly cool at first sight) and three correct ones again today, several times two correct numbers recently. That is damn improbable and shows me that the gnosis I can achieve again now is the real thing, and I have my sufficient notes about how to get there now. That could be a major step further. And I have applied the gnosis to something more likely now, which should also be very sensible. Repeating efforts seems to be not a problem either with this. But now I wonder about one of the "contadictions" you can find in the occult. LaVey said in the Satanic Bible "You can only do magic with and not against the natural order" (surely not quite the literal quote, but almost) while from what I know the defintion of their "black magic" of the Temple of Set is "magic that is worked form outside or against the natural order". While I think LaVey plainly shows more common sense with this, my experience in this case kind of proves both sides correct, as this particular gnosis is one which transcends the natural order, while it doesn't quite work because of natural order chances. To me it also seems, because of failure in certain areas of my life. that while magic surely works there must be something like karma or what is called blueprints in the J.Roberts-Seth-system. Just something which experience teaches me. But while Anton focussed on "skill-relevant" insights I really meant to imply there can be even more to it. I think walking a magical path can truly bring up things meant to teach you something other than just magical skill. The self-confidence, strength of personality brought about by the first working spell might be only one of the first steps. I think it leads even further and I guess the insights coming shouldn't be ignored. But it's just an opinion...

  • I agree with what you say Anton, hadn't heard the Fries version. Though I'm also trying to partly escape the psychologising influence of Dion Fortune and return to a time when a spirit was just a spirit (even if just instumentally)

  • Well I used the terms spirit/subconcious/spell because I don't think it really matters which the magician thinks it is. The point is giving the magic is that rather than doing magic to get b because you think b will lead to c, you should simply do magic for c.

    For example, I spent many years of my life doing love spells for quite specific partners, using check lists of criteria they must fill. I would find myself in relationships with wonderful people who met all of my requirements, but I would still not be happy. Eventually I came to my senses and simply worked with Aphrodite and said simply to find me a partner with whom I would be happy. And it has worked.

    Now I like you prefer to work with spirit based rather than psychological models. Since I find it easier to invest belief in spirits as independent intelligences capable of achieving the best results. But I also see this as a personal taste matter that I don't wish to impose on anyone else. Nor do I necessarily see any 'truth' in any one interpretation, I see mainly differences in theory rather than approach.

  • Well I used the terms spirit/subconcious/spell because I don't think it really matters which the magician thinks it is. The point is giving the magic is that rather than doing magic to get b because you think b will lead to c, you should simply do magic for c.

    For example, I spent many years of my life doing love spells for quite specific partners, using check lists of criteria they must fill. I would find myself in relationships with wonderful people who met all of my requirements, but I would still not be happy. Eventually I came to my senses and simply worked with Aphrodite and said simply to find me a partner with whom I would be happy. And it has worked.

    Now I like you prefer to work with spirit based rather than psychological models. Since I find it easier to invest belief in spirits as independent intelligences capable of achieving the best results. But I also see this as a personal taste matter that I don't wish to impose on anyone else. Nor do I necessarily see any 'truth' in any one interpretation, I see mainly differences in theory rather than approach.

Leave a Comment

bolditalicunderlinestrikecodeimageurlquotespoiler