#37820 - 04/18/10 08:54 PM
Views on Magic
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
I thought to start a thread for personal views of magic. I think it would be quite interesting. I've been lurking around, reading what many of you have to say. I thought it would be nice to have a place to describe views more in depth for better discussion and understanding.
While I will agree with most that it is up to an individual to decide what magic is, I should say that I am wholly convince by my personal knowledge that magic must be completely natural in its process. Such processes occur all the time. People use these processes to their advantage without realizing. While some may be more naturally gifted at using such processes, it is not magic, nor are they a magician, unless they are conscious of their actions and desired result.
I would also like to include that I am uncertain of LaVey's description of magic as either Lesser or Greater. Greater magic, as I understand his definition, is psychologically manipulating the self to cause a desired change, be it release of stress or anger, a change of outlook, extra confidence, etc. If we are to accept that Lesser magic is performed by an individual to manipulate another, we must look at how one is able to achieve this. To be a proper magician, you must be aware of yourself and your surroundings. You must be confident in your skills. You need to make yourself into the best person you can be to perform your magic properly. If I speak correctly, and this truly be the case, then Greater magic must be first performed in some way in order to perform Lesser magic properly.
Also, Anton LeVay also suggest that a mastery of Lesser magic provides for greater mastery of Greater magic. I will not disagree with this statement, however, I hope I have shown that a mastery of Greater magic leads to a mastery of Lesser magic. In fact, if you think about it, you will realize that little to no mastery of lesser magic is truly needed to perform Greater magic, while Lesser magic depends upon Greater magic. Then you are left with a decision, which type of magic is truly greater, the magic that manipulates others to your will, or the magic that gives you the strong will to perform it?
In addition, I think there was one type of magic that has been left out. When one individual performs magic on another individual, that is Lesser magic, but what of magic done to manipulate many people. This I label as High magic. This is the magic performed by politicians, business men, and other influential people. Magic, such as to convince an entire nation to vote for you or your political party, takes a lot of energy and is usually performed by large groups rather than a single individual.
I think that just about sums up what I have to say. Looking forward to seeing what you all have to say.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38116 - 04/26/10 04:17 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
Severed, I am glad if what I had to say has helped you in some way.
William, I completely agree with you, but I will make an argument for calling Lesser magic on grand scales "High magic."
It is understandable that you would not have heard of "High magic" before, as it is my own creation. When you perform magic on a mass scale, it takes an extremely large amount of knowledge and other resources. This is the very reason that it usually is done by groups rather than individuals, though individuals are capable. There are a lot of interesting things to say about group dynamics, but I won't go into it here.
I may need to make a clarification to the understanding of High magic. While I'll agree it is Lesser magic, you can look at Lesser magic on a scale from Low to High. Low magic would be Lesser magic that effects one individual, and as your magic effects more people it progresses on a scale up to the highest magic possible, thus "High magic."
I'm sorry if it seems my position has changed somewhat. The first model I proposed was indeed flawed in the way which I initially presented it and so I've attempted to fixed it.
Knowledge and language are meant to evolve just as our understanding. I've found the distinction of High magic to be useful in defining the different types of magic one can do. If people find this useful and wish to use it, then they are free to do so. If they think it's all crap, I don't care. It works for me and they're free to do as they wish as well. Also, to say "High magic" instead of "Lesser magic on a grand scale" is simply more elegant, mysterious, and aesthetically pleasing.
I would like to as well say that I agree that Lesser and Greater magic are equally important, which is why I question the labels of Lesser and Greater.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38173 - 04/28/10 11:46 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
I am running a touch late on this one.
The below comments are my own, but they have been deeply informed by study.
They are a work in progress. They are my current views on Greater Satanic magic.
Satanic magic is a performance which takes place in a real material world between real flesh and blood human animals. There is no mystical or supernatural element to it in my opinion. The vast majority of Satanic magic can be explained. Those portions, which cannot be explained now, will probably be explained at some time in the future.
Quotes related to Greater Magic
"The change in situations or events in accordance with one's will, which would, using normally accepted methods, be unchangeable." Anton LaVey. TSB P 110
What good is a study of falsehoods, unless everyone believes in falsehoods? Many, of course, DO believe in falsehoods, but still ACT according to natural law. It is upon this premise that Satanic magic is based.” Anton LaVey. TSB. P 109
“Greater Black Magic (GBM) is the causing of change to occur in the subjective universe in accordance with the will. This change in the subjective universe may cause a similar and proportionate change in the objective universe.” Michael Aquino. The 600C
“We are thus the victims of a world-wide GBM epidemic which has manifest itself as political ideologies, artistic æsthetics, advertising, social morality, etc. We cannot honestly say that we “live” in the objective universe, but rather in a crazy-quilt of subjective overlays on the objective universe. The first thing the magician must do is realize this; the second thing he must do is attempt to see and understand the actual objective universe through all the camouflage. The third thing he must do is attempt to change parts of it carefully and precisely through his own magical workings, both LBM and GBM.” Michael Aquino. The 600C
“Satanic ritual is a technique of self – transformative psychodrama.” Peter Gilmore TSS. P 221.
“There is no guarantee that ritual can do anything more than serve as a cathartic experience for the ones performing it.” Peter Gilmore TSS. P 221.
“A theory advanced by Ingo Swann in Natural ESP suggests that there may be a gateway through the most primitive part of the brain by which thoughts and imagery might in some way “broadcast” to other minds when fuelled by extreme emotional experiences. We Satanists see this as a possible means for Greater Magic to impact the world outside of the ritual chamber.” Peter Gilmore. TSS P.222.
Greater Magic Notes
The greater magical ritual does have a cathartic effect. This is one of its purposes - to rid the magician of that which cannot be dispelled or driven from the psyche or the body by normally accepted means.
Greater magic is also a self – transformational process. Its purpose is to change the magician’s subjective viewpoint on the self as a means of focusing and magnifying the will and clarifying, strengthening or changing consciousness.
Greater magic is also a self – transformational process. Its purpose is to change the magician’s subjective viewpoint on the objective qualities of the world, or a particular portion of the world, and hence the meaning of states of affairs and the role or position of involved actors or stakeholders.
Satanism is objective subjectivity, as Dr. LaVey stated, and this applies to Satanic magic as well.
A further result of a successful greater magic ritual is the production of a subjectively generated blueprint of a particular “is-to-be,” which the black magician successfully imposes on a certain portion of the objective universe, thereby changing the selected portion of the objective universe, targeted by the magician, in accordance with the blueprint.
The forging and elaboration of the blueprint can take place once an intellectual decompression has taken place and once the collection of objects and the words to be spoken in the designated space have been invested with an absolute value as “tools” and “meaningful truth” in the subjective universe.
The blueprint is forged and elaborated by emotionally fuelled and powerfully articulated need or desire.
A question naturally arises: how can the magician impose a subjectively generated blueprint on a portion of the objective world?
There are two models which I look at this aspect of Greater Magic through.
Model One – Transmission via the Ritual
I conduct the ritual successfully – my wish is transmitted (as a form of message) to the person/s it is addressed to – the person/s who receives the message thinks and/or acts in accordance with it.
Again, I complete a ritual and as a result of the ritual my target is affected. Everything takes place (message formation and transmission) within the ritual and it is an act of unconventional communication between a sender and a receiver.
Model One - Some Qualifications
1. I am an Atheist, therefore no supernatural being or intelligence will assist me in making the ritual work. 2. I have no conclusive proof confirming that supernormal forms, such as telepathy, or other forms of inter-subjective unconscious or subconscious communication, are involved in the ritual process, though I cannot strictly confirm that supernormal forms aren’t involved.
I therefore agree with the Satanic notion that one should look at the effects of this model of Greater Magic pragmatically. One should practice it and take a careful note of whether it works or not.
Model Two – The Will to Power
The premise of this approach is the belief that human society is a bloody battlefield where subjects are fighting to impose subjectively generated meanings, on a barely seen objective, already thoroughly drenched in prior meaning.
Who has the power to appropriate the object and define and re-define? Who benefits from the transformation of interpretation into knowledge and its imposition onto the object? How does stratification function here? Some can define large areas of the “objective” and others less?
LaVey’s definition of the premise of Satanic magic looms here: the natural law of might is right, or of dog eat dog has been transformed into the endless war to define and exclude within a billion contexts. Meanwhile, the vast majority continue to somehow believe in the falsehood of the egalitarian and democratic.
If human beings are political animals and hence will, in most cases, seek to build parties, alliances and factions with the like minded than the types of meanings generated and imposed will be a reflection of the type of people and herds which generate them.
Satanic magic, in this sense, is the attempt by a single magician to impose a blueprint on the objective - to carefully change portions of the objective.
Some Final Comments
Greater Magical ritual is not just confined to a specific Satanic ritual chamber and the tools which LaVey mentioned in TSB. Rather ritual is taking place in all manner of spaces and using tools and symbols of all sorts.
I am beginning to see a strong link between the work of Nietzsche, Freud, Foucault, Deleuze, Szasz and Dr. LaVey and Dr. Aquino. There is still a lot of work to be done here, before I can provide a comprehensive and clear statement on this aspect of GM, but getting there.
I’m going to have to provide something on Lesser Magic some other time. This thing is just too long and involved. Very tiring…
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38460 - 05/12/10 06:44 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
Mikey58
stranger
Registered: 11/12/09
Posts: 18
Loc: England
|
Magic rituals are the means to an end, and any maifestations or things seen or heard may be simply projections of the mind; controlled hallucinations if you will for want of another expression. Whether entities summoned, seen or heard have an independent existence outside of the mind is debatable, maybe the mind creates them and projects them. As Crowley said, whether these things have an independent existence matters not.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38492 - 05/13/10 03:32 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Mikey58]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
“Magic rituals are the means to an end, and any maifestations or things seen or heard may be simply projections of the mind; controlled hallucinations if you will for want of another expression. Whether entities summoned, seen or heard have an independent existence outside of the mind is debatable, maybe the mind creates them and projects them. As Crowley said, whether these things have an independent existence matters not.”
Thanks for your comments. The below quote may interest you.
“I don’t feel that raising the devil in an anthropomorphic sense is quite as feasible as theologians or metaphysicians would like to think. I have felt His presence but only as an exteriorized extension of my own potential, as an alter-ego or evolved concept that I have been able to exteriorize. With a full awareness, I can communicate with this semblance, this creature, this demon, this personification that I see in the eyes of the symbol of Satan—the goat of Mendes-—as I commune with it before the altar. None of these is anything more than a mirror image of that potential I perceive in myself.”
“I have this awareness that the objectification is in accord with my own ego. I’m not deluding myself that I’m calling something that is disassociated or exteriorized from myself the godhead. This Force is not a controlling factor that I have no control over. The Satanic principle is that man wilfully controls his destiny; if he doesn’t, some other man—-a lot smarter than he is—-will. Satan is, therefore, an extension of one’s psyche or volitional essence, so that that extension can sometimes converse and give directives through the self in a way that thinking of the self as a single unit cannot. In this way it does help to depict in an externalized way the Devil per se. The purpose is to have something of an idolatrous, objective nature to commune with. However, man has connection, contact, control. This notion of an exteriorized God-Satan is not new.”
Anton LaVey, Popular Witchcraft, Jack Fritscher (1973)
This quote of the Doktor's is well worth studying. The level of perception is extraordinary.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38497 - 05/13/10 10:37 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
Mikey58
stranger
Registered: 11/12/09
Posts: 18
Loc: England
|
Thank you, i agree. The external and objective placement is the way communication is made in magic. The forces worked with are personalised externally and made objective as you say.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38697 - 05/20/10 01:41 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Jake999
senior member
Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2174
|
Ok. Next time you pull take a good crap to get relief, you should worship that power of magic that made it so!! Yes, the power of magic that got you what you want! OH! And the awesome power of, yes... feel the magic... opening the door of the refrigerator for a Coke to make your thirst MAGICALLY go away.
Seems to me you might have done too much "wacky tabaccky" or drunk from the Setian wells a bit too much.
As for my views on magic ...you might have read it in the Book of Belial in The Satanic Bible... simply "The change in situations or events in accordance with one's will, which would, using normally accepted methods, be unchangable."
"Further: "Magic falls into two categories, ritual or ceremonial, and non-ritual or manipulative. Ritual magic consists of the performance of a formal ceremony, taking place, at least in part, within the confines of an area set aside for such purposes and at a specific time. Its main function is to isolate the otherwise dissipated adrenal and other emotionally induced energy, and convert it into a dynamically transmittable force. It is purely an emotional, rather than intellectual, act. Any and all intellectual activity must take place before the ceremony, not during it. This type of magic is sometimes known as "GREATER MAGIC".
Non-ritual or manipulative magic, sometimes called "LESSER MAGIC", consists of the wile and guile obtained through various devices and contrived situations, which when utilized, can create "change, in accordance with one's will". In olden times this would be called "fascination", "glamour", or the "evil eye". "
So, in your case, I suppose that you are considering the master manipulation of smiling at someone to elicit a smile in return to be "magic," yet rejecting the logical and normal assumption that given a positive stimulus (a smile), a similar and expected response should be expected. Well... a couple of minutes of applied psychological and attitudinal studies during the course of human development show that when you smile at someone, your're likely to receive a smile in return might have been something you missed. Or someone smiling at you is so abnormal to your existence that I'm afraid it would be more telling of your personality than your magical expertise.
Granted, if you "magically" started up a business that just out of the blue netted you a cool million, it would be pretty rare indeed. And I would say that it would definitely fall under the "The change in situations or events in accordance with one's will, which would, using normally accepted methods, be unchangable," parameter. Go for it if you can. Junk bonds worked, there were a some of IPOs that went crazy, being nothing but ideas floated in the ethers that caught on, and hell... who can deny hoola hoops, and Shamwow? But having been in business and having participated in startups that have been successful, I can tell you that normal means, i.e., business acumen and established business models and applications can and do routinely create the desired result, Dusty Springfield said it best in her song "Wishing and Hoping." Action is the magic in such situations, based on sound knowledge and the application of proper business protocols.
If you just said, "I'm going to make a million selling used condoms door to door" and you did it... well, maybe then you've had some magical assistance.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38728 - 05/22/10 02:33 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
As I stated earlier, when you have a purpose to your actions and they have been carefully chosen to cause a specific result, you are doing magic.
Does it matter if we understand it or not? When we understood how rain was made we didn't rename it. So what of techniques and knowledge that would normally be considered magical? Just because we can explain the consequences of your actions and why it works with behavioral psychology, neuro-linguistic programming, physics, etc. doesn't make it your actions less magical. If you had a thoughtful intent to change the environment to your purposes, then you are doing magic. If anything, our new found ability to explain so much of it has only made magic easier to use and understand.
Magic is an umbrella term for the things we can do to improve our lives in the practical world. It is interdisciplinary, as it calls upon many different fields of knowledge. To say that every human action is magic is over-simplifying. Many things we do are without conscious purpose, a free choice, or knowledge of consequences. Actions like getting a drink or taking a shit are things you do not choose to do. Your body gets thirsty and you are forced to drink something or perish... and I'm not even going into what could happen if you don't empty your bowels. Since these are not thoughtful actions that can be chosen, but bodily maintenance that must be done for basic survival, it is not magic.
By acknowledging this distinction, we are better able to communicate with one another of the methods we use to get through everyday life, the ways we improve ourselves, the ways we improve our status, and with a language to the untrained ear is mysterious and is aesthetically pleasing to most ears.
Besides, magic is a huge part of our history, especially in the sense that Satanism is part of the Western Esoteric Tradition. Can't we allow how we use these ideas to evolve, rather than tossing them away completely?
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38729 - 05/22/10 09:52 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
William Wright
member
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 375
Loc: Nashville
|
LR, your post was well explained and made a lot of sense. I had already begun to reexamine my thoughts regarding magic after the posts of Dimitri and my dear colleague Jake, and yours pretty much cemented the deal. My intent was not to stir up trouble; god knows I’ve got enough trouble in my life already. I merely wanted to explain magic as I had come to understand it. That said, am I glad I made those posts? Absolutely. If I hadn’t, then I wouldn’t have learned to look at magic differently. Learning is an often humbling experience, and damned if I’m gonna let arrogance get in the way of that.
I heard somewhere that Crowley once said that a sneeze was magic. It resonated with me because it seemed to correspond to my idea that everything we do to benefit ourselves, even in the most mundane of ways, is magic. However, I now see that if everything is magic then nothing is magic, because magic has nothing to distinguish itself from. I’m not sure yet how this new outlook will affect me as I go about my daily activities, but I look forward to finding out. I suspect it will be magical.
_________________________
My life is a movie. I am the star.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38733 - 05/22/10 02:40 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
You definitely make a good point, William, as do the others. When I first read Crowley and understood that for him magic is everything, I quickly disagreed. That is like saying everyone is special. If everyone is special, then special becomes mundane and looses all purpose.
I do not find it the least bit odd that many would not agree with the use of magic, or rather the use of the terminology. It depends on how one associates magic in the mind. If you associate magic with spiritualism, theism, and delusion, then you probably will not have a good opinion of it when combined with an atheistic perspective. If you connect magic with the unknown, unknowable, or imaginary, as a skeptic it is not going to appeal to you and seem silly. However, I do not associate magic with these concepts except to acknowledge others do. I associate magic as far more related to that of stage magic than spiritual or theistic magic, using psychological manipulation to effect people in such a way that they are enchanted by your actions.
We still label stage magic as magic, even when we know exactly how it is performed. We may want to give some distinction and say that isn't "real magic" because of its apparent lack of supernatural forces with which magic is normally associated, yet it is the form of magic that actually works in the real world and we still label it as such.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38744 - 05/22/10 11:58 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
The Zebu
active member
Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1129
Loc: Orlando, FL
|
Interesting... Concerning the views of Crowley, I recently came across this issue in another forum.
That is like saying everyone is special. If everyone is special, then special becomes mundane and looses all purpose.
Agreed- that is, if we accept the definition of Magic as being something isolate and subjective. For many occultists, and Satanists, "magic" refers specifically to a mode of thinking or imagination; a certain "frame of mind" in which the Will is projected. Magic is a current of power; it requires occult skill to tap into it.
For Crowley, however, "Magick" was the very metaphysical fabric of the universe, not something distinct from the material world. Everything is magick because everything is inherently divine-- sort of like Pantheism. Granted, he recognized that some expressions of Magick (theurgy, evocation, sex magick) were more potent than others (such as sneezing).
At least, this is how I have interpreted his writings. However, I can't say I buy this definition, considering that my metaphysical views differ vastly from that of To Mega Therion.
Edited by The Zebu (05/22/10 11:58 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38791 - 05/25/10 03:22 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
Valor
pledge
Registered: 01/27/10
Posts: 54
Loc: Coast of New England
|
Also, Anton LeVay also suggest that a mastery of Lesser magic provides for greater mastery of Greater magic. I will not disagree with this statement, however, I hope I have shown that a mastery of Greater magic leads to a mastery of Lesser magic. In fact, if you think about it, you will realize that little to no mastery of lesser magic is truly needed to perform Greater magic, while Lesser magic depends upon Greater magic. Then you are left with a decision, which type of magic is truly greater, the magic that manipulates others to your will, or the magic that gives you the strong will to perform it?
I don't know anyone who uses GBM Workings on a daily or even a weekly basis. However i can say this for LBM. I'll use LBM on a daily basis if i cannot find normal means to remedy a situation.
GBM is useful, yes. But not needed...LBM is a must for the LHP Magician.
Edited by Valor (05/25/10 03:27 PM)
_________________________
~there are none so blind as those who will not listen~
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#38917 - 05/30/10 08:08 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Valor]
|
Mindmaster
stranger
Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 45
|
I don't know anyone who uses GBM Workings on a daily or even a weekly basis. However i can say this for LBM. I'll use LBM on a daily basis if i cannot find normal means to remedy a situation.
GBM is useful, yes. But not needed...LBM is a must for the LHP Magician.
Some of this might make a point, and some might be rambling. :P Don't argue with me about psychodrama vs magic has you will be wasting time here. Magic is magic to me and not mental masturbation (not particularly directed at Valor! :P)
LBM/GBM is an imaginary division. In fact, "Black Magic" is as well... We don't exist as disassociated parts, and few people do magic without some benefit directly conferred to themselves even if that benefit is recognition. Not to rail Uncle Anton, but his view of duality is weak and this is one place where he basically got it all wrong. (I admit he borrowed a lot of this from the architecture of the systems from which he derived his own.) One can be individualistic by removing limits from ones life, but can still have a realization of their connection in the primordial cosmic soup. Magic is freeing yourself from all the crap that becomes an obstacle to your will and allows you to fully manifest your being. Anything that isn't a process of doing this isn't magic since no will is involved.
I would go so far as to say that these days the rituals in TSB are very "old" tech inversions of the douche-baggery used by Crowley and company. Modern ritual techniques have jettisoned most of this pomp and got down to the tacks. I don't use any of these anymore because they're just useless crap taking far too much time for the same result. Yes, you cannot do anything GBM on a near daily basis if you use the material in TSB. Nor, would I think you would want to. Kind of odd to be spanking your monkey on a daily basis for a lust ritual when I know of at least seven other more effective techniques. But, if you like jacking off lots.. go for it.
I perhaps find it interesting more that there can even be a GBM vs LBM magic debate. Traditionally, there is high magic and sorcery... Satanists just don't do "high magic" since they don't believe in Holy Guardian Angels, etc. So basically you have Satanic Witch style LBM and stuff that takes longer than the time that it takes to put clothing on is GBM. Technically anything a Satanist would be doing would be sorcery... by common definition... The LBM/GBM debate is moot all of it falls in a very narrow scope.
Personally, I've changed my models as I see fit and have no problem using one vs another as it suits me. This has lead me to taking out the trash several times and undoubtedly I will do it again. I regularly pit systems against one another in a winner takes all battle. You have to do this or you are susceptible be becoming deceived by the dogma of your chosen system. Once you figure out the mechanics you really don't see the divisions of conscious/unconscious/the collective. In fact, if you have only used one 'system' you should certainly stop doing it and learn another immediately. You will learn more about both by the contrasts between them. Even us people on the LHP are not immune to dogma, just vulnerable to the worse type: The Legend in Ones Own Mind Syndrome. Feel free to step back and laugh at yourself and the silly crap you have tried to do, and look at ritual as play not work. If it's not fun... fuck it... life is too short!
- Mind
Edited by Mindmaster (05/30/10 08:10 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#39103 - 06/06/10 09:34 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Mindmaster]
|
William Wright
member
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 375
Loc: Nashville
|
I’ve been giving magic a considerable amount of thought lately, and I’ve come to the conclusion that I’m just not a big fan of the word. Too vague and esoteric, too “spiritual” sounding. Furthermore, I have real-world words that suit my needs just fine. If I want to do something, I set a goal and plan my attack, take action and accomplish it. That’s how I would explain it to a non-Satanist. Why must I substitute that with the word magic?
Some have argued that magic is extraordinary, as opposed to the ordinary actions ordinary people take to accomplish ordinary things. But then, what’s extraordinary? I would argue that whatever one wants to accomplish in life, it all comes down to two things: brains and effort. That’s how Bill Gates founded Microsoft and Sam Walton created Wal-Mart. That’s how Barack Obama became president of the United States. There’s nothing “magical” about it. They just happened to want it more than the next guy, so they went out and made it happen.
So I think I’ll save the word magic for those times I’m referring to a David Copperfield performance. As for what I do in life, I prefer to use words that make sense to me when describing how I get things done. I came, I saw, I conquered.
_________________________
My life is a movie. I am the star.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#39109 - 06/06/10 02:40 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
If magic is defined as an extraordinary power or influence, then many of the things I do is magic. Merriam Webster actually includes "seemingly from a supernatural source" but I think this implies that it can be perceived to be from a supernatural force though does not necessitate that one must believe that it does. Of course the occultists that came before us certainly would only understand how the things they did worked through some supernatural force when he knew of no natural way it could be. I know of no other word that expresses the sort of "extraordinary power and influence" of these individuals, or myself, or anyone else.
I am admittedly quite biased on the subject. The attraction in my eyes is aesthetic in part. You can speak in plain, ordinary words and be properly understood, if you can get somebody to listen. However, I think it is sometimes more important to speak beautifully, to subvert the rational mind and appeal to the emotional mind. There is also a sort of empowerment to magic, that you know and can do something rare and special, something most people cannot. I also view magic as part of self deification. What kind of god cannot use his or her magical powers to influence the environment to their will? I also attach to it an attitude of how to behave and view your actions. You have the powers of a god at your command; you are a god. You must be mindful of your environment, what tactics best to use, the responsibilities you must face due to the consequences of your actions, etc.
If there is a word that can express all this, one that is not loaded with supernatural baggage from the past, then do share. I would certainly like to know of such a word. Until then I shall continue using the mysterious language of our esoteric ancestry.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#39163 - 06/07/10 04:57 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
William,
Will simply does not resonate with me, nor properly describes what I do the same way as magic. Of course my will is important in what I do, but it is only an element needed to do magic. Will only describes my desires. What of my knowledge? What of my forethought and planning? What about the tactics that I use, and the processes that allow my plans to work? What do you call the skillful utilization of all these to have your will be done? What subject is all this held under?
As anyone else, you are free to your own thoughts and preferences. However, I personally think you should think on it further. It took me a rather long time to even decide to use the word, because of very similar arguments you and others have posted.
In most cases, you are right. Plain language is sufficient. I have very few people roll their eyes at me, because I tend not discuss it with people I know would only scoff, and the majority of my occult acquaintances I speak with will agree that what I do can properly be considered magic, and we talk of it as such. I would not explain something to a co-worker in magical tongue because it would not be appropriate to do so. However, if you want to give somebody that sense of wonder you use mysterious and beautiful speech. "Magic" denotes a respect for what you are speaking about, and a secrecy between those with a common knowledge. So what is useful for me may not be useful for you, but I still think magic can be an important part of a person's vocabulary.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#39259 - 06/12/10 02:03 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
paolo sette
Temp Banned
member
Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 237
Loc: IL, USA
|
It all centers on the practioners purview of what he/she wants to accomplish with the act. A magician who is just concerned with going through the process of a spell-ritual for sake of affiliation to an organization won't accomplish much outside of performing the motions of Black Magic. Try to stay away from the superficiality of performing Magic for Magic is vastly deeper than that. Direct your energies within, and employ varied techniques of the Mind to bring about the intuited reason of your Black Magic. (To have something benefit you!)LaVey was on this path when he put forth the idea that it is just psychodrama. I didn't know Anton, and I'm not going to justify either for or against this statement; but, the Doktor was onto something. Rituals-Ceremonies shouldn't be performed for superficiality (psychodrama) purposes, but should be taken to a higher-level (or lower-level, you decide) of realization which enhances the desired effect.
If I go a couple steps further, one has to look at the Magician's spirit that he/she brings. The whole act revolves around this one idea. Bring wonderment, unfathomabilities, and mysticism to the ritual or ceremony, and the Magic will go beyond discursive understanding. Therefore, leaving the people involved with a heightened sense, and like actually accomplishing something. Keep in Mind the five senses, and bring the participants accessories to aid in the attainment of that higher-level of realization. The senses are taste, touch, sight, hearing, and thinking. The Magician just has to delve into the recesses of the Mind, and pull together what he/she wants to effect and affect utilizing the supports Mindfully.
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama 666 [nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#39285 - 06/12/10 05:08 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: paolo sette]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
I have a few questions and some things to add.
I've been hearing a bit about "black" magic here. I may need some explanation as to what is meant when this is added. So far, it appears to me that "black" is the title used when a Satanist acts like a Wiccan and thinks performing something of a greater magic ritual will produce the effects of lesser magic. It also seems to claim the same supernatural forces, only claiming they are natural. Am I mistaken?
If this is so, then I think I must be firmly against black magic. I do not feel the need to invoke an unknown, so far unprovable force, be it natural or supernatural. I don't think that I will go as far as to discourage it's use entirely. I do not think such a force exists, but I may be wrong and could possibly be proven wrong. If you think you have sufficient reason to believe it is there, then by all means use it. However, I think you should understand that you cannot prove its existence, and your own subjectivity may not correspond to reality. Thus, I suggest not to rely on any such forces too heavily and delve into the other, more tangible ways to accomplish your goal.
I have been thinking much on ritual magic, and what can be considered a ritual. I would like to hear what others think about it. I consulted the dictionary and thus far I have had to put many definitions together to make a useful definition. A ritual is a system of action stressing careful attention to form and detail. By this definition, it seems that much of what humans do can be seen as ritual. When I am doing what I would consider lesser magic, what makes it different from the ritual of brushing my teeth, or is brushing my teeth a sort of magic?
I thought of this a while and it seemed I had to once again tweak my view of magic. I think now that magic may begin with a goal. Then it goes to thought, understanding if the goal is worth while and if deciding that it is, planning the ways to achieve the goal. Then comes the ritual, where you implement your plans paying close attention to form and detail. So perhaps I would have to consider brushing my teeth magic, since there is the goal, the plan, and the ritual. However, a sneeze would not be magic for there is no goal or planning. Relieving yourself of waste, as in Jake's example, would not be magic either. The only magic there might be to that situation is doing it in a toilet. You had a goal, you had a plan, and you had a ritual for making sure your waste went into a toilet. However, the waste would eventually come out even if you didn't do that. There is no magic to unconscious bodily functions that I can see.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#39398 - 06/18/10 10:17 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
paolo sette
Temp Banned
member
Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 237
Loc: IL, USA
|
The essence of Black Magic appears to elude you, Lucipher, or perhaps the words used to define the meaning is noetic or perplexing. A hallmark trade ideation is that Satanists are themselves sole monisms. There is nothing exterior. (sometimes I think that I am an agnostic! Then, I'm reminded of where I get my metaphysics from. Ah, I'm a Satanist...I'm a Satanist. LOL!!) One point that is a constant throughout the Dark Arts realm is that the actions have to do with an individualized nature: What you want to accomplish through engaging in the action. Personally, I find Magic's utility in seeing into the nature of my being as it points the way out from fetters to mental freedom. By exercising the Mind with my will and senses around Magic, I spontaneously move from a state of quiescence and quietude to a plain in which things are in flux. Everything in constant motion, that's a preferred reality. More or less, one can say that I have an interplay between my conscious and unconscious. Anyway, Magic is the Agent or catalyst that ignites my sense of self.
The truth of Black Magic is such that if we want to comprehend it, we have to lend ourselves to experience. Whether we want to amplify our passions or bring about the demise of another, the action is individualized. A lot can be said as to the approach, but that's the bottom line. A participant can be only concerned with the relative and limited side of Magic, but I'm in the game for experiential mysticism. When this aspect of Magic is fully engaged, trivialities just lose their hold falling off as the Workings manifesting itself. Am I an addict to Magic? This has come accross my Mind. No, I sternly say...I'm living by Black Magic!
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama 666 [nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41523 - 08/06/10 02:32 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: paolo sette]
|
Mikey58
stranger
Registered: 11/12/09
Posts: 18
Loc: England
|
I recently went to a talk on Buddhism and meditation, and one of the statements made was that the brain is not the mind. This ties in with certain scientific thought on quantum physics and metaphysics. This is a fascinating subject and i believe it bears strongly on magicical practice. Reading books about science made me believe in magic whereas prior to this it was all so much superstition and hokum.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41560 - 08/07/10 12:24 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: paolo sette]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
There is nothing exterior. (sometimes I think that I am an agnostic! Then, I'm reminded of where I get my metaphysics from. Ah, I'm a Satanist...I'm a Satanist. LOL!!) Well that is not my metaphysics. I don't know where you could even get metaphysics from Satanism, aside possibly from reality being natural, especially since it is metaphysics that seem to be the main differences between the different Satanic groups.
My understanding of reality and the metaphysical claims I accept came from my studies into science and philosophy. My philosophical and moral views and personal use of symbolism match up most closely with Satanism, which is why I consider myself a Satanist. I've never looked to Satanism for answers or reassurance of belief.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41589 - 08/07/10 11:12 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
paolo sette
Temp Banned
member
Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 237
Loc: IL, USA
|
My understanding of reality and the metaphysical claims I accept came from my studies into science and philosophy. My philosophical and moral views and personal use of symbolism match up most closely with Satanism, which is why I consider myself a Satanist. I've never looked to Satanism for answers or reassurance of belief. As much as Satanic philosophy is concerned, I have a statement to make: to each person, they can take whatever they can use. When I take a look at something of interest, I like to concretely visualize all that is possible with its utility in my life. Commercial products are no exception. Accountrements of neccessity are typically all that I buy, and I use everthing until it is completely consumed. (It's how I gauge life in general.) Especially with a for-profit religion such as Satanism! It's applicability to how I live life occupies the primary reason why I gravitated towards it in the first place. I enjoy collating Satanism with life; therefore, making a bolder impression on my outlook of it. What a right-handed, evangelical person would consider to be sinful, thus, expiated over with investment of time and energy is by Satanic standards...no deviation at all. The thought of fidelity just flashed accross my mind. As far as Satanism is concerned, you have to look at how the issue of having another person fuck your partner pertains to the conjugal relationship. I prize honesty and truthfulness as two of the most important human attributes there are. If one partner was honest and spoke the truth, relating to the other that they were going out to find a plaything; then, they went out and found another to fuck hitherto: How is the stay-at-home, sole partner to the other- seeking-another fuck handling the situation? Honesty and truthfulness in the situation would benefit both people whereas lying and cheating would severly hamper and diminish the relationship. What would make for interesting reading though is to have further sentences detailing what philosophical viewpoints you find illuminating, what kind of moral stances you take in relation to Satanism, etc. etc. (Just a suggestion) I recently went to a talk on Buddhism and meditation, and one of the statements made was that the brain is not the mind. This ties in with certain scientific thought on quantum physics and metaphysics. This is a fascinating subject and i believe it bears strongly on magicical practice. Reading books about science made me believe in magic whereas prior to this it was all so much superstition and hokum.
I would encourage you to look into Eastern religions in as much as particular books over articles. As both form a bond with each other. One compliments the other. The vacuous nature of Black Magic with Buddhism stems from the essence which means both religions offer a different viewpoint on life and things generally. If we want to get into the inmost life of both, we must forgo all our ordinary habits of thinking which control our everyday life (we must try to see if there is any other way of judging things...for example, as stated above: the person going out to find another while in a relationship.) If we feel dissatisfied somehow with life as its moving forward in our lives, if there is something in our ordinary way of living that deprives us of freedom in its most sanctified sense, we have to endeavor to find a way somewhere which gives us a sense of finality and contentment. (Black Magic=Bring About Change) Both types of religions offer to do this for us whereas the right-hand path religions put all the emphasis on an other-power; thus, passivism is the resulting outcome which I abhor.
I feel better, now. Many thanks...666
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama 666 [nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41591 - 08/08/10 12:18 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: paolo sette]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
As much as Satanic philosophy is concerned, I have a statement to make: to each person, they can take whatever they can use.  I agree, though I would like to expand this as it is true of just about anything. Humans take whatever they can use in most situations.
When I take a look at something of interest, I like to concretely visualize all that is possible with its utility in my life.
Just thought I would add that visualization is a great tool and I would agree that you are right to use this. Also remember to use this when you've tried something and it works well. You can use visualization to repeat the process over and over in you head, and it wires the brain the same way it would if you actually were to do the task repetitiously, making the procedure habit.
It's applicability to how I live life occupies the primary reason why I gravitated towards it in the first place. I enjoy collating Satanism with life; therefore, making a bolder impression on my outlook of it.
I can agree with this sentiment, but your earlier comments seemed a bit dogmatic. Reminding yourself that "I am a Satanist." to keep a certain philosophical or metaphysical claim from entering your thoughts seems close-minded. It is like a Christian that disallows himself to entertain certain ideas because "I am a Christian." Feel free to entertain whatever thoughts that come to you, analyze them, do some actual thinking. Nobody is holding you back but yourself.
What would make for interesting reading though is to have further sentences detailing what philosophical viewpoints you find illuminating, what kind of moral stances you take in relation to Satanism, etc. etc. (Just a suggestion) What drawn me to Satanism can be pretty much broken down into two parts. It's focus on the material, which has metaphysical importance to me. As well as the focus on the self: self preservation, self responsibility, self indulgence, etc. I've thought for a long time that it was best, if you were to enjoy your existence, to lead, control, be selfish, and put yourself first. These things I had thought and believed, and before I started talking with other Satanists I even felt a little guilty for it. Our culture is ravished with the idea of the superiority of a morality of the weak, and when I read LaVey and talked to other Satanists it was really nice to hear from others that it is okay to think in these ways.
Also, my use of symbolism and fondness of magic is something that, as an Atheist, has been mocked by both sides. People either think I shouldn't bother with magic and symbolism as an Atheist, or don't think I should be an Atheist if I'm to "understand" symbolism and magic properly. I've not really had too much problem with this in Satanic circles, however.
I am, as you are, very practical in my magic, attempting to find what works best. I've been working to implement a lot of different fields of study into my magical toolkit and working out what is most practical and useful for me, and possibly others. I'd talk more about other things said, but I'm tired.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41600 - 08/08/10 03:25 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
Michael A.Aquino
veteran member
Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 1247
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
|
A very interesting and multi-faceted thread. Certainly the terms "magic" (M), "Black Magic" (BM), and "White Magic" (WM) are used in a variety of ways by a variety of groups.
Here is how the Temple of Set uses them [which is not to say that you need to]. But before we get to those terms, we have to identify two environments:
The Objective Universe (OU): This is the physical totality of matter & energy, including your own physical body, extending in four dimensions.
The Subjective Universe (SU): This is the creation of the individual's consciousness. It may be a perception or interpretation of the OU, or it may be something entirely different. An individual may also generate more than one SU, simultaneously or consecutively. An SU may have an intended purpose [e.g. for the accomplishment or comprehension of something], or it may be merely reverie, dreaming, allowing one's consciousness to "run wild".
As beings with OU bodily extensions, we can choose, as most noninitiates do, to interact with the OU on a purely-mechanical, stimulus/response basis. This is the realm, the ideology of materialism. It also implies, whether or not such people think about it, Atheism [of both an external god/gods or a self-god]. There is no M here.
M enters the picture the moment a god/gods/selfgod appears. M is the language by which G/Gs/SG communicate with the OU & SU: sense/understand them, embrace/reject them, control them. Hence M is not a phenomenon exclusively of either the OU or the SU; it is a transition, a medium between them.
Now we get to the two basic divisions of M, "White M" (WM) and "Black M" (BM). These have nothing whatever to do with "good" and "evil", except in a very advanced initiatory sense beyond this post.
If an individual consciousness (ka, psyche, soul) fears, denies, and or rejects its distinction and isolation from the OU, it seeks to rejoin it, to be absorbed into it, to become indistinguishable from it. It attempts this through the generation of a SU which is as identical to, or at least as harmonious with the OU as possible, then obliterating its distinction and difference from that OU. This, in its many varieties, is WM. Its theoretical culmination is known by such names as Grace, Samadhi, Nirvana, etc. However WM is nevertheless an illusion, an act of self-deception or self-anesthetizing. It is never actual absorption into the OU, but only a SU construction of same. The most that the isolate consciousness can do is to stupefy itself until its physical extensions cease [in "death"], whereupon it lacks all coherence, becomes a "mindless mind": existing but having no focus or concept of this existence.
BM is divided into two major types: "Lesser BM" (LBM) and "Greater BM" (GBM).
LBM is the influencing of beings, processes, or objects in the OU by the application of obscure physical or behavioral laws.
LBM is an impelling (encouraging, convincing, increasing of probability) measure, not a compelling (forcing, making inevitable) one. The object is to make something happen without expending the time and energy to make it happen through direct cause-and-effect.
Note that the isolate self here has no interest in self-absorption/annihilation. It sees the OU as something separate and wishes to act upon it. It could of course do this by conspicuously-OU means. But LBM explores and experiments other than the ordinary. It does this both for the pure entertainment of it and for additional effects upon other beings' SUs permeating and overlapping the same arena. Indeed the prime goal of a LBM working may be such other-SU impact, and only incidentally upon the OU.
GBM is the causing of change to occur in one's SU in accordance with the will. This change in the SU may cause a similar and proportionate change in the OU.
Examine this definition. A deliberate effort is made to alter one’s subjective frame of reference, so that a thing which used to be conceptualized one way is now conceptualized in another. A distasteful situation may be adjusted to produce a favorable outcome; a live enemy may be adjusted to be thwarted or nonexistent; a desire of any sort may be realized. This begins with full, willful control over the SU. But as GBM continues, the self's entire juxtaposition to, perception & interpretation of, and attitude towards the OU alters. The OU is absorbed gradually and finally completely into one's consciousness. It is thus the inverse of WM: Instead of the individual being absorbed into the OU, the OU is absorbed into the individual, who thereby becomes its final, true god (indeed God). This god transcends and redefines the four OU dimensions, thereby rendering OU "death" meaningless. Indeed he can reshape, destroy, recreate the OU as desired, or many of them. The SU/OU distinction disappears.
More recently we coined the term "Medial BM" (MBM) to describe works blending LBM & GBM. Examples of this are many, from Adolf Hitler's Germany to Walt Disney's Disneyland. LBM is concentrated, elaborated, and interwoven to such an extent that OU phenomena begin to be affected, ostensibly through physical change but consequently in the SUs of others who enter such environments.
Well, that's the "short version".
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino
[On Ignore: Dan_Dread, 6Satan6Archist6, Caladrius, MindFux]
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41639 - 08/08/10 02:43 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Michael A.Aquino]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
Doc, I like you, but of course I must express where I disagree. For now I will accept the general definition you give for the Objective Universe.
The Objective Universe (OU): This is the physical totality of matter & energy, including your own physical body, extending in four dimensions. The definition you gave for SU I think can be made a bit more concise.
The Subjective Universe (SU): The experience of one's psyche, including: perceptions, emotions, thoughts, drives, imagination, etc.
Where I disagree is the idea that the SU is so separated from the OU. The psyche results from the brain, and the more I learn about brain structure and the utility of these different structures, the more confident I become in making that statement. I do not think that when I die what will be left is a "mindless mind." I expect there to be no mind at all, just as there would be no capacity for language if the language centers of one's brain were severely damaged.
As far as I'm concerned, the psyche is not only a result of the OU, but part of it. When you perform GM, you are messing around with your own psyche, but you are also messing with the way the neurons are wired in your brain, which is definitively part of the OU. With the performance of GM, you can change your own psyche and your own brain, but beyond that the only change that may occur from beyond the psyche is how others react to the change you've made within yourself.
This is what I think is actually holding magic back, magicians sit in poorly lit rooms with candles, or whatever they personally do, and try to influence events by thinking about it really, really hard. I'll admit, as I had before, that this can be very beneficial if used with an understanding that you are only manipulating yourself. You can use it to make yourself more confident, more optimistic, think about the ways you can accomplish something, and what you might have to do if it fails. However, you still have to actually do something. Your body language, tone of voice, and actions will match that of somebody who is confident, optimistic, and knows what's going on, because you actually are confident, optimistic, and you've made sure you know what's going on. That will help you out in just about anything you do, but you need a goal and you need to take real action.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41646 - 08/08/10 03:46 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
Michael A.Aquino
veteran member
Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 1247
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
|
Where I disagree is the idea that the SU is so separated from the OU. The psyche results from the brain, and the more I learn about brain structure and the utility of these different structures, the more confident I become in making that statement. I do not think that when I die what will be left is a "mindless mind." I expect there to be no mind at all, just as there would be no capacity for language if the language centers of ones brain were severely injured. You are welcome to that reasoning, and within contemporary society it is the prevailing one. I cheerfully disagree with it, because in my research & personal experience (cf. Category #19/The MetaMind of The Temple of Set Appendix #14/TS Reading List), the psyche is distinct from the mind, though it is a participant in/observer of it. The mind is a bit like those "intelligent" transmissions in advanced cars which can "learn" the habits and impulses of the driver; and the driver coincidentally becomes synchronistic with that device and the car as a whole. But the driver can exit the car without vanishing, and so can the thing that is You. Try it in any number of ways. Get the hell out of Indianapolis, go to Esalen, discover your self, enjoy the hot springs, and "forget your worldly cares at Nepenthe's gay pavilion, where the Phœnix bird repairs and is feeling like a million". You don't have to resign yourself to Dr. Jessup's soggy old sensory-deprivation tanks.
When you perform GM, you are messing around with your own psyche, but you are also messing with the way the neurons are wired in your brain, which is definitively part of the OU. With the performance of GM, you can change your own psyche and your own brain, but beyond that the only change that may occur from beyond the psyche is how others react to the change you've made within yourself. I agree, but in apprehending your psyche (since it is the "primal you", not an object you are acting upon) and reprogramming the "transmission" of your brain-neurons, explain to me how the OU does not change when you now view it through this altered "lens". The "raw material" (matter/energy/NL processes) may still be there, but it is all different for you, which is its entire significance. Indeed the OU is not a single thing, but innumerable perspectives on what noninitiates assume to be a uniform phenomenon. [And yes, you are now entering the Twilight Zone.]
This is what I think is actually holding magic back, magicians sit in poorly lit rooms with candles, or whatever they personally do, and try to influence events by thinking about it really, really hard. Only in Indianapolis. 
But seriously, that's not what ritual chambers are all about. They are devices for the concentration and focusing of thought, the exclusion of distraction, and the beholding/unfolding of self. [In LBM they can be used to do things to/for other persons present. This includes setting in motion, through yourself or them, consequent influences to change events or aspects of the OU.] Oh, and they're also spooky fun.
I'll admit, as I had before, that this can be very beneficial if used with an understanding that you are only manipulating yourself. You can use it to make yourself more confident, more optimistic, think about the ways you can accomplish something, and what you might have to do if it fails. However, you still have to actually do something. Your body language, tone of voice, and actions will match that of somebody who is confident, optimistic, and knows what's going on, because you actually are confident, optimistic, and you've made sure you know what's going on. That will help you out in just about anything you do, but you need a goal and you need to take real action.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino
[On Ignore: Dan_Dread, 6Satan6Archist6, Caladrius, MindFux]
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41653 - 08/08/10 06:48 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Michael A.Aquino]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
Thank you Dr.Aquino, for posting your valued insights on this forum.
If an individual consciousness (ka, psyche, soul) fears, denies, and or rejects its distinction and isolation from the OU, it seeks to rejoin it, to be absorbed into it, to become indistinguishable from it. It attempts this through the generation of a SU which is as identical to, or at least as harmonious with the OU as possible, then obliterating its distinction and difference from that OU. This, in its many varieties, is WM. Its theoretical culmination is known by such names as Grace, Samadhi, Nirvana, etc. However WM is nevertheless an illusion, an act of self-deception or self-anesthetizing. It is never actual absorption into the OU, but only a SU construction of same. The most that the isolate consciousness can do is to stupefy itself until its physical extensions cease [in "death"], whereupon it lacks all coherence, becomes a "mindless mind": existing but having no focus or concept of this existence.
I know some American Buddhists and Hindus, and WM would not accurately portray what their beliefs seem to be. Buddhists and Hindus believe everything is one. The ones I know speak of expanding their minds so they become everything. It seems to me that WM and BM reach the same conclusion where there is no SU/OU distinciton.WM is simply BM done by people who don't know what it is but in the end, all M is really BM. GM or GBM is the use of a ritual environment to help us take our focus off the OU and instead focus on the SU which is normally hidden by the external interference of the outside world. You write of multiple SU per person. We can extend this to mean that each person has a Primary SU that they mostly unconsciously created during their lives and in GM, we create new Secondary SU that effect our existing Primary SU. Our Primary SU is our interpretation of the OU and the Secondary SU are what we create in GM to change our Primary SU. So we're pretty much creating ourselves consciously from GBM to GBM.
So the OU is ultimately a converging point of agreement between many SU. What you're saying is that the OU would not exist if there were no multiple SU to apprehend it right? So even though the OU exists, it is dependent on the multiple SU perspectives that make it up. If that's the case and the Prince of Darkness is the original source of human consciousness, would that not imply that Satan or Set created the physical universe, similar to Jehovah creating the earth in the "good"book?
Hope this did not confuse everyone but this is interesting stuff. I'm glad there is a place where people can discuss these ideas.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41657 - 08/08/10 09:10 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Michael A.Aquino]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
We can disagree on exactly what psyche is for the moment, Doc, as it seems to make little difference in the ways we look at magic. I also could have a rather long discussion about SU and OU, but this also seems to have little effect. I think we can both agree that GM is meant to make a change in the self, and that this is the purpose of the ritual chamber and the rituals (and it can be used for LM if you bring others into it). We also agree that one must have a goal, and that one must take action. Our points of disagreement I do think would make quite a good discussion, but I'll save that for another time.
This is what I think is actually holding magic back, magicians sit in poorly lit rooms with candles, or whatever they personally do, and try to influence events by thinking about it really, really hard. Only in Indianapolis.  I really do wish that was true, however, this is what I've seen the majority of occultists do and teach. I've even found Satanists that do this, though most of them have been Theistic Satanists but not necessarily. Considering how few Satanists I've been able to come across, this is the most common form of "magic" I see. A bunch of psychologically masturbatory rituals equivalent to dramatized Christian prayer. All the psychological effects of having done something without actually doing a damned thing. This is something I am quite strongly against. I think Satanists should know better; I'm just reminding them.
Returning to White and Black Magic for a moment, from what you've said about the topic I'm not even sure if I'm able to give proper sanction to the definitions provided given my stances on SU and OU. However, I think I can do some creative translation so I might be able to see the distinction clearer.
Here is my attempt (possibly just the first):
White Magic (WM): Magic that aims to benefit, or to integrate the self into, an entity or ideology other than the self.
Black Magic (BM): Magic that aims to benefit, or isolate, the self.
This would definitely put me on the Dark Side of the spectrum. I do some WM from time to time, but usually only if it helps me out so it might still be considered Black. Yet, this distinction seems almost identical to the distinction between Left Hand and Right Hand paths. Either this is something I simply don't understand, or cannot properly use because of the differences in metaphysical claims being made.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41882 - 08/13/10 03:21 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
Matt, that is a great example. Hitler did amazing things in the art of manipulation. Here are a few thoughts I figured I would just throw out there.
To manipulate a large amount of people you have to physically change the environment, you pay close attention to your presence in front of audiences, you put propaganda in place. The human mind doesn't really differentiate between hearing something from 3 different source, or hearing it from the same source 3 times. The mind will construct a belief of how popular something is based on how often they see or hear it. Also, you subvert their conscious minds and connect to people on an emotional level, go straight for the subconscious, entertain them, entice them, tell them all the things they desperately want to hear, then you can convince them of just about anything. Then there is his message of a common enemy. Nothing brings people together more than having a scapegoat to blame for everything.
As far as the Objective and Subjective Universes are concerned, that which I might disagree with many of you is the nature of SU and OU/NU. I view the SU as a part of the OU, and the OU as something truly objective; it is what it is no matter our perceptions of it may be. For me, it seems quite easy to see how the SU can impose itself on the OU. My perception may contribute to why I see no need for unexplained forces. Especially when it seems to me much of it has been explained already at least in part. You experience life, you have a thought, you take an action, and your SU has changed the OU.
The magic is understanding how to change the OU to create a change in the SU of others in a directed way. I think there is probably little disagreement here. This is what I would like to focus on. We all get the general idea of SU and OU, though we might disagree in details. Yet, these details don't really seem to effect our views of magic in any significant ways, at least it doesn't seem to in my perspective. So I would hope to avoid bickering about petty details that do not seem relevant to the matter at hand. Let us save it for another thread.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41900 - 08/13/10 09:52 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
Hey all,
Here are some ideas I thought of as I was feeding my kittens.
The OU itself is the blind creation/ point of agreement of all the SU out there. If there were no SU, there would be no OU. How can you know the OU exists without your personal perspective informing you of it? In no way do I deny the reality of the OU. Just because it is a creation of the SU does not diminish it's significance. If there were no SU, the OU would not be. If the OU is the meeting point or agreed upon reality of all SU, then the question arises, what was the first SU? This first SU can be understood as the Prince of Darkness. If the OU is the area where all SU overlap, and is an active creation of all SU, then those who seek to merge with it(RHP'ers)are simply barking up the wrong tree.
Greater Magic is the awareness that you are a SU and then carefully creating a new SU which reflects what you desire to manifest. This new SU can be seen as your self ahead of self. If your Ritual is successful, you will Become the SU you created and your desire will be realized within and to a degree in the OU and the SU of others. If you are wise, you will not bask in the glory of victory for too long, and create a new SU as you seek future victory, and because there is no rest for the wicked. What do you think?
Duende
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41914 - 08/14/10 01:57 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
paolo sette
Temp Banned
member
Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 237
Loc: IL, USA
|
Kwatz!
Pshaw!!
The discussion of the Universe whether subjective or objective intrigues me with broaching on the prodigious topic of Magic, and giving ample examples with follow through attempting to hypostatize. Let me reassert that all sides are valid until the locus is fully met, and proffers by speculation and cognoscenti. Let me propose a different mode of epistemology which is common place with Indologists. There is a Sanskrit word termed maya whence I take refuge in with describing the phenomenal Universe and World of particulars we live in that when everything is envisaged: everything is evanescent, impermanent, ephemeral, and changing. Minus the Absolute Truth which for sake of this thread is Set-Satan as the appellations with the ideational facts are beyond human conceptualization or categorization. The One is outside the limitations of words, and effects the unattainable by making it attainable which defies logic altogether through superimposition of thought.
Here is something to think about in pithy sentences that border on aphorisms: The aforementioned posts can be distinguished in three groups. 1) Realists-those who maintain the reality of everything. 2) Idealists-those who maintain the reality of thought only. 3) Nihilists (with the prior post as well as myself)-those who maintain that everything is Void (unreal). (Go further.) The type of thinking as portrayed can be met head-on with thinking still further along the same lines of ratiocintation. Replying to the philosophic pluralist objections (meaning all who responded)that if we acquiesce to various fiats or doctrines: 1) The ordinary means of correct knowledge and perception become invalid because the prescence of manifoldness is equipoise in relation to the objects represented, if we accept the real as real. For example, a definitive jar is a definitive jar, or is it not? To follow this thinking: 2) All the texts with injunctions and prohibitions will lose their purport if the distinction on which their validity depends does not really exist or is a manifestation of something different. To follow this thinking: 3) The entire body of doctrines (this encompasses the Temple of Set-Church of Satan, also) which refer to the explainable by means of locution will collapse, if the distinction of teacher and pupil on which it depends is fallicious. This statement challenges the way we've been learning all our lives...
Accept nothing prima facie. Challenge your thinking about things. Challenge them yet again and again. This was ment to throw a wrench into your mentation with posing conundrums.
Ciao...
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama 666 [nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41921 - 08/14/10 06:19 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Dan_Dread]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
The goal of sculpting your subjective universe to your Will is something I work towards every day. In that I am sympathetic to your ideas. But I think reality is what it is, and whether or not our particular species of animal are here to experience it doesn't make too much difference. I think the idea that our combined experience of the world somehow creates it to be an extraordinary claim for which extraordinary evidence would be required, before one should give it any serious consideration.
I agree that reality is what it is. But our ability to perceive that reality, to be aware of it is via our consciousness of it. My ideas of the OU being a creation of the mind is based on my personal experience with Greater Magic. For many years, I have considered many explanations as to how Greater Magic works and thus far, the concept of the OU as the creation of a limitless number of SU seems to fit best. These thoughts I am entertaining here are only for consideration as an approach to Greater Magic. If anyone wants to take them further, beyond the Ritual Chamber, that's up to them. Again, if the OU were the creation of the SU, this does not make it any less real. The OU is not a single thing but a mass of overlapping SU. This makes any idea of becoming one with the OU quite impossible and mucho loco.  Although this would be an immaterial approach to reality, it is no way solipsism, which denies the existence of the OU or of other SU! Besides explaining how Greater Magic works, it also has implications in regards to what the self is as well as the idea of Satan. Through Greater Magic, we can become aware of ourselves as an ego that is not just a self image or personality but a SU of limitless potential. Personal immortality is the birth right of every conscious being within such a cosmology since the OU never defined the SU(you) completely to begin with. Those who are not self aware, who are not Satanists, unconsciously (blindly) participate in the creation and definition of the OU. If you are not willfully shaping your SU, then you can rest assured someone else is and you are mostly a product of the SU of others. This why the sheep are called sheep. If Satan was the first SU, there automatically had to be an OU present. Satan is not God cloaked in a black robe with red horns and cloven hoofs . In order to become Satan he would have had to differentiate himself from everything else. In order to achieve identity, what became Satan created another SU that was not identical to him. In other words, Satan gained existence through an act of Greater Magic. Satan is the archetype of the cosmic rebel. Each time we engage in Greater Magic, we are emulating Satan's action of achieving intellectual independence from the Universe. This is what Greater Magic does for us if we become sensitive to it. The changes in the OU are byproducts of Greater Magic not the goal of GM itself. This is just speculation but it is speculation based on based on my experience with GM and the experiences of others with GM. Some may find their experiences with GM will vary. I find it useful to engage in such thinking because in examining these concepts, I hope to uncover better models of applicable to GM which allow me to apply it more efficiently in my life. As Satanists, I think it is fair to say that as Satanists, we resonate and pridefully identify with the archetype of Satan. We may find that by investigating what Satan represents to us further, the more we understand Satan, the more we understand ourselves.
Duende
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41937 - 08/14/10 02:31 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Dan_Dread]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
Well I was trying to avoid it, but here I go anyway.
I've been reading the latest responses. I've found a few statements that caused me think of possibly better ways to visualize this to examine it more closely. The idea that the Objective is the result of the agreement between separate Subjective Universes seems at first a silly idea. After some thought, however, I think I've found ways of looking at the problem to better understand the other position. Hopefully this may illuminate my position as well.
If the Objective Universe manifests itself from the Subjective Universes, what causes the SUs to agree. Say there is a group of people in a room, all of the people agree that in the room is a table. They can all describe the table, and express that they all see what appears to be the same table. What keeps some of the people from seeing a chair instead, or perhaps they don't even see the room, but a field with an apple tree? Why should they agree if there is nothing tangible to agree upon? This view has many other problems as well. If the OU is the result of the SU, then you have no reason to consider what you call objective as objective. The natural world would be subjective, and there would be no objective point to agree upon. We can all be riding around on flying unicorns if we convinced enough people to agree that they exist. By this logic, God should exist as there are plenty of Subjective Universes in agreement pertaining to his existence. The convergence of SUs does have its place in the discussion, however, but I will get back to that later.
If people are to be able to make mistake and to be able to learn, if objects do not come into existence and fairy tales are not to become real simply by agreement, we must inhabit a universe that cannot be brought into existence by thought alone. People or no people, life or no life, with or without any SUs, the objective universe would still exist.
There is another side to the coin. As a human being, I can only speak of all this subjectively. From a psychological stand point, what a person believes to be true, effectively is true for that person. What everyone accepts as truth effectively is truth until there is a change in perceptions and thinking. This is the subjective agreement on the perception of the Objective Universe, but is not the OU itself.
Now here is the kicker, the SU is part of the OU. Deny it all you wish. Do you breathe without air, drink without water, think without a brain, or touch what isn't there? Of course not. The reliable evidence that we have concerning the human mind is that it functions the same way as, and is determined by, how the brain works. The mind is the product of objective computation, in an objective system of the body, with objective processes and objective input, in an objective universe. Each person is restricted by their neurophysiology, their brain chemistry, and what sensory data they come in contact with and are able to process. We grow and become reflections of our environments, our cultural upbringing, our experiences.
We share our subjective ideas with the use of associated symbols through objective mediums: pressure waves through air, ink on paper, electronic characters on a screen, etc. If the person has a similar enough experience, is part of the same cultural heritage you reflect, or is at very least has made some association to it (perhaps by learning the language or through exposure), then the message can be understood and cause action to occur in their brains that affects the mind.
There are many, many different ways, different processes, in which the SU and OU interact and change one another. This is where I see the domain of magic, or at least from where much of my magic has developed. You can almost break magic down into two parts. You need to understand the SU, the human mind, and how the OU can change it, and you have to understand how the SU can change the OU. Using the mechanisms that control these processes for your own advantage though an understanding of them is what I consider magic.
At least this is my subjective perspective.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41949 - 08/14/10 06:16 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
If the SU is an aspect of the OU, then are you asserting that GM is merely a psychological effect that does not extend beyond the mind of the individual Satanist?
I suppose you had to say something that made sense eventually.
YES.
Magic is self transformative psychodrama. Kicking the greater subconscious mind into action though catharsis. The conscious mind is a very small part of who we are, and does not exert nearly as much control as some seem to think. The conscious mind is largely an observer, rather than an actor. The purpose of GM is to affect change in ways that are generally 'off limits' to the conscious mind.
It is through these changes in ones own perceptions and actions that the objective universe is effected and changed.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41965 - 08/15/10 10:57 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
If you apply the idea that subjective universes create everything to your day to day affairs or to science than yes, to some it may appear as nonsense. Within thie the ritual chamber however, you may find that scientifically irrelevant ideas may yield some OU results that warrant further investigation.
What scientifically irrelevant ideas exactly? It might be insightful to our perceptions of your views.
Can the application of GM result in a strengthening of our sense of self which makes the SU appear to dwarf the OU? Yes.
Well you're screwing around with your own psyche, so of course you can make it appear as such. Whether it is true, or even beneficial, are questions that should be asked.
What causes the SU to agree? One thing I have noticed over the years is that the OU results of my successful GM operations manifest through the actions of other people, thus implying a link between all SU. There appears to be a link between all SU . Through GM, the SU of the Satanist seems to be able to violate the "laws" of the OU.
You can make yourself perceive anything with GM, which is why you should be careful with it. If you do some sort of cursing ritual on somebody, and you convince yourself you've done something real to them by doing nothing but a ritual alone in a room, then for anything bad that happens to that person after that you're going to take credit. It is the same with any other sort of ritual. It doesn't make you a powerful magician, it makes you wishful and probably delusional. I will agree that SUs are connected, but they are connected by material means by the many ways we communicate to one another.
If the SU is an aspect of the OU, then are you asserting that GM is merely a psychological effect that does not extend beyond the mind of the individual Satanist?
I suppose this is mostly right, but you're missing a huge aspect of it. The GM ritual will only effect you psychologically, but the psychological effects will change your behavior. This brings what you've done in the GM ritual to the realm of the OU and LM. You use GM to change yourself, change your behavior, with the goal of enhancing your LM abilities.
I want to know how GM works. I want to know why. I want to know how the whole contraption is put together. I am not certain if I will truly know for sure, but I derive great satisfaction and many other benefits from the quest itself.
If you want to understand how GM works, I suggest a psychology class. There are psychology lectures online, free to the public. It's a good start.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41971 - 08/16/10 12:31 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Dan_Dread]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
If the SU is an aspect of the OU, then are you asserting that GM is merely a psychological effect that does not extend beyond the mind of the individual Satanist?
I suppose you had to say something that made sense eventually. YES. Magic is self transformative psychodrama. Kicking the greater subconscious mind into action though catharsis. The conscious mind is a very small part of who we are, and does not exert nearly as much control as some seem to think. The conscious mind is largely an observer, rather than an actor. The purpose of GM is to affect change in ways that are generally 'off limits' to the conscious mind. It is through these changes in ones own perceptions and actions that the objective universe is effected and changed.
Dan Dread,
Your view of GM as mere psychodrama is very common among those who have not tried it, are unsuccessful at it, or are simply afraid of it. It is quite common for people like you, to feel insecure when their beliefs are challenged and then lash out to defend their soft and lazy perspectives. Examining complex ideas such as Greater Magic and the operation of the human psyche demands that you get up and away from the soft drinks and potato chips, and actually do hard work. I can help you when you are ready to get back into shape . Until that time, it is obvious that you are not responsible for what you say or do on the 600 club any more than a boisterous fifth grader who stumbled into a university level class.
I would like to clarify GM to the legions of the silent majority who read posts on the 600 Club daily. Having personally interacted with a good number of Church of Satan and Temple of Set members through the years, I can state that most Satanists *do not* believe Greater Magic is just mere psychological "play acting." Most Satanists who see Greater Magic as just catharsis and "play acting" also tend to be those who rarely use it or find no interest in it whatsoever.
The perspective that GM is just "play acting" for fun or just emotional gratification is not the only one on the matter.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41973 - 08/16/10 01:27 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Autodidact
member
Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 371
|
(general reply) (NB: in the time it's taken me to put my thoughts together, much of this has already been discussed. Feel free to skip altogether.)
Reading through this thread, it seemed a good exercise to spell out my current thoughts on magic, and throw them into the mix for comment. Note that this is mostly my own definitions and my current opinion on why things are. I've never done any rituals. This might seem baseline to most of you, but I like understanding why things work.
Background The human brain is a remarkable thing. It's an excellent pattern-matching device, able to find patterns with a minimal amount of information. (See, for example, the success rates of EMTs or firemen who need to make decisions under pressure on almost zero information.) It's so good, in fact, that's it's very easy to trick false positives out of it.
But even more remarkable than that, it's aware of its own functioning, and is able to reprogram itself. So easily is this accomplished that it's often done unknowingly based on the inputs a person gets. Most people would not admit this to themselves.
Human are social animals, and evolved as such. (See, eg, Ed Wilson's Sociobiology) Whether social behavior is embedded in the genes or not is irrelevant to this discussion, but the fact that most human behavior is predictable is. (See, eg, Cialdini's Influence)
Humans are also herd animals, by which I mean that it takes far less energy to just let the alpha male make the decisions.
I heard Arthur C. Clarke's quote, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" when I was very young, and use it in a more general sense - "technology" (including magic) is just a tool, whether physical or procedural, and "sufficiently advanced" is a more specific way of saying "any unknown".
LBM Given the above, most LBM is only "magic" because most people don't understand how people or social groups work. I'm not saying I do, of course; I'm just saying that it seems to me that most LBM could/should be explainable via normal human behavioral responses. I don't discount "super-/supra-natural" methods, but I've never actually seen them in play. For instance, much of what LaVey says in The Satanic Witch is (it seems to me) simply leveraging normal male sexual instinct and behavior.
The "smile" example given earlier in the thread is a perfect example. Despite being denounced as "insignificant", consider what actually happens - you perform an action, and somebody else automatically performs a known response, without thinking about it. In essence,you have made them act by your will. Simple, yes, but this is the basic building block of all (or much) LBM.
A better example is from Cialdini's book: a Hare Krishna gives you a flower, you take it, then a donation is asked for - usually it's given. This is the reciprocation rule, and it works extremely well. Marcel Mauss phrased it thus: "There is an obligation to give, an obligation to receive, and an obligation to repay."
With this understanding of LBM (even if there's more to LBM), it seems clear that one with a Will, an alpha male (or alpha female) can easily conceive a method to work his will on most people. It might take a lot of work, though ... if it was easy, anybody could do it. To paraphrase Crowley, "Everybody is a potential star." Not everybody is actually willing to expend the effort, though - this is what separates (in this context) Satanists from sheeple. Sheeple have their SU constructed by others.
Lucifer Rising mentioned "high magic" in another thread - personally I call that "propaganda", as codified by Edward Bernays in the 1920's (I think). It's basically the same thing - control the input people get, leverage known human behavioral responses, make them act as desired. (Update: see the Hitler examples earlier in this thread.)
In both small-scale and large-scale LBM, continuous exposure or repetition leads to reprogramming the targets. Brainwashing is a concentrated version of this. American "political discussion" in the media is probably a more wishy-washy, undirected form of this.
GBM I have not done any GBM rituals, but my distinct impression is that part of GBM is akin to "doing LBM on yourself". Since one can autodeify, and one controls one's subjective universe, and since one's brain is easily reprogrammable, it seems that it should be straightforward to adjust as desired. ("Look everybody, it's Tony Robbins!")
I think this is the objective (or part of the objective) to the yoga practices in the Crowley systems and the Temple of Set (I think I saw something that made me think that of ToS - please correct me if I'm wrong). See also Robert Anton Wilson's Prometheus Rising.
If you reprogram your SU to get where you want to be, is that any different than changing the OU? I dunno. In my metaphysics, the OU includes all SUs, including yours - does changing your own SU constitute changing the OU? Again, I dunno. Certainly seems like it.
GBM also seems a useful tool to focus yourself, and perhaps to focus your will (or Will). I think this is also part of the point of yoga in AC's systems, or perhaps in general.
Since I haven't done any rituals, I can't speak to actually modifying the OU solely via a GBM ritual ("like in the movies"). As I said in the beginning, I don't rule it out, I just haven't seen it done.
Conclusion There is no conclusion - I'm learning and cross-referencing a lot of this, and I'm open to having my mind changed. As I said, this is all just my current opinion, and probably not new for most of you.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41977 - 08/16/10 08:11 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
Dan Dread,
Your view of GM as mere psychodrama is very common among those who have not tried it, are unsuccessful at it, or are simply afraid of it. It is quite common for people like you, to feel insecure when their beliefs are challenged and then lash out to defend their soft and lazy perspectives.
This made me laugh. Project much? I challenged your idea, and here you are lashing out with asinine character judgments and direct personal attacks. One can only assume because you are insecure 
Examining complex ideas such as Greater Magic and the operation of the human psyche demands that you get up and away from the soft drinks and potato chips, and actually do hard work. I can help you when you are ready to get back into shape  . Until that time, it is obvious that you are not responsible for what you say or do on the 600 club any more than a boisterous fifth grader who stumbled into a university level class. Well, from my perspective you have things exactly backwards. The sort of beliefs based on a need to believe rather than any sort of consistency with reality are a dime a dozen. If you think you are actually effecting the universe by saying some chants and lighting some candles, or even somehow creating the universe with your thoughts, I don't really think you are in any position to be pretending your perspective is somehow more advanced. Maybe advanced as far as psychosis go, but that's about it. We live in the material world, and if you understand magic in anything other than a carnal context you are simply deluding yourself, and further missing out on the benefits understanding your tool set provides.
The perspective that GM is just "play acting" for fun or just emotional gratification is not the only one on the matter.
Putting words into my mouth is rather unbecoming, you should really stop letting your emotions rule you. I neither used those words nor did I imply anything close to what you are saying. I fear you have missed the point entirely.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41978 - 08/16/10 08:18 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
If you are saying the universe IS..for all intents and purposes, sensory signals interpreted by the brain, and as such the only reality we can experience is completely subjective,..then I agree 100%.
Consider a video game. All the code is there, in a certain order, formatted a certain way. The graphics engine interprets that code and delivers it in a way that is meaningful to our brain and senses. Take the graphics engine away, and the code is still there. Reality is what it is, all we are is interpreters.
On the other hand, the belief that we somehow project reality out of ourselves and without us all would cease to exist, is patently stupid.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41980 - 08/16/10 10:36 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
I would like to clarify GM to the legions of the silent majority who read posts on the 600 Club daily. Having personally interacted with a good number of Church of Satan and Temple of Set members through the years, I can state that most Satanists *do not* believe Greater Magic is just mere psychological "play acting." Well according to Duende I was right about one thing for sure. He's implied there are plenty of delusional people sitting in rooms trying to change the world by thinking really, really hard about it, and not only in Indianapolis. When do I get my apology Doc?
Just so I'm clear, no hard feelings toward Doctor Aquino. We seem to mostly agree on the stuff that matters. You can't just sit in a room and expect shit to happen.
As for Duende, he's well convinced that there is some scientifically irrelevant force that does all the hard work. Probably no hope for him.
Autodidact, that was a great response. Easy to say that when I agree almost completely, but still. Propaganda definitely is High Magic according to my definition. There are other things besides propaganda that could be considered HM, but most HM could be classified as propaganda of some sort. I just prefer the term. You have to admit though, compared to propaganda, with all its negative connotations, High Magic sounds almost royal.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41985 - 08/17/10 05:15 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Dan_Dread]
|
Diavolo
Moderator
stalker
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 3781
|
If you are saying the universe IS..for all intents and purposes, sensory signals interpreted by the brain, and as such the only reality we can experience is completely subjective,..then I agree 100%.
Consider a video game. All the code is there, in a certain order, formatted a certain way. The graphics engine interprets that code and delivers it in a way that is meaningful to our brain and senses. Take the graphics engine away, and the code is still there. Reality is what it is, all we are is interpreters.
On the other hand, the belief that we somehow project reality out of ourselves and without us all would cease to exist, is patently stupid.
Of course the universe as we perceive it is nothing but a manifestation of sensory interpretation and when we, the observers, cease to exist, all -Earth, the galaxy etc- will lose its current natural shape. The natural reality as we know it will indeed cease to exist.
We do project reality, or what most perceive as reality, and as such, I do think it can be molded but unless we are able to circumvent, or manipulate our biological limitations, we'll be stuck in only toying with the interpretation.
In some ways it is similar to the computer analogy besides us being an independently evolved processor that developed its own unique way of interpreting the basic code and translating it on its monitor. The only difference being we have a hunch there is some basic code but because we are limited to interpreting that what we, at the same time, manifest, it is close to impossible for us to penetrate into the very basics.
D.
Edited by Diavolo (08/17/10 05:53 AM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41988 - 08/17/10 10:13 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
Autodidact
member
Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 371
|
If the SU is an aspect of the OU, then are you asserting that GM is merely a psychological effect that does not extend beyond the mind of the individual Satanist? I suppose this is mostly right, but you're missing a huge aspect of it. The GM ritual will only effect you psychologically, but the psychological effects will change your behavior. This brings what you've done in the GM ritual to the realm of the OU and LM. You use GM to change yourself, change your behavior, with the goal of enhancing your LM abilities.
This exchange, I think, is the crux of the whole conversation.
Duende, you said you wanted to know how GM works - well, that's how it works. You change yourself, then you act.
Part of the problem here seems, to me, to be too much abstraction. If we stop using the term "OU" to mean all the collected SUs and start using the term "human society", things should become much more understandable.
It should then also be clear, I suspect, that what's trying to be passed off as "GM" is actually the realm of LM. One cannot simply redefine things and, as Lucifer Rising said, "sit in a room and expect shit to happen."
Society is made up of other people, each with their own wills (regardless of whether you think they're using them effectively or not). If you want to call that whole shared experience "the OU", that's fine and dandy, but doing something solely in your own SU (eg in your ritual chamber) will not affect someone else's SU. You must act in the "real world", where your SUs overlap, if you wish to change their SU.
If you're "targetting" one person, you're doing what LaVey called LBM. If you're "targetting" a million people, you're doing what Lucifer Rising calls "High Magic", which is based on LBM principles - it's not GBM simply because the scope is larger.
I would like to clarify GM to the legions of the silent majority who read posts on the 600 Club daily. Having personally interacted with a good number of Church of Satan and Temple of Set members through the years, I can state that most Satanists *do not* believe Greater Magic is just mere psychological "play acting."
If they're not acting in the real world, outside the ritual chamber, to achieve their goals, then they're no different than the masses that pray for health or a promotion or winning the lottery.
In those cases, ironically, when they identify something that seems to affirm the success of their ritual, they're actually closer at that moment to real GM than they were in the ritual chamber.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#41990 - 08/17/10 03:40 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
All magick can be described as manipulation and as such, there are only two approaches; either manipulate oneself or manipulate others.
And that my friend, is really the bottom line.
/thread
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42004 - 08/17/10 08:26 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Autodidact
member
Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 371
|
I experience catharsis as well but there are times when there appears something of the ritual did act beyond my skull and modify the SU of other people and the OU.
Hm, try looking at it from my point of view: the statement above sounds like you're saying, "Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't."
How would you try to convince me it's not just coincidence? Even a broken clock is right twice a day. For instance, is there a certain method that works reliably more often than chance?
I'm not questioning your beliefs, just trying to evaluate your claims.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42005 - 08/17/10 08:45 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
6Satan6Archist6
senior member
Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2233
Loc: Oregon
|
I have known Satanists who have had experiences as a result of GM that they were unable to explain as LM or just coincidence.
Even if what you say is true that doesn't mean that there isn't a perfectly rational explanation. For example: When a door shuts seemingly by itself one might jump to explain it by saying it was the work of a ghost, forgetting that they left a window open.
These experiences are moments of synchronicity where events occurred in the OU which reflected the desired results in GM.
One time I wanted a Mountain Dew real bad and within five minutes of me thinking about how much I wanted one my roommate came through the front door with a Mountain Dew for me. Sometimes we get what we want. I certainly do not think that me wanting it caused my friend to get it for me.
This link or connection may be a force not yet discovered through science.
This is probably because 'coincidence' is more than likely the explanation allowing for little to no reason for science to look for such a force.
I think that through GM, we give form to this force/link within the ritual chamber. I don't think it matters if you say certain words in a certain order or summon a god or demon.
Well if that is the case then it shouldn't matter how any of it is done. It shouldn't matter what your altar looks like, what sort of tools are used etc. This puts ritual in league with a process of affecting the self. If ritual were to have any true outward effects on anything other than the self then it would follow that it has to be done a certain way or it would not work at all.
experience catharsis as well but there are times when there appears something of the ritual did act beyond my skull and modify the SU of other people and the OU.
Appearances can be deceiving.
_________________________
Ultimate Satanic Bad Ass of Ultimate Satanic Bad Assery PhD Esq. LLC Inc.^∞ DCLXVI°
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42009 - 08/17/10 10:31 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
Duende (and other room sitters that may be),
I will fulfill your need for acceptance for a moment. I will say that it is possible that there is some currently unknown force or connection between human beings that we can manipulate. However, entertain the thought that it could just be chance.
First, you probably remember a far higher ratio of times it has seemed to work than times it has not, so whatever ratio you're thinking in your head right now is probably way off. You can also raise the probability by casting for something likely to happen anyway. Then, determining how much time you give for something to happen, you're increasing the probability even further. If you cast for something general enough, and you give it enough time, it becomes almost certain to happen whether you do the ritual or not.
This is, at least in part, probably why many here do not believe there is such an unknown connection, though I cannot speak for everyone. The fact is, we have plenty of known connections that work quite well, and that we can manipulate. We know that it works, we even understand how, at least in part. It is fairly reliable magic that can and in many cases has been backed up by science.
Your magic on the other hand has little to no scientific support, and can often be explained by mere probability. Would it not at least make sense to make the effort to learn what we already understand. If then you are thoroughly convinced that these unknown connections still exists, or you think they could exist, then you have only added more tools and methods to your arsenal.
Since this is not the path you seem to have chosen, it appears you are lazy and dull. You have not bothered to do any real research. You've delved so far into the unknown that you haven't made any time to understand the known. How can you speak of unknown forces when you do not have an understanding of what is already known?
So turn off the lights, burn the candles, and sit in the dark. That's what you're going to do anyway. Or maybe, just maybe, you will look deeper into it. Maybe you will really try to understand the human mind. Though, you'll probably be too busy buying candles.
Edited by Lucifer Rising (08/17/10 10:34 PM) Edit Reason: typos
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42010 - 08/17/10 11:23 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Autodidact]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
(general reply) (
GBM I have not done any GBM rituals, but my distinct impression is that part of GBM is akin to "doing LBM on yourself". Since one can autodeify, and one controls one's subjective universe, and since one's brain is easily reprogrammable, it seems that it should be straightforward to adjust as desired. ("Look everybody, it's Tony Robbins!")
I think this is the objective (or part of the objective) to the yoga practices in the Crowley systems and the Temple of Set (I think I saw something that made me think that of ToS - please correct me if I'm wrong). See also Robert Anton Wilson's Prometheus Rising.
If you reprogram your SU to get where you want to be, is that any different than changing the OU? I dunno. In my metaphysics, the OU includes all SUs, including yours - does changing your own SU constitute changing the OU? Again, I dunno. Certainly seems like it.
GBM also seems a useful tool to focus yourself, and perhaps to focus your will (or Will). I think this is also part of the point of yoga in AC's systems, or perhaps in general.
Since I haven't done any rituals, I can't speak to actually modifying the OU solely via a GBM ritual ("like in the movies"). As I said in the beginning, I don't rule it out, I just haven't seen it done.
Conclusion There is no conclusion - I'm learning and cross-referencing a lot of this, and I'm open to having my mind changed. As I said, this is all just my current opinion, and probably not new for most of you.
I think for a number of people, GM is "doing LBM on yourself." GBM by definition is not. When you do LBM on yourself, you are engaging in what some would call White Magic.  I don't believe anyone can change the OU through ritual "like in the movies"but I do think we sometimes can give it the right push at the right moment to create the momentum we need for whatever our objective was. Is there any reason you have not attempted GM that you would like to share?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42011 - 08/17/10 11:45 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
I think for a number of people, GM is "doing LBM on yourself." GBM by definition is not. When you do LBM on yourself, you are engaging in what some would call White Magic.
Why would 'some' call it white magic? Magic has no colour, magic is magic. It all serves the will of the magician. The only distinction is the choice to delve into self deception or keep it real. Do you care about undefiled wisdom or do you prefer to live in a fantasy world?
It never fails to astound me that some are so conditioned by RHP memetics that they can't help but view the material world as confining and limiting. Why? What we understand is just a blip compared to what we don't; there is a ton of learning and exploring to do RIGHT HERE without having to divert off into what ifs and hypotheticals.
What we know already, as a species, is a thousand thousand times more than any one person could ever learn in ten lifetimes - Why waste time on bullshit? Magic, as it is , is a very real and powerful tool. The mechanics of HOW it works are right there, for anyone to see. All you have to do is look.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42013 - 08/18/10 01:14 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
I see it a bit as a painter that prefers to see a certain imagine materialized. He can either sit in his studio visualizing it extremely hard hoping one day it will magickally appear on canvas somewhere, or he can share this imagine with other painters, or paint it himself. His success rate for the first option will not be tremendously high.
D.
Here is a story which illustrates GM. There is LM hidden in there too. Let's start with a painter. A painter called Arnold, is in need of inspiration for his painting as well as some funds to travel around the world displaying his work for profit. He does his homework and then does a GM ritual. In the ritual, he invokes Satan and creates a SU in which these desires are fulfilled. He feels the ritual went well and goes out with his girl to see Inception for the third time later that night. The next morning as he is showering, he suddenly gets some ideas concerning an abominable sea creature who lays hidden in the sea and starts putting his vision to the canvas. He also feels uneasy with lying still (this always happens to him after a good GM ritual) and through his social network is convinces his friend Don, who happens to own a bar, to let him put up his artwork there. Don is not sure about this since the uncanny tentacled spectacle staring at him from the canvas may scare off his more discriminating patrons. But Don knows Arnold to be an all around good guy and lets him. A few days later, the paintings are on display at Don's bar & grill. Arnold is giving out the fancy cards he got his cousin to make for him at no cost, to the characters who show up. More than a few people are interested in Arnold's work and he adds a few to his Facebook account. At that time, a cougar called by the name of money bags Matilda, who does not frequent this bar because it is in a shady part of town, gets a flat tire about a mile away. Her cell phone is not getting a signal. She also does not like to change tires and walks to Don's bar because it is the only place that seems to be open at this time of night. After she calls AAA, she sips on a martini and just happens to glance at Arnold's strange art and feels that some ancient memory she can't quite put a finger on has been stirred. She gives Arnold her number on the way out and can't get the disturbing yet familiar monstrous imagery out of her head. Arnold calls her and does his best to convince her to invest in him. She decides that Arnold's artwork must be shared with the whole world and offers him more filthy lucre than he's ever seen, to take his art around the world. On the first leg of his world tour in Africa, he gets initiated by the Dogon priests into a scarcely known star cult, who recognize the squid like abomination in his artwork as one of their primeval half forgotten gods. As he leaves the Dogon tribe, one of their highest respected elders gives him an oddly shaped wooden chest and makes him promise not to open it until he leaves their country. Arnold feels a sense of joy like no other as the SU he created in GM has become the SU he now is. He recognizes he is no longer the same person he was when did the GM. The world around him has also been transformed. While some other artist may just kick back and relax for a while, Arnold realizes this sense of comfort must now come to an end, or chaos will bite him in the ass sooner or later. He decides to return to Africa and spend time with the Dogon to learn about the old gods and paint them. Through his voyage around the world he has learned he can make quite a mint by painting these ghoulish sea fiends. He goes back into the ritual chamber. A new SU is created to assist the fulfillment of his new desires. After the ritual, Arnold feels energized and moved to action by the mental energy created by the tension between who he is and the vision he has cast into the Is-To-Be. On the way to the airport, he stops by Don's bar and gives him the strange wooden chest he got from the Dogon, as a gift. Don opens the chest and finds an ancient scroll and upon intently gazing upon the strange characters and awkward symbols begins to have abnormal waking dreams. Arnold ends up becoming the head Dogon priest and Don writes a book about the sea creatures described in the scroll and it hits #1 on Amazon.com for seven straight weeks. Arnold has changed himself(SU), the worlds of others(SU), and the physical world(OU) through GM.
Duende
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42015 - 08/18/10 01:28 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
6Satan6Archist6
senior member
Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2233
Loc: Oregon
|
In the ritual, he invokes Satan and creates a SU in which these desires are fulfilled. So Satan is something that can be invoked? What is it? Is this an actual being or some sort of supernatural "force"? Is it the Christian Satan?
That's a nice little story there but that is all it is: a story. This being the case, it proves nothing other than that you have a vivid imagination.
_________________________
Ultimate Satanic Bad Ass of Ultimate Satanic Bad Assery PhD Esq. LLC Inc.^∞ DCLXVI°
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42017 - 08/18/10 02:19 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
In the ritual, he invokes Satan and creates a SU in which these desires are fulfilled. So Satan is something that can be invoked? What is it? Is this an actual being or some sort of supernatural "force"? Is it the Christian Satan?
The Invocation to Satan is one of the thirteen steps of Satanic Ritual as written in _The Satanic Bible_ by Anton LaVey. I don't think Satan is a supernatural force. Nor do I think Satan is some alien entity residing on some far off moon somewhere left of the Milky Way. I think Satan is an symbol used by mankind to grasp the idea of the ego in it's natural form. As I've previously written, I think there is a force(yet undiscovered through science)that links all SU together, similar to the Jungian idea of the collective unconscious. I think it is a very interesting idea. To me, Satan symbolizes our full potential which normally lies hidden in plain view. The human ego has long been associated with the Dark Lord.(See _The History of the Devil and the Idea of Evil_ by Paul Carus.) Duende
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42018 - 08/18/10 02:36 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
This magic business is a tricky little bugger I think, and the distinction drawn between a Subjective Universe and an Objective Universe as a basis for understanding what is happening during Greater Magic is not straight forward either.
I have painted and exhibited in a small way in the past and like to think I have at least some sort of understanding of art, aesthetics and the role they play in exemplifying the action or nature of Greater Magic.
I am not a Christian but I still enjoy looking at the paintings and sculpture of Raphael, Leonardo, Michelangelo and Giotto etc. Shit I am amazed by those guys and the skills they had. When I think of Jesus I think of ‘The Last Supper’ and the way he looked there in that painting, and when I think of Adam and Eve and God, I think of the Sistine Chapel.
Man, those works represent the Judeo-Christian paradigm in visual terms, or maybe rather, they are the chief pictorial representations of that religious culture, philosophy and era.
They draw on an interpretation of reality and they continue and articulate that interpretation of reality. They represent and extend a formidable Subjective Universe held more or less in common by a great number of people over time.
The Subjective Universe in this particular case (Judeo-Christian paradigm) is an overlay on the Objective Universe; it is a piece of camouflage. (There is indeed a lot of it loose in the universe Dr., just as you have said.)
Actions undertaken by actors under the influence of this particular Subjective Universe, have had, and do have, an effect in the Objective Universe of matter, energy and scientific laws.
They have acted and interacted with this Objective Universe and have moulded it and changed it according to their vision. It was their vision which provided the approach, the methodology, the rules regarding how the Objective World was to be regarded not only metaphysically, but also to be used in a practical sense as well I think.
When I go into the ritual chamber to do my thing I am primarily trying to give voice to the most personally convincing performance of my own particular Subjective Universe as possible. All the chamber objects which are more or less worthless in the real world suddenly become priceless and irreplaceable within the context of that performance.
Once I have finished in the chamber I am thinking the following: ‘stick a fork in its ass and take it off the grill, it’s done.’
How does this ritual effort have any effect in the real material world according to my understanding of this definition of magic? Because the Objective Universe and its states of affairs and its events and its nature are up for grabs and I succeed to some extent.
I want power, I want the power to control through definition; I want the world changed in line with what I want. I want everybody to agree with me, but the guy over there and the guy next door wants the same thing as me and is proposing a different vision and a different agenda to me.
I am engaged in a war with others over whose subjective vision is going to triumph so the Objective Universe can then be altered in line with that vision.
Greater Magical ritual is the statement of a desire and a sort of an emotional girding of the loins. A pre-sporting match chant or rev-up I use to ready myself for the political battle to define the world and then make my tentative and small changes to reality itself in line with that desire or definition.
Maybe this idea is wrong, but this is the way I see things. I have always seen it as will to power.
Some very powerful Subjective Visions, such as the social contract or law tend to hold the battle to define within reasonably peaceful grounds, but that ongoing battle, that war underpins Greater Magic for me, at least this definition of it.
I don't know if senior members such as Jake, Dr.Aquino, 6 or Dan etc. see it this way, but I can't get past that.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42020 - 08/18/10 05:16 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Oxus]
|
Diavolo
Moderator
stalker
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 3781
|
Question: what do you call it when the manipulation of either the Self or an Other manifests into the physical?
If the intention of the manipulation was within the limits of the possible, I would call it obvious. All successful manipulation manifests in the physical, even when it is solely about manipulating the self.
Here is a story which illustrates GM. There is LM hidden in there too.
I don't really see what the point of this story is. It is close to saying GM is me desiring to win the lottery and as a result, someone in Africa decides to go on a short vacation and selects his destination by throwing a dart into a worldmap. The dart punctures this town. While doing the tourist thing, one morning he buys a newspaper and decides to waste his change on a lottery ticket. He loses it after bumping into someone. The ticket gets picked up by a dog fooling around on the street, continuing his stroll with the ticket between his jaws until the need arises to pee at my front door. While doing so, he gets scared by a fighter-jet passing through the sound-barrier, dropping the ticket. The next morning it gets picked up by the mailman who slips it into my mailbox together with my newspapers. And lo and behold, the very next weekend, it turns out I win the big one.
It isn't very likely this will happen is it? I think that if I just buy a ticket, the odds that I'll win are higher. Not to say that I would be oblivious to the whole path of causality and only know someone would have slipped a ticket in my mailbox.
The problem with magick is that it sets the mind up for confirmation bias, implying you will affirm your own expectations. That's why horoscopes predicting that you'll get a letter from someone this week are so highly regarded by a certain kind of people. We could call those people gullible. Of course you get mail quite often, I more than once a week but it is so common, I hardly notice. Until I become focused upon it, which in return turns the average into above-average. People that don't understand confirmation bias are amazed by what others call normal or probable and their mind starts to runs wild after that. Because if A then B, which isn't necessarily true.
There are two reasons why I don't think Magick is as most wish it to be: money and sex. Every person I know likes them both quite much. So if I see a Magus and he isn't fucking all he desires while buying all he desires, he is either doing something very, very wrong or, and this is more likely, magick isn't an "all-you-can-wish" buffet.
D.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42023 - 08/18/10 09:50 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Autodidact
member
Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 371
|
I think for a number of people, GM is "doing LBM on yourself." GBM by definition is not. When you do LBM on yourself, you are engaging in what some would call White Magic.  I don't believe anyone can change the OU through ritual "like in the movies"but I do think we sometimes can give it the right push at the right moment to create the momentum we need for whatever our objective was. Is there any reason you have not attempted GM that you would like to share?
On the contrary, I do GM all the time (as I define it) - I just don't do a full-fledged Satanic ritual. Taking time to review, focus, plan, "emotionally gird your loins" as MatthewJ1 put it, those are all valid activities.
One could argue that a dedicated chamber and a ritual are excellent tools to achieve those - I would probably buy that argument.
But you're trying to convince me by citing a story that claims that GM boils down to really, really, really wanting to be rich and famous. Diavolo has already pointed out the confirmation bias evident. I'll add that if that type of GM worked reliably, an abnormally large number of rich/famous/successful people would be practicing Satanists, and it would spread like wildfire.
If ritual GBM produces results, they can be measured. After forty-some-odd years, I'd expect that someone could at least come up with a better explanation than "I really, really want something and sometimes I get it."
Since there's none of that, all I'm left with is that you're really only manipulating your own thinking, and abdicating responsibility for it - hence, you're doing LBM on yourself, but don't realize it. This is no different than an athlete saying, "I'd like to thank Jesus for helping me score this touchdown."
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42025 - 08/18/10 11:37 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
6Satan6Archist6
senior member
Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2233
Loc: Oregon
|
I liked what I was reading so far until I got to this part:
Actions undertaken by actors under the influence of this particular Subjective Universe, have had, and do have, an effect in the Objective Universe of matter, energy and scientific laws.
What exactly has believing in the Christian myth done in the way of having an an effect on matter, energy and scientific laws? I am especially curious about which scientific laws have supposedly been affected. Through my experience the laws of nature are pretty concrete and circumventing them is pretty much impossible.
_________________________
Ultimate Satanic Bad Ass of Ultimate Satanic Bad Assery PhD Esq. LLC Inc.^∞ DCLXVI°
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42027 - 08/18/10 01:07 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Autodidact]
|
Duende
pledge
Registered: 03/25/10
Posts: 75
Loc: USA
|
I think for a number of people, GM is "doing LBM on yourself." GBM by definition is not. When you do LBM on yourself, you are engaging in what some would call White Magic.  I don't believe anyone can change the OU through ritual "like in the movies"but I do think we sometimes can give it the right push at the right moment to create the momentum we need for whatever our objective was. Is there any reason you have not attempted GM that you would like to share? On the contrary, I do GM all the time (as I define it) - I just don't do a full-fledged Satanic ritual. Taking time to review, focus, plan, "emotionally gird your loins" as MatthewJ1 put it, those are all valid activities. One could argue that a dedicated chamber and a ritual are excellent tools to achieve those - I would probably buy that argument. But you're trying to convince me by citing a story that claims that GM boils down to really, really, really wanting to be rich and famous. Diavolo has already pointed out the confirmation bias evident. I'll add that if that type of GM worked reliably, an abnormally large number of rich/famous/successful people would be practicing Satanists, and it would spread like wildfire. If ritual GBM produces results, they can be measured. After forty-some-odd years, I'd expect that someone could at least come up with a better explanation than "I really, really want something and sometimes I get it." Since there's none of that, all I'm left with is that you're really only manipulating your own thinking, and abdicating responsibility for it - hence, you're doing LBM on yourself, but don't realize it. This is no different than an athlete saying, "I'd like to thank Jesus for helping me score this touchdown."
When suggesting a link between the SU and the OU, there seems to be an assumption amongst a handful of users on the 600 Club, that to hold that view means to assume GM is wishing very hard and sitting down and waiting for results. That's not true at all. It's as if there is a court with a chalk drawn line in the center separating those who believe GM is just psychology applied to oneself (LM) and those who posit that there may be something more going on(GM). I missed the part where those in the latter camp had to sign on the dotted line that to understand GM as more than just LM meant to rid oneself of the rational mind and embrace some sort of Harry Potter world view, where one can wave a magic wand and poof, it happens!  There is no need to see everything in black or white when there are many available shades of gray, or as Anton LaVey called it,taking the Third Side. Assuming a link exists between the OU and SU does not in any way imply not going out and taking action in the OU to achieve your goals. Because there are so many SU defining the meaning of the OU, you are just one SU and must direct your GM to affect specific areas of the OU and/or other SU to tweak it/them in the way you desire. A group ritual may generate a greater effect on the OU as there are more wills (SU) involved. When this is done consciously, it is called GM. When it is done unconsciously, and a group of SU is being manipulated to alter their perception without their awareness of the process, it is called propaganda. In the US, this is called politics. GM is the interaction of the self with itself. GM illustrates that you are not just a limited personality but are an ego that is actually a universe of limitless potential. In GBM, you show yourself that you are the meaning of all that is and are capable of more than you previously imagined. Do I believe GM may have effects beyond one's skull? Absolutely. I base my opinion on my personal experiences and those of others who have shared theirs with me. If you don't subscribe to that opinion, that is fine with me. I do think that by completely denying any probability of a tenuous link between all SU and the OU, and assuming everything that can be known about consciousness has indeed already been discovered by science, you may be closing yourself to the possibility of a beneficial new experience.
Duende
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42029 - 08/18/10 02:05 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dimitri
veteran member
Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 1357
|
First a little remark: ever heard of paragraphs? Use them please, it's quite a downer to read such a lap of text without proper structure.
Assuming a link exists between the OU and SU does not in any way imply not going out and taking action in the OU to achieve your goals. Because there are so many SU defining the meaning of the OU, you are just one SU and must direct your GM to affect specific areas of the OU and/or other SU to tweak it/them in the way you desire. There is a difference between defining and interpretating. I think it has been mentioned many times that for every person the OU can be interpretated in a different way. The OU or pure objective reality is not being defined by different SU's, it is merely being processed differently by different people.
An example: a balloon floats in the sky. One sees the hand of god in letting it floating trough the air, another person who is a physic describes that the air in the balloon is helium which is less heavy then atmospheric air causing the balloon to float, another person sees it as a symbol for freedom. Those are the different SU's. OU would say that a balloon is just floating trough the air. Plain and simple. Or even better yet; "something is floating".
The only thing that needs a definition in the OU would be the naming of things to make it easier to understand and work in the OU.
A group ritual may generate a greater effect on the OU as there are more wills (SU) involved. When this is done consciously, it is called GM. When it is done unconsciously, and a group of SU is being manipulated to alter their perception without their awareness of the process, it is called propaganda. A greater effect of what? Delusion? Affecting the reality as perceived trough your eyes?
Do I believe GM may have effects beyond one's skull? Absolutely. I base my opinion on my personal experiences and those of others who have shared theirs with me. If you don't subscribe to that opinion, that is fine with me.
That's quite a dead-beater. Many other people also have claimed to have experienced "gods grace" trough meditation or a sinless life.. I'll add that your brain and body is capable of deluding itself.
_________________________
You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42030 - 08/18/10 02:20 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Dimitri]
|
Lucifer Rising
member
Registered: 04/10/10
Posts: 147
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
|
It seems just about everyone here accepts that are connections between the OU and SU. That is not where the disagreement lies. Where most of us disagree with you, Duende, is the idea that there is a direct connection between SUs. I accept there is a possibility that such connections exist that are currently unknown to us, however, I strongly advocate against relying on connections that may or may not exist.
The only evidence you are able to give for such connections is personal experience and anecdotes, which is not reliable enough evidence for acceptance. Personal experience can be tainted through bias and other psychological processes. There's better evidence for Bigfoot.
I am not telling you not to believe that there are mysterious forces, I probably have even better reasons to believe in such things than you do. However, I would never suggest that somebody depend on such forces since they are unproven. At best they are unreliable and at worse do not exist and are only products of our imagination.
If you want to convince anyone that such connections exist, I suggest you find some real hard evidence. Until you do, do not expect us just to welcome the idea with open arms.
_________________________
Even if you're the ultimate evil lord of the underworld, you should always be yourself. Mickey Mouse
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42037 - 08/18/10 08:15 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Duende]
|
Dan_Dread
senior member
Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 2010
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
|
Please don't link LttD here. That is quite disrespectful.
But since you have gone and done it anyway, I encourage you to read the posts made by Nemo and Reprobate, who there have been saying the same things many of us have been saying here all along.
There is no need to see everything in black or white when there are many available shades of gray, or as Anton LaVey called it,taking the Third Side. Interesting you should mention this. Traditionally, there are those that think magic is an esoteric quasi-science that can directly effect the material universe (as you do), and those that think it is a load of bullshit. The third side of this is truly to whittle away the fluff and esoteric meandering and get straight to the source of what magic is, and how it actually works. The third side is to use the tool without engaging in willful self deception.
I do think that by completely denying any probability of a tenuous link between all SU and the OU, and assuming everything that can be known about consciousness has indeed already been discovered by science, you may be closing yourself to the possibility of a beneficial new experience.
Firstly, not one person in this thread has either denied a link between the subjective consciousness and the objective world around them, nor has anyone claimed that everything about consciousness has been figured out. What thread are YOU reading?
Secondly, as for closing oneself off by not accepting the truth of specious concepts such as you are advancing, the same could be said of prayer. Maybe you are closing yourself off to a relationship with Jehovah by not praying. Or better yet, maybe an asteroid will kill me dead the next time I step out of my front door. I don't expect to lose sleep over any of these possibilities.
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42043 - 08/18/10 11:43 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
To 6,
This Objective Universe in itself, as opposed to our subjective vision or interpretation of it, is matter, energy and is conformable to some sort of scientifc law.
'Actions undertaken by actors under the influence of this particular Subjective Universe, have had, and do have, an effect in the Objective Universe of matter, energy and scientific laws.'
‘GBM is the causing of change to occur in one's SU in accordance with the will. This change in the SU may cause a similar and proportionate change in the OU.’ M.A.A. 600C.
The basic structure of the OU does not change, rather change occurs within the OU, but within accordance with the basic nature or rules of the OU. Matter is and remains, Energy is and remains.
Christian changes within the OU. Some quick examples.
Religious based war - manipulation of matter and the killing of living beings
The Inquisition - the seizing and murder of living organic beings.
Creation of places of worship - manipulation of matter.
There are probably many I cannot think of right now.
Sorry, if you want more fleshing out later. Am in a rush today.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42044 - 08/19/10 12:24 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
6Satan6Archist6
senior member
Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2233
Loc: Oregon
|
This Objective Universe in itself, as opposed to our subjective vision or interpretation of it, is matter, energy and is conformable to some sort of scientifc law.
I am well aware of this.
'Actions undertaken by actors under the influence of this particular Subjective Universe, have had, and do have, an effect in the Objective Universe of matter, energy and scientific laws.'
Christian changes within the OU. Some quick examples.
Religious based war - manipulation of matter and the killing of living beings
The Inquisition - the seizing and murder of living organic beings.
Creation of places of worship - manipulation of matter.
None of those are examples of changes to the "scientific laws" which you did specify as being affected by belief in the Christ myth.
The last example given is a very poor one indeed. The "creation of places of worship" is called construction; it happens all the time and though you prefer to call it "manipulation of matter" there is nothing magical about it. Sure it may change the OU in appearance but that is in no way changing any of the laws the govern the OU.
_________________________
Ultimate Satanic Bad Ass of Ultimate Satanic Bad Assery PhD Esq. LLC Inc.^∞ DCLXVI°
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42046 - 08/19/10 03:17 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
|
MatthewJ1
member
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 529
Loc: Australia
|
Hmmm, okay:
• Matter, energy and valid scientific laws define and characterise the Objective Universe in – itself. Matter, energy and valid scientific laws are held a priori; that is, they are necessary and universal and in a sense prior to experience, but can be confirmed empirically, or rather, experience conforms to them.
• Human beings cannot create or destroy the basic nature of the Objective Universe, that is, its most basic material nature and the valid scientific laws which it conforms to. One cannot just wish away matter, like a subjective idealist may try to do.
• Human beings can manipulate the Objective Universe by building, changing and destroying objects in the world; by giving birth, maintaining life and by taking life etc. They can do this, but it is always done within the context of a universe of the basic building blocks of matter, energy and valid scientific laws. If you wish to regard this as changing the appearance of the OU then go for it. I am not casting it in terms of an appearance/essence dualism at this time. One is changing, or possibly more precisely, re-arranging what is already there in place without changing it at its most basic level.
• The Subjective Universe is not only being – for – me, as that which is phenomenologically given, but is also what is read within a discursive field or symbolic or significant universe. I interpret the Objective Universe through the Subjective Universe. I try to make changes to portions of or manipulate the Objective Universe through the Subjective Universe.
• Political philosophy, propaganda, religious metaphysical worldviews, moral dogma, aesthetics, personal opinion etc. etc. are all subjectively generated designs which have been imposed or overlayed or used to camouflage the Objective Universe. They are a tool of interpretation, but also the excuse needed for action and the manipulation of the Objective Universe in line with the dogma, theory or conclusions expounded by the content of the subjectively generated design and by the partisans or constituencies who advocate that design.
‘GBM is the causing of change to occur in one's SU in accordance with the will. This change in the SU may cause a similar and proportionate change in the OU.’ M.A.A. 600C.
To Dr. Aquino: my apologies to you if my interpretation of your definition may be different from your own and may misinterpret your work. It is an important point of departure for me and I try to keep to the spirit of it.
Here is the sum up, and this process is magical from my perspective:
1. I engage in a magical ritual and change my viewpoint or my Subjective Universe in accordance with the wish or desire expressed in the ritual. I henceforth view the world through a freshly articulated subjective vision.
2. I engage in action or practice in the world outside the ritual chamber and that action is animated, directed or situated within a fresh worldview, a Subjective Universe, a subjective vision which I am working towards bringing into being objectively and which I have derived from the ritual chamber.
3. I manage to more or less cause a change in the (appearance, if you like) Objective Universe. This change in the Objective Universe corresponds to the vision, or is similar and proportionate to the Subjective Universe I have articulated. I am therefore magically successful as a result.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42049 - 08/19/10 06:51 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MatthewJ1]
|
Diavolo
Moderator
stalker
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 3781
|
What bothers me about this is that it all sounds so grand while in essence it isn't that exceptional. This is probably because it is rather vague and abstract and might be solved by giving a practical example.
(successful) Manipulation is:
I have an idea – I want that idea realized – I realize that idea.
That's all, there is nothing more to it even when certain steps might be complex or take an awful lot of time and energy.
Let's assume I have a grand new political view, called Tjintjism. Of course I'll go out there and try to install this. I can use several methods or approaches but whatever I do, all is manipulation. Do I change the objective universe in doing so? Hardly.
Matter cares very little about my manipulation and a monkey out there might at best give me a dumb look when he hears me declare my ten point program. When I am using this manipulation I solely work at a memetic/subjective level and due to that, try to affect human society as a whole. Human society is a reality in itself and while its components are part of the reality out there, it is governed by a lot of rules and principles which only exist in this specific reality. As such, I do have very little effect on either the natural or the ontological reality.
What is more important that this is done all the time by numerous people. Look at the course of history and how many people had ideas, tried to put them in practice and succeeded. Now count how many amongst those sat in a ritual chamber and applied Magick. I think it would be safe to say that many, many more managed to do this without magick than with magick.
Does that imply magick doesn't work? Not at all, it only implies there seem to be other techniques which seem to have a higher probability and more frequency in succeeding. And those are used all the time, by the majority of manipulators.
Consider it a bit like going to the woods and making fire. While one rubs two sticks together, the other uses his lighter. In the end, both might succeed in making fire. Still, who do you think is fastest and has the highest probability?
I don't doubt Magick has its uses on developing the self but when it comes to manipulating the other, it is rubbing sticks together.
D.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#42053 - 08/19/10 09:55 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Diavolo]
|
Fnord
active member
Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 718
Loc: Texas
|
(successful) Manipulation is:
I have an idea – I want that idea realized – I realize that idea.
That's all, there is nothing more to it even when certain steps might be complex or take an awful lot of time and energy.
That's exactly where I am on the subject of magic.
Whether it's LM or GM, the object is to use it to achieve a specific result. How it all works, or if it does indeed work, is dependent upon the individual practitioner.
The 'technology', and I purposefully use that word because it can be tested, is yet to be fully understood by anyone (in the OU).
Certainly early man could rub sticks together and make use of the result without understanding exactly what fire is. Such is the position of the modern magician. All explanation is, at this time, incomplete.
_________________________
Scratching Peace Symbols on Your Tombstone
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43415 - 10/03/10 03:48 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Fnord]
|
Wolflust
stranger
Registered: 11/20/09
Posts: 33
|
I`ve noticed that it may be seen as disrespectful to link directly to the LttD-forums here, so I won`t, unless I learn otherwise. But Magister Nemo (also known as the infamous Vampire Adept) just posted a blog entry where I specifically reacted to this passage:
"All ancient magic relies upon spirit entities in one manner or another. Whether you call them devils, demons, spirits, ghosts, gods, goddesses is not relevant. If you wish to assume that you are actually the sole source of the power and you are merely using imaginary "entities" as an excuse to get past your own self doubts that is fine except that it may not work. It usually doesn't."
Maybe I`m uniformed, but it seems to me that not all of the hierarchy of the C/S is stricly atheistic...
By the way, Im not jugding anything here either way, I just find this interesting.
Regards.
_________________________
It is not my name or my number, its how I use it and what I do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43418 - 10/03/10 06:42 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Asmedious]
|
Lamar
member
Registered: 02/03/10
Posts: 226
Loc: Alabama
|
Are you really going to give serious consideration to the opinion of someone who even claims that they believe that ToV bullshit?
One very real and dangerous aspect that I have found in certain Satanic circles is, if a person gets themselves in a position where they are looked upon by a bunch of individuals as a Magus or some Know it All, then eventually they will actually start believing their own line of bullshit themselves.
I have to agree with this post. Although, in Nemo's own essay on the Church of Satan titled "Satanism Needs an Enema!" he is strongly against Theism. Maybe Wolflust mis interpereted it although I have not read this new blog myself.
_________________________
Blast for Satan
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43431 - 10/04/10 03:54 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Asmedious]
|
daevid777
active member
Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 951
Loc: Hell's Pisshole, Texas
|
Hahahahaha!
I mean, yeah.
Asmedious, in that statement, you have singlehandedly, and most brilliantly done away with Abraham, Noah, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Aleister Crowley, L. Ron Hubbard, Anton LaVey, and Michael Aquino!
Nicely done sir!
I'm proud of you this day! Right on brother!
Daeve.
_________________________
Where we're going, we don't need roads.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43434 - 10/04/10 08:46 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Asmedious]
|
Wolflust
stranger
Registered: 11/20/09
Posts: 33
|
Are you really going to give serious consideration to the opinion of someone who even claims that they believe that ToV bullshit?
One very real and dangerous aspect that I have found in certain Satanic circles is, if a person gets themselves in a position where they are looked upon by a bunch of individuals as a Magus or some Know it All, then eventually they will actually start believing their own line of bullshit themselves.
I understand your point, and I agree, this Nemo doesn`t seem very trustworthy at all. Just wanted to point out that even under Church of Satans strict "Atheist policy" there seems to be differing, and as shown in Nemo`s blog entry, even opposing ideals. I wonder how well he can cover this up with his double-speak.
Even so, it seems to me that there are folks on here with highly different views on magic, so anyone who can educate me or inform me on the matter are welcome to do so, even though it may end up with me calling bullshit on them.
And regarding what you wrote on ass-kissing in certain Satanic circles; I totally agree.
_________________________
It is not my name or my number, its how I use it and what I do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43435 - 10/04/10 08:52 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lamar]
|
Wolflust
stranger
Registered: 11/20/09
Posts: 33
|
Are you really going to give serious consideration to the opinion of someone who even claims that they believe that ToV bullshit?
One very real and dangerous aspect that I have found in certain Satanic circles is, if a person gets themselves in a position where they are looked upon by a bunch of individuals as a Magus or some Know it All, then eventually they will actually start believing their own line of bullshit themselves. I have to agree with this post. Although, in Nemo's own essay on the Church of Satan titled "Satanism Needs an Enema!" he is strongly against Theism. Maybe Wolflust mis interpereted it although I have not read this new blog myself.
I recall reading that essay some time ago, and it seems like Nemo is great at telling people what they want to hear, and twisting different terms for his own use. Either for his own benefit or just to further protect his own self-delusions.
As for misintepreation; the quoted passage from his blog is cut and paste, and seems kinda self-evident enough to me. But sure, rather read the whole thing and make up your own mind. Too much these days seems to turn into rhetoric and semantics...
_________________________
It is not my name or my number, its how I use it and what I do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43436 - 10/04/10 11:53 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Wolflust]
|
Fnord
active member
Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 718
Loc: Texas
|
Even so, it seems to me that there are folks on here with highly different views on magic, so anyone who can educate me or inform me on the matter are welcome to do so, even though it may end up with me calling bullshit on them.
Well, there are only three ways to go with it.
1). Magic is 'psychodrama' and nothing else 2). Magic is 'psychodrama' and possibly something else 3). Magic is 'psychodrama' and definitely something else
Where:
something else = "The change in situations or events in accordance with one's will, which would, using normally accepted methods, be unchangeable." (courtesy of The Satanic Bible)
Folks who tend to accept or are curious about options 2 & 3 would likely see a debate to convince you of anything as a waste of time.
To borrow again from the Satanic Bible, Satanism demands study.
_________________________
Scratching Peace Symbols on Your Tombstone
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43438 - 10/04/10 01:56 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Fnord]
|
Wolflust
stranger
Registered: 11/20/09
Posts: 33
|
Even so, it seems to me that there are folks on here with highly different views on magic, so anyone who can educate me or inform me on the matter are welcome to do so, even though it may end up with me calling bullshit on them.
Well, there are only three ways to go with it. 1). Magic is 'psychodrama' and nothing else 2). Magic is 'psychodrama' and possibly something else 3). Magic is 'psychodrama' and definitely something else Where: something else = "The change in situations or events in accordance with one's will, which would, using normally accepted methods, be unchangeable." (courtesy of The Satanic Bible) Folks who tend to accept or are curious about options 2 & 3 would likely see a debate to convince you of anything as a waste of time. To borrow again from the Satanic Bible, Satanism demands study.
Absolutely. As of why there will always be hard to point out some "objective authority" on the possible effects of magic. And to paraphrase Dr LaVey, "born not made", some will "get it", others won`t. And this applies to all of the three points you made out above.
Point taken. Time to stop pondering and get crackin`. :P
Edited by Wolflust (10/04/10 02:01 PM) Edit Reason: rant
_________________________
It is not my name or my number, its how I use it and what I do.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43464 - 10/06/10 02:54 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Wolflust]
|
Sinthesis
stranger
Registered: 06/27/08
Posts: 40
Loc: various places in New Jersey
|
Does Satanism actually demand study?
Let's say we're operating from the assumption that "magic" is basically just psychodrama. (Since this is a general "views on magic" thread, let me open another can of worms.)
Sometimes I find myself puzzled by the massive lengths that LHPers sometimes go to in order to memorize pantheons upon pantheons of ancient gods, names of Satan from cultures with which they have never had any interaction, foreign words, bizarre alphanumeric correspondences, etc.
I suppose if you believe magic actually creates a change in the universe outside of your mind, and you think these things are merely a practical part of utilizing that power, then that makes sense.
However, let's again assume that we don't believe magic does that. Because these occult systems have so little significance to me and I even find them tedious, they don't only fail to assist me with anything but even get in the way. In fact I find my focus being sidetracked and obstructed merely by invoking the four directions, which honestly have very little significance to me. The four directions are for me merely a tool I use to get around and I have a very unsentimental view of them.
For effective psychodrama, in my opinion it makes more sense to use whatever meditation narratives you have found to work for you, and to make the process revolve around whatever is in your head from real life. This takes the things which truly matter to you and uses them as emotional propellant for whatever you are trying to accomplish in your head.
For me, a pack of Tarot cards is evocative enough, if only because of the images and their systematic attempt to cover all the archetypical, frequently occurring parts of life.
As far as I can tell, if "magic" is just a psychological exercise, the only study which Satanism would require would be some applied psychology, finding or creating whichever rituals work for you, but most importantly -- the study of getting ahead in real life.
Sometimes I'm pretty suspicions of the motivations behind accumulating systems upon systems of arcane factoids. I wonder if people go down that road to attempt to give their spiritual path unneeded legitimacy in their own eyes and the eyes of others -- "Hey, look, it's a big complicated system like any other religion, so it's a real thing."
_________________________
accept the darkness in your self make war against everything else
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43466 - 10/06/10 03:17 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Sinthesis]
|
Aklo
member
Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 145
|
Depends whether one enjoys accumulating arcane trivia or not, I suppose. You don't seem to, but you can bet that the people who do do it do enjoy it, in one sense or another, and find that it gives them results that they like.
If it's just a difficulty reading or memorizing things, we could show you some mnemonic tricks (the meat of the cabala) which make all that effortless. But if it's a genuine disdain for the material then it's probably better not to struggle with it, go with what does work for you.
As for what those rewards are that one gets by doing it, this may be like trying to describe color to someone from the classic television era, when everthing was black-and-white. But I will give it a go.
You are right about those tarot cards. They are an excellent group of evocative images, corresponding to the archetypes or hard-coded figures in our brain in a calculated way. Now, each of those god-forms or magickal images has --- wait for it --- a secret identity. They have stories about them, things that they do, lists of attributes that they may have taken at one time or another. They have a personal name, which you can learn, by studying, in your spare time, when you aren't doing anything more productive.
Carl Jung goes further and further over the edge in Seven Sermons to the Dead and The Red Book as he documents the persistent manner in which these shared archetypes behave as distinct persons from ourselves. So it is particularly fitting to treat them like people! But beyond this, all the effort that you put into studying and manipulating the information in your brain will come back to you in the form of increased apparent intimacy with these "ghosts in the machine" who have a major influence on your mindset and your relationships with others.
_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#43472 - 10/06/10 09:27 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Aklo]
|
Fnord
active member
Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 718
Loc: Texas
|
But beyond this, all the effort that you put into studying and manipulating the information in your brain will come back to you in the form of increased apparent intimacy with these "ghosts in the machine" who have a major influence on your mindset and your relationships with others.
Your whole post is well wrought and insightful. I quote the above because it goes with what I was going to add about "Satanism demands study."
It's not so much about memorizing names and systems as it is about developing an understanding of what they are/were and then seeking out the motivations for developing them in the first place. With this understanding, one can then move on to application and to begin to understand one's own context within Satanism (or LHP). The study is to build a foundation of understanding, it's not to simply memorize words and names to throw them out at a party to impress people (though that can have value as well).
In order to understand yourself you must first understand your own motivations for being drawn to the LHP. If those motivations are superficial, then no amount of study will ever be beneficial.
Study, in this context, is focused inward (with a high powered microscope). It's not about how much you can memorize, it's about what you can actualize.
_________________________
Scratching Peace Symbols on Your Tombstone
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#45371 - 12/21/10 11:22 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Jake999]
|
William Wright
member
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 375
Loc: Nashville
|
You’re welcome, Jake, and thank you for being so brutally honest with me over the past several months.
Perhaps the biggest misunderstanding about Satanism is that Satanists are just a bunch of assholes who like hurting people and causing trouble. While there are certainly a fair share of jerks out there who claim to be Satanists, my experience has shown that most serious Satanists are far more interested in improving their own lives than in destroying others. In so doing, they seek out life “truths” and have little patience for those who don’t have anything meaningful to contribute.
This selfish approach can have a surprisingly philanthropic side effect: Correcting bullshit gives bullshitters an opportunity to learn. Whereas many family members and friends will politely sidestep bullshit, Satanists will scoop it up and shove it into the bullshitter’s face. The bullshitter can then get mad about it or cry about it; or he can stop, take a big whiff and say, “Hey, you’re right. This IS bullshit.”
You know your bullshit, Jake, and that’s no bullshit.
_________________________
My life is a movie. I am the star.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#46527 - 01/11/11 01:00 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: William Wright]
|
Leiko18
stranger
Registered: 01/10/11
Posts: 10
|
I've been reading trough this post and i think it's the closest to what I've been looking for...
(generally speaking)=>
I don't know if it has crossed your mind to "prove" your ideals trough actual science, like find a proof to show yourself "Hey, I'm not crazy after all =D"
alright, this is my point:
There's something called electromagnetic energy, an energy field that all of us,have (humans, animals, living beings) ... in fact, it has become popular lately with this "magnetic" bands for balance and stuff... it is said that this energy is really powerful yet weak looking usefulness. compared to electricity or fire, it's nothing, since it can't hurt us, but the fire is affected by this energy, which means somehow... so we all have "fire" inside us? or we can control it trough this energy? (there's a lot of stories about controlling elements btw...)
I'm want to keep people away from the idea that i want to shoot fire or anything like that, since it looks Im pretty young... but I'm not a "kid"...
anyways.
Satanism is popular for it supposed "rituals" and all that, I've tried it, and i had little success but still, i feel meditating/rituals (not "bloody" rituals...) have helped me to develop something inside me that helps me to think clearly, obviously when you're in meditation you manage to think really clean, without the fog of emotions...
but, when i think about this... there's no way to prove anything to anyone but just words... but there can be an explanation after all, if i'm not the only one who believe in this ways and have tried to develop and control "magic" (i call it energy) then probably, I'm heading on the right direction to find my answers...
_________________________
DaeCy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#46668 - 01/12/11 09:04 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Leiko18]
|
Aklo
member
Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 145
|
Hi Leiko.
Look, you are definitely on the right track. But I would strongly urge you to study the science harder. This will help you to use terminology better, as well as more accurately distinguish the objective from the subjective.
I'm going to use your electromagnetic stuff as an example. Yes, our body has an electromagnetic field. Yes, our thoughts and senses and actions and reactions, our neural impulses in other words, are electrochemical in nature. But no, it's not useful to describe this as "energy". The actual energy (capacity to do work) involved is barely enough to make a light bulb flicker.
See, the fields involved are static, not current. Static is not much good for carrying energy; what it is good for, though, is storing and transmitting information. Increasing the energy enough to do any amazing magnetic tricks, like, say, really bending spoons for example, would totally wipe out this information.
Now this information, in conjunction with our body's actual energy (calories) and somatic capabilities, can do some amazing things. Stigmata, savant abilities, the wonders of adrenaline all come to mind. So I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility that floating electrostatic fields could leech some information from one mind to another.
But isn't it actually much easier to move these ideas around through normal communications methods like talking, writing, playing music, and even body language? Just changing your attitude and thereby transforming your relationship with others can have a huge effect on them that they won't understand or be able to effectively fight.
Now you mention that you may have had little tangible result from rituals. What I would suggest that you try to do is to pick a goal you want to achieve. Distinguish out what parts of achieving that goal are really within your control, and visualize the steps you will need to follow to cover those parts. Make sure you have all of that covered, that you will do everything you can in the real world.
Then move your focus to the parts that are not objectively in your control. These are the things that magic will have to take care of. Ritualistically work off all your emotional attachment to these various random factors, get it completely out of your system. Get yourself to the point where you can say that you have done your part and have no reason not to succeed.
Then do your steps toward your result without worrying any further about the parts you have taken care of with your spell. If things don't seem to be going well, don't care. Just keep doing your steps and covering your bases.
I expect you will be amazed.
_________________________
Behold, I send you forth as wolves among sheep; eat Lambchop for supper and fuck Bo Peep!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#46724 - 01/13/11 01:29 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Aklo]
|
Leiko18
stranger
Registered: 01/10/11
Posts: 10
|
I'm not crazy after all... since Aklo seems to be several steps ahead from me.
I'am amazed for this info you just shared, I'll take it in consideration every time from now on hehe.
now...
...Yes, our body has an electromagnetic field. Yes, our thoughts and senses and actions and reactions, our neural impulses in other words, are electrochemical in nature. But no, it's not useful to describe this as "energy". The actual energy (capacity to do work) involved is barely enough to make a light bulb flicker.
Electromagnetic energy seems to be in every living being, right? the earth it self has a huge electromagnetic field... If we could absorb this energy and use it just to "light a bulb" perhaps then, we would be able to actually use "Physical magic".
But that's in the long run... I've learned a lot from body language.. one fellow satanist friend of mine knew how to use it pretty well... that's one living example... he was trying to develop telepathy really hard... he once past out in front of me. But that's out of my point here, he had no idea about electromagnetism until i told him, so i think my objective will be, after knowing exactly what my results should be, try to develop something which allows me to feel things in my body that are not (eg: the third hand theory)
Once Again, thanks.
_________________________
DaeCy
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#47060 - 01/20/11 11:26 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Leiko18]
|
LittleNicky
stranger
Registered: 12/19/10
Posts: 6
|
Fnord wrote that there are three ways you can view it:
1). Magic is 'psychodrama' and nothing else 2). Magic is 'psychodrama' and possibly something else 3). Magic is 'psychodrama' and definitely something else
Now, don't get me wrong. Different people look for different things in Satanism and religion is general. Some stuff out there is more about philosophy than anything else. I am biased towards what Fnord called "something else" and ways to pursue it.
For me, without that "something else", that connection between mind and reality all religions, all LHP / RHP just comes down to playing mind marbles with yourself.
I know that "skeptics" like to come up with stuff like "deja vu is just neurons firing at a wrong time making you think that you already saw something" etc.
They can tell that to someone who hasn't been having such deja vu experiences since pre-school days. Me and my kid brother would just giggle as we listened in on conversations and I would say entire sentences before people would use them in a given conversation.
The only problem is that I can't do it whenever I want. And if you can't do it for everyone who wants to see it then "it's your imagination / hoax / trick".
They can't put everyone into a rocket, so there are people who think that moon landing was a hoax. Same thing here. People don't believe until they see it for themselves, some will doubt even then.
I'm just saying I'm in camp #3.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#47067 - 01/20/11 02:33 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: LittleNicky]
|
MindFux
member
Registered: 12/27/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Houston, TX
|
They can't put everyone into a rocket, so there are people who think that moon landing was a hoax. Same thing here. People don't believe until they see it for themselves, some will doubt even then.
By the same token, some people will believe without seeing, and even if they see evidence directly to the contrary will cling to their world view. Whether your experiences with deja vu are more than a vagrancy of perception or otherwise I'm not going to comment on. All I can say is that I've had a similar experience, where it genuinely felt like I could state the entire conversation before it happened, but at no point did it ever confirm for me a belief in anything 'paranormal'. The danger with the subjective, or the entirely subjective, (unless you bury yourself in total solipsism), is that how the mind experiences reality is in part based on expectation. Anyone that's practiced lucid dreaming is familiar with the concepts around expectation governed reality, and how it can be carried over to the 'waking world'.
As an example, if you want, you can perform a simple experiment. Simply stare at a wall and expect it to move in and out slightly as if the wall is breathing. Don't imagine it in your minds eye, just look at it and expect it to do it. Done right, you'll actually be able to visibly see the wall moving, not in your minds eye, but through your eyes themselves. A compelling illusion created by expectation. This is a simple example, but it works for most people, and it illustrates nicely the simple fact, that your senses, and even your sense of experience is telling you that the wall is moving, and yet any objective measurement or test would demonstrate that the wall is not moving at all. That's the power of expectation combined with sensory input.
That doesn't make the subjective experience useless, it just makes it unusable in having a real effect on the world. So whether or not deja vu is a vagrance of perception, or something 'subjective' and yet occurring measurably and objectively, albeit randomly, is irrelevant. The very fact that it can't be used, harnessed, or occur based on your Will means it is by definition not magic. Nor is it evidence of magic even if it were an objective phenomenon. There's a huge leap from sensory input seemingly running ahead of the curve to manifesting a real change in the world in accordance with your Will based on unseen forces that you can harness. For me, magic is manifesting a change in the world in accordance with your Will. Unharnessable deja vu, whatever it in fact is, doesn't allow you to do that. I'm yet to find an 'unseen paranormal force' that can do that, or do it well enough that it's not just easier to use more psychological methods.
My most successful magic has been ritual based, but only to alter my behaviours, and my perspectives. It adjusts my attitudes, and brings forth the aspects of my psyche that I need to accomplish certain things that would be harder to accomplish with other attitudes, ideas, or memes invading my consciousness. It allows me to make changes to the outside world through right action, which is driven by right thought, that is derived via meditation and occasionally ritual.
As the old axiom goes, the world has a habit of reflecting you right back at you.
Edited by MindFux (01/20/11 02:39 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#47151 - 01/21/11 05:03 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: MindFux]
|
JWG
pledge
Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 50
Loc: Japan
|
To me, 'magic' is simply a mental art that most are not aware of or consciously work with on any sort of consistent basis. Hence, it would be considered 'occult.' Much of our current mass accepted 'technology' is simply magic of the past to me. The technology of tomorrow, is today's magic. It's a hidden mental technological art, to me.
As for 'the world reflecting back at you' and magic about transforming the magician, it makes perfect sense to me and I can accept that. The whole world, everything we experience is through us in a sense. When our mood, our sense of perception changes; so does the world. In a slightly metaphorical sense, we are the world. Change your self, change the world. This would be what the Temple of Set and some within the Church of Satan (for sure, myself) would call the art of Greater Black Magic (GBM).
EDIT: I'd like to correct myself. Not "within the Church of Satan", but rather "within Satanism", would be more accurate I think.
_________________________
In every real man a child is hidden that wants to play. -Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#48900 - 02/15/11 11:56 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Lucifer Rising]
|
GeorgeDeadson
stranger
Registered: 02/15/11
Posts: 10
Loc: Dallas, TX
|
My personal views on magic? Magic is magic, thats all there is to that. It is what it is, its using energy to bring about a change in events that would not have happened otherwise. I think that magic is totally natural, there is no supernatural as nature encompasses all that is, and that everyone has the ability to use it. Greater magic is what you would imagine, a wizard going into a chamber lit with candles and using tools to direct his will to manifest whatever he desires. Lesser magic is using the energy around yourself and others in your immediate area to cause a change in your current environment. The Satanic Witch is a great book on using lesser magic. We do it all the time, just unlike other people, we are aware of it. Magic is nothing but focused will and thought. I personally believe that, if anything, if something is prohibiting you from living your life the way you want to, or if you feel that there is an obstacle in your path that you need to overcome. Just go into ritual, and focus your energy and will and release all of the emotions that inhibit you. After your ritual is over, leave those emotions behind. And continue on down your path with confidence that your ritual has worked and that you can overcome any obstacle that is placed in your way. Magic is a tool. Utilize the tools you have.
_________________________
George Deadson
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#48918 - 02/16/11 03:11 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: GeorgeDeadson]
|
myk5
member
Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
|
My concept of magic was shaped by my experience in sales, whereupon I discovered that the techniques of master sales folks, they were mostly watered down magic techniques.
So I see magic as a point of view rather than something supernatural. If you assume the point of view that you are responsible for your life and will mould that life as if it were a work of art - that's the essence of magic to me. Spells and the like are simply statements of intent you have to follow though with.
No need to agree with me, this is my point of view. You go find your own point of view!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50472 - 03/05/11 01:32 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: myk5]
|
RavenOfMorrigan
stranger
Registered: 03/05/11
Posts: 15
|
My view on magic?
Yes, it exists and is everywhere. I'm not a fan of greater magic, and wouldn't use it very often. LaVey's definition on Lesser magic, which to an extent resembles manipulative psychology, is what I prefer to practice. Magick isn't some fluffy Harry Potter crap, it's an intense practice often involving dedicated ritual and strong willpower.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50544 - 03/07/11 03:59 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: RavenOfMorrigan]
|
Woland
Seasoned
active member
Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 616
Loc: Oslo, Norway
|
Yes, it exists and is everywhere. I'm not a fan of greater magic, and wouldn't use it very often.
Yeah; and for every 99,999999999999999999999999999999999% who claims to apply it successfully; I am the 00,000000000000000000000000000000001% who actually does.
Go figure...
_________________________
Regards Woland
Unhand that woman, Sir!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50567 - 03/07/11 03:52 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Woland]
|
RavenOfMorrigan
stranger
Registered: 03/05/11
Posts: 15
|
Yeah; and for every 99,999999999999999999999999999999999% who claims to apply it successfully; I am the 00,000000000000000000000000000000001% who actually does.
Go figure...
I never claimed to use it successfully. Heck, I'm still new to the idea of true magic. I stated that I would not use Greater magic if given the opportunity. Lesser magic, the subtle psychological ways to achieve a goal, is more of my thing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50575 - 03/07/11 10:30 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: RavenOfMorrigan]
|
Fnord
active member
Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 718
Loc: Texas
|
I stated that I would not use Greater magic if given the opportunity.
Who would give you an opportunity other than yourself?
Also you seem to be confusing your terms a bit. Lesser magic doesn't require ritual as you seem to suggest.
Anyway, I'm a huge fan of ritual magic. I lead a very busy life and it gets me in the right headspace and forces me to focus on things with intent.
_________________________
Scratching Peace Symbols on Your Tombstone
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50597 - 03/08/11 04:37 AM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: RavenOfMorrigan]
|
Woland
Seasoned
active member
Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 616
Loc: Oslo, Norway
|
I never claimed to use it successfully. Heck, I'm still new to the idea of true magic.
Then maybe you should consider a little hesitation, before you let your nifty little fingers attack your innocent keyboard?
We have all been young, and thus new to many a concept. But if you post outside the 101 section you better have your shit together.
That said; good luck with your journey. And remember; inhale before you exhale...
_________________________
Regards Woland
Unhand that woman, Sir!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50646 - 03/08/11 04:17 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: Fnord]
|
RavenOfMorrigan
stranger
Registered: 03/05/11
Posts: 15
|
Fnord, I like ritual magic as well for the same reasons. I stated Lesser magic as being more of a form of manipulation, like seduction in the Satanic Witch. Greater magic, admittedly I don't know much about. Magic is simply changing things through your will by any means, as long as it wouldn't happen without your intervention.
Woland, your superiority concept amuses me. You assume I haven't read much on the subject or know what I'm taking about. While I'm not as well read on Satanism as some others are, I think I have the concept of it straight. But as you wish, to the 101 section I go, since I'm shot down elsewhere.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#50649 - 03/08/11 04:47 PM
Re: Views on Magic
[Re: RavenOfMorrigan]
|
Diavolo
Moderator
stalker
Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 3781
|
Woland, your superiority concept amuses me. You assume I haven't read much on the subject or know what I'm taking about. While I'm not as well read on satanism as some others are, I think I have the concept of it straight. But as you wish, to the 101 section I go, since I'm shot down elsewhere.
My friend, it wasn't a superiority concept as much as it was good advice. You're a puppy and while you might think you got it all figured out, most here have been living Satanism longer than you have been breathing. Maybe longer than your parents have been breathing. It is inevitable that when your reply, most likely it will turn out you didn't figure it out quite that well and, no doubt about that, there will be those who will point that out quite bluntly.
If you're not quite sure, 101 is the best place to post upon Satanism since it is a more tolerant section of this forum. Of course, more general posts aren't as closely watched either.
It was good advice and you can neglect it but at the risk of losing a couple pounds of meat after the wolves did their biting. In the end, the real question is how you will handle that.
D.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: Woland, Mercury_Templar, fakepropht, Nemesis, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Morgan, Bacchae, Diavolo, Asmedious, Fist
| |