BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Real or not; the roll call

 
 
Char Aina
17:35 / 14.07.04
do you think of magick as an external force into which one taps, or an internal mechanism one learns to fully control?

i find myself somewhere in between, leaning heavily on the side of the internal.
slowly figuring out my PsychicTechnology without the manual, if you like.

how do you personally imagine your efforts translating into reality?
 
 
Shanghai Quasar
21:46 / 14.07.04
In the "All For One and One For All!" cosmology, it would be hard to suggest that it's one or the other. Internal and external are just mildly useful constructs in such a Universe, aren't they?

What's in the head is all around, and what's all around is in the head.
 
 
Pants Payroll
03:40 / 15.07.04
As above, so below...
 
 
Char Aina
18:18 / 15.07.04
well, sure... but i dont really have all that much faith in an independent above.
dig?
 
 
Magister Lewdi
21:13 / 15.07.04
"What is here, is everywhere.
What is not here, is nowhere."
 
 
C.Elseware
00:13 / 16.07.04
not real. But a good way to understand a system too complex for current science.
 
 
LVX23
06:02 / 16.07.04
do you think of magick as an external force into which one taps, or an internal mechanism one learns to fully control?

I think that magick is the realisation that internal and external are the same thing.
 
 
Char Aina
07:40 / 16.07.04
okay, but is it real or not? is it a way to understand what would otherwise be called science if we were sufficiently advanced? is it gonna be explained by midichlorians(or whatever) in a few hundred years?

i agree with elseware, and was interested in hearing from those who dont.
i want to hear someone who has credibility with me(most of the forum) tell me that they believe something i do not, and explain why.
if you feel like it.
 
 
illmatic
10:14 / 16.07.04
do you think of magick as an external force into which one taps, or an internal mechanism one learns to fully control?

I don't think of it as either really. I am convinced that though reality doesn't always work in the way predicted by our culture and science. However, it does work this way 99.9% of the time, that's why our technology works. And there's a lot of self delusion in the magical results field - a lot of the time people seem desperate to convinve themselves "something weird" is going on (to get over their learned, residual disbelief). What convinced me - experimenting consistently. Here's one for you - go into a church, preferably an old one, and see if you can perceive an atmosphere. See if you can perceive any parts of the church where this is stronger, or absent. I normally can, and I'll be fucked if I can find a science based explanation for it. (which doesn't mean there isn't one, it just mean something get left off the map).
 
 
C.Elseware
10:45 / 16.07.04
I suggest buying a copy of Douglas Adams' The Salmon of Doubt. There's an article called "the artificial god" in it which has some ideas which are much better phrased than my own.
 
 
Char Aina
11:34 / 16.07.04
what you said definitely resonated with me, so i reckon i might.
cheers.
 
 
+am
13:19 / 16.07.04
when going through the whole- 'is this "magic" thing real or just a load of crap' phase i was very interested to to read about contemporary quantum physics, which has abandoned the classical model of physics on the microcosmic scale, because it doesn't work.

basically, filtered thru my humble brain, and according to certain interpretations, it was found that the nature of a certain particle CHANGES BECAUSE someone has looked at it. the very ACT of MEASUREMENT determines the characteristics of the particle, the propertues he has. also, it determines the characteristics of a similar particle that has shot off in an opposite direction and is spatially distant from the first.

this means either: the observer, the human MIND, has control over the reality it exists in, at least at a microcosmic level (as above so below?)

or- there are an infinite amount of universes in parallel, each decision or alteration branching them off from each other so every thing that could possibly occur has occured in one of these universes, though we can't see it. (branching universe theory- the magician has the power to alter which universe they currently occupy?)

or- something else. like an ether, an unexplained variable that has not been discovered...

interestingly einstein the pioneer of all this washed his hands of it in the 50s, near the time of his death, as he could not accept the new notion of "reality" that the quantum pardigm produces: i.e. there is no "objective" reality, by the very act of observing we Create reality.

thats just a really rough and crap explanation, there's loads more on the net. i just find it exciting that science, the religion of the masses, is becoming more and more "magical" in its explanations of reality.

also, regarding communication with entities, i like Jung's idea of the collective unconscious- they are in our head but also in the collective head of the entire human race... a god is worshipped and thus comes into being... the more specified, defined, this god becomes, the greater its presence. the whole human body and consciousness and the emotions/states it experiences as microcosm and the external world as macrocosm. tho this is pure speculation cos i haven't quite reached the old "summoning demons to visible appearance" bit yet!

finally, neal gaiman's excellent novel American Gods deals with these kind of issues in an interesting way and its very funny. as some person on Amazon wrote... " The idea that the continued existence of the gods is dependent on the belief of human worshippers is an old one, but Gaiman adds enough innovations of his own to make this a strength of the story he is telling rather than a weakness. Without giving significant plot details away, this is the story about what happens to the gods who have been brought to the shores of America with successive waves of immigrants, and who are subsequently transformed or diminished as the stories that are told about them are reduced to the status of folktales or forgotten entirely, and as the new gods of consumerism, information and innovation arise to take their place in the pantheon of the United States"
 
 
SteppersFan
13:38 / 16.07.04
At the moment, I'm working with the model that "it's all in my head", cos it feels more comfortable working like that right now, and it's also what the voices told me. Seriously.
 
 
Lord Switch
15:46 / 16.07.04
The true questions IMHO are:

why can a magician affect someone who doesn´t even know that they are being affected by magick in case magick is all in your head

why is it that NOONE whom I have met or heard of can actually affect objects without interference from
a: very unlikely coincidence (open the door. open the door. open the door. *firealarm goes off and all doors automatically open*)
b: nothing happens.
 
 
brokenbiscuits
19:41 / 23.07.04
maybe they can't... maybe you just think they can.
 
 
Nalyd Khezr Bey
20:59 / 28.07.04
I tend to bounce around different theories but for the most part I think of Magick as a full on interaction between internal and external forces. How can it not be? It's the same in Quantum Theory where the interaction between the observed event in space/time has to be considered along with the observer. I think the external forces may be a chaos beyond our comprehension and appear to us according to our projected expectations (in-formation). However, most of what I do magickally tends to involve internal subconscious manipulation, sleight of mind.
Magick may be the Science and Art of Maybe, outside of that, it may all be theory and speculation and metaphor swapping. IMO, when Magick is practiced, or put into motion, the results will always be subject to a personal interpretation, hence relative to the observer (QT). The exercises used in Magick were and are designed to create changes in the human-nervous system which blasts our consciousness with information overload and breaks down the armor that causes our limited perspectives. When in these states of vulnerability, what Tim Leary called "re-imprinting" can take place. We change our personal "realities" at will. When these shifts in perspective take place we tend to interact differently with objective space/time and cause more change outside of our nervous-systems. In a world of uncertainty, chaos, relatives, and constant change and mutation, Magickians are in the business of creating probabilities out of possibilities. All of the maps, metaphors, beliefs, symbol-systems, etc. that we see talk about are just that... maps, metaphors, beliefs, symbol-systems, etc. They are what we apply to our new found (insert your personal "maybe" here). This is why we speak in vague language. We confuse these metaphors for what is beyond our language to describe. We are not talking about Magick, we are talking about the models we apply to the results of Magickal practice. I call this the Magick Catastrophe because it seems to be an infinite spiralling regress. So, since we, as Magickians, seem to be in the business of creating probabilities out of possibilities, or form out of chaos (ordo ab chao), or Everything from Nothing, and though I think most of what is going on in ritual work is purely psychological, I will venture into the realm of speculation so do not take the following too seriously without doing some homework. Here is one of my theories to give an example of the interaction.
In terms of what may be going on physically in ritual work, I think "High" Magick deals in the manipulation of the high-frequency Ultra-violet end of the visible light spectrum. This may account for some reports of phosphorescent pinkish/purplish colours that can't quite be described or rendered in physical terms (Philip K. Dick's "laser" in VALIS is a good example). Also, during the 1960's psychedelic-ness the introduction and popularity of fluorescent paint seemed to be the closest thing to help capture the visuals experienced during LSD trips. Could it be that LSD was helping tap the same areas as ritual work? I think so. "Low" Magick deals in the manipulation of the low-frequency Infrared end of the visible light spectrum. It seems a little easier to tap these frequencies which may be the reason there are more and more witches and chaos magickians popping up, not that witchcraft and chaos magick are confined to the low energy spectrum, but it seems that most of the techniques used here are designed for "results", and what better place to get them? Also it seems that the low end of the spectrum is where most of the nightmarish, hellish things reside, the Nightside of the Tree of Life in Kenneth Grant's terms. Now this is all speculation based on a theory inspired by Carl Jung in his Flying Saucers and further advanced by the likes of John Keel, Gregory Little, and Michael Persinger. It is called the Spectral Reality Theory of Physical Archetypes. Robert Anton Wilson has "hinted" at this theory also, but in his typical Pope Bob fashion, he "hints" at a lot of things and, like me, seems to remain agnostic about the whole subject. For further information on the Spectral theory try Gregory Little's Grand Illusions. Now other forms of Magick, such as sympathetic magick, which is a large part of voodoo, seem to be better explained by quantum theory interpretations. Look into "quantum connections", "hidden variables", and "superluminal influences" to help get a picture of what is taking place when someone is putting needles into a voodoo doll. I personally put no distinction on Magick being "high" or "low" because sometimes we mix it up so much that it is hard to tell what exactly it is we are doing. Some of the "entities" we invoke/evoke may pass from one end of the visible spectrum to the other and the exposure to radiation of this kind released in the process may account for some of the health problems that some Magickians may encounter with long periods of practice such as asthma and conjunctivitus (same symptoms of close encounters with UFOs btw, read Kenneth Grant for more on that). Just like the theory I presented above, it doesn't really matter and doesn't change the fact that we are going to keep practicing this interesting psychological artform regardless of it's name or what scientific theory helps explain it. But, here is something that may interest those (like myself) who would like a quantum physicist's take on Magick, sort of. Here is Nick Herbert's Quantum Tantra and an ESSAY on the subject as well. Might be better to read the essay first before embarking on the other site. Enjoy.
 
 
Nalyd Khezr Bey
22:19 / 28.07.04
Haha, I just realized that mysticwreck and I are on about the same thing here. Sorry for repeating similar themes. It's all good though.
 
 
Nobody's girl
02:12 / 29.07.04
Empirically I can say I have experienced what could be discribed as magick both "internally" and "externally". Though I'm still not convinced there's a difference.
 
 
charrellz
16:04 / 30.07.04
I think of it all as something just on the other side of science. I fully embrace science, however there are a few things it doesn't cover. For instance: luck. Matter does not have a scientific property for luck, and yet everybody has something they consider lucky or charmed or blessed or whatever. I think magick is a very real force thats works beneath the surface of science, almost creating and guiding it in a way.
 
 
Charlie's Horse
01:35 / 31.07.04
Good point, Charrellz. Science also tends to have a great deal of difficulty studying things that occur on a state-dependent basis - humor, creativity, the things that rely on a certain emotional state to work. Lots of scientists don't like state-dependent things because they're hard to study in a lab, leading many a scientist to attempt to banish them from the great lexicon of Things That Occur. (Oh, those wacky scientists!) I'm just glad they haven't tried to officially abolish sex.

Scientists are akin to tailors - a tailor can take your measurements, churn out clothes for you, and easily place you within a framework of measurements that can contain everyone. It's a fairly beneficial and consistent system. But it won't tell ya who wears the suit.

Slight threadrot aside, I think Lord Switch's first question is the most relevant to the 'internal' viewpoint, which I've started to drop. If it's not real. But a good way to understand a system too complex for current science. (elsewhere), if this is the case, then where does this system exist? Why does it allow us to reach out and play with more of reality than the bits in our heads? Why do rain dances work in places that get 6-8 inches of rain a year? I've changed my cat's behavior with magick (he wasn't housetrained. Can you imagine? Perhaps a form of magickal initiation, and my Holy Guardian Angel thinks I'm a wimp), I secretly helped my roommate find a love(r), and a week ago I had a semi-lucid, very vivid dream that fufilled itself the next day. And we've only just begun...

If this is all in my head, I hearby invite everybody to my Pineal Gland block party - I'll be turnin dopamine into that crazy-ass DMT for free, so y'all show up!

And in the immortal words of Lord Fanny:
Reality can suck my dick, darling.
 
 
the cat's iao
05:31 / 31.07.04
Heh. Yeah that's about it, eh? I mean, what is "real" anyway?
And if it is "all in your head," then where is your head?

I go for this internal/external mingling thing myself, but I dunno', I figure it's not really that. That is, I sorta' see the internal/external divide as another sort of duality to overcome, see through, or whatever. Hit the 1 = 0 full on. But it's not easy since we're conditioned from birth to think in terms of self or other (which to me is similar if not the same as external or internal). So I ask myself not whether magic is internal or external, but what is that magical union of the two that we habitually perceive as one or the other? To me "the magic" is found in the interim that unites opposites.
 
 
Unconditional Love
10:49 / 31.07.04
magick becomes your definition your thinking process your inexternal experience as does reality, reality fulfilling propheseys, and deep anthropic principles.
 
 
Seth
12:14 / 31.07.04
Maybe magic just has exactly the same mix of being simultaneously internal and external as the rest of our experience, because there's no dividing line between magic and the rest of our experience?
 
 
Seth
12:19 / 31.07.04
Oh, and the cat's iao: that's pretty spot on, I reckon.
 
  
Add Your Reply