BARBELITH underground
 

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


Underground > Temple >

Magical Expectations

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
folded
09:54 / 30.01.06
In the interest of clarity and in a spirit of helpfulness, I'd like to say a few things to younger magical players on these boards.

My little disclaimer is the obvious one: I'm only talking from the basis of my own experience. I'm certainly not trying to dictate anything to anyone nor to invalidate anyone else's experiences. This should go without saying- but I've said it nonetheless. I'd like to be able to say what I want to say on this matter without offending anyone, but that is probably impossible.

Further disclaimer: I realise that implicit in stating things in this manner I'm creating a duality between External/Objective/"Real"/etc. reality and Internal/Subjective/Metaphorical/etc. reality- and that this duality to those with Understanding and Wisdom is flawed/imprecise.

Please forgive this inaccuracy and imprecision but it is in service to clarity and brevity for those beginning the Work. Those with Understaning and Wisdom realise the difficulty (impossibilty) of being absolutely truthful.

I'm trying to help, clarify and ultimately, encourage.


Here it is:

Magick/magic will help you attain a fundamental perspectival shift.
It will do nothing more (or less) than this.


Q: Why state something as simple and seemingly obvious as this?

A: I'm quite frankly tired of people getting into magick (or, worse, who have been doing it for years) thinking they'll eventually be able to fly, make gold, be a Jedi etc. etc. Yes, its a useful lure to get young players thinking but beyond a certain point it retards real progress. All those things, even if they could be done, stand in the way of attainment (read any good book on yoga- in the sense of Union- and it'll tell you that siddhis are a distraction at best and a total diversion at worst. See also: Black Brothers in the Crowleyean lit).

I also think many people, when they finally begin to see where attainment might lead (ie. a fundamental perspectival shift rather than becoming a living superhero) often give up, rather than persisting and continuing to seek what is truly worth finding. Or they simply stop progression and contentedly play with their siddhis in the privacy and safety of their own spaces (innuendo intended). Or they abandon this particular path and start a new trail (which they also abandon once it becomes evident that it too leads to realisation rather than siddhis- see: worst kinds of current Western mix-n-match spirituality. Don't get me wrong- having a diverse base can be very useful indeed, but not when your whole life is simply spent mastering new spiritual vocabularies and never really getting around to finding out what they are actually saying- which is the hardest part but the most rewarding). Much of this has to do with false expectations.

(It seems everyone wants to be Neo at the end of the first Matrix film- the superman of Ideaspace, flying above the "sheeple" to a kicking rock soundtrack. However, no one wants to be Neo at the end of Matrix: Revolutions. Please- this is not an invitation to start a discussion on the Matrix films- there is a more appropriate forum for that elsewhere here which I will gladly join if the discussion is resurrected- this is simply a popcultrue example to illustrate my general point).

To the naysayers (ie. people who will now tell me they CAN fly, make gold, are in fact a practicising Jedi etc.), if such powers/siddhis existed in any but a subjective/metaphorical/Idea Space/etc. sense, why would this boards beloved Mr Morrison (presumably having some attainment) still be engaging in commercial activities (rather than just writing and publishing as he chooses) when he could just use his attainment to mint up some nice new shiny gold? Why is Alan Moore often in financial woes? Why did Mr Crowley suffer financial ruin and have to curtail his material ambitions? Why are attained/realised people still running in the rat race instead of living in Xanadu-like splendour?

Here it is again kids, in new (old) clothes:

"Before enlightenment, chopping wood and carrying water. After enlightenment, chopping wood and carrying water".
- old (Zen?) proverb

Magick/magic will help you attain a fundamental perspectival shift.
It will do nothing more (or less) than this.

This, however, if fully attained, is everything you'll ever want or need.

I hope I haven't offended anyone and further hope that this may be of help to someone who reads it.

I'd also love someone to come along and bust this up good and proper and tell me where I'm in error if that is the case (noting the earlier disclaimer on language and duality if possible). I'm open to learning and improvement. If you can help me, please do.
 
 
Olulabelle
10:08 / 30.01.06
I really, really can't believe that there are people out there who think magic is going to make them able to fly. We're human beings and we're stupid, but not that stupid surely?

Harry Potter is obviously to blame.
 
 
folded
10:13 / 30.01.06
Flying is an exaggerated example obviously.

However, if you move in the right (or wrong) circles long enough, you'll probably encounter someone who'll tell you they can fly (or at the very least levitate)...
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
10:15 / 30.01.06
I knew someone once who claimed to be able to cure AIDS.

Jerk.
 
 
folded
10:25 / 30.01.06
Such expectations are not as wild as you might initially think. (I'm sure you can find similar expectations expressed on these very boards- though I wouldn't want to engage in finger-pointing.

And its interesting that Be-bop mentions Harry Potter (though flippantly) as it does have a relevance to the kind of expectations that many seem to have (albeit in a more "grown-up" form). Given that most here have probably had an intro to esoteric ideas through fiction (I noted that many here talked about early introductions through Dungeons & Dragons or fantasy films/novels), your (perhaps flippant?) remark has great relevance. The idea of Powers/siddhis is very alluring and many rational adults place much stock in them (for example, if you went to India I'm sure you could find a saddhu- albeit wreathed in clouds of chillum smoke- who'll tell you about his last flight).

Mordant: "Jerk". Directed at me?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
10:29 / 30.01.06
Oh, no! Not at all. "Jerk" was directed at the guy who claimed to be able to cure AIDS.
 
 
Dead Megatron
10:40 / 30.01.06
People claiming they can cure diseases, make you rich, fix your love life, and so on, are very common, not only in magick circle, but religous circles also (which often coincide). Most of them are just charlatans trying to squeaze a few bucks out of desperate, gullible folk.

Damn them to hell, those jerks
 
 
folded
10:44 / 30.01.06
Sorry if I'm a bit nervous/defensive Mordant. I don't want to ruffle anyone's feathers here (I like this place) by telling them what is a valid/invalid experience- and I know what I'm saying is probably offensive to some, though not intended that way.

The person who said they could cure AIDS is a great example of the kind of person I'd like to help young players avoid. I've met quite a few in my time like that and it saddens me (and I've met "I can fly" guys a few times. They're usually guys- what was the term people here used with the derogatory connotations "Darque Mage" or something like that- very apt. You've probably met them- the guy that will tell you he has "mastered the Universe" yet can't seem to get his act together in Malkuth).

I see this expectation problem so often in so many places (eg. the Buddhist who sees realisation as something that will make them perfect in the sense of sitting 3 feet above the ground in a golden glow with a perpetual Buddha smile- and will give up when they fall short of this fictional ideal).
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
10:47 / 30.01.06
To be honest, I see more of a problem with a widescale diminished expectation in contemporary occultism than exaggerated expectation of magical powers. Too many people limiting themselves and the parameters of their magic, rather than pushing the boundaries of what may be possible if you give it a bit of breathing space.

The only people I ever hear deriding siddhis are the people that haven't attained any - to which it becomes an easy excuse to project fears about a lack of attainment onto the childish expectation of others.

Which is not to say that such things aren't necessarily a distraction from "the Great Work" in the long run, but you could say the same thing about many other aspects of day-to-day life that aren't directly focused towards union with the Divine, but nonetheless have their place. Certainly it's daft to go into magic expecting to be able to fly and cast fireballs, but who does? Outside of eager 15-year olds and hypothetical straw men? I think my own expectations of magic have widened over the years. The further I get along the road, the more I realise how much more there is, how little I've seen, and how laughably small me and my little perspectives are in the face of the vast, unfathomable vistas of magic.
 
 
folded
11:02 / 30.01.06
Thanks for the response Gypsy. My examples- as noted above- are exaggerated but do serve to illustrate my point.

If you could direct me to a work (say something on Yoga) that will cast siddhis in any kind of positive light I'd be much obliged. I quite like traditional stuff (eg. Vivekananda) which tends to paint siddhis in a very negative way.

Yes- I'm probably one of those who have no respect or use for siddhis (and such as I have personally experienced I'll paint as "subjective"- though please note the caveat in my original post re: subjective/objective).

If you'd care to correct my erroneous thinking at greater length, I'd very much appreciate it.

And I certainly wouldn't characterise siddhis as distractions akin to day-to-day non-directed activities. Siddhis help build (or rather rebuild in a more sophisticated way) the very prison you're hopefully trying to escape from.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
11:09 / 30.01.06
Well, yeah, and I would disagree with the statement "Magick/magic will help you attain a fundamental perspectival shift.
It will do nothing more (or less) than this" as being almost alarmingly restrictive.

But I'd also say that I've come across a lot of people like the cure-AIDS guy--and for each of them there's a lot more people who believe that and similar claims without question. There are people who make overblow twattish claims for their magic, and that does have an impact on the magicians around them. Either you get suckered into their phony practice with them, hanging on in the increasingly vain hope that you'll one day learn how to perform the amazing feats they describe, or you get bitter and end up going the other way: rejecting all but the most limited (and limiting) goals, dismissing anything more than half an inch outside the psychology model as mere fantasy.
 
 
folded
11:13 / 30.01.06
Further Gypsy, I'm not sure its particularly helpful trying to attack people on a personal level ("The only people I ever hear deriding siddhis are the people that haven't attained any - to which it becomes an easy excuse to project fears about a lack of attainment onto the childish expectation of others.").

I think a counter argument is a better discursive device(specificity adds to persuasiveness. Emotive connotative words and pretty metaphors lack long term impact).

Again: I'm not being anyone's Reality/Experience police. I'm always in favour of people trying new things in this test lab called Reality. I just see and hear so much talk and so little change. If everyone did indeed pursue the Great Work to its fullest extent, I think things could be quite different indeed.
 
 
folded
11:25 / 30.01.06
Mordant:
A "mere" shift in perspective is beyond worth. Crudely (and this is cliched) Reality is essentially perception. Shift perception, fundamentally alter reality.

There's nothing restrictive in Realisation (and it is just that- as the word "Realisation" implies- as simple and unvarnished and readily- NOW- attainable as that)- in fact, it will free "you" from everything. And Siddhis will just get in the way of that Realisation- by their very nature they must.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
11:32 / 30.01.06
Okay, having expressed broad sympathy with your veiwpoint,
folded, let's tackle this paragraph in your first post:

To the naysayers (ie. people who will now tell me they CAN fly, make gold, are in fact a practicising Jedi etc.), if such powers/siddhis existed in any but a subjective/metaphorical/Idea Space/etc. sense, why would this boards beloved Mr Morrison (presumably having some attainment) still be engaging in commercial activities (rather than just writing and publishing as he chooses) when he could just use his attainment to mint up some nice new shiny gold? Why is Alan Moore often in financial woes? Why did Mr Crowley suffer financial ruin and have to curtail his material ambitions? Why are attained/realised people still running in the rat race instead of living in Xanadu-like splendour?

Because they're not 'attained/realised' (I'm not totally clear on what you mean by that but I think I get you). I'm not sure I'd point to GM as an 'attained/realised' magician (do any of us even know what kind of magic he practices these days? Because I sure as Hell don't). Ditto Alan Moore. Uncle Al was a brilliant scholar and made some amazing magical acheivements, but seems to have been thwarted ultimately by his own ego. I think you're looking for elevation in the wrong places... although I don't claim to know what the right places might be.

Ther's also the fact that a magical practice can take you some pretty odd places. 'You' don't remain in conscious control, not if you're really doing the work. You might end up working in a direction that leaves you on the edge of material penury yet fulfils you in other ways. (You should always have enough, of course, and if you don't you're doing something wrong.)

The bottom line is that I don't think many of us here can really say we know what magic can and can't do. We can look at the random guy bragging about how he can cure AIDS or levitate and know that he's probably a jerk, and we can set ourselves reasonable initial goals when we start out, but that's about it.

After 20-odd years of (frankly) pissing about with magic, I'm now finding myself on the edge of something far vaster than I ever anticipated. Doubt I'll ever be able to cast fireballs, but I am doing small things that I'd previously have deemed impossible.
 
 
folded
11:42 / 30.01.06
Sorry for being a Chatty Cathy on this one.

Mordant: on
"or you get bitter and end up going the other way: rejecting all but the most limited (and limiting) goals, dismissing anything more than half an inch outside the psychology model as mere fantasy."

I think there's a third way. Turn base metal into Gold. Turn all of "Reality" into the sacred. No more Matter vs. Mind, no more Material vs. Spiritual. (Probably a cliche again but screw it): Everything is sacred/magick. What we've got is the here/now and its far from limited and its far from mundane. But like everything, its constructed in a certain way. One part can't unilaterally change the whole. The best it can do, once it realises it is a part (and the Whole- sorry for language collisions. Think Holographic- each part contains the whole within it but can't itself alter the nature of the Whole), is to help other parts Realise. Maybe when all the parts know what they are, then things can radically and instantaneous change- but until that point we are left with an incremental mode, though far from restrictive and mundane. Try things. If they work, fantastic- try something further. I would however, characterise siddhis as more akin to undesirable side-effects of a more important experiment.

Mordant: the Zen proverb cited above is the best I can succinctly offer. I started a thread on "Silence" some time ago and perhaps should have kept my own counsel. These things are semantic loops. My advice to young players is the same: avoid the person who says they manifest "objective" siddhis/powers. Ask them for an on-the-spot demonstration and you'll rapidly see why.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
11:55 / 30.01.06
Well... that's great and all; I mean, the main drive of my own practice these days could be loosely filed under Turn all of "Reality" into the sacred. In my case that's represented by a dive into mysticism, seeking union with the Gods. Knowledge and conversation of whoever's out there.

But that doesn't prevent me from wanting to 'effect change in accordance with my will'. I want to be able to get my friend this job or that flat; send the new bypass somewhere else, get the electrics in my building fixed. I want to be able to make dramatic changes in the world around me, greater changes than those avaliable to me by more conventional means. I'm still going to work towards accomplishing those things because to me this aspect of magic is also infused with the spiritual.

This isn't to denigrate the shift in perspective that you mention above. However, I'd dispute your claim that magic 'will do nothing more' than achieve this shift. I think there's some ground between the wild-goose-chase we both agree can arise from unrealistic expectations, and abandoning any attempt to affect the wider world through magic.
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
11:59 / 30.01.06
Further Gypsy, I'm not sure its particularly helpful trying to attack people on a personal level

I was being a tad provocative, but you do come across like someone who is protesting too much about other people's expectations, which tends to make me think your issues might well say more about you, than they do about all these hypothetical kids who want to fly.


If you could direct me to a work (say something on Yoga) that will cast siddhis in any kind of positive light I'd be much obliged. I quite like traditional stuff (eg. Vivekananda) which tends to paint siddhis in a very negative way.

I was broadening the term siddhis to apply outwith the scope of yoga and encompass "magical attainment" and "results sorcery". I don't practice yoga. It's not really my cup of tea. I can certainly see its value as a system of attainment, but I don't think its principles should be broadly applied to all facets and paths of magic. My own practice involves a lot of results-based and reality-based magic. I've seen some pretty unusual stuff in the context of that, I've experienced many things that I find it difficult to attribute a rational explanation to. Much of this, to borrow the language of yoga, might be considered siddhis. I find work of this nature to be valuable - right here, right now. Either in terms of magic employed to help myself or those I care about with specific real world problems. That has value. That is its own reward. I don't think these things should be disrespected and derided as some kind of negative experience distracting me from some nebulous, ill-defined goal that I haven't actually agreed I'm necessarily working towards in the first place.

And I certainly wouldn't characterise siddhis as distractions akin to day-to-day non-directed activities. Siddhis help build (or rather rebuild in a more sophisticated way) the very prison you're hopefully trying to escape from.

What prison would that be then?
 
 
illmatic
12:02 / 30.01.06
If you could direct me to a work (say something on Yoga) that will cast siddhis in any kind of positive light I'd be much obliged

A lot of the tantras talk about siddhis, or at least power, riches and sex without a particuarly pejorative tone towards these activities. After all, they're part of life. I don't have time to dig out any links right now, but will do in a couple of hours. You might want to have a look at www.shivashakti.com in the meantime.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
12:09 / 30.01.06
Turn all of "Reality" into the sacred.

I *heart* Mordant.
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
12:19 / 30.01.06
I would however, characterise siddhis as more akin to undesirable side-effects of a more important experiment.

I think the problem is not so much with siddhis as it is with how people relate to them or even obsess over them. Lets simplify the conversation and assume for the sake of argument that results magic is a different area from siddhis, defining siddhis specifically as those curious abilities that come about as a side-product of magical work. I think you do get them. I've got several curious little siddhis that come up every now and then, mostly weird psychic stuff like being able to read objects or increased sensitivity to place. I'm not in control of it. I can't do it on demand. It tends to happen when I'm not expecting it. I never asked for it or did any magic to cultivate any of it, and it really is just a curious side effect of other stuff like deity and spirit work.

I think the problem would be if I began to obsess over this stuff, and abandon the wider scope of my practice in order to really cultivate something like psychometry or telepathy. Rather than simply recognising it as an interesting side-effect that has its value but is an incidental result of a process not the ultimate goal. To divert all attention towards the cultivation of these siddhis, at the expense of everything else you were trying to do, and to narrow your focus to become all about trying to produce psychic party tricks - would be a distraction. But that doesn't mean these quite remarkable phenomena should be spat on and scorned, just not obsessed over.
 
 
folded
12:23 / 30.01.06
My final post for the evening (1am here in OZ).

Mordant: on:
"Because they're not 'attained/realised' (I'm not totally clear on what you mean by that but I think I get you). I'm not sure I'd point to GM as an 'attained/realised' magician (do any of us even know what kind of magic he practices these days? Because I sure as Hell don't). Ditto Alan Moore. Uncle Al was a brilliant scholar and made some amazing magical acheivements, but seems to have been thwarted ultimately by his own ego. I think you're looking for elevation in the wrong places... although I don't claim to know what the right places might be."

Yes. Precisely the problem I'm getting at. Either these guys (GM, Moore, Uncle Al) are full of crap or not very accomplished because they have no powers/siddhis (lack of accomplishment is not something I associate with Mr Crowley at the very least) and there's some heavy duty mages siting around (or rather floating) in the "right places" that people never see (think: Illuminati, Secret Chiefs, Darque Mage under the bed etc.) and these people have siddhis but are, like, too cool to use 'em just right now ("Hey man! That's not cool. Like Jesus said, don't test me man! I've got these kewl powers and coz you asked I'm not going to show you, so nahnahnah"... go to almost any Occult group and you'll meet this person).

OR: Siddhis/powers are an utter irrelevance to the process of Realisation- a side-effect at best, to be avoided and not replicated.

Illmatic: Thanks. I know that Siddhis are often encouraged in some practices but that still doesn't change my basic position though. (previous sentence). Siddhis impede progress to Union/Yoga.

Gypsy: Still with the personal attacks. And semantic redefintions.

The prison would be "you" Gypsy.

Mordant:
As to "want to be able to get my freind that job or that flat; send the new bypass somewhere else, get the electrics in my building fixed. I want to be able to make dramatic changes in the world around me, greater changes than those avaliable to me by more conventional means."

Please see my bit about Holography (part contains- and IS- whole- but cannot reconfigure the whole in a radical sense). Best test: try and try again. See if you get the desired results. Personally, I think the most effective magickal method to help your friend get that job is by offering them "mundane" assistance (eg. writing them a great reference, help with their CV, skill set etc. etc.)

I think I've failed to communicate my point dismally again. My fault. Please accept my apologies.
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
12:33 / 30.01.06
Still with the personal attacks

Touched a nerve? There is a difference between a personal attack and someone disagreeing strongly with the point you are making and questioning your motivation for raising it in the first place.

I think I've failed to communicate my point dismally again. My fault. Please accept my apologies.

There is a difference between people not understanding your point and people not agreeing with you on your point. You have made your point perfectly well, but it has holes in it and these are being politely criticised. I think you are being terribly short-sighted in the position you are forwarding.

The prison would be "you" Gypsy.

I didn't realise I was a prison. Blimey.
 
 
folded
12:49 / 30.01.06
Gypsy- (damn, I should just pull the plug and call it a night done but can't resist this one).

Gypsy: you didn't offer any critique of my position at all. You disagreed, stated your disagreement and attempted a series of personal attacks, finally attempting to redefine the terms of discussion. Classic debating technique- but this is not a debate. I'm not even really discussing it. I'm simply stating and restating my position ad nauseum in the hope that in doing so someone out there will hear what I'm saying and maybe avoid some pitfalls- which I've now realised is useless.

Now my flippant little riposte (just to stay in the spirit of things so far);

"I didn't realise I was a prison. Blimey."

Of course you haven't. Hopefully "you" will Realise soon.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
13:17 / 30.01.06
I'm simply stating and restating my position ad nauseum in the hope that in doing so someone out there will hear what I'm saying and maybe avoid some pitfalls- which I've now realised is useless.

Okay. Remeber the broad sympathy with your position I mentioned earlier? Starting to lose that right now.

Why are you "simply stating and restating my position ad nauseum"? Why not back it up with some solid argument, or perhaps share some of the experiences that have led you to embrace this perspective? The Temple is nothing if not receptive to experience-based conclusions.

If you're not prepared to do that, then it begins to look as if your sole motivation for starting this topic was not to draw attention to some possible pitfalls but to tell us all how foolish we all are to look for concrete results from our magical practice. You accuse other posters of making personal attacks, but you seem awfully keen to reach for the ad hominem yourself.

There are loads of threads here where people here talk about their magical and spiritual practices, the rationale behind those practices and the roads by which they got to where they are. You might want to absorb a little more before denouncing people as being trapped within the prison of the Ego. At least let us get to know each other before you dismiss us out of hand.
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
13:19 / 30.01.06
you didn't offer any critique of my position at all.

Yes I did. Several. Please read my fairly lucid posts on results magic, my own experiences with Siddhis, how I perceive their relative values based on my own practice, and my perspective that such things only become problematic when we allow ourselves to be distracted by them, rather than the reductionist position that they are somehow "dirty".

If I was making a personal attack, you would know about it.

but this is not a debate. I'm not even really discussing it. I'm simply stating and restating my position ad nauseum in the hope that in doing so someone out there will hear what I'm saying

Here lies the problem, I reckon. You're not treating this like a debate. You do not appear interested in discussing anything. You are simply stating and restating your position ad nauseum in the hope that everyone is going to agree with you and pat you on the head for being special and clever. However, barbelith is - implausible as it may seem - a discussion forum. Lively debate, criticism, presenting alternative perspectives and raising uncomfortable questions are its life blood. That's what we're all here for.

Of course you haven't. Hopefully "you" will Realise soon.

Go to bed and stop being pretentious.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
13:52 / 30.01.06
Personally, I think the most effective magickal method to help your friend get that job is by offering them "mundane" assistance (eg. writing them a great reference, help with their CV, skill set etc. etc.)

Why do you assume I would skip the "mundane" assistance and go straight for the magic? Do you really, truly, honestly believe that no-one except you has worked that out yet?
 
 
folded
13:52 / 30.01.06
Yes- Its true. I'm not interested in debate. And as I said, I'm simply reiterating a point again and again, as you are Gypsy.

"Lively debate, criticism, presenting alternative perspectives and raising uncomfortable questions are its life blood."

I hoped with this thread I was doing just that- maybe not debate but certainly criticism (of much of what I read on Temple), an alternate perspective (certainly to many here) and raising uncomfortable questions (again- proof is in the responses that this is indeed an uncomfortable topic). I find it interesting that the personal, experience-based (see my very first post) angle I offered to younger players is construed as mere ego-building and status seeking(ie. look at me stuff). I won't get into construing and questioning the motivations of others that I do not know at all as some here so readily and quickly do. Further, as you will see in my other posts on other topics, I'm not interested in getting into personal attacks, pointless semantic debates or becoming an ongoing presence on these boards in any frequent/consistent fashion. I simply offer a contribution and you can take it or leave it. If I think someone is asking for genuine clarification (as I did in some of the posts above), I'll respond. But I'm not interested in scrapping/debating/convincing/impressing/insulting/etc. and endlessly dissecting on a semantic level.

I like that some can get personal, but reply in kind (after ongoing provocations) and it is unacceptable. Some need a smack from time to time with the Happy Stick. And so smacked, they lose all control and get even more personal.

That said, I will now take my "clever", "special", "pretentious" little self to bed as instructed by wiser heads than mine.
 
 
illmatic
14:00 / 30.01.06
Siddhis impede progress to Union/Yoga.

My problem with this is two-fold. One, it's a very spcific reading of Indian magico-mystical culture. IMO, if you get a bit deeper beyond the usual palatable-to-Western-hippies stuff like Vikenanda and Paramahamsa Yogenda, the culture is full of chock full of both mysicism and results magic. And, indeed, they are often found as bedfellows rather than in opposition to each other.

Secondly, it appeals to an unknowable abstract - what is "union/yoga" in this sense? Refering to your previous sentence what is "Realisation" in this context? I'd like you to quantify your argument in sensory specifc terms - what exactly do you mean by the above terms and when have you experienced them? If you haven't experienced them, why are you so sure of your position?

To be honest, while having broad sympathy with some parts of your argument, what annoys me about it is I feel your trying to lay down the law and extend your personal truth to everyone else - "THIS is the way it is". For, you maybe, but there are other perspectives.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
14:00 / 30.01.06
I'm not interested in ... becoming an ongoing presence on these boards in any frequent/consistent fashion. I simply offer a contribution and you can take it or leave it.

That's sweet of you, kitten. Any reason why you decided to post this contribution--which, as you've clearly stated, is not up for discussion but merely perusal--on a discussion board? Rather than, say, a web page?
 
 
folded
14:02 / 30.01.06
Mordant:

"Why do you assume I would skip the "mundane" assistance and go straight for the magic? Do you really, truly, honestly believe that no-one except you has worked that out yet?"

I didn't assume this at all.
I simply said that the so-called "mundane" method is the most efficacious "magickal" method.

The undirected hostility, face-saving, water-muddying and general thread rot has clearly begun. If anyone is still reading this thread- I hope earlier perspectives presented (mine and others) are helpful to you. I'll take this opportunity to bail out before I'm drawn into even more degrading "debate".
 
 
Quantum
14:05 / 30.01.06
Folded, back up dude, that's not what is happening. Gyspsy is not attacking you or redefining the debate etc. he just doesn't agree with you.

And here's why- you're a mystic not a magician. By that I mean you would go up the middle pillar of the Tree of Life rather than the zig-zag, you value union with the Divine over 'showy Gypsy stuff', and you probably have heard this Indian parable before;

A Yogi lives by the river and through strict fasting and meditation has attained the ability to walk on water. One day as the Master visits the Yogi on his way elsewhere. Crowds of excited people gather as he chants and prays, and scream with amazement as he strolls across the river. Someone says to the Master, 'Isn't that amazing?' but he seems less than impressed. He looks at the nearby boatman who carries folk across the river for a Rupee, and asks the Yogi how long it took him to master the ability to walk over the river. 'Twenty years!' the Yogi proudly replies.
'Twenty years meditating to save a rupee? You are a fool.'

Anyway, my laboured point is that union with the Divine is not the only aim, you might be projecting your own values onto other paths. There's a traditional difference between Mysticism and Magic, despite their obvious similarities, and I *can* actually summon flying golden Jedi out of my pants so Nyeeuh- I'm just not going to show you right now as the stars are not properly aligned.

Great thread, ta Folded!
 
 
folded
14:09 / 30.01.06
"That's sweet of you, kitten".
hmm.

"Any reason why you decided to post this contribution--which, as you've clearly stated, is not up for discussion but merely perusal--on a discussion board? Rather than, say, a web page"

Web page. Simply can't be assed. I'm not a teacher. I did have something I thought I would share though, so I posted it.

Was up tonight doing some work- read "Temple" as I often do. Wrote something I thought people may enjoy at some level. Clarified my 2 cents worth to be helpful when people replied. I wasn't really prepared to present a thesis and debate it for the rest of my life. Just like someone starting a discussion by saying "Hey. I think that...."
doesn't intend to debate it, defend it, publishing a book or webpage on it etc. etc.
 
 
Gypsy Lantern
14:16 / 30.01.06
More "redefining the terms of the discussion" masquerading as critique:

Either these guys (GM, Moore, Uncle Al) are full of crap or not very accomplished because they have no powers/siddhis

I'm more than a bit uncomfortable with the logic that looks at the perceived financial shortcomings of writers who are also magicians, such as Grant Morrison, Alan Moore and Aleister Crowley; and posits that - because they are not seemingly producing gold bullion out of their arses and living in palaces - results magic, in all its forms, is redundant. I don't think anyone is claiming that magic can conjure vast wealth at the drop of a hat. In my experience, it doesn't really work like that. But I'd say you can use practical magic to attain definite, positive worldly change in your life. People like Morrison and Moore are rather good examples of that, whilst they may not live like kings, they both support themselves doing work they seem to enjoy and which they have chosen to do. I'd settle for that myself. Pretty good magic from where I'm sitting.

there's some heavy duty mages siting around (or rather floating) in the "right places" that people never see (think: Illuminati, Secret Chiefs, Darque Mage under the bed etc.) and these people have siddhis but are, like, too cool to use 'em just right now

The only magicians that you ever hear about are the ones that also happen to be writers. This doesn't necessarily make them "the darque secret cheifs hiding under the bed", but not all magic and magicians are in the public domain. A lot of the most accomplished magicians I've met don't have any literary ambitions whatsoever and just get on with their work. Even the ones who publish, probably don't talk too openly about their experiences.

Nobody is claiming here that there are people around who can levitate or bend spoons with their penis or throw fireballs. What is being objected to is your seeming insistence that all things that might fall under the vaguely defined umbrella of "Siddhis" is worthless and pointless. You could perhaps start addressing some of these criticisms by defining what it is you actually mean by a Siddhi, and how broad your definition is.

OR: Siddhis/powers are an utter irrelevance to the process of Realisation- a side-effect at best, to be avoided and not replicated.

What's that mean then? "The process of Realisation"?

If they are irrelevant, then why are they there? Why do they happen? Are they not perhaps serving some purpose? Why are you so determined that I ignore this very interesting phenomena as "irrelevant" and "to be avoided", rather than looking closely at it and trying to understand it?

This is not a personal attack, I'm just genuinely interested in where this is all coming from. When I get weird unexplainable tangential stuff happening, whilst it might be tangential and probably not a good idea to focus on it to the exclusion of the bigger picture, I also see it as a tremendously positive thing. A manifestation of Spirit. A small miracle. A nod from the deities that I work with. A communication from the divine. Not an "utter irrelevance".

I can't help but detect a sense of bitterness in the way you talk about Siddhis. You sound like a person who has had their own expectations of magic crushed and are constructing a coping mechanism where magic can still be real, albeit a lot smaller and tamer. Not a personal attack, I'm just not pulling my punches because you keep ignoring the content of my posts. I don't like the finite box that you are trying to construct around magic with this line of thinking. I'm perhaps not the only person in this thread who is oblivious to the prison they are constructing for themselves.
 
 
folded
14:18 / 30.01.06
Thanks Quantum.

You're spot-on in your assessment. (Yes, I've seen that passage. Yes, I'm probably a mystic rather than a magician).

Apologies to Gypsy if I misconstrued your intentions.
Further, apologies to others if they feel slighted (not my intention).

You bastards have now kept me up so long I'm no longer tired.
 
 
folded
14:25 / 30.01.06
Gypsy:
"I can't help but detect a sense of bitterness in the way you talk about Siddhis. You sound like a person who has had their own expectations of magic crushed and are constructing a coping mechanism where magic can still be real, albeit a lot smaller and tamer. Not a personal attack".

Again, this makes no sense to me. You say "You sound like..." etc. and then say "Not a personal attack". I don't mean to be rude but you don't know me and that's unlikely to change given a few posts here and there. My intentions/motivations etc. are in fact personal- as are anyone's. Would you not find it offensive if I said "Gypsy, from your posts I can sense X, and you must have had Y happen to you?"
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply