BARBELITH underground
 

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


Creating the FAQ- questions and answers here!

 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
12:44 / 01.03.02
Taoism isn't necessarily a religion, for all that that's usually where you find it in booshops.
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
13:24 / 01.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Nick:
Taoism isn't necessarily a religion, for all that that's usually where you find it in booshops.


Which leads to another encyclopaedia entry on the philosophical and, in some ways more relavent, political aspects of Taoism.

But as far as the question goes for newbies, most people interpret Taoism as either a philosophy, a religion, or both.
 
 
grant
13:29 / 01.03.02
What is "chicken magick"? - derogatory term for an artificially limited magical practice; a magical rut. So named because it "all tastes the same."
 
 
Saint Keggers
19:50 / 01.03.02
Just putting in my 2-cents..

High magick: Any magick in which the main goal is spiritual/metaphysical improvement.
Low magick: Any magick in which the main focus is on personal/material matters. Getting money magick for example.

But I could be wrong...
 
 
The Monkey
20:04 / 01.03.02
Lately, Lothar, et al. I've been getting an itch to put together an Encyclopedia-type thing for occult and religious stuff...it's probably obvious in the way I've sorted of vomitted info onto the board...sorry if it's more than wanted/needed....
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
20:32 / 01.03.02
No need to apologize, the stuff's great. An evolving encyclopaedic collection of info generated by the collective forum would be sooo fucking cool.

The FAQ could be the appetizer with the encyclopaedia as the main course.
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
20:40 / 01.03.02
quote:Originally posted by kegboy:
Just putting in my 2-cents..

High magick: Any magick in which the main goal is spiritual/metaphysical improvement.
Low magick: Any magick in which the main focus is on personal/material matters. Getting money magick for example.

But I could be wrong...


Actually, I think those're great definitions.

The only thing I would add would be

"These terms were coined and used primarily by magicians who consider themselves practitioners of High Magick as a way to separate themselves from practices they considered inferior."

But that may be too loaded of an addition.
 
 
cusm
14:05 / 04.03.02
Eh. This may be best moved to its own thread, but I'd prefer definitions of "high", "low", "left", "right" or "just below the navel" magic to be as procedural as possible. By that I mean, the types and practice of these forms in a general sense, rather than getting into it with intentions and whose better. Try to stay objective, as hard as that may be For example:

High: structured, ceremonial, calling upon established traditional methods and archetypes.

Low: more personal and spontaneous, with less emphasis on structure and more on the experience.

Right: Culturally accepted or traditional forms. Often also seen as benevelent or outwardly generous in nature.

Left: Heretical, profane, or unpopular forms. Often seen as "dark", or of only selfish benefit.
 
 
pacha perplexa
14:41 / 04.03.02
I've been asked these questions some time ago:

- what are servitos?/ how can they be useful?

- how do I make one?

- how do I know if mine's working?/ how do I communicate with it?

- can a servitor become dangerous?

*(this is the most interesting, in my opinion) - These godforms, demons, servitors, faeries, elementals... can you actually SEE them, talk to them, interact with them?
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
15:24 / 04.03.02
quote:Originally posted by cusm:
Eh. This may be best moved to its own thread, but I'd prefer definitions of "high", "low", "left", "right" or "just below the navel" magic to be as procedural as possible.


Despite all the current fighting regarding these, I agree with you. I also think though that the next logical question would be to ask for clarification on the terminology used. At least it was for me when I was a newbie:

"Does the use of the term 'high' mean that structured, ceremonial magic is better or more powerful than personal, spontaneous magic? Should I be eventually striving for 'high' magick?"

or for those with a strong Christian background. "My parents say that my use of Tarot cards is following the 'left' hand path. Am I going to go to hell?"

Or

"Isn't all magic evil? How can some be 'right' hand and some be 'left' hand?"

It opens up a big can o' worms and I'm not sure one can sufficiently separate the political and/or religious prejudicial aspects of certain terms from the procedural without being misleading and/or endorsing the philosophy behind the terminology (as the alt.magick faq linked above does).

Or like you say, just stick with the procedural but add a caveat of something like: "These terms come with a lot of history, baggage, and continued heated arguments, for a more detailed investigation please check out the Barbelith Magickal Encyclopaedia."

In the Encyclopaedia we can get into all of the various permutations of 'loaded' terminology.
 
 
Naked Flame
08:51 / 05.03.02
Woah. 8000-word editing job ahoy!

Everything up to this point has now been copied to Word for editing and eventually Your Reading Plea-Zure. Some lovely stuff here. I'll check back when I've got somewhere with this lot!
 
 
Perfect Tommy
08:51 / 05.03.02
quote:Originally posted by grant:
Are these things real, or is it all in my head? – Does the difference really matter?
Not to split hairs, but I would add a sentence or three on why it doesn't really matter. I read something in a Phil Hine book about the spirit model, the psychological model, and so forth... that kinda thing. (I don't know if those are terms in general use or if they're his.)
 
 
cusm
14:42 / 06.01.03
All hail the wiki!

I started a page for the Magick FAQ, so this sort of thing can finally have a permanentish home. The wiki is cool. Love the wiki. All that stuff we come up with here that would do well being indexed in a place people can reference it can be done through the wiki. I'll actually work on it some later when I have time, but for now, feel free to jump in there and start putting things up. It'll evolve and reedit as we go.
 
 
Wrecks City-Zen
18:26 / 06.01.03
[threadrot.sort.of.]o you know how excited I was to see Lothar Tuppan posting on this thread?...then I realized it was from last year...[/threadrot]

...cheers cusm...
 
 
cusm
18:55 / 07.01.03
Alright, rough draft up. Please add to it! If you don't like something, redoit. Thus is the fun of the wiki. Try to keep entries short and definitive, this isn't the place for essay. Discuss changes here.

If you want to play but are having a hard time with the wiki, feel free to PM me for help.
 
 
cusm
19:53 / 07.01.03
Aw crap. I just realized the draft I put up has 22 questions and 10 definitions. Bloody Quaballa sneaking itself into my work again!

Still, that's awfully funny. I really didn't mean to do that. honest.
 
 
enough
20:08 / 07.01.03
lol
 
 
cusm
18:51 / 07.02.03
Someone mentioned the Magick FAQ, so bumpity it is again.

The wiki FAQ is here.

Anyone can sign on and edit or add pages. This is how the wisdom in these threads may find a permanent place to dwell. Its open for anyone with the time to work on it.
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply