|
|
The TTS/Mako 'dismissed out of hand'/'considered and tested very briefly' exchange has me wondering. I don't get the 'you have to try it to know' insistence on direct experiential awareness thing (or, similarly, the insistence some have on remaining open to all practices at all times). Neither Mako nor TTS are making that claim (and TTS' article, linked above, seems to make a pretty decent claim in the opposing direction), to be clear, it's just similar territory, and jumpstarted my wondering.
In general, sure trying new things is a good idea, but really, there are some elements, some options, which you're just not going to go in for. The idea that practicing magick implies one to be necessarily invasive or transgressive, that you have to go about touching or exploring everything, any and all avenues and aspects, has always seemed to be an Eastern Hemisphere trope based in imperialism.
We should be open to witnessing or acknowledging all sorts of things, yes, but clearly there have to be times when we just note that others have done X and it turned out really rotten and it was an asshole thing to do anyway, and then we don't do it. Right? Like putting on a pie plate and trying to get a rise out of every third person in the bar, with amazing invasive psychick powerz. Or, hell, pointing at an airplane up in the sky and willing it to crash.
Following a sun honoring with 'By the power of Greyskull!' might be worth a go once or twice, or deciding to go back and try anagrams as magickal tools, et cet. I'm digging sun rituals in the restroom at the moment, because it's got that inner-star push going on. Worth a shot. But me doing a banishing ritual, even a basic one? Not worth it to me. Still feels like you're staking out total claim on a space/aspect; magickal imperialism. Or testing the waters of, say, trading other people's lives, luck, or happiness, for your own benefit. There are practices, and I'm sure some people get something out of it, but y'know, it's like anything some people would consider not-magick, in that, you don't need to pull the trigger just to find out what blowing someone's face out the back of their skull would be like. Or kick the legs out from under a small children and tell them a boojum did it.
Has someone suddenly declaring 'I think I shall become a trickster' and poking around really done anybody any good? Or taking the stern but loving parent routine? Neither side of that, taken alone, has ever appealed to me even in actual human beings in real child/parent situations, but to dress yourself up in them seems awful full of presumptions.
While I may wonder about the gain, I am unlikely to try wrapping the facade around my shoulders, pulling down the mask and jumping out from behind bushes, trying to scare/anger someone, before taking off that facade for the parental one beneath, to do a 'oh, see, I scared the bad monster off, everything's fine.' Some people may base their entire practice around that, but really, if I'm not seeing the use, and the detriment is an actual detriment, what's the point in remaining open to it as viable?
Not everything is worth doing just because you get an effect. That's why we're capable of observing. And analysing. Right? |
|
|