| Author |
Message |
kidneyhawk |
|
Post subject: The Measurement of Magick
 Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 01:48 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 02, 2006
Posts: 1576
Status: Offline
|
|
OK-the recent Intro from Paul has already evoked some "debate" regarding rationality, scientific analysis and the "supra-rational" nature of Magick. I thought I'd move the topic into its own thread as I think its brimming with possibilities...
So-! Taking off from Paul's words on the "Method of Science" being able to catch up with the Phenomena of what we "moderns" understand as "Magick," how do folks here see things?
Are Dualism and the "Scientific Method" fundamentally linked yet ultimately discarded as a sheer necessity in Mystical Pursuit? Is there such a thing as "Non-dualistic Science?"
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
wolf354 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 04:02 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 217
Status: Offline
|
|
Greetings
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
I thinl "science" is a very vague term.
Is psychology science? if so does Freud, Jung or Reich have that much in common?
With Magick is just the same Crowley, Spare and (fill as you will) do have things in common but the main concepts seem different.
I feel that many people tend to label science as something very real and well defined, but I don't think it is. There are always several diferent scientific opinions and conclusions relating to one fact.
I am reading a book about Astrology and when a French statistician decided to proove that Astrology where just lies and luck he found that many astrological predictions where correct... but that "...they where missing the company of qualified experts".
This isn't really scientific research in my opinion... is just changing the "selling label" of something (in this case Astrology).
I don't think Thelema needs any "scientific research", the methods proposed are already very clear, what an individual needs is strenght and will to pursue those goals.
If someone finds a better way of achieving there own goals that is also fine, but the methods aren't going to be the same and it will need a diferent label (in my opinion... of course).
Probably the True Will of someone can be in Scientific research, another person in Magickal workings. Of course True Will can also be Art or in Spiritual Achievements and whatever you can think of.
Love is the law, love under will
Best regards |
_________________
Be thou therefore prompt and active as the Sylphs, but avoid frivolity and caprice; be energetic and strong like the Salamanders, but avoid irritability and ferocity; be flexible and attentive to images like the Undines, but avoid idleness and changeability; be laborious and patient like the Gnomes, but avoid grossness and avarice.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MichaelStaley |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 12:31 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 1304
Status: Offline
|
|
kindeyhawk wrote: › Are Dualism and the "Scientific Method" fundamentally linked yet ultimately discarded as a sheer necessity in Mystical Pursuit? Is there such a thing as "Non-dualistic Science?"
I’ve never had much enthusiasm for the “method of science, aim of religion” approach. I do take some of it on board – keeping a magical record, for instance. However, I rely more on my instincts than on rationality, useful though the latter undoubtedly is. I thought that a remark on the “Paulus” thread is extremely pertinent:
Uni-Verse wrote: › A question on measurement: Is it really that useful? Does not the act of measurement intrisically change that which is measured? When a sub-atomic particle is subjected to measurement, it ceases to be a wave and instead becomes a particle.
I work wherever possible on a thorough and sustained basis. However, at the end of the day (that phrase: don’cha luvvit?) we are dealing with an experience which being beyond duality is also beyond words and beyond reason. That doesn’t mean we should fling aside our sword and shield and yield to despair. There are some texts which do facilitate that insight: for example, The Book of the Heart Girt with the Serpent, or The Diamond Sutra, and some marvellous works of art.
Intuition and reason are not polar opposites, but more likely two sides of the same coin, and certainly we need both. |
_________________
"It's all in the egg".
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
wulfram |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 12:55 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 08, 2004
Posts: 144
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
|
|
True Magick is the merger of Art & Science...
I approach Magick from a more shamanistic slant than I ever did as a beginning student. Once you wrap yourself in the structure and embrace it fully, it opens one up to being able to operate outside the lines of structure.
Page called it "tangents within a framework"... |
_________________
www.occultdetective.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kidneyhawk |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 01:17 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 02, 2006
Posts: 1576
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: ›
I’ve never had much enthusiasm for the “method of science, aim of religion” approach
Well, I'm quite glad that someone came out and said this. My intention in asking the questions I did was not to gather responses I could lamblast based on pre-decided perspectives and I think Paul is already contributing many thoughtful angles to the topic. But outside of some vague terms like "occult science" etc. I don't see there being a non-dualistic science, myself. Science functions in a dualist realm by virtue of requiring comparsion. Mystical experience is "epiphanous" and non-comparative.
HOWEVER, the Sage does descend from the Holy Mountain into the "plane" where duality is useful and necessary, having formed a linkage between the two and we've seen how forms of art allow the tools of language, representation etc to warp outside of the bounds of nature and take an "in-between" role where energy passes between the "worlds."
I don't think the artistry of Egypt, for example, was born and continued due to lack of technical skill in representing what was seen with the "corporeal eye." |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Baxian |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 01:53 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 28, 2007
Posts: 74
Status: Offline
|
|
Hi, if I may.
I think Michaels point that
MichaelStaley wrote: › Intuition and reason are not polar opposites, but more likely two sides of the same coin, and certainly we need both.
seems a good "common sense" take on things.
Paul's approach is excellent though does not interest me personally that much to utilize, with regards to Magic. I will leave that to Pete Carroll etc.
Analizing and thinking about feedback in terms of probability is used in science, and by magicians it seems.
I suspect strongly that it was and is not unfamilar to Magicians in many parts of the world and even to (lol) "primitive" Shamanic people's.
A good (friendly) question could be- what can science add(a part from being a personal taste thing) to Magical exploration that does not already exist within "it's" methodology.
Cheers.
Baxian. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Paolo_sammut |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 02:10 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 41
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
|
|
I must admit I have problems with terms such as "measurement of magic" and think that there could well be issues with this as regards to science attempting to understand (as opposed to disprove) magic. I think this is because one is experiential, the other empirical.
Paulus in another thread mentioned consciousness studies which is progressing in leaps and bounds, for example we have some very interesting work by researchers such as Michael Persinger. However I think that one thing we will never know is whether (in this instance) the magnetic fields he is using generates the experience or simply makes the mind more receptive to what is already there. With regards to the experience itself I would have to ask how much this matters how people experience magical or mystical states?
It is of course important to investigate things and through investigation we all learn. We are also lucky as magicians that we can take advantage of "peer review" nowadays something not really possible when magic was less acceptable in society due to a range of religious and social reasons.
I actually wrote about some of this in detail along with a discussion of language and the problems that can cause in my recent Lashtal blog - "Journal of impossible things"
Part of my problem arises in the approach a scientist must take. Ultimately this needs to be sceptical and work by disproving things. No scientist can prove a hypothesis such as "all swans are white", because to do so would be to examine every swan in history. However it can easily be disproved by producing a single black swan.
I see this need for scepticism to work contrary to magic where belief is essential in generating results. A scientist also needs to stand back and observe rather than become part of the experiment as such perhaps we can say that they will not form part of any group-mind formed which might serve to booster belief. I believe that without belief coupling the magicians mind to the universe effects cannot happen.
Secondly we have the "world" which science deals with. Much of magic takes place in our own magical space which is either a part of the mind, or interfaced through the mind. In a sense attempting to objectify parts of this is tantamount to using a Geiger counter to find the background radiation level of a dreamscape.
Whilst phenomena such as apports or poltergeists suggest that there is an overlap between these worlds I don’t think that its a case of building a better detector or looking for something such as "magic particles" but rather think that next we need to work with the interface needed to consistently generate such phenomena.
That is not to say that one day human knowledge will not come up with a complete "theory of reality" encompassing magic, science and who knows what else. I just do not think that we have the tools to do that yet. I think we need to look at developing different conceptual tools to investigate magic and its effects. However a side effect of this is the person using these tools might need to discard key points in sciences methodology, such as the need to disprove rather than prove. As such there is a philosophical case for arguing that strictly speaking this will no longer be a “scientific method”
I don’t want this to be seen as an attack on science. My educational background is scientific and I think that it is as full of wonders as is magic. However I do think that the two operate in different worlds and within a different context. I also do not believe that as a magician I need to seek justification in science any more than as a scientist I need to justify my beliefs in magic. Just my take on it of course 
Cheers Paolo |
_________________
So shall he see things that ought not to be seen, sights that are abominable, and secrets that are unutterable
Last edited by Paolo_sammut on Jun 01, 2007 - 02:55 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
hawthornrussell |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 02:28 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 02, 2005
Posts: 401
Status: Offline
|
|
| If branches of science like Physics and chemistry have diffculty with issues like UFO's and cryptozoology i think its safe to say that the scientific issue over Magick is a non starter. Even avenues like telekinesis , and psi abilites have been peer reviewed badly by scientists. The parapsychology unit at Edinburgh Uni under Dr Wiseman has done good research but it doesnt get the sort of respectability of say quantum physics. So how magick would even get attention from scientists is open to question. It would destroy their academic reputation and credibility to be even thinking about something of that nature. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
runelogix |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 03:33 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2006
Posts: 168
Location: San Francisco
Status: Offline
|
|
There was an obsession a century ago to prove all things metaphysical in a scientific basis. Rationality and the scientific method were thoroughly dominating every other mode of thought in the Western world as it continued to get real results in the real world. Just about every occult author at the time tried to use the language of science in their fundamentally irrational teachings to give it a form of legitimacy to a skeptical public. The thing is that magick does not need science or rationality to be effective. In Crowleys case he certainly wanted to be a thorough magician that masters all forms of magical practice. This may or may not be anyone else's calling. Personally I don't have a need to master all forms of magic, the more I learn the more I realize what is right for me. Crowley is not a person I would solicit for help in this regards. It's the great task of modern science to discover a unified theory of physics to resolve the duality between relativity and quantum mechanics. This has been going on for decades. Magically however the unified non dual Void is already here, you just have to get out of it's way  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 03:42 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 02, 2006
Posts: 259
Location: New York
|
|
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Quote: › So how magick would even get attention from scientists is open to question. It would destroy their academic reputation and credibility to be even thinking about something of that nature.
In my experience, the science/engineering community, of which I've been a part of for 25 years, takes to esoteric subjects to a much greater degree than many people might think. I'd go as far as to say that an occult undercurrent pervades the technical community at its most influential levels within all technical disciplines.
John
Love is the law, love under will. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
mikemystery |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 03:44 PM
|
|
Joined: May 13, 2005
Posts: 40
Location: London
Status: Offline
|
|
*edit: I missed the above post, Its the same as when I found out that, (much as i hate to admit that Jack Chick is right): Dungeons and Dragons does lead to black magic
I thought the Koestler Chair at Edinburgh Uni was currently empty? There's a brilliant Fortean Times article this month about the appropriation of parapsychology funds by other university departments. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
badfreddy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 04:24 PM
|
|
Joined: May 23, 2005
Posts: 134
Location: The North
Status: Offline
|
|
| Magick is the metaphysical alchemy that happens when base elements become art. That is how it works for me anyway. |
_________________
------------------------------
www.dyspraxianation.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
runelogix |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 04:44 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2006
Posts: 168
Location: San Francisco
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
djinn888 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 04:51 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2007
Posts: 34
Status: Offline
|
|
I'd have to agree with Proteus in the idea that "an occult undercurrent pervades the technical community at its most influential levels within all technical disciplines." Underneath and Within the computer science realm lurks the beautifully Qabalistic framework, whether recognized or not....... A single flow of electricity (Kether) split into duality (Chokmah) & (Binah); high voltage & low voltage ; binary 0 & 1; the recombining of these two dualities producing the infinite forms and functions of which we experience and work with.
Brent |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
zain |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 06:20 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 172
Status: Offline
|
|
| Runelogix the sites you gave dont mention specific scientific studies on Magick. All i saw was stuff on Yoga and historical studies. I wouldnt equate that with scientific experiments on Magick. Can you give a site which is specifically attempting to approach Magick through scientific means? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
runelogix |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 07:05 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2006
Posts: 168
Location: San Francisco
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
zain |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2007 - 07:48 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 172
Status: Offline
|
|
Thanks for that Runelogix. But i would debate if those articles were relevant to genuine magickal practice. I accept they are using scientific techniques to measure systems of belief but i dont think they are relevant to the practice of genuine magick.
I would love to see a parapsychologist use scientific equipment to measure a Goetic evocation!! ( Like that will ever happen!!) |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kidneyhawk |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 12:16 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 02, 2006
Posts: 1576
Status: Offline
|
|
Zain-
I think some of a parapsychological bent COULD rig up a truckload of testing tools to measure heartbeats and body temps and glandular secretions and brainwave activity etc., coming to all sorts of conclusions as to the factors at play during Goetic Evocation, Scrye-work and so on. Perhaps some of the tabulated data would be useful. But ultimately, one is going to fail with such an approach in taking a full and total picture. For example, how can science peg "Enlightenment?" It can be defined by someone outside of the experience as an observable "condition" marked by certain perceived qualities and assumed to be caused by tangible influences. But the human animal repeatedly subjected to the same set of circumstances will keep responding differently. For the animal is a sensory apparatus loading experience into mind strata which keeps changing every second. It's true that psychology has mapped out temporarily "stable" strucutres in this plasmic realm which can be applied to a PERCENTAGE of the populus but man is NOT a machine-at least not one operating by the rules which apply to, say, a car. When the mind keeps morphing, one's use of the machine (which in Magick is transformative) can't fall back on a set list of "rules." It would seem that a type of Inner Martial Arts discipline is to be employed to redirect energies and patterns towards the end of an impulse which belongs to some "Super-Nature." NOT distinct from the whole of what we might call "Reality" but of another ilk, and one which requires new and different tools to operate upon. Magick provides these tools yet Magick can also become Dogma when one embraces the form of the tool over its use.
As you brought up the Goetia, there is then the issue of summoning to visible appearence, a seeming hallmark of "success." I recall Lon Milo's account of Goetic Work in My Life With The Spirits, a forray into an other dimensional plane of perception, evoking the total experience, the images and visions and swift results. I have no reason to doubt his account of summoning-and yet a camera may well have come away dissatisfied. The factors involved are a billion-fold...can you image what a botch that experience would be for a researcher trying to tabulate sensory data as Lon gets Abramelin in his eyes and decides to run out of the room, whilst commanding the spirit to stay put?
Crowley advocated that we really know ourselves, our limits, our ability to function on 1, 2, 3 hours of sleep etc. Physical stuff. It's all really useful. I'm well aware of how my own physical condition links into magickal effectiveness. But there's so much more, deeper than any outside observer can assess...this takes us well down into places where we, as judges of our own experience, may well fly off into delusion...or keep driving on down through it.
One main point of mysticism seems to be dissolving the seperation we've accepted regarding "body" and "mind," "outside" and "inside." "Density" is so because we perceive it as such. The Summoned Spirit is only authenticated by passing through a perceptive field whereby we authenticate it. When going deeper than the "monkey-mind," we find ourselves in a realm which doesn't make judgements about whether or not something is "real." It simply IS. Phenomena. Transient. And if we are adequately performing the Inner Aikido, it may magnetize to patterns of particular relevance to our evolutionary and expressive impulse, an unveiling of the potentiality within which has its own unique "fit" into Cosmic Will.
Crowley may have liked the catchy "Science & Religion" line, but really, I think Thelema goes beyond BOTH and may evoke something along the lines of "The Aim of Mysticism, the Method of Magick" without in one iota spitting on the physical sciences or placing them outside its scope. |
_________________
"Embrace Reality by Imagination." -Austin Osman Spare
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MichaelStaley |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 12:36 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 1304
Status: Offline
|
|
kidneyhawk wrote: › "The Aim of Mysticism, the Method of Magick"
Now that really IS talking! I've always regarded magick as having a mystical core, without which it is somewhat empty. |
_________________
"It's all in the egg".
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kidneyhawk |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 12:49 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 02, 2006
Posts: 1576
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: ›
I've always regarded magick as having a mystical core, without which it is somewhat empty.
This is something which was STRONGLY impressed on me as I read AC's John St. John. I've experienced many things, enough to know that the field of experience stretches WAY beyond my present ken. I could state unhesitantly that I've communed with extraterrestrial intelligences, Voudon Loa etc etc. And yet time rolls on and hindsight always offers a new perspective. I sometimes find things shrugged off or forgotten to be of immense import (hence, I can understand AC's stuffing away of AL and the "rediscovery" to which he dedicated his life) and then there are things I've gone manic over which later on prove to be self-delusion and not even possessed of enough energy to keep the game going. But Thelema is some Arrow, ever moving and yet ever still, around which the world itself is rushing. It never left the bowstring and has already struck the target.
But I suppose NOW I belong on the "Taolema" thread!  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 12:58 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 21, 2004
Posts: 416
Location: Folkestone.Kent.UK.
|
|
How many times out of a hundred does divination have to work before you can call it scientific?
I have always found that it is me and not the method used that matters to achieve results.
I have often had much better results with simple methods of divination such as the pendulem and simple yes no answers. The more intellectual the method of divination the less it works. Successfull divination is usually accompanied by synchronicitys and states of mind akin to the mystical state.
So perhaps magicians are frustrated mystics.
Best Wishes Robert. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
wolf354 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 01:29 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 217
Status: Offline
|
|
Greetings
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
rabrazier wrote: ›
So perhaps magicians are frustrated mystics.
Best Wishes Robert.
Your sentence brings me another question (maybe out of thread). Who as achieved a higher Spiritual success (sorry I am missing the correct words...) Aleister Crowley or Allan Bennett?
A tricky question I guess.
Love is the law, love under will
Best regards |
_________________
Be thou therefore prompt and active as the Sylphs, but avoid frivolity and caprice; be energetic and strong like the Salamanders, but avoid irritability and ferocity; be flexible and attentive to images like the Undines, but avoid idleness and changeability; be laborious and patient like the Gnomes, but avoid grossness and avarice.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Uni_Verse |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 01:48 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 332
Status: Offline
|
|
Wolf had it right when he said "science is a very vague term."
As I certainly think that magick is indeed a science.
It invovles the body of knowledge we call the "self."
Therby it is a personal science.
The things we see and experieince are extremly powerful to us.
But it is difficult to try to explain that to others so that they feel it as we felt it.
Understand it as we understand it. |
_________________
You are missing the point
There is only one verse, sung in infinite ways.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
runelogix |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 02:20 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2006
Posts: 168
Location: San Francisco
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Thanks for that Runelogix. But i would debate if those articles were relevant to genuine magickal practice. I accept they are using scientific techniques to measure systems of belief but i dont think they are relevant to the practice of genuine magick.
What is this "genuine magick" you're talking about?
NLP = belief, AOS = Will, Desire, Belief, Thelema = belief, goetic magick = belief, HGA = belief, Scientology = belief, Christianity = belief, Buddhism = belief, hypnotherepy = belief, Iraq has weapons of mass destruction = belief. Belief colors everything about magick. One persons "genuine magick" is anothers superstition. Another persons superstition is another persons religion. Maybe I'm missing the "genuine magick" Magus zain can enighten me on?  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
pike66 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 03:05 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 05, 2003
Posts: 111
Location: New York
Status: Offline
|
|
I wouldn't call magick "supra-rational". I would call it "extra-rational", being the suspension of rationality/ethics (at least in an ideal world). Opinions, opinions.
-R.Pike- |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
adonia444 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 03:12 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 354
Status: Offline
|
|
Rabrazier,
Kudos for your great post. I agree with you entirely. The method of divination used tends to be something of a material nature, in other words, paper cards, pennies, etc...
When you examine the tools they really aren't different from many other commonplace objects. It's the mind which forms a connection to the means and through it is allowed a greater degree of freedom to function as one Will. Can one measure the mind? This seems to be the debate here and quite frankly when it comes to magick I dont believe one can do this to the degree of certainty which will be accepted by the scientific community.
Still, regardless of one groups approval the results and experience speak for themselves. Personally I dont need nor seek the validation from a scientific authority. This is not to say I wouldnt be interested in a genuine study and the findings therein. Sadly I dont think anyone takes this all serious enough to fund such a project. Regardless, the pratice of magick has pushed on through the centuries without need of this type of validation which to me stands alone and speaks it's own language.
At the risk of sounding like an annoying American (ahem) I'd also appreciate clarification, Zain:
Quote: ›
What is this "genuine magick" you're talking about?
As much as we are forming our own opinions regarding what we consider to be science I think "Magick" might require it's own definition here (even if we're all familiar with Crowleys classic definition).
How does Quote: ›
genuine magick
escape scientific probing?
What is the quality of your "genuine magick" which eludes the analysis of the
Quote: ›
parapsychologist
93 93/93
Kym |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KCh |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 06:42 AM
|
|
Joined: Oct 08, 2003
Posts: 248
Location: Louisville, Ky
Status: Offline
|
|
The dangers of mysticism:
http://lib.oto-usa.org/crowley/essays/dangers-mysticism.html
Quote: › Hundreds of mystics shut themselves up completely and for ever. Not only is their wealth-producing capacity lost to society, but so is their love and good-will, and worst of all, so is their example and precept. Christ, at the height of his career, found time to wash the feet of his disciples; any Master who does not do this on every plane is a Black Brother. The Hindus honour no man who becomes “Sannyasi” (nearly our “hermit”) until he has faithfuly fulfilled all his duties as a man and a citizen. Celibacy is immoral, and the celibate shirks one of the greatest difficulties of the Path.
Beware of all those who shirk the lower difficulties: it’s a good bet that they shirk the higher difficulties too.
Of the special dangers of the path there is here no space to write; each student finds at each step temptations reflecting his own special weakness. I have therefore dealt solely with the dangers inseparable from the path itself, dangers inherent in its nature. Not for one moment would I ask the weakest to turn back or turn aside from that path, but I would ask even the strongest to apply these correctives: first, the sceptical or scientific attitude, both in outlook and method; second, a healthy life, meaning by that what the athlete and the explorer mean; third, hearty human companionship, and devotion to life, work, and duty.
Let him remember that an ounce of honest pride is better than a ton of false humility, although an ounce of true humility is worth an ounce of honest pride; the man who works has no time to bother with either. And let him remember Christ’s statement of the Law “to love God with all thy heart, and thy neighbour as thyself.” |
_________________
Κφ
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Azidonis |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 08:46 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 05, 2006
Posts: 383
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Status: Offline
|
|
93,
Just some opening thoughts.
1. Intuition is born of either Chokmah or Binah, and Reason born of the Ruach, right? Roughly. Reason can always be transcended by Intuition.
2. The "Method of Science" in Magick is the formula itself. There is a Formula for every known method of Magick. Evocation, Invocation, Meditation, etc. all have their own Formula. The works themselves are the scientific hypotheses. The Individual and the conditions the Individual is presented with are the Variables. The Hypothesis says that if you do such and such, you will attain the Summits of Meditation. When one actually puts the formula to the test, the initial theory of "how can I Evolve" is either proven or dis-proven. That is the Science.
3. The Art is the Scientist making it all happen and enjoying the Wonders.
More to come... nice thread!
93 93/93,
Az |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kidneyhawk |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 03:36 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 02, 2006
Posts: 1576
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: ›
Actually, it's All About the Chicken
The (K)entucky (Ch)icken-?
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MichaelStaley |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 02, 2007 - 04:51 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 1304
Status: Offline
|
|
kidneyhawk wrote: › The (K)entucky (Ch)icken-?
Finger-lickin' good? |
_________________
"It's all in the egg".
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
in 29° 
: 
in 13° 
: Anno IVxvii 
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
