Does "sex magick" w...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Does "sex magick" work?

Page 7 / 7

David Dom Lemieux
(@david-dom-lemieux)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3276
 
Posted by: @katrice
 
Skepticism is healthy, and essential in magickal practice, but if your approach is to start looking at everything from the viewpoint of "Let's see how much this sucks!", you're going to screen out everything but what sucks. 

How does that quote go?  What the thinker thinks, the prover proves.

In relation to that I didn't provide a reference to the Crowley-Jane Wolfe episode I mentioned.  It's an interesting account of Crowley's skepticism.   Here it is belatedly;

 

From The Confessions Chapter 89 ;

 

Jane Wolfe was full of fixed ideas about America, of the regular spreadeagle stuff. (“Los Angeles is the modern Athens”!! This actual phrase is hers.) The stars and stripes stood for wisdom, virtue and truth; for spirituality, good manners, progress, civilization — you know, it goes on till somebody faints. Woodrow Wilson was the reincarnation of Jesus Christ and the Hearst newspapers the standard of literary excellence.

Her aspiration was utterly pure, unselfish and all-absorbing. She disdained to count the cost or to seek reward. But alas, in her eagerness she assumed that so long as she ran, it did not much matter which was she was going. She had fallen in with a crowd of charlatans of the vulgarest sort, sheer frauds without knowledge of any one fact about Magick and only concerned to dupe. She accordingly claimed to have received messages from several “Masters on the other side”. She showed me this stuff. I have read a lot of rubbish in my life, but nothing in the same street, city, county, country or continent which would stand a moment's comparison for sheer asininity. These “masters” did not even take the trouble to invent plausible accounts of themselves; e.g., there would be a Persian guide named Schmidt and her Chinese master who issued instructions which were on the level of, and quite indistinguishable from, Sunday School exaltation. Her pet persuasion was that she was to travel eastward for three years and after some adventure with a “M. Joperal”, an Englishman (the well-known Shropshire or the Essex branch of that typically English tribe), she would proceed to Japan where her destined soul-mate was waiting to marry her, the climax being the birth of a Messiah.

Amid this steaming midden of putrefying manure, I detected rare posies. She had got two or three symbols both intelligible and indicative of initiation.

During her first few weeks at the abbey, every day was one long battle. I hacked through her barbed wire of aggressive axioms. I forced her to confess the incongruity of her assertions. I drilled holes in her vanity and self-satisfaction. I dug her critical spirit out of its corner, and made her clean off {864} the rust, sharpen the edge and the point, and polish the steel till it shone. When she saw it, she feared it all the more; but I forced her to grasp it and use it. At every stroke she split the skull of one of her dearest delusions and shrieked as if its destruction were her own. She dropped the sword every time my eye was off her, but I always made her pick it up and do some more damage, till at last she found out that killing falsehoods, never so smiling and so like her idea of herself, did not hurt her, but on the contrary freed her, and she also found that the harder she struck at truth the stronger it stood. So in the end, she learnt the value of the critical spirit and made it one of her regular weapons.

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 4223
 
Posted by: @david-dom-lemieux

It's an interesting account of Crowley's skepticism.

Scepticism about what?


ReplyQuote
David Dom Lemieux
(@david-dom-lemieux)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3276
 
Posted by: @michael-staley
Posted by: @david-dom-lemieux

It's an interesting account of Crowley's skepticism.

Scepticism about what?

If you read all of the section I quoted from The Confessions Chapter 89 this may give you a clue. 

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 4223
 
Posted by: @david-dom-lemieux

If you read all of the section I quoted from The Confessions Chapter 89 this may give you a clue. 

Yes, I read it. In the quote, Crowley is ridiculing Jane Wolfe's messages from "Masters on the other side". He is sceptical not because he finds the possibility of such messages as preposterous in itself, but because of the content of those particular messages which he finds asinine and contradictory.

It would be strange if Crowley were to be sceptical about the possibilily of such communications, given events such as the communication of The Book of the Law, the Abuldiz Working, the Paris Working, the Amalantrah Working, and more.

If by scepticism you mean the anti-occult scepticism as propounded by Los and Erwin, then I think it unlikely that Crowley was a sceptic in that sense.

 


ReplyQuote
David Dom Lemieux
(@david-dom-lemieux)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3276
 
Posted by: @michael-staley

 

Yes, I read it. In the quote, Crowley is ridiculing Jane Wolfe's messages from "Masters on the other side". He is sceptical not because he finds the possibility of such messages as preposterous in itself, but because of the content of those particular messages which he finds asinine and contradictory.

It would be strange if Crowley were to be sceptical about the possibilily of such communications, given events such as the communication of The Book of the Law, the Abuldiz Working, the Paris Working, the Amalantrah Working, and more.

If by scepticism you mean the anti-occult scepticism as propounded by Los and Erwin, then I think it unlikely that Crowley was a sceptic in that sense.

 

No I'm not going all Los and Erwin on you. The second paragraph in my quote is more important because it's about the aftermath of getting rid of dumb spiritual contacts with "Masters".  

I dug her critical spirit out of its corner, and made her clean off  the rust, sharpen the edge and the point, and polish the steel till it shone.  

 

So e.g. when elitemachinery asserts that a particular Aerosmith track is amazing because it's the result of the vocalist's sex magick I'm thinking a) what about the other flapping flared-trouser wearing dinosaurs who had success but never did sex magick b) Tyler didn't even write the riffs anyway he was just the singer.    

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Sanguine Chuck
(@sangewanchuck56)
Member
Joined: 12 months ago
Posts: 468
 
Posted by: @david-dom-lemieux

So e.g. when elitemachinery asserts that a particular Aerosmith track is amazing because it's the result of the vocalist's sex magick I'm thinking a) what about the other flapping flared-trouser wearing dinosaurs who had success but never did sex magick b) Tyler didn't even write the riffs anyway he was just the singer.    

What @elitemachinery actually said was;

The Rolling Stones Mick Jagger and Aerosmith Steve Tyler have used sex magick.
 
They've spoken about it to varying degrees.
 
It worked for them to create rock n roll legacies.
 
But they also did the work of recording music and touring etc.
 
And they were working in a context that could create the wealth and lifestyles they desired.
 
(It probably helps to be a rock star and have a few willing participants to practice with on occasion.)
 
 
Basically Dom, the way you are phrasing your "skepticism" simply reads like someone reacting on social media and leaving a quick comment without taking the time to see what the author means, how they see it.
 
What's more, speaking as someone who has taken this journey with you once or twice, you ask a question or respond with what you claim is your "skeptical mind", and don't seem to respond at all when your "skepticism" as you call it is addressed with consideration.
 
Personally, I do not see you practicing true skepticism at all, at least not in the scientific or philosophical sense. 
 
I wouldn't try to don the "skeptic" hat just yet, until you're clear on the distinction between cynicism, materialism (Los' view), and skepticism (Thomas Moore, Robert Anton Wilson) and can frame your own comments with brevity and clarity.
 
Although, I must say I am a fan of your cynical trolling 🙂
 
 
 
 

"If you have come to help me, then you are wasting your time, but if you are here because your liberation is bound together with mine, then let us work together." Lilla Watson


ReplyQuote
katrice
(@katrice)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 389
 

 

Posted by: @sangewanchuck56

I wouldn't try to don the "skeptic" hat just yet, until you're clear on the distinction between cynicism, materialism (Los' view), and skepticism (Thomas Moore, Robert Anton Wilson) and can frame your own comments with brevity and clarity.

For clarification, I was referring to the Moore/RAW type that you refer to here.  Skepticism,not rationalist materialism or cynicism, and making a distinction between skepticism and cynicism, particularly the in the sense of latter when it's aimed at supporting a foregone conclusion. 


ReplyQuote
Alan_OBrien
(@alan_obrien)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 262
 

Yes it does for me.


ReplyQuote
katrice
(@katrice)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 389
 
Posted by: @alan_obrien

Yes it does for me.

Would you like to elaborate a little more on that?  Do you use the method mentioned in the original post of another approach?


ReplyQuote
David Dom Lemieux
(@david-dom-lemieux)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3276
 
Posted by: @katrice
Posted by: @alan_obrien

Yes it does for me.

Would you like to elaborate a little more on that?  Do you use the method mentioned in the original post of another approach?

Me too, I'd love to hear about this.

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


katrice liked
ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Elderly American druggie
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3841
Topic starter  
Posted by: @daathielabaddon

Women I can feel or have a response to (like a throbbing erection from a brief moment of eye contact) have usually had a NDE or been in a coma.

I stopped reading after this part.

101+ on the Whack-A-Loon Scale.


katrice liked
ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6474
 

But the question, here on this treaded retreaded thread, is Does Sex Magick work? The defining parameters of the quest were/are defined as "Working to get something of material composition" (money, honey, house, wheels, an election, that sort of thing).

Many people chime in and agree, "Well, yes, it helps me to attain, or at least get closer to, cosmic consciousness." Yet most also record, "But it doesn't seem to work for getting things."

Erectile kundalini radiations that cause NDEs are filed under Attempted Homocide. Videos are acceptable as evidence - all other claims will be denied.

 


katrice liked
ReplyQuote
katrice
(@katrice)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 389
 
Posted by: @shiva

Many people chime in and agree, "Well, yes, it helps me to attain, or at least get closer to, cosmic consciousness." Yet most also record, "But it doesn't seem to work for getting things.

Most, but not all. That said, it works better for the former for me. My track record for the latter is not as great, but not without its successes. Still, I tend to use mixed method approaches to most things.  

Erectile kundalini radiations  

 

That's a name for a band if I've ever seen one.

 


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 630
 
Posted by: @daathielabaddon

I also have sexual abilities most people don't have that are related. But no earth people, so don't even think about it! I'm retired from all that.

Me too! Earth people suck!


katrice liked
ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 2106
 
Posted by: @katrice

Most, but not all. That said, it works better for the former for me. My track record for the latter is not as great, but not without its successes.

The question here is how you know your "successes" are just that? If I toss a 6 sided die over and over and try to guess what number will come up with my "psychic abilities," I WILL have a few hits. But not across the board. So how do I ascertain those hits were more than "lucky guesses" (as opposed to genuine precognition)?

I think Crowley himself fell prey to excusing himself from "the method of science" here. All of his colorful experiments and "operations" yielded results which could be regarded as..."inconsistent" at best.

A critic might observe that it is no different than the "power of prayer." Sometimes it doesn't work. And then God has a plan we can't understand. But when the request and outcome line up, damn! That's GOD, right there!

We all know how Crowley enflamed himself in prayer. And he seems to have reaped the same results.

For the record, I DO "believe in Magic" and I also feel that a "sometimes yes, sometimes no" track record may reflect ones' developing skill level as much as a "lucky guess." But we need to be wary of fooling ourselves, also.

I think Crowley fooled himself (while intuiting a much deeper secret) and I think he was happy to fool others, as well (despite the fact that he also had genuine wisdom and guidance to offer)...


ReplyQuote
katrice
(@katrice)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 389
 
Posted by: @kidneyhawk

The question here is how you know your "successes" are just that? If I toss a 6 sided die over and over and try to guess what number will come up with my "psychic abilities," I WILL have a few hits. But not across the board. So how do I ascertain those hits were more than "lucky guesses" (as opposed to genuine precognition)?

I agree with everything you say.  Your dice rolling example, "I WILL have a few hits. But not across the board."  also describes my experiences with trying to guess tarot cards, which have not gotten good enough for me to explain it to myself as anything other than chance.  Which leads me to my answer for your question: I only count something as a success if I cannot explain said success any other way. If I enchant for something unlikely to happen on its own, and it manifests before I've even started laying any mundane groundwork for it, or comes perfectly-timed from a source I never knew existed, to give a couple of examples, and all of that checks in with my internal congruence signals, I'm more likely to call that a success.  I may have a better track record than I give myself credit for.  Or not.  But I'm quite hard on myself, by necessity. It helps keep me from becoming Yellow Brick Roadkill.   

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6474
 
Posted by: @katrice quoting Shiva.

Erectile kundalini radiations  

Posted by: @katrice

That's a name for a band if I've ever seen one.

Before you get the band (or Order) started, let me adjust the name ...

Erectile Kundalini Radiators

Posted by: @kidneyhawk

I WILL have a few hits. But not across the board.

You've never had a run across the board? I will describe one. In the early daze of Solar Lodge, we would do practices instead of social gossip. You know that one in Liber E (II) "Take a pack of (78) Tarot playing cards. Shuffle; cut. Draw one card. Without looking at it, try to name it."

Well, we degenerated a bit. It was a [52] card deck, and we only had to call Hearts, Diamonds, Spades, or Clubs. We were just beginners, starting out with basics. Some folks did pretty good, but I hit a run of ten or twelve correct. I didn't guess, or try to tag it, I knew. I also recognized an "altered state," so I just relaxed and put on a show.

Later (days, weeks, or months later), I tried it again ... and was lucky to have hit 50%. For some reason, the Secret Chiefs wanted me to know that certain siddhis exist, but they felt it would be foolish to leave it permanently activated. Good grief, I might have gone to Las Vegas!

So your scenario, quoted above, is pretty much correct, for almost any occasion, but there are exceptions. Gamblers call them "rolls." The same may be applied to sex magick, sympathetic (quantum) magick, evocation to visible appearance, etc.

Sometimes there is a direct "knowing" (gnosis). But is the person substituting "wishful thinking" for "gnosis?" Heaven forbid, but we know it can happen. Fortunately, there is no need to worry, because if one just keeps on doing the Work, any misconceptions are mercilessly revealed.

Posted by: @katrice

Yellow Brick Roadkill.

What a delightful term. Like Harry Smith, I never heard this one before. I will confess to reading "Center of the Fire" carefully. Not so carefully, I guess.

 


katrice liked
ReplyQuote
katrice
(@katrice)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 389
 
Posted by: @shiva

Erectile Kundalini Radiators

Much better. 

In the early daze of Solar Lodge, we would do practices instead of social gossip. You know that one in Liber E (II) "Take a pack of (78) Tarot playing cards. Shuffle; cut. Draw one card. Without looking at it, try to name it."

 

This is what I was referring to when I mentioned trying to guess tarot cards.

 

 Sometimes there is a direct "knowing" (gnosis). But is the person substituting "wishful thinking" for "gnosis?" Heaven forbid, but we know it can happen. Fortunately, there is no need to worry, because if one just keeps on doing the Work, any misconceptions are mercilessly revealed.

What I call congruence signals. I've learned through experience that if I ignore them, the misconceptions will be mercilessly revealed, as you put it. 

 

What a delightful term. Like Harry Smith, I never heard this one before.  

I got it from an interview with Alan Moore. It's a useful one to have in one's vocabulary. 


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 630
 
Posted by: @katrice

Most, but not all. That said, it works better for the former for me. My track record for the latter is not as great, but not without its successes. Still, I tend to use mixed method approaches to most things.  

Mixed methods and evolving methods that change as you do are probably best. But I don't think anyone should beat themselves up over the failures of their magick or sex magick. Baseball players are considered legends if they bat .350 ...every skill has expected ratio of success to be considered an "expert" in that field. The ratios are different depending on the difficulty of the skill and it turns out hitting a baseball at 100 mph aint easy. Skydiving doesn't leave a lot of room for failure.

Is magick any easier? Also, there aren't a lot of people doing it formally so it takes more muster to learn and become skillful. I personally dont do any of it but I did do my own modern version of mixed martial sex magick at various times. I find meditation works well these days. But maybe im just getn old.

Don't beat yourself up (pun?) for magick/sex magick failures is what i'd say. Keep at it. Less is more with magick. Too many people ruin the soup with all sorts of garbage. Keep it simple and take actions in real life in line with the intention. And constantly edit and simplify the system you use to make it more efficient.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6474
 
Posted by: @elitemachinery

I don't think anyone should beat themselves up over the failures of their magick or sex magick.

Crowley, no dispersions upon his name, told us that we are lucky if our magickal engines reach an efficiency of 50%.

 


ReplyQuote
katrice
(@katrice)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 389
 
Posted by: @elitemachinery

Mixed methods and evolving methods that change as you do are probably best.  

I'm constantly looking for ways to upgrade and streamline my approach.   

But I don't think anyone should beat themselves up over the failures of their magick or sex magick. 

Oh, I'm not beating myself up, just being honest and realistic.  

 

mixed martial sex magick

You may have to tell me more about this. 😊

 

I find meditation works well these days.

Meditation is one of the essential foundations of any serious magickal practice.  

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6474
 
Posted by: @elitemachinery

I don't think anyone should beat themselves up over the failures of their magick or sex magick.

Crowley, no dispersions upon his name, told us that we are lucky if our magickal engines reach an efficiency of 50%.

 


katrice liked
ReplyQuote
Page 7 / 7
Share: