Home Forums Thelema Magick Was Crowley too harsh on psychic-mediums?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 36 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #110580

    dom
    Participant

    He had some harsh things to say about them. Why? Jealousy that he had to work for his psychical abilities?

    • This topic was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  dom.
    #110582

    redman
    Participant

    I would say that it was most likely due to that period where there were many charlatans and frauds being exposed on a regular basis.

    Sent from my SM-G955W using Tapatalk

    #110586

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    Apart from the obvious charlatans & fraudsters, Crowley did not only not have harsh things to say about (some of) them, but he had the greatest respect for those “psychic-medium” pythonessic channellers who succeeded in bringing forth e.g. Amalantrah, Ab-ul-diz, Aiwass etc., as the same time as always being rather critical of those he saw as just dabbling & delving within the lower reaches of the astral.

    Greetings on Twelfth Night & wishing you many epiphanies
    Norma N Joy Conquest

    #110594

    ignant666
    Participant

    Crowley lived through the Golden Age of fraudulent spiritualist mediums, table-tapping, trumpets, ectoplasm, etc.

    As someone driven by an obsession with spiritual advancement through occult methods, he of course went after those he thought were giving such activities a bad name.

    So, no, i don’t think he was too hard on spiritualist mediums, since they were all either frauds, delusional, or subject to possession by icky things, no more than Houdini or the many others who debunked fraudulent mediums were too hard on such liars and scam-artists.

    #110598

    dom
    Participant

    yeah of course any right minded person is against charlatanism but here in MITAP chapter 21 he talks of those mediums with abilities;

    Of all the creatures He ever met, the most prominent of English spiritists (a journalist and pacifist of more than European fame) had the filthiest mind and the foulest mouth. He would break off any conversation to tell a stupid smutty story, and could hardly conceive of any society assembling for any other purpose than “phallic orgies”, whatever they may be. Utterly incapable of keeping to a subject, he would drag the conversation down again and again to the sole subject of which he really thought — sex and sex-perversions and sex and sex and sex and sex again.
    This was the plain result of his spiritism. All spiritists are more or less similarly afflicted. They feel dirty even across the street; their auras are ragged, muddy and malodorous; they ooze the slime of putrefying corpses.
    No spiritist, once he is wholly enmeshed in sentimentality and Freudian fear-phantasms, is capable of concentrated thought, of persistent will, or of moral character. Devoid of every spark of the divine light which was his birthright, a prey before death to the ghastly tenants of the grave, the wretch, like the mesmerized and living corpse of Poe’s Monsieur Valdemar, is a “nearly liquid mass of loathsome, of detestable putrescence.”
    The student of this Holy Magick is most earnestly warned against frequenting their seances, or even admitting them to his presence.
    They are contagious as Syphilis, and more deadly and disgusting. Unless your aura is strong enough to inhibit any manifestation of the loathly larvae that have taken up their habitation in them, shun them as you need not mere lepers!

    It occurs in certain rare cases that a very unusual degree of personal purity combined with integrity and force of character provides even the ignorant with a certain natural defence, and attracts into his aura only intelligent and beneficent entities. Such persons may perhaps practise spiritualism without obvious bad results, and even with good results, within limits. But such exceptions in no wise invalidate the general rule, or in any way serve as argument against the magical theory outlined above with such mild suasion.

    Actually it occurred to me that I think that the modern term for what Crowley’s is discussing there is “channelling” which is pretty wacky. However there are people who communicate with the dead a la Sixth Sense movie, They are not “channelers” and some do sell their ability as a service. The evidence of genuine ability seems very strong and even Colin Wilson was convinced however of course there are con men in that field.

    Judge this huy for yourself;he asks ‘someone with a brain tumour? …someone with a name starting with J…a new car…cars….a diabetic? Know anyone called Stephanie…so on

    I’m sorry but there is something going on here that needs looking into.

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  dom.
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  dom.
    #110602

    ignant666
    Participant

    yes, as i said, most are frauds but some are subject to possession by icky things (“loathly larvae” as AC puts it).

    No time to waste watching videos of psychics, but all TV psychics are frauds, as the icky things are scared off by klieg lights, and don’t show up for the try-outs, so the genuinely possessed seldom get booked.

    Seriously, you are impressed with a fake psychic’s patter that includes “Is there someone in the house whose name begins with J?”

    There are 26 letters, some are more common than others. Similarly, among any decent sized crowd, there are certain to be diabetics, owners of new cars, and friends of Stephanie (and even of Dorothy), just as there are certain to be at least two people with the same birthday.

    For a recovering “Skeptic”, you are very gullible; study the work of “The Amazing Randi” for an antidote.

    #110603

    dom
    Participant

    @ignant666

    es, as i said, most are frauds but some are subject to possession by icky things (“loathly larvae” as AC puts it).
    No time to waste watching videos of psychics, but all TV psychics are frauds, as the icky things are scared off by klieg lights, and don’t show up for the try-outs, so the genuinely possessed seldom get booked.
    Seriously, you are impressed with a fake psychic’s patter that includes “Is there someone in the house whose name begins with J?”
    There are 26 letters, some are more common than others. Similarly, among any decent sized crowd, there are certain to be diabetics, owners of new cars, and friends of Stephanie (and even of Dorothy), just as there are certain to be at least two people with the same birthday.
    For a recovering “Skeptic”, you are very gullible; study the work of “The Amazing Randi” for an antidote.

    I hear that 9/100 people are diabetic. I don’t know how many female people have a name beginning with J in a given 100 but let’s say it’s 15/100 at a guess. If you think he’s a mentalist as you say then he chose a ‘J’ 15/100 and then a diabetic 9/100 accurately. Do the maths 15/100 x 9/100 = 135/10,000.

    I’m gullible you say but in the same breath you’re telling me that there are astral larvae who are scared off by TV studio lights? Unless you’re joking?

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  dom.
    #110607

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @dom :

    I’m not too clear about what you’re getting at: in the title and the OP you’re skeptical and dismissive of ALL those whom you label “psychic-mediums”; you make no differential there at the start between those who are out-and-out shysters & mountebanks and those who might actually have some special esoteric ability along those lines.

    “It occurs in certain rare cases that a very unusual degree of personal purity combined with integrity and force of character provides even the ignorant with a certain natural defence, and attracts into his aura only intelligent and beneficent entities.” […] Actually it occurred to me that I think that the modern term for what Crowley’s is discussing there is “channelling” which is pretty wacky.

    What word do you think it would be better to use instead of “channelling” in order to make it less wacky? Which one do you think would convey the/ his meaning across better then?

    I previously pointed out that Crowley himself had the greatest respect for the integrity and talents of those seeresses who conveyed messages to him from transmundane reality. Since your opinion of this appears to be that it is wacky, then your opinion of them — Mary D’Esti Sturges, co-contributor to Magick, who channeled Ab-ul-diz; Roddie Minor, who did a similar thing with Amalantrah — is presumably that they were all pretty wacky people too. And yet on the other hand you seem to think “people who communicate with the dead” are quite acceptable examples of “genuine ability” and that John Edwards is credible and seriously worthy of further investigation. Where is the line drawn between the two?

    N Joy

    #110609

    ignant666
    Participant

    I’m gullible you say but in the same breath you’re telling me that there are astral larvae who are scared off by TV studio lights? Unless you’re joking?

    #110611

    Tiger
    Participant

    Jealousy that he had to work for his psychical abilities?
    Dion Fortune has said it’s better to work and gain psychic abilities than be born with them because the unfortunate unawake person with psychic abilities gets more confused by them .

    If you do some work you might see The larvae you have attracted into your aura that seeks to find if there are real psychics . Once you begin to see it and find how it entered into you then you might gain a little siddha of insight and instead of thinking getting bigger is transformation; a whole other experience may arise .

    #110613

    ignant666
    Participant

    I don’t know how many female people have a name beginning with J in a given 100 but let’s say it’s 15/100 at a guess.

    No need to guess- i thought you had been studying this stuff recently?

    There are 26 letters in the alphabet. The odds (ignoring the fact that some letters may occur more often in names than others; “J” is certainly a more common initial than “X” or “Z”) that a given person will have a given letter in either their first or last name are

    1/26 + 1/26 = 2/26 = 1/13

    Assuming that the large preponderance of women in attendance at performances by such folk reported by Crowley, Houdini and others has been ameliorated by greater male attendance, and that there are even numbers of men and women in the audience, the odds that there will be a woman with the initial “J” in a group of 100 are thus

    1/2 * 1/13 = 1/26 added together 100 times = 50/13

    With an audience of 26 or more people, the “mentalist” almost always proves his/her “psychic powers” when a woman with the initial “J” gasps and/or proves the ability of most folks to do simple math when anyone is impressed by this. With a couple hundred in the audience, there should be multiple hits. When you allow for middle names, the odds are of course even more on the side of the “mentalist”/”psychic” that this “miraculous psychic vision” will be correct.

    This is just basic 19th century “rope the rubes” carnival fake-psychic stuff- how can anyone still fall for it?

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  ignant666. Reason: fix math error i caught within seconds of posting
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  ignant666. Reason: fixed _again_ bc i was rihght in the first place
    #110626

    dom
    Participant

    @jbarter

    Where is the line drawn between the two?

    Good question. I guess the modern channelers are not surrounded by educated sceptics such as AC who would call all out their bullsh1t. That’s what Ignant is trying to do now.

    @ignant666

    “J” is certainly a more common initial than “X” or “Z”) that a given person will have a given letter in either their first or last name are
    1/26 + 1/26 = 2/26 = 1/13

    …………………………….
    Assuming that the large preponderance of women in attendance at performances by such folk reported by Crowley……………….1/2 * 1/13 = 1/26 added together 100 times = 50/13
    With an audience of 26 or more people, the “ment

    Conveniently ignored my stats on J and then diabetic (and on reflection add the 3rd probability of car salesman in family).

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  dom.
    #110628

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @dom :

    “Where is the line drawn between the two?” Good question. […]
    But I wasn’t asking you “what ignant is trying to do now” — I suppose what I should have asked was something more along the lines of: “where is it that you, in your skeptical reasoning, draw the line between e.g. people who communicate with (i.e. receive intelligible transmissions from) Messrs. Ab-ul-diz and Amalantrah who are “wacky”, and those other people who communicate with (i.e. receive transmissions from) “the dead” (albeit “a la Sixth Sense movie”), but who in your reckoning apparently have “genuine ability” and for which there seems to be “very strong evidence”?

    … who would call all out their bullsh1t
    Such as, what exactly does this coy mealy-mouthed alphanumeric namby pamby P.C. bullshit at the end of this inelegantly phrased statement here supposed to mean, dom old fruit?

    Not afraid to call a spade a shovel and fucking vice versa,
    N Joy

    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  Jamie J Barter.
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  Jamie J Barter.
    • This reply was modified 9 months, 2 weeks ago by  Jamie J Barter. Reason: sin tax
    #110632

    ignant666
    Participant

    Googling produced some info about david’s latest hero.

    Surprise!, surprise! He is a known and proven fraud, who uses the “cold reading” techniques i described above, plus plain old cheating, and most important, edits out his many misses from shows like the one david is so impressed by, since he is not very good at this good old fashioned carnival scam.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edward

    https://www.csicop.org/si/show/john_edward_hustling_the_bereaved

    I would advise david to avoid playing games of chance any passing fairs or carnivals, as the warmer weather eventually arrives in Merrie Olde England; i know david is a country-dweller, and those crafty old carnies are looking for easy marks like him.

    Also, another tip: if an old gypsy woman tells you that your money is cursed, and to take it all out of the bank and wrap it in her handkerchief for a blessing- it is possible she may not be entirely honest.

    #110637

    Tiger
    Participant

    if an old gypsy woman tells you that your money is cursed, and to take it all out of the bank and wrap it in her handkerchief for a blessing- it is possible she may not be entirely honest.

    and possibly quite true that she may not be honest for those
    doing the rituals, gestures, spells, words, incantations, invoking, evoking and manifesting the 3rd circuit reality tunnel
    and it may be possible in a 7th circuit reality tunnel that the apparition was an agent for change .

    so better have wits about you if you don’t wanna smack down on the ground.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 36 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.