R39


             Laws of Magick
                  by
               Simon Magus

Magick, not unlike physics or
chemistry, operates according to
certain laws.  These laws, as well as
those of the sciences, residein reality
within the heads of those who use them.
 However, the analysis of reality into
artificial categories is useful at
certain levels of investigation.  It is
well to bear in mind, nevertheless,
that such categories reflect more the
contents of the human mind than they do
of whatever "reality" might be out
there.
For the following analysis we are
indebted to REAL MAGIC by P.E.I.
Bonewits.  Mr Bonewits, incidentally,
holds the first Bachelor of Arts degree
in magic(k) ever awarded.  He, much to
the chagrin of some of the faculty of
the University of California, was
awarded the degree in June, 1970.

LAW OF CAUSE AND EFFECT
Anything done under EXACTLY the same
conditions will always be associated
with exactly the same result.  This law
is taken for granted in the sciences
and in everyday life.  The whole
concept of causation is now on shaky
ground, thanks to developments in the
field of quantum physics.  But for
practical purposes, in magick as well
as in our everyday lives, we ignore
causality to our own peril.  We must
assume, at least in dealing with things
the size of human beings, that effects
follow causes.  Even in the constantly
flowing, changing astral realm we find
the law of cause and effect in full
operation.
     
LAW OF KNOWLEDHGE
This law tells us that "understanding
brings control," that the more you know
the more powerful you are.  If you know
all about something, you have total
control over it.  "Knowledge is power."

LAW OF SELF-KNOWLEDGE
This is a sub-law of the previous law
and follows from it.  If you
know yourself, you control yourself.
The more you know about yourself, the
better you can control yourself.

LAW OF NAMES
This law is related to the Law of
Knowledge and to the Law of
Association.  It states if one knows
the whole and complete name of a
phenomenon or entity, one has complete
control over it.  This is one of the
reasons the Mystery Religions
(including Christianity) conferred a
new name on the neophyte.  His new name
was then his true name, but it was
known only to his fellow members of the
mystery.  The Law of Names also relates
to the Law of Personification which
will be explained later.  Two premises
behind the present law are: (1) Names
are definitions.  This is more obvious
in simpler languages, but it is as true
of English as of any other.  Sometimes
the definition is hidden in the origin
of the word, as is often the case with
those derived from Latin or Greek, but
it is there.  (2) Names are mnemonic
(memory) devices which trigger a range
of associations.  (See the Law of
Association).
                    
LAW OF WORDS OF POWER
This is a sublaw of the Law of Names. 
It states that certain words trigger
changes in the inner and outer
realities of the person saying them. 
Many of these words are corruptions of
the names of abcient Gods.  Words like
"Abraxas," Osorronnophris,"
"Abracadabra" are examples.  They have
no meaning to us today, but THEIR POWER
LIES IN THE SOUNDS OF THE WORDS
THEMSELVES.

LAW OF ASSOCIATION
If two things have something in common
(anything!), that thing can be used to
control both.  Bell's theorem in
quantum mechanics indicates that every
particle in the Universe affects every
other.  The following two sublaws,
which anthropologists think are the
basis of "primitive" magick, are more
useful in practice.  These are the Laws
of Similarity and Contagion.

LAW OF SIMILARITY
Most people have heard of sympathetic
magick, which is based on this
principle.  Effects resemble causes. 
To make something fly, put feathers on
it and make chirping noises.  Wave it
in the air.  The example is not
entirely absurd and serves to
illustrate the principle.  Much of the
magick of "primitive" people is of this
nature.  For example, rain is made by
(among other actions) sprinkling water
on the ground (or by washing your car
-- a modern example of the same
principle!).

LAW OF CONTAGION
This is the principle behind
doll-sticking and such in "primitive"
magick.  This directly relates to
Bell's theorem and states that things
once in physical contact continue to
influence one another after they have
been separated.  This relates more to
our consciousness than to things as
they are in the physical world, but
defining the two is more difficult than
they appear on the surface.  Thinking,
feeling, and memory are associational
functions of the human brain.  New data
are related to existing knowledge and
patterns are established which
correlate particular elements of
knowledge.  The overall pattern, which
includes the "personality" and the
"world view" is the METAPATTERN of all
this.  This metapattern we may
consider to be made up of the memories,
fantasy images, beliefs, values,
techniques, rules of behavior,
attitudes, etc. which make up the
individuality of the person.
                     
LAW OF IDENTIFICATION
This law relates to those of Knowledge,
Association and Personification.  It
states that by complete association
between your metapattern and that of
another entity, you can BECOME that
entity.  You can then examine your own
metapattern from the point of view of
that entity.  At full identification,
one "becomes" the entity.  All idea of
distinctness vanishes and you are
empowered with all the attributes of
that entity because you ARE that
entity.  The danger here is that many
people become lost in the new identity
as the stronger metapattern submerges
the weaker.  Proper training, practice
and guidance will lessen the danger.

LAW OF SYNTHESIS
Two opposing ideas or items of data
will be resolved into a third idea that
is more valid than the first two.  This
principle allows you to hold two
seemingly contradictory ideas (such as,
"Electrons are particles," and
"Electrons are waves.") at the same
time.  Reality is as it is, not as we
concieve it (or even as we perceive it,
for that matter).  The wave-particle
duality in physics is an example. 
Physicists were nonplussed to observe
in their experiments that light
behaved (depending on the experiment)
sometimes like a wave and sometimes
like a particle.  Light striking a
surface of copper, say, releases
electrons from the surface.  This
phenomenon, when examined closely,
demonstrates that light is made up of
particles (now called photons) which
impart energy to the electrons,
allowing them to escape.  However,
another experiment, in which we direct
a beam of light at some pinholes,
"proves" that light is of the nature of
waves.  If we direct a beam of light at
an arrangement of pinholes:

---------------------------------------
I          I                          I
I          I                          I
I          I               screen-->  I
I          I                          I
I                <--pinhole           I
I          I                          I
I          I                          I
           I                          I
LIGHT      I                          I
           I                          I
I          I                          I
I          I                          I
I                <--pinhole           I
I          I                          I
I          I                          I
I          I                          I
I          I                          I
---------------------------------------

assuming that we have a beam  of
"parallel" light (a plane wavefront),
we see the light projected onto the
screen.  If we cover one of the
pinholes, we see a single illuminated
spot on the screen.  If wwe uncover the
first and cover the second pinhole, we
again see a single spot projected onto
the screen.  Now, if we uncover both
pinholes, what do we see?  Two spots of
light?  No!  We see a pattern of
alternating light and dark bands on the
screen.  This phenomenon is due to
INTERFERENCE between the crests and
troughs of the WAVES of light as they
strike the screen.  When two crests
occur together, or two troughs, the
amplitude is doubled, and we get a
bright area. But when a crest and
trough coincide, they cancel each other
, and the result is a dark spot of zero
amplitude (no brightness).  The point
of all this is that interference is
necessarily a WAVE phenomenon.  The
experiment demonstrates the wave nature
of light.  How do we resolve the
dilemma?  By realizing that we are
dealing with something that is neither
a wave nor a particle, but SOMETHING
ELSE.

 - Protocol   : Punter 
 - Credit Pts : 55
 - Blks Free  : 35

 - 10:12 PM - 45 Min. Left

U/D#4:
Text Files 2: