From: Bandit Area: MagickNet To: Khephera 6 Aug 96 14:29:06 Subject: ALT.Magick UpdReq 5> 0 MG> love are the same thing. We can apply the same principal with the En 5> 0 MG> Qaballa. To Illistrate we could take a value of a name using the En 5> 0 MG> values and apply it to a Hebrew name with the same value, compare th 5> 0 MG> meanings and assume that they were the same thing. 5> 0 MG> I have spent a considerable amount of time studying this portion of 5> 0 MG> book of the law and have come to the conclusion that this must be wh 5> 0 MG> Crowley was talking about when he says to attribute new symbols to t 5> 0 MG> Qaballa. A symbol in itself does not change. But symbols are 5> 0 MG> misunderstood. This is not an attempt to say the old Qaballa is obs 5> 0 MG> as much as it is a means to shed new light on the Qaballa. 5> 0 5> 0 MG> I welcome input or questions from anyone. 5> 0 5> 0 Kh> I think you sum it all up quite well here. I'm not much into Crowle 5> 0 Kh> to contemplate what he may have "meant", but you seem to be on 5> 0 Kh> the right track in any case. The old ways would not be 5> 0 Kh> "obsolete", but certainly can be added to infinitely. This 5> 0 Kh> is true of any system, symbolism, etc. 5> 0 5> 0 Kh> Blessed Be, may Yahweh and His Asherah guide and keep thee, 5> 0 5> 0 Kh> Ar ReX Em SeXem Eref Neter Au-a 5> 0 Kh> Rx 5> 0 Kh> Khephera 5> 0 5> 0 Kh> -!- Msgedsq 3.20 5> 0 Kh> ! Origin: Horus - Altamonte Springs, FL (93:9087/1.777) 5> 0 5> 0 ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Paul Hume Area: MagickNet To: Jade 13 Aug 96 09:37:30 Subject: Pollution UpdReq Jade - 1) Turtledove wrote an amusing speculation, but was applying physical laws (Newton's Third, for example) to magick, an unproven assumption. He's obviously done his homework on magical literature ("Packing a Rod" meaning carrying a blasting wand was good, but identifying the wand as an "Abramelin Special" was terrific, for example), but his model of magick was idiosyncratic, written to support the plotline. 2) The Threefold Law notes that what you send out returns (three times over, which I find doesn't work, or on three levels, which for me seems more accurate). As it happens, I don't accept the inevitability of the Threefold law (not being a Wiccan, it is not part of my belief system), but taking the broader principle of return, the energies stirred up in ritual (not the emotions so much, for reasons I will go into in a bit) tend to resonate only around two foci, towo points - the subject and the magician. General pollution of the magical environment does not seem likely, especially from the actions of an individual. Mass action can certainly blight or pollute a significant portion of the magical ecosystem - the Nazis being a recent example. 3) Emotional effects - again, outside the principles themselves - impress a tendency on a medium often called the astral light (if one doesn't use this model, then this explanation is not helpful, of course). The astral light needs a WHACKING big charge of energy to hold a particular form for long - that's why a transient wish or whim or feeling is not a "spell" - a "spell" (ritual, charm, talisman, etc.) is a process, or the tangible result of a process, which does keep the image imprinted on the astral around long enough for it to have an effect on the less fluid, more resistant physical plane. 4) If worried about magical pollution (I once heard a very Deep Green type complain that "grounding" was pollution, since it discharged left over energy into the Earth) then use a model that discharges left over energy into the cosmos, where it is all balanced out. 5) If working a work of wrath, etc. the magician is working with very high tension lines indeed - they must be properly grounded and connected, to continue the metaphor, or he will fry himself with the energy he is working with, long before the question of some Law of Return gets into action. But again, it seems to me that the energy from a failed rite has nowhere to go but "home," ie. back where it came from, or perhaps, back to the one who tried to shape it is more accurate. 6) It seems to me that in Turtledove's model, the "waste" from a spell intended to induce fear and hate would be courage and love. For every Tendency, an equal and opposite Tendency (or however it was stated down at the good old Environmental Perfection Agency). The emotions (leaving aside the question of whatever else a magician working that current has called up, or Called Up) are not a side effect, but the actual result desired. 7) Actually, your premise is not half bad, since magical work redounds upon the magician, and the Threefold Law is one way of saying "Don't monkey with the buzz saw." But wider pollution in the sense of Turtledove's excellent fantasy? I don't see it in action, myself, exept when ferocious amounts of energy are involved, or really focused and repeated workings of a particularly nasty type - and even there, there is no "seepage" - and the astral medium recovers a lot faster than the physical ecosystem. Regards, Paul 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Ellie Area: MagickNet To: Sandirien 12 Aug 96 12:01:00 Subject: Re: Magick UpdReq Quoting Sandirien to All Re: Magick Sa> agrh. Please quit saying "magick" at least from where i come from, you Sa> don't need to say it. It seems to flamboyant. Why not just good ol' "ma Sa> simple. magick is just so irritating. Most students of the occult use "magick" with a k, to differentiate it from abracadbra-type stage magic. lli the pider-Wm 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718