Subject: re: Uncle Al's "Do what thou Wilt shall be the Whole of the Law": To: The zee-list
>>And you threw the Crowley quote as if to say it >>means nothing more than, "do what ever you want to". >>In which case... if that was what it meant, that is >>what it would read. > >that is what it reads....i think..to me it is. anyone >else care to suggest it means otherwise? i know there >are some more qualified than me on this list on >Crowley's works...Thelema is a Greek word meaning "Will". The way that Crowley used the term, he meant *Will* as in a Path that one follows in Life. It has a kinda "higher" feel to it, in that one's life should be spent discovering and then following their "True Will" (cf. *will*, as in a mere fleeting desire or want). Read More
From: Xi O’Teaz
<< What are other folk’s opinions of the phenomenon of >so-called `spirit-possession’? Is it `real’? >>
IME, *yes*, it is real. It has been called the same thing as Obsession, which would be accurate, minus the negative connotations modern psychology attaches to it. I have witnessed and Experienced various degrees of Possession, myself.
If you are asking about an “Exorcist” type of Possession, I don’t recall any experience as long-term and dramatic as that (or any other Occult phenomena as it has been portrayed in Hollywood FX, for that matter).
<< Is it ‘just’ a form of `mental illness’? >>
Most psychologists would say *yes*, it is a mental illness.
As a former Psych major, however, I would have to strongly disagree with this stance (one of many things I disagree with mainstream psychology about). I should qualify this statement by saying that *anything* that causes a severe imBalance (with unDesirable effects in one’s life) is a dis-Ease, to me.
So *my* answer would be *no*, it is not a mental illness, unless the Possession impairs your Desired functioning in Life.
<<How would a `chaote’ who does not use the `spirit model’ fit such a phenomenon into their paradigm? >>
A variety of ways (but it would sure help to know what “your paradigm” is):
*Acting* and *role-playing* are but 2 examples of what I would term Possession.
Have you ever done an Invocation? *That* is spirit-Possession.
I really like the idea of morphic fields, and I tend to use them as substitutes for “spirits”. I just access/Link to the morphic field via Correspondences, acting as a channel or conduit, and go from there. I think that both channel and conduit are apt descriptions, but that may be just my Taoist leanings.
I also get Possessed by music at clubs, acting as a channel thru which the music Manifests/Acts-out. I.e., I’m not in control as much as the music is. Lack of primary control is one of the hallmarks of Possession, IMHO.
Another way you could look at Possession is thru the lenses of NLP (one of my favorites). NLP would look at Possession as a Program that has been installed, (at least temporarily) overriding the main Programs that we are accustomed to.
Your Imagination is your only Limit to
<< Or must one of necessity include the spirit model in order to explain observable reality? >>
Nope, see above.
<< Or is the question irrelevant because `nothing is true, everything is permitted’? >>
As I always say,
From: Xi O’Teaz
>I most always have marvelous results, but a lot of
>times the fallout is quite dramatic and not always
>quite worth the reward.
…i suppose that depends on an awful lot of factors…and whether you are trying something as small as sending a telepathic message to your twin, or something as large as getting spurious george to kill himself for the good of the world…
>The worst part is that people connected with me
>usually get hit too (some get hit real hard, to the
>horror of my guilt ridden, God-fearing twin) and it’s
>not in my intent AT ALL to harm anyone in the
…oooh…i never thought i’d say this, but have you ever even tried adding some qualifier at the end of a working, like “an it harm none”??? …i say this somewhat tongue in cheek, but maybe it’ll work?!?
…i’ve never really encountered this, that i can recall…
>And, the amount of shit that happens is directly
>proportionate to the size and value of the desired
>objective – the bigger it is, the worse things are in
>getting there, all the way around. Downright
>FUUUUGLYYYYYY at times.
…and sometimes, this just goes with the territory…but i’d think it should be more the exception than the rule…
>Any clues, or outright words of wisdom, that any of
>you can give me on exercises or such that I could do
>to strengthen my grip on these things?
…try a different technique??? ;-)
…with magick, your imagination is–literally–the only real limit to what you can do (although i’d argue against this, as well, i s’pose)…
…i’d suggest that you set up some parameters/limitations in which your magick may manifest itself…yes, you’re limiting your chances for “hitting your goal”, but it’s the same with a bomb vs. a bullet…maybe you’ve gotten really good at magickal bombing, so perhaps it’s time to take some sniper classes…maybe start with a machine gun, and work your way toward the more precise aiming skills…
>I know chaos is just that, and it grabs whatever it
>needs to in order to manipulate things and arrange
>them to allow you to get what you’ve ordered
…so order something in a different Way…
>but surely there are means to keep at least some
>rein on it so that it doesn’t just go like
>gangbusters through everything in a bee-line to the
>objective – which is exactly what happens in extreme
>need cases, crushing and soiling a lot of things in
…i’d start with some Intents that you aren’t nearly as emotionally needy toward…enchant for a particular song to come on the radio tomorrow, and tomorrow, follow your intuition as to when you turn on the radio, and what station you listen to…
>(hmm – maybe it’s my ‘expedited service’ clause that
…that might have something to do with it…
…i think the most important thing is you sound like you need to change the manner in which you perform magickal rites…have you tried magickal flowcharts???
…i think you need to focus on setting some parameters, though…”will abort function if…”
focus on a different technique
give clauses, limitation, or parameters
focus on the bullet, rather than the bomb
and of course
know thy selves
Date: 11 November 2003
>and given that what is real changes with chemicals,
>then truth is a chemical reaction’s byproduct. seems
>kinda pointless to ascribe any kind of objective
>meaning to it when you look at it that way.
Very true. Most of the world is on one long serotonin trip. The problem is that most people fear other chemical realities, ala “my drug (serotonin) is better than your drug (any controlled substance)!”
Some interesting Magickal exercises in exploring alternate chemical realities I have experimented with involve going for a month (or longer) in an extreme direction, such as:
- Eating no meat
- Eating primarily meat
- Staying drunk
- Staying stoned
- Eating only organic foods
- Eating only overly processed foods
- Being severely depressed
- Tweaking (any “upper”)
- Tripping (any “hallucinogen”)
- Sexual Exhaustion
- Sexual Frustration
“Dose ’em all! Let the drugs sort ’em out!”
“Know Thy Selves”
~~~3 Coyotes Dancing~~~
From: Xi O’Teaz
>>Sentient entities as a general rule will strike out
>>if you try and put them “under control”. Much the
>>same you or i would. The only difference is the
>>mutlipurpose servies have the advantage of access to
>>a whole range of nasty non-physicals.
>thus, my hesitance at making something too ‘multi’ in
>purpose it could get muddled & angry, like me :)
See, I read about this, but I don’t find that to necessarily be the case. First of all, if you harbour Doubt and Fear and MisTrust in your Own Creation, the chances are good that the servitor may indeed become unruly.
Perhaps I got around these problems with a strong Belief in the following:
I have always treated my servitors as Creations, whose DNA is its Intent; i.e., just as we humans have certain *drives*, e.g., sex, food, water, shelter–“that is what we do”; so too do my servitors perform their functions because “that is what they do”. That’s their purpose, Intent, and Destiny. Part of their Intent is to generally be likeable, agreeable, and protective of me. Thus I generally give them Personalities, and we “talk” (sorta). I call them, and think of them as, my “Friends who take care of things for me” ;-) They take care of things they are good at, and I take care of things I’m good at.
And as far as “servitors getting pissy ‘cuz they’re not getting ‘fed’ enough” theory, I have yet to find that to be the case. But then again, I guess I generally say some sort of “thank you” (energy exchange) whenever a Friend does something for me, but that’s just having good (energy exchange) manners, IMHO.
That being said, I have never had any real problems with a “serfie revolt” or some-such-thing, anymore than any of my physical friends would do such a thing.
But then again, I would never really try and put a friend under “my control” in a slavish manner as is suggested by many a Grimoire and Manual of Magick!
Perhaps the key to the whole “getting along with servitors” thing is to Percieve the servitor relationship from a different Perspective…
3 Coyotes Dancing