Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail
From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick
Subject: Xiwangmu: Magick, Will and Love (Was def: Magick)
Date: 9 Jan 1996 11:44:59 -0800
Organization: Portal Communications (shell)
Lines: 127
Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com
Message-ID: <4cugjr$ncg@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva)
NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com
Xref: shell.portal.com alt.magick.tyagi:6119 alt.magick:63579

Orig-From: tyagi@HOUSEOFKAOS.ABYSS.COM (Xiwang mu)
~Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 17:57:43 -0800 (PST)

kaliyuga
49960102 

|From: BillS@VAV-NUN.COM (Fr. Also)

|Crowley's definition:
|
|Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with
|Will.

Check again.  In _Magick_ or _Book Four/ABBA_ he gives at least one or
two others.


|sometime back I made a statement here that I find a better def. to be:
|Majick is the Study of Change.

Whatever definition suits you, use it.

This would not suit me, as I do not intend to 'just study change', which
appears to imply science without art, physics without engineering.

 
|...the Changes of our world are ultimately NOT controllable, 

This amounts to saying, in my tongue, that magick, as such, does not exist,
since it is the object of thaumaturge at least, at times the theurge also,
to marshall the forces of this world and, learning of their pattern and
dynamic, usher them toward a desired and intentional result.  Crowley's
examples include such seeming trivialities as bookselling and warlording.


|and the insinuation of CAUSING Change is distracting.

Perhaps the problem is in being so easily distracted.  What do you find so
distracting about this, and what would you prefer given that with which
magick is so often associated (as compared to what you'd have it)?


|I am convinced at this tender point in my development that the Changes of
|which we are affected are the result of our actions indeed, but that the
|infinite body of Nuit within which we work, guarantees that one will not
|ever 'control' it. 

Consider that 'causing change/Change' may not, to us all, imply 'control', 
just as 'study' may imply to us applied theoretics (if nothing else to 
ensure that the lesson be learnt).


|...expend that force upon an existing field, with the result being
|your Will as much because of your action as your ability to adjust
|perfectly to its reality,  (Understand it).

I agree, and this may be the importance of Crowley's capitalization
of 'Cause' and 'Will' (perhaps implying a greater context and shape
to the circumstance than merely 'control and force' will yield).

Look at his 'Magi', the Logos-manifestors: Buddha, Moses, Jesus;
these weren't just power-mongers who thrashed the cosmos with their
phallic braodswords in tune to their egotistic cravings and whims.

No, they were working BETWIXT THE WORLDS, tuned to the majestic Way
given name unsuited It and concealed beyond the veil of consciousness.
They were mystics as well as mages, and it is this shamanic element,
this relation to religion, which allowed them to move in consonance
(at least in the stories) with All That Is.  Leave off for the moment
that religions developed before and after them.  This is relatively
unimportant in the observation of their Art.


|The Changes that are Life are the result of a cooperation of force and
|field, the resultant Child is never an end in itself, but a new beginning.
|The majician therefore best spends hir time discovering more precisely what
|hir Will is and how it relates to Reality. 

With all this I agree.


|This is no less a powerful definition of majick, in fact I believe it to 
|contain far more power than the previous stance of 'causing change', 
|forever limited. Becoming the Change in synch with All is the ultimate 
|it seems. Hence the word Study.

'Study' implies an abstracted consciousness, a passive and empirical
absorption with respect to cause that does not in the least require
movement or force.  One begins Work when study is completed, learning
thence from the continued application of the lessons previous absorbed.  

I feel that what you have specified ('discovering the true will/God's Will
and how it relates to the Real') is indeed very important, in fact
essential to the path of the mage, but by my reckoning this is an orienta-
tion, a scientific or mystical endeavor which does not participate in the
motility and conscious involvement which the example you gave of Crowley's 
implies directly and intentionally.  

I would refer you to the book _Moonchild_, by Crowley, which has within
its sometimes tedious pages a very clear example of the contrast between
these two extremes in the characters of Cyril Grey and Simon Iff (perhaps
the devotees of Will and Love respectively).  Grey's magick is very deeply
dependent on 'causing change' whereas Iff's taoist fancy has him meshing 
with All until there remains no barrier which can withstand him in True 
Love.

I don't claim that one path is greater than the other.  I'm not even
sure that there really are two 'paths' so much as two applications or
extremes of a continuum.  However, I think you point out a serious and
real limitation to this one of his descriptive definitions as it tends
to center very directly on WILL rather than LOVE.  

In the Thelemic philosophy of which I have read these two are seen as 
twin manifestations of a common essence (especially the 'true' varieties),
and within Christian mysticism they are very important aspects of
the nature of God (God's Will and Love).  Merton has much to say
in reflection of this, I notice, and I enjoy comparing his writings
with those of Crowley's upon occasion.

Xiwang mu
tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com


-- 
To ensure my response CC public responses to email (READ alt.magick.tyagi) 
(email responses may be posted) * http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/nagasiva.html
INTENTIONAL .SIG PROTEST: FUCK SHIT PISS COCKSUCKER MOTHERFUCKER TITS CUNT