maldor

The whole "outside"/"inside" thing is pretty meaningless. There is an underlying reality that we have some interaction with. We can refer to this as "outside" but we can never know the "outside" (underlying reality). We experience perceptual interpretations of this underlying reality. Sorry kind of stepping more into philosophy here. I do feel it is important to consider these things though in order to feel around around and distinguish what is practical, possible, likely and desirable. The problem is that the more you think about it most things tend to blend these into one. For this reason alone our view of the world is our view and our view only. That is not to say we are completely isolated because in order to exist interaction is required. No solipsism here! My point remains that although I am not in favour of solipsism I am only able to compare eveyrthing I experience with my experience. I am the vessel of a contained experience that has the power of imagination/empathy to put myself, theoretically, in the position of other experiencing beings. What I am trying to propose in this thread is that magick is the willful self manipulation of imagination in order to order and integrate higher meaning and understanding of "self". liminal - Just want to make clear my view here is probably not the view of the majority here. I am someone who has been fascinated by religious/occult practices for some time. I am certainly not an authority on this subject and not, in the strict sense, a practitioner of magick. I am pretty convinced that all "religion" (no better word to use) is founded on shamanic (no better word to use) practice. Shamanic practice is very human and found in all human culture. It is a human attribute. The way I see it it is the earliest "neuroscience" and over time mnemonic techniques and oral tradition has altered it into the strange thing today currently called religion. If you are interested in any of this I would recommend reading "Inside the Neolithic Mind" or better still "Prehistory: The making of the human mind" by renowned anthropologist Colin Renfrew, the guy who gave modern neuroanthropology serious consideration. Of course scientists generally don't speculate much. In psychology they do tend to speculate much more because the subjects they deal with lack strict empirical methodology (it is far removed from physics!).

Apech - There are many words that lack universal meaning. "Consciousness" is something that I am growing less and less fond of as a term. By surrender/ignorance I mean that in order to get closer to knowing ignorance expands and surrender is necessary to surpass this wall. Every page of the Tao Te Ching to me says the same thing over and over, it kind of reminds me of something Kant said which is basically saying that to say something precisely and simply often turns out to be ambiguous and complex.

This is my personal view. Some people view these "angels/demons" as entities separate from themselves whereas I view them as entities of the unconscious rising into conscious experience. I believe we use whatever is at hand to personify these entities. Jung remarks upon this by pointing out that alien abductions only began to be reported once the idea of ET was in the social media. The underlying experience was previously interpretated as demons/angels prior to sci-fi. The point being here is that there is an underlying human condition that is recognised by relating it to current social myths. The entity from my perspective is an entity of the mind. There are case studies that show how one brain can have two distinct personalities. In split brain patients this is very apparent (Not merely talking about multiple personality disorder).

What does that mean? Your life is a lie ? Existence is a lie ? What do you mean "lie"?

If you don't know what I mean by mind I cannot explain further ... I have a feeling the thing you call soul/spirit I call mind ? Either way I mean the thing that constitutes the thing you perceive yourself to be; that is why I mentioned Dasein. Humans only see the world as humans because they are humans. Ants only see the world as ants because they are ants. I think asking how much we understand what we mean by "Tao" is important if you take the subject seriously. Simply as a word concept it is similar to others linguistically. Either it is something that we cannot know, but say we do, much like people say they know God but they cannot explain why. Tao is not anything like a deity though, but some people may view "God" as the force of nature something like what Tao is; of course always failing at a full explanation because it is something we cannot appreciate just as I can only be me experiencing not anyone or anything else. The point of this thread is just me asking what we mean when we say "Tao". Is it simply something attained through a state of surrender to ignorance? Are we talking about something we experience ?

Insanity is relative. I know that much. My experience was the most "real" experience I have had. I could "see" and "read" everything around me with absolute clarity. I would cry because a crack in the pavement was so beautiful and could not explain to anyone why it was because they were obviously blind to it. Delusional or not it felt more "real" than "real" ... so to speak

I see many similarities with Tao to Dasein. I am biased because I see all religous/shamanic/spiritual paths as interpretations of the mind not a God or primal "energy".

Are we all agreed that "Tao" has no meaning that language can grasp ? If we cannot grasp it in language then we are unable to verbally think about "Tao". We have a word concept that lacks definition or meaning linguistically. Another word comes to mind along these lines 'love". Although love is associated with sensations and Tao seems to defy even that.

I am just looking for explanations. There are numerous studies in neuroscience that show many strange phenomena of human perception, language, consciousness, learning, cross-sensory perception, etc.,. Neuroscience has taken a huge jump ove rthe past couple of decades and there are many avenues to investigate. There are many things I would like to believe humans are capable of. When it comes to the actually use of Magick I am referring to the methodology of ritual being mnemonic in nature as to give access to certain states of consciousness. Memory is flexible. That is just the way it is. Fear to fit in socially is always a hindrance known by all. I know one thing for certain. Psychiatrists have absolutely no idea what psychosis is if they have never experienced it firsthand. Also psychology is often referred to as a "soft science". Neuroscience is putting more empirical weight into some ideas and showing them to be useful or otherwise. When I tell some people it is possible to control a computer by thought alone they don't think it is possible when you can do so today with the correct technology. There is evidence that manipulating the brain with magnetic pulses increases the ability to learn complex motor functions more quickly (such as playing the guitar). If we are unable to explain something I would not say it is magick. I would say we are ignorant about it. Newton was regarded as a magician at one point because of this mysterious force "gravity". Now we accept gravity even though we have no real idea what it is only how it functions. If we cannot relate phenomena to other phenomena there is nothing to work with other than guess work and speculation as to what is happening. Some ideas may prove more fruitful than others. I want simply to get back what I had. From what I have read some people call it psychosis and others call it enlightenment.

Seth - I am willing to believe but have not experienced this first hand. I think everyone would like to believe these things but that in itself makes me skeptical until I experience it myself. I have had experiences that are strange and impossible to explain to others. I cannot believe something just because someone tells me it is so. I think these kind of areas are not openly talked about much because they are not the norm and they are often surrounded by frauds, or simply delusional people. If they were in the next room that is easy to explain. If they were far away from you ... then I am stumped.

Energy is a physical concept.

Also to add I am saying that Magick is the willful experience of these things rather than an accidentally induced neurological phenomena.

This is active imagination. You create the experience, or rather you access the subconscious in combination with your conscious creation. The 'holy shit I am no longer in my physical body" does not mean you are actually outside your body you just think you are. There are numerous explainable illusional such as this.

soaring - If you don't value the question don't troll the thread then accuse me of trolling. It is a genuine question not a test. I find it intriguing that we can refer to something with language that defies the direct grasp of language. "Tao/dao" seems to be an adumbration of an adumbration of an adumbration ... but there is no "thing" or "concept" to it ... much like "nothingness".

Glad to see these responses. It gives me faith in the site. I was worried at first by some of the comments I had seen. This is, obviously, an exercise of language and how to express what cannot be expressed ... although it seems we do kind of manage to do so from a distance.

Noonespecial - You can believe what you choose. The "demons and angels" are not you they are part of the conglomerate that makes you I suspect. I have had a three way conversation with these. It would be refered to psychologically as psychosis. The thing is a managed to rationalise the situation at one point and have an intriguing conversation with these things that had risen from my unconscious into the form they did. It was very interesting, although scary at the same time. What I believe and what you believe are only versions of what is.

Steward - I like that very much "Before form and conception have risen." Just that alone expresses my "understanding". I would not say "energy" as that is a concept itself!! Was hoping for a number of replies to this considering the nature of this forum ?

I think Tarot is great for two things. 1) Unlocking the subconscious/unconscious -The cards can be read in so many ways that the reader sees what his subconscious sees. I have done this on various people and told them the various meaning of each card presented to them. They only see ONE answer though whereas I see there are many interpretations. Sometimes people like the answer and sometimes they don't ... it gives them a better idea of what they really think of the matter they bring to question either way. 2) Writing - Amazing for building characters and plots. Just do three random selections for make believe characters and flesh them out. If you have a character you are writing about just do a reading and it will bring up various ideas for you to use and help make the character more accessible. Does anyone here know how to play the original game the cards were made for? I've heard its pretty good.

Nungali - "To me this comes down to the bigger question ; is 'everything' of the human mind and its functions' ?" That sounds very much like solipism. To which I would answer no. Our perspective of the world, and the very idea of world, is of the human mind. Songtan - "I suppose, but it could all be psychosomatic...honestly, everything that can be explained shouldn't be called magic." If it cannot be explined to what degree? If we then find in the future that it can be explained sufficiently does magic become none magic. I think it is dangerous to take something unknown as magical ... but that said I guess life is "magical" and a mystery to us all Zhong... - "There is nothing particularly new or bold about this idea." Never said it was new but assumed it was bold here because when I posted this elsewhere I was met with hostility. Glad to hear you say it is not bold it gives me reason to stay with this site. You seem a little against Jung's ideas ? I am certainly not in favour of all of his pieces (I have only read a few). I do find Archetypes and teh collective unconscious very useful myself. Probably his most misused and misunderstood concept is that of the collective unconscious. Not familiar with Plotinus. My philosophical reading list only touches on Plato, Aristotle, Heidegger, Neiztsche and Husserl. Can you suggest something by Plotinus in reference to his "psychology" ?

BES - I am not here to belittle your experience, want to make that clear. How would you suggest providing evidence for someone in your position (not asking for it from you merely want suggestions that would help others know of this). My mother and sister also claimed to have something like this becasue my sister would answer my mother before she called her name several times in her childhood.

Spotless - If you merely wish to insult me then that is your choice. I find it very strange though given that you know next to nothing about me. Is the usual and acceptable behaviour on these forums ? Vork - There are numerous studies in neuroscience and few are very conclusive. Generally in the scientific community they do rely on a number of independant studies as you know. There are many cases where simple lack of mathematic knowledge causes a stir. It is worth looking into the errors as well as what is expected. Usually the results that do not fit a theory show a glitch in the technique. I am very open minded and also skeptical. In the past (recent past) in neuroscience scientists were advised to stay away from consciousness and religious type experiences because it could harm their reputation.

You can influence peoples thoughts easily enough. There are plenty o illusionists capable of this feat. The US also tried to get people to blow up goats with their minds ... What is your point ? People research this stuff and come up with nothing much. There are numerous bizarre aspects of neural research that would blow most peoples minds that has evidence. I just find it misleading to equate hearing voices with telepathy.

I get it. I disagree so I am a troll ? I have heard voices, I have had psychotic episodes. I am aware that many people hear voices that are non-malicious too. There is a website where people discuss this. If you hear a voice it does not mean it is coming from outside ... and trust me I know VERY well how much it seems like it is external (I have experienced this first hand). I also believe everyone hears voices and that it is simply a case of conscious focus to hear them. To some people it just happens naturally (trauma not needed). I have yet to hear of any evidence of telepathy in any neuro study.

Carl Jung - Archetypes. The basic principles are psychological. "Active imagination".

Hearing voices is called psychosis