From: mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Ritual Magick Experiences
Date: 14 Apr 92 10:04:34 GMT
Organization: University of Bath, England

In article <1992Apr13.141531.16016@acsu.buffalo.edu> oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown) writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.123402.913@gdr.bath.ac.uk>, mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf) writes...
>>In article <1992Apr12.230126.28846@acsu.buffalo.edu> oispeggy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown) writes:
>>>In article <1992Apr12.210932.10514@gdr.bath.ac.uk>, mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf) writes...
>>>>In article <Gerald_Del_Campo.0031@sorinc.UUCP> Gerald_Del_Campo@sorinc.UUCP (Gerald Del Campo) writes:
>>>>>In a message dated Sat 11 Apr 92 06:35, Joshua@coombs.anu.edu.au (joshua Ge
>>>> 
>>>
>
>Disclaimer:  Again, I speak only for myself.
>
>
>Its unfortunate that you've made so much effort and absorbed so little.

On the contrary, I've absorbed a lot.  Why is it assumed that because I 
attack people's unwillingness to explain their magick that I know 
nothing about it and don't understand it.  I have been practising it for
years and have recieved useful benefits from it.

>

>
>I'm glad you found someone to relate to.  What did they tell you that you 
>consider to be useful information?  Not trying to be nosy here, just want to 
>find out what reached you.
>

Tagi was communicating with me, but has stopped since the flamewar began.
I was also starting to get some useful info from Michael Glosson (sp?).

>Stop whining.  Noone has attacked you, yet....  
>

Whose whining?  I've been getting mail from people calling me names and
telling me to go away.

>
>Its very possible that I have no information you would consider to be useful.
>If you are confusing magick with religion then you have completely "missed 
>the boat."  Personally, I would classify myself as agnostic, for lack of a 
>better category.

I'm only saying that you are giving religious (ie. non-rational) excuses
for not giving me any information.

>I don't owe you any explanations.  Don't have to justify anything to your 
>satisfaction.  Noone does.  You have to figure things out for yourself.
>

Fine, then why didn't the people that didn't want to give me information,
just leave me alone so I could communicate with the ones that did.  I know
why, because they want people to think they've got something but are unwilling
to share it. 

>It helps to be polite when you are asking people to give you something - even 
>explanations.  Since you have made an effort (though its certainly not 
>apparent), I'll try to answer your questions - specific questions only, 
>not generalities.  

What was impolite about my original questionaire?  How was it unapparent
that I wanted to know about people's experience with magick.

Here were my questions?

1. What was the ritual about?

2. Did you acheive desired results?

3. Did you summon any supernatural (I suppose I should say spiritual) 
entities?

4. Has anyone met or know of a Black Magician. I'm not sure that they
exist.

>
>People don't have to explain it, because (hopefully) those discussing magick 
>already know what it is.

Then you must all be adepts.  If you know all there is about it and there is
nothing else to be explained.  If that is the case, perhaps you should call
this newgroup Alt.magick.adepts-only.

>
>You're spending a lot of effort trying to discuss something - magick - which 
>you consider to be nonsense.  Why do you bother? 
>

On the contrary, I don't consider it to be nonsense.  I consider some of the
negative responses I've gotten from people to be nonsense.

>
>First time I've ever been called a religious freak.

One more time.  I see your arguments as being religous in nature meaning that
it doesn't follow a logical or rational course.  It's like me saying that
I am right and everyone else is wrong, because God told me so.