HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Gerald_Del_Campo@sorinc.UUCP (Gerald Del Campo)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Distribution: world
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:54:21 PDT
Organization: Shades of Reality BBS - Medford, Oregon

In a message dated Sun 12 Apr 92 06:10, Ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (b.a. Davis
wrote:

 BD> Magic is not glamorous or exciting--it is a hell of a lot of hard
 BD> work, over
 BD> a large number of years, which can enrich your life in ways you
 BD> cannot imagine.

Hard work...but someone's gotta do it :)  (couldn't resist).

 BD> If you are looking for quick anything, magic is not it.  If you are
 BD> looking to
 BD> shake the very foundations of your life, deal with all the garbage
 BD> which makes
 BD> you crazy, and generally give up everything that is familiar, welcome
 BD> to
 BD> the club.  We can't do it for you, but we will be cheering for you
 BD> all the way!

Amen!

Gerald

-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
From: rose@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu (Kermit Rose)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: What is reality?
Date: 6 Apr 92 02:30:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: mailer.1992Apr5.223050.10775
Reply-To: rose@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu
Organization: Florida State University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4


What is reality?  This promises to forever be a controversal question.  The 
practice of magick seems to encourage people to belive that reality is a 
function of our interpertation of reality.  Whereas the person who has 
faith in reality as presumed by physics, would say that it is true that all 
of our theories of reality are based on interpertations of reality, but 
this in no way detracts from the fundamental faith in the presense of a 
reality that is not dependent of our knowledge of it.

For those who question the independent existence of reality, I pose the 
question "Why is there as much agreement as there is about what is solid 
and common experience to everyone?"

For those who see reality as something out there to be scanned, unlated to 
our theories about it, I suggest the question "Are there multiple valid 
ways to see this reality?" 

Kermit@FSU or rose@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu.bitnet
If you want to be sure I see your response, please e-mail me.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the signature file of Kermit Rose.

Believing in dichotomies leads to hardening of your logic.

What determines the existence of Free Will?
I strive to believe only what is true. I have faith that whatever is 
true will also be logically consistent and knowing truth will increase my 
capacity to be kind.
Peace is the way to peace.  Hostility is the way to hostility.
From: cal@otter.hpl.hp.com (Colin Low)
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 21:11:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Liber Reguli and Pentagram directions
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
Newsgroups: alt.magick

Paul CLARKE writes

>But you say GS liked his "Holy Kabbalah"? Do you think that was on its merits
>or because of Waite's political stance (I'm just wondering, since Scholem
>made that statement about '...written by a Goy'.)

My customary flippancy gets me into trouble again. Thanks to LeGrand
I think Scholem's attitude to Waite has been sufficiently clarified :-)

>	Have you read "The Holy Kabbalah"? I have it on my shelves, but 
>haven't gotten to it yet. I'd be interested to hear what you think of it.

Like many books it doesn't stand by itself, but it is useful to read it
in conjunction with several others. One should undergo special training
in gematria to extract the hidden meaning in Waite's prose however, and there
are those who skip the main body of text and concentrate on the significance
of the page numbering. Given the eccentric structure of the text, the linear
page numbering strikes one as distinctly odd, and indicative of something
deeper.

Colin
From: oispeggy@ubvmsc.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Money for Magick?
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:10:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr8.123806.21950@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu>, miss059@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Pug) writes...
>In article <1992Apr07.203515.23309@demon.co.uk> Leo Smith <shaman@cix.compulink.co.uk> writes:
>>I would say that anyone who charges money for magick will get what is
>>coming to them.
> 
> Money is more of a social trophy than a material object.
> 

???

I equate money with physical freedom.  The more money, the more choices I 
have about physical things - 
  *what* I want to do, 
    *where* I want to be, 
      *what* I want to be surrounded by, 
        *who* I want to associate with, 
          *when* will I do whatever.
Maybe its nice to have infinite choices, but I wouldn't know - not until I 
win the lottery anyway...

Physical freedom is not more important than spiritual freedom, emotional 
freedom, or whatever other freedoms there are, and too much emphasis on the 
pursuit of money seems to mess up these other freedoms.  Maybe because people 
tend to see money as more than it really is and get trapped by the demons of 
image, lifestyle, fashion, upward-mobility, etc...

Which of the freedoms is most important, or whether they should be balanced, 
I don't know.  Balance appeals to me.

Regarding money and magick - well money and art don't mix too well, though 
art costs money in order to happen.  Money and magick?  Could it be like
prostitution?   Could you end up doing things or being invaded by things you 
wouldn't freely choose?  If so, what's wrong with that - as long as you 
practice safe magick of course.  Instead of a circle, create a magickal 
condom whenever you plan to do magick for money.

- Peggy -
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: joshua@coombs.anu.edu.au (Joshua Geller)
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:55:22 GMT

bill@psych.toronto.edu (Bill Pusztai) writes:


> 
>>Joshua, does 3+ person sex magick fit into the system you
>described?

sure why not? finding two willing and able participants may be difficult
(finding one willing and able participant is often difficult).

>            What is its use/function (in the way you described
>"function" for the "degrees OTO")?

what I posted are more along the lines of guidelines; there are fine
shadings of detail and variations too numerous to mention (as well,
I might add, as completely unrelated systems (as Taoist)).

josh
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: Gerald_Del_Campo@sorinc.UUCP (Gerald Del Campo)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Girl with a problem
Distribution: world
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:12:07 PDT
Organization: Shades of Reality BBS

In a message dated Tue  7 Apr 92 07:05, 890780m@ace.acadiau.ca (darrell Ian
wrote:

 I>  I am posting about a friend of a friend. She was apparently playing 
 I> with some Tarrot Cards alone in her room in residence and since then
 I> she has 
 I> had a few problems. Such as flickering lights, curtins opening and
 I> closing 
 I> by themselves, shot glasses flying across the room at her, her room
 I> being 10 
 I> degrees cooler than the rest of the house (starting at the door), and
 I> one 
 I> night she was awoken by something touching her and she had some
 I> wetness 
 I> across her neck. Some of these incidences have been witnessed by other
 I> 
 I> people. Anyone have any ideas about a solution before she has to go
 I> through 
 I> exams with her "problems"?

A Lesser Banishing Ritual of The Pentagram might help.  However, I think
that most of those manifestations are manifested by the person involved, as
the Tarot cards have no power in themselves.

Gerald

-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
From: joshua@coombs.anu.edu.au (Joshua Geller)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Money for Magick?
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:39:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: coombs.joshua.703096787
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University

misha@netlink.cts.com (Michael Glosson) writes:

>> is one reason. because I don't like hierarchies. because I don't like oaths
> 
>Wait a sec...you don't like Hierarchies?  Then how did you become an
>expert on self proclaimed expert on Enochian (which is All Hierarchies)?
>...you don't like Oaths?  Then how can you undertake any magical operation
>over any long term, especially since all magical oaths are basically a
>binding of the magician to the fulfillment of a specific goal?
> 
hierrchis in the sense of human hierarchies of authority. oaths in the
sense of oaths and obedience and secrecy (to humans).

is that clear?

josh
Newsgroups: alt.magick,alt.cyberpunk
From: hiho@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark Peterson)
Subject: Re: Help me to summon a demon!  Now!
Originator: hiho@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: hiho@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 14:25:04 GMT

From article <57473@cup.portal.com>, by Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva):

> Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
> The word of Sin is Restriction.
> 

[[words of power deleted...]]

> [Someone said I didn't know how to invoke.  I'm trying to prove them wrong.
> What is the most hostile and dangerous Demon that I could conjure?  Got any
> suggestions for names of those in principle power??  I don't want to mess
> around with anything too inconsequential on my way to the top.]

I think our most dangerous local demon is josh -- but it'd probably be
better to evoke, than invoke, in this case.  ;-)


hiho
-- 
mark ce peterson   | uw-washington county  | hiho@csd4.csd.uwm.edu 
dept of philosophy | west bend, wi.  53095 | (414) 335-5200        

     The shorter the tether, the sooner the goat starves.
From: mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Ritual Magick Experiences
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:01:28 GMT
Organization: University of Bath, England

In article <1992Apr6.200857.26908@ccu.umanitoba.ca> mayor@ic15.umeeng writes:
>In article 18018@gdr.bath.ac.uk, mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf) writes:
>>
>>I was wondering if anyone out there might be brave enough
>                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>to share some experiences they've had with ritual magick?
>>
>
>Unfortunately, this strikes me as a junior-high way of getting somebody
>to do something stupid.
>
>Why would somebody stick their neck (and their energy) out for this?
>
>Why am I even bothering to respond to this?  
>Bah! 

Wow aren't you mr. negative know it all.  Personally, I find the subject
of magick quite fasinating, but I've been quite bored with this newsgroup,
because it's just loaded with a bunch of intellectual details.  I thought
is might be interesting if people would be willing to share their experiences
instead for a change.  One charge that people make of magick is that its
just a bunch ranting and raving and no action.  All the secrecy is just
to cover up that there isn't anything behind it.  I hope it does something
for you to act holier than thou, but it doesn't do anything for me but
bore me.
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 07:32:07 GMT

tncp9@isuvax.iastate.edu (D. Pendragon) writes:

>In article <qZuyiB3w164w@netlink.cts.com>, misha@netlink.cts.com (Michael Glosson) writes:
>> 
>>Why do you want to practice sex magick?  
>> 
>>m

>Why not?

Because sex is a lousy reason to learn magic.  Sex magic doesn't do anything
(except play with your head) if you are not already experienced with magic.
Most folks who want to learn sex magic (who are not learning it as a later
step in learning a whole range of magical techniques) are jsut looking to
make sex more exciting.  If you need to make sex more exciting, you have
a problem which magic will not fix--it might make it work.  Try a therapist
or one of the Twelve-step programs which deal with sexual addiction.

Magic is not glamorous or exciting--it is a hell of a lot of hard work, over
a large number of years, which can enrich your life in ways you cannot imagine.

If you are looking for quick anything, magic is not it.  If you are looking to
shake the very foundations of your life, deal with all the garbage which makes
you crazy, and generally give up everything that is familiar, welcome to
the club.  We can't do it for you, but we will be cheering for you all the way!

              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Weird! :-)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Subject: Re: Asatru, Was Re: Request for info on Celtic/Norse Myths and Practices
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 07:24:00 GMT

tncp9@isuvax.iastate.edu (D. Pendragon) writes:

>In article <92100.000148IO81409@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>, IO81409@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (Ailsa N.T. Murphy) writes:
>>is there room in asatru for a somewhat individualistic lesbian
>>feminist?  i've been intrigued by it for quite a while - that
>>

>Asatru...May I ask, what is that?

>>Voudun, on the other hand, i don't get into further because i
>>                                      -ailsa
>Once again, my lack of knowledge on this surprises me.  What is Voudun?
>Do these things require one to be female in order ot practice it?  Is it a
>magickal tradition?

Asatru is Norse paganism.  Vodun is the Afro-diasporic religion in Haiti; you
may have heard of it as Voodoo.  Most of what you have heard about it is
wrong.  It is a beautiful tradition combining ancestor reverence and nature
based gods (called Loas).  Vodun is actually the word for God in one of the
African language.  The Vodun religion incorporated elements of Roman 
Catholicism (partially for camoflauge) and Native American practices into the
structure they had brought from Africa.  One good book and Vodun is Maya
Deren's _Divine Horsemen_--it is a beautiful book.  It is not a how-to book,
it is a record of the religion as Deren experience it in the Forties.

              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Weird! :-)
From: walrus@bessel.umd.edu (Grig Larson)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Sex Majikk Made E-Z
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:21:09 GMT
Organization: Punk Walrus Enterprises, Inc.


"Hi, I am 13 years old and don't know anything about blak majikc. I have this
friend who needs to get all A's. Also this girl I like won't like me because
I don't belive in personal grooming.
 
Can someone mail me all the rituals from their secret shadow book so I can
hex my teacher and get all a's and become a god or something? I am really
immature and play D&D way too much to be normal and see reality as a threat
and live in my own shrouded insecure world where everyone is my enemy. I
want to cast fireballs!"
 
 
 
--- sigh --- I know this was tacky and a bad joke, but I had to get it out of
my system. never tell anyone you are a witch on a teen BBS board...
 
Don't flame me, please. I am frustrated because everyone thinks I can cast
hexes... <"I'll even pay you... is $20 enough?">
 


=================<<< <  <   < *Punk Walrus* >   >  > >>>=================
[  \||/  |       ---------------------------------------       |  \||/  ]
[  (o-)  | "It might be in the     ||  walrus@bessel.umd.edu   |  (o-)  ]
[   /\   |  basement, I'll go up-  ||  Punk Walrus on the      |   /\   ]
[ Punkus |  stairs and check..."   ||  FanTek BBS 301-203-9582 | It's   ]
[ Walrus |       -- M.C. Escher -- ||  SF&F Author Extrordinare| Punkie!]
=========================================================================
Try the new "10th Anneversary U-kan-du-it in 10 EZ Steps Deluxe Signed by
Alistair Crowley Tarot Deck with Translations on the Back"... NOT!
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Magic & the Scientific Method? (was Re: Ritual Magick Experiences)
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:09:16 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Parkard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA

>: I've read a lot of articles about "spirits" and "possessions" and
>: "summonings," but I've never seen anyone attempt to use the scientific
>: method to explain these things.

Maybe because a fair share discount them as fanciful claims and just ignore
them? Why use scientific method to attempt to demonstrate the existance of
something you do not believe exists?

: I personally have nothing against your belief in the supernatural (or what-
: ever you prefer to call it), but please don't call it science unless you
: can show that you follow scientific methods.

You will find that many people who post here make no claim about believing
in the supernatural. What they will claim is that they believe in being able
to make changes in the world by exercise of will. Now, this is going to be
very subjective. They may be very rigorous in applying scientific method to
their experiments. If so, then probably they have marked most of their
attempts as "not proven". Such attempts do not need to be documentated as
to "following scientific method". If they fail, then the method does not
matter. 

Now, if someone happened to perform an experiment where the results were
repeatable, then would be the time to inform others who were interested and
ask them to examine the method to make sure it was scientifically valid.

Bill
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: bill@psych.toronto.edu (Bill Pusztai)
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Organization: Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:16:47 GMT


 
Joshua, does 3+ person sex magick fit into the system you
described? What is its use/function (in the way you described
"function" for the "degrees OTO")?
 
 _____________________________oOo_______________________________
                               +
 bill@psych.toronto.edu  Bill Pusztai  B5 f+ t++ w++ g+ k- s+ p
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: pautler@ils.nwu.edu (David Pautler)
Subject: burning Ouija boards
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:35:21 GMT

> phantom@Bogus.COM (The Internet Phantom) writes:
> 
> >Oh, has anyone ever burned one of those puppies?  A freind of mine did, and it
> >screamed...   Wierd..  Why did it do that?

I think Ouija boards are basicly particle board, which means they contain a lot
of glue and are highly compressed.  When heated, this glue will liquefy and
emit gases.  As these gases escape, they cause high-pitched whistling which
can sound like a scream.  Have you ever thrown green wood on a hot fire?
Same thing.

The coating of glue on the outside would also keep the board from burning
thoroughly.  Once it was broken into pieces, the natural fibers would
be exposed and it would burn better.

	-dp-

Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson)
Subject: tabu (was: RE: Money for Magick?)
Keywords: tabu
Followup-To: samba.1992Apr8.024142.21075
Organization: Reed Intellectual Onanist Soc.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 04:29:39 GMT

In <samba.1992Apr8.024142.21075>,
shava@hermes.oit.unc.edu (Shava Nerad Averett) writes:

>Isn't a tabu a rule that says:  DON'T!  and if you have little enough
>discretion to take it at face value, then it protects you, and if you
>have enough sense to understand it veils something sacred, then you
>can approach cautiously and slip behind the veil?  Just be real sure
>if it's a lady or a tiger...

My friend spent some time in Nepal, where whistling inside of a house
is tabu because it attracts "ghosts" (his translation).
By the same token, forbidding the act of whistling inside of one's house
could give one a tool for evocation, just as magickal weapons and Temples
gain power when they are used for nothing but Magick.

I'm sure this is nothing new for most readers, but it is an interesting
twist on the idea (and would cause problems if one moved out of the
house - how would one banish the power of whistling?).

k

Coffee seems like it would be a good magickal tool - 
guess I'll never find out...

Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: pautler@ils.nwu.edu (David Pautler)
Subject: Re: "real" = physical ?
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 20:42:32 GMT

In article <WBE.92Apr4162012@crystal.bbn.com>, wbe@bbn.com (Winston Edmond) writes:
> pautler@ils.nwu.edu (David Pautler) writes:
> # You said, "Nothing real is outside physics, by definition."
> #
> # I gave the obvious counterexample that psychological and cultural states
> # are "real" but not physical.  Do you disagree?
> 		     ^^^^^^^^
> # By saying that "science does not require that level of detail", you're
> # admitting that not all science has to be physics, so there are some things
> # that are "real" without being physical (because science is the pursuit of
> # what is "real").
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you didn't say what you intended to say.
> It looks like you were trying to say "... that psychological and cultural
> states are 'real' but not part of the province of the science called
> Physics."  The meaning of what you wrote is "... that psychological and
> cultural states are 'real' but have no physical (material) basis."

My views have changed some as a result of this discussion.  I've believed
all along that mind and culture do reduce to physical phenomena, but I've
been trying to argue that that is a matter of faith, not provable fact.
I certainly agree with your first interpretation (I think anyone would) and
I'd restate your second interpretation this way: "psychological and cultural
states are 'real' but cannot be *shown* to have a physical (material) basis."
There is no direct evidence of reducibility from psychological phenomena
to biological/physical phenomena, like an explanation of decision-making in
terms of neural interactions in the brain.

That's been my argument.  But there is another way to justify a claim of
reducibility than through direct evidence; it's the falsifiability of the
claim.  Mental processing does not exceed the speed of light, for one thing.
If it did, that would falsify reducibility.  And contrary to what I've said
in the past, you could say that reducibility does add to explanatory coherence
by preventing all kinds of ad hoc additions to scientific theories (Occam's
Razor).  But its position isn't as secure as it would be with direct evidence,
and we'll probably never have that.

[deleted for brevity, but some of these comments led me to remember the
importance of falsifiability]


I'd still like to pursue the discussion on the role of metaphor in science
and magick.  Winston Edmond says that magick is science because they both
"try, observe, and learn" (no argument there) but this doesn't seem to be
enough to me.  What about reproducibility of your results?  If magicians
can reproduce each other's results, why can't mainstream scientists?

	-dp-
From: phantom@Bogus.COM (The Internet Phantom)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Need Emotional Manipulation Spell
Date: 17 Apr 92 03:56:36 GMT
Organization: Bogus.COM -- Public Access Network Services


Hey all you worthy people out there that know something.

I need to get a spell that will give two people a very strong dislike of
eachother.  :->   Anyone have such a beastie?

The reverse of this would also be nice too.

Thanks!


===
* phantom@Bogus.COM (The Internet Phantom) * via CyberSpace Cafe
My opinions are my own.  They may or may not be shared by the management.
From: mayor@ic14.umeeng (Cam "You didn't see me!" Mayor)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Ritual Magick Experiences
Date: 14 Apr 92 02:26:46 GMT
Reply-To: mayor@ic14.umeeng
Organization: Sun Microsystems

In article 29830@gdr.bath.ac.uk, mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf) writes:
>
>Thank you.  I can only conclude that you and Gerald are Charlatans.

Don't forget me!  I'm a Charlatan, too!  Actually, the entire purpose
of this newsgroup is to Bamboozel you, CD.

---
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------"It's about time to change that tired old .sig, cam."---------
----------- email: mayor@eeserv.ee.umanitoba.ca --------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------