HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Friday, 10 Apr 1992 14:43:11 EDT
From: John A. Johnson <J5J@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: masonic morals & dogma
 <1992Apr9.222445.1512@samba.oit.unc.edu>
 <1992Apr9.224801.2178@samba.oit.unc.edu> <92101.084109J5J@psuvm.psu.edu>
 <1992Apr10.163131.10913@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>

In article <1992Apr10.163131.10913@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu
(B.A. Davis-Howe) says:
>
>John A. Johnson <J5J@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>
>>It would seem to me that the "naturalistic" explanation for Masons excluding
>>women can be found in Lionel Tiger's _Men In Groups_.  This anthropologist
>>points to the universality of men's groups across time and in different
>>cultures, and sees this as related to the need for male solidarity in
>>the hunt.
>
>A possible origin, but not really applicable any more.

Why not?  Do you think males' brains have evolved in significant ways since
the advent of agriculture?
>
>>An esoteric explanation of the practice of excluding women was given to
>>me by a fellow Mason who is also a priest of the Liberal Catholic Church.
>>His explanation is that the different psychological/spiritual makeup of
>>men and women would require that women perform some of the rituals in
>>reverse (left-handed) from the male version.  Thus, it would be difficult
>>to integrate male and female ritualistic practices together.  This
>>explanation also applies to ritualistic practices in his church.
>
>Pardon me while I scream. :-(

Many of my friend's female parishioners have screamed, too.
I do NOT want to defend my friend's claim, which I, in fact, reject.
I am simply presenting his point of view to stir up some excitement
(alt.atheism has been getting boring).

I would like to clarify, however, that I should have put "left-handed"
in quotation marks; it was meant as a metaphor in the sense of
yin=negative=left-handed vs. yang=positive=right-handed.  It does not
refer literally to the use of hands, but to the direction of spiralling
energies created by the church rituals (hmm, I guess "spiral" is a
metaphor, too).

>This is simply a convention that he accepts.  It is not inherently true.
>In fact, I doubt very much that anyone except a man could possibly have
>generated this concept.  I am right-handed-->left-handedness is other-->
>women are the epitome of other-->therfore, women must do everything
>significant
>with their left hands, so that I can clearly see that they are other.
>What do they do about left-handed men?  How do they explain that the majority
>of women are right-handed?  Why is someone as feminist As MZ Bradley involved
>with them?  (Sorry, I think I got carried away at the end there.)
>

John
Who, in fact, has sometimes been called
>Queer, Peculiar, and Weird! :-)
From: Gerald_Del_Campo@sorinc.UUCP (Gerald Del Campo)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Ritual Magick Experiences
Distribution: world
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:39:20 PDT
Organization: Shades of Reality BBS - Medford, Oregon

In a message dated Tue  7 Apr 92 17:26, Mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (c D Burdorf)
wrote:

 MDB> I was wondering if anyone out there might be brave enough
 MDB> to share some experiences they've had with ritual magick?

 MDB> Specific topics of interest:

 MDB> 1. What type of ritual and source

 MDB> 2. Did the ritual summon any supernatural entities?

There is no god but man.  Every Ceremonial Magick phenomenah, or entity is
a reflection of the Magicians mind.

 MDB> 3. Did the ritual bring about a desired result?

 MDB> 4. Finally, has anyone ever run into a black magician?
 MDB> I'm not certain if they exist.  I've never met one.  There
 MDB> are constant stories and warnings of them, but I've never quite
 MDB> met one.  Please don't practice it on me to prove you exist if 
 MDB> you are one, but please share any experiences you may have had.

A Black Magician ( i'm assuming you mean of the 'evil' kind) is usually a
pissed off Christian.  Anything which is not conductive to the Knowledge
and Conversation with The Holy Guardian Angel (god), I consider Black
Magick.


 MDB> Thanks much.

Your welcome  ;)

Gerald

-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:16:02 GMT
Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney)
Organization: Watching that Leather Miniskirt Go By

In article <oHJ6iB1w164w@netlink.cts.com> misha@netlink.cts.com
(Michael Glosson) writes:
>While there
>are many variants on Sex Magick, the central discipline of most Sex Magick
>is that the practitioner does not even think about sex outside of a magical
>context.  That means you don't end up being distracted by the critter in
>the tight leather mini skirt.

What a disgusting, prudish, anti-Thelemic viewpoint!  You seem
convinced that the natural sexual impulse is evil and that sex can only
be redeemed through a sort of Apollonian constraint.  This is not even
in line with your own prophet's writings; what do you think the
"impulse" of Liber Artemis Iota refers to?

"Magical chastity" does not consist of some puritanical restraint of
the sexual function, but of the bringing of sacredness to all sexual
thoughts and conduct.  When you see the "critter" (no bestiality for
me, thanks -- I assume you meant "woman") in the tight leather
mini-skirt and you feel the sap rising, that should be understood as a
spiritual process.  Whatever charge you get in your aura from sex
magick should start to manifest then.

You really need to brush up on Thelemic sex magick, oh you spouter of
Thelemic slogans.  I recommend re-reading _The_Book_of_Lies_ first, and
than asking yourself: who is wiser, you, or that within you which is
billions of years old?
-- 
Tim Maroney, Communications and User Interface Engineer
{apple!sun}!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com

"Every institution I've ever been associated with has tried to screw me."
	-- Stephen Wolfram
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: windsphire@wizard.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: War in Heaven ... a FAQ of a different kind.
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:24:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: wizard.9APR92.10245602
Organization: UMS

L. Had some problems with the demon PM sending this to your account...

  	...perfect your banishing before reading...

  		WAR IN HEAVEN
  		Kyle Griffith

  		$15

  		S/R Press
  		PO Box 60327
  		Palo Alto, CA 94306-0327
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: saracen@netlink.cts.com (Ann Olson)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Ritual Magick Experiences
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:06:11 GMT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law

From: mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf)

>>please look again at the list of those whom I have mentioned...were they
>>deluded since their results (particularly Einstein's) can not truly be
>>proven at this time?

>Atomic Power and Black Holes are pretty stong evidence to back up
>Einstein's theories.

but they still have not been proven or disproven...one can have all the
evidence in the world but unless it can be shown that the Theory is
true in every possible case it will not be considered Law.

>I know Goedel's proof that not all things are provable.

More what I was thinking of was his -theorum- (another one of those theorums
that can never be truly proven because it describes an infinite set (all
axiomatic systems...including those yet to be created)...it can
only be disproven)...that all axiomatic systems are incomplete. The
Scientific method is an axiomatic system and therefor can not be complete by
this theorum...but who knows, someone may yet disprove Godel's Theorum.

>How then do
>you propose that we determine whether someone is telling the truth or not?

I don't...and -I- (and I myself, you don't have to) rarely worry about it..
I just look out for the case in which someone may be lying to me...so that
I am not harmed by it.

>The scientific method has been used to prove the existence of psychic powers.
>Why shouldn't it be able to prove the results of magick as well.  All you have
>to do is have a series of rituals and show that the desired result was
>acheived at a consistency that substantially exceeds the laws of
>probability.  That's how they did it with psychic powers.

Again...evidence does -not- equal proof (no matter how much of it you have
because evidence can -not- include every element of an infinite set...in
this case the infinite set of variables involved with the human mind).
Also how do you measure this since quite often the results are extremely
subjective. Evidence is very useful in convincing someone of the validity
of an hypothesis/theorum, but it is not proof.

I, myself, use magick on a daily basis (not ritual magick...still working
on that) but most of that is extremely subjective and also very personal...
and I can't really see any particular reason why I should subject the
entire net to my ramblings :}... that and after seeing the ferocity
and frequency of Auto-de-fe's about these parts I really don't want
to open myself up to becoming the next chef's special simply because my
definition of magick may not coincide with others :}.

Love is the Law, Love under Will
Ann

--                    
INTERNET:  saracen@netlink.cts.com (Ann Olson)
UUCP:   ...!nosc!ryptyde!netlink!saracen
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 435-6181
From: jf3a+@andrew.cmu.edu (John Christopher Forman)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Girl with a problem
Date: 7 Apr 92 07:10:49 GMT
Organization: Junior, Architecture, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

First, you saw "Teenage Ouija Nightmare"
Now there is, "Teenage Tarot Cards-o-Death"


Get real.  Tarot doesn't do that.

I've heard of people using Tarot to strengthen and guide spells, but
unless she was trying to invoke some really evil spirit...  Normally I'd
try to accept this situation as I would any other, but :

> flickering lights
"Its time to change your bulb" -Philips Corp.

> curtins opening and closing by themselves
What kind of curtains?  Is the window open or drafty?

> shot glasses flying across the room at her
Well, they're called "shot" glasses, aren't they?

> her room being 10 degrees cooler than the rest of the house
The window is open, or drafty... Or the heater vent is closed...

> she was awoken by something touching her
Does she have a boyfriend or little brother?  Or is she overly paranoid?
> and she had some wetness across her neck.
Sweat?  If you were scared, you'd sweat.

> Anyone have any ideas about a solution before she has to go
> through exams with her "problems"?

Ideas?  Well, trying to be realistic, she's probably got a recurrent
nightmare that was spawned by playing with the Tarot cards.  She saw
something or thought of something, which triggered some subconscious
reactions.  That'll explain any paranoia, as well as the related
psychosomatic reactions.  Other stuff can be some physical phenomenon...
 Except the shot glass incident(s?) - if it happened more than once, or
in the company of others, then I'd be more interested.  If that were the
case, then I might consider poltergeists.  But it probably only happened
once, alone, and got exaggerated.  That could easily be a self-defense
mechanism that is masked by a selective memory.

Other than my explainations, she should seek "professional help."
If YOU have experienced the situation first-hand and find it completely
valid and rationally explained [see above], you might want to seek out
the services of a hypnotherapist to dredge up the exact situation. 
Otherwise, psychiatrist.

Last chance, GHOSTBUSTERS.  202-555-1212, and ask for their number...
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Crowley's Soul and Annata
Date: 14 Apr 92 05:24:30 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

iew21308@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ian E. Wickram) writes:

>given this not so suprising discrepency how many of you would take the         
>authority of Frater Perdurabo over Sakiyamuni Buddha?      

This one is easy for me.  I do not take anything on any authority that I cannot
support with my experience.  This does not mean that I have to verify every
statement myself, but it does mean that I will accept a statement from the
Senior member of my Community *because he has given me reason to believe him 
by having been right in the past*.  I will accept, tentatively, statements
by authors who have impressed me with their sensibility in general, but will
tend to check those statements as quickly as possible.  I will accept
immediately statements which seem to be either expressions of things which 
I intuit to be right, or which follow reasonably from things which I have
experienced.

So, to answer your question: I would not accept what either of them say.
For more comments from me, contact me personally--we're in the same town.

(Random addition to the discussion on relating ones magical experiences:  I
will relate some of my experiences in person, but will not commit them to
writing.  This is not because I am keeping secrets (I do not believe that 
anyone has great secrets which they could reveal), but, rather, that it is
a *mystery* (something which cannot be explained, but only obliquely referred
to, as in poetic language).  Love is a mystery, and I will not attempt to
discuss it on the net either.  Either you have experienced it, or you will
not understand my explanation.  However, if I am in the physical presence of
someone, I have an opportunity to discover what experiences they have had, 
and to adjust my language as I go along.  This improves communication
immensely.  Any thing I can say is wrong, but you may understand it anyway.
So, I will wait to learn what you are likely to understand before I say
anything.  This paragraph is not really directed to the person to whom I am
responding--I just noticed my own behavior patterns while making an offer to
do in person what I refused to do over the net.)

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

Queer, Peculiar, and Weird! :-)
From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:07:41 GMT
Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney)
Organization: Agreeing with Every Word of My Superiors

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

tncp9@isuvax.iastate.edu (D. Pendragon) writes:
>>>Why not?

ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe) writes:
>>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.

What experiences of yours lead you to say this?  I know people who began
their magical studies with sex magic and proceeded to learn nonsexual
techniques.  What qualifies you to describe their experience as invalid?

>>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.

In article <joshua.702999787@coombs> joshua@coombs.anu.edu.au (Joshua Geller)
writes:
>hey BA, fuck off eh? where do you get off rendering judgements on other 
>people in this manner (oh, I forget, you always have done that ... sorry).
>
>the human asks a simple question and youassume he needs a therapist or a 
>twelve step program? how did you get to be such an asshole anyway?

It's a rather incredible arrogance he has, but one that's hardly
unusual in the occult and pagan communities.  People often seem the
most opinionated on those subjects they understand least.  With
Davis-Howe, that covers quite a broad area.

Let's see, on top of saying that anyone who is interested in sex magic
needs to enroll in a twelve-step program for "sexual addiction" (a
concept, by the way, completely without any empirical basis, and touted
by the same kind of drivel-spouting psychotherapy junkies who are
bringing us the "Satanic survivors" crap), we all recall previous
forays of Davis-Howe into such noble stands as "I have made no effort
to read and understand Aleister Crowley, but here's a few hundred lines
on why he is so awful" and "why should beliefs and thoughts be examined
critically?  I never have, and look at me!"

The man is dim.  That's all there is to it.

>"[BA] says wicca is green and fuzzy...sounds like mold."
>                        peggy brown

Or like the inside of his head....
-- 
Tim Maroney, Communications and User Interface Engineer
{apple!sun}!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com

"Strong men tremble when they hear it.
 They've got cause enough to fear it;
 It's even blacker than they smear it!
 No one mentions -- my name." - Bill Sykes, "Oliver"
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: miss059@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Pug)
Subject: Re: Need Emotional Manipulation Spell
Organization: Pug's Pub and Pleasure Palace
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 15:40:41 GMT

In article <2swcJB1w164w@Bogus.COM> phantom@Bogus.COM (The Internet Phantom) writes:
>Hey all you worthy people out there that know something.

Must not be me. I'm not worthy. Atleast not to mine or probably most
people's standards.

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

How about just spreading rumors of one about the other or vice-versa?
Seems to work in most simple minded folks lives.

>The reverse of this would also be nice too.

Try large amounts of money. Tends to cause people to put up and possibly
even like others.

(returning from the grave is illness)

-- 
Richard Bainter          Mundanely     |       "Teachers are supposed to
Phelim Utred Gervas      Society       |        teach you *HOW* to learn 
Pug                      Generally     |        not *WHAT* to learn."   
  miss059@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu  |  pug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu  |  pug@wixer.UUCP
From: misha@netlink.cts.com (Michael Glosson)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Sex Magick
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:51:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: netlink.qZuyiB3w164w
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

DAHUGH@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes:

> First,apologies if I may have missed any previous threads on the subject.
> 
> Can anyone help me in finding out about Sex Magick?I know very little
> about it and wish to know from an academic viewpoint.Possibly I may
> consider practising if I find a worthwhile cause and the rites are
> agreeable.
> 
 
Why do you want to practice sex magick?  
 
m

--                    
INTERNET:  misha@netlink.cts.com (Michael Glosson)
UUCP:   ...!nosc!ryptyde!netlink!misha
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 435-6181
From: mascdb@gdr.bath.ac.uk (C D Burdorf)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Ritual Magick Experiences
Date: 12 Apr 92 18:31:38 GMT
Organization: University of Bath, England

> 
>From your point three, it sounds like you are interested in doing Evocative
>Magick.  Have you considered working the Goetia?
> 

What is Evocative Magick?  What is the Goetia?
From: misha@netlink.cts.com (Michael Glosson)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: A meditation of the Fourth Power of the Sphinx...
Date: 13 Apr 92 14:19:40 GMT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
 
There has been a bit of traffic of late invoking the Fourth Power of
the Sphinx as a reason for not talking about the nitty & gritty of ones
personal magical practices.  And, there was an invocation of the olde
adage "Throwing Pearls Before Swine" to further reinforces this stance.
 
While, on one level, I do agree with this stance (the magick I employ
the most, the nuts and bolts of it, will never hit the nets in anything
other than veiled metaphor and imagistic poetry), any magician worth hir
tools will have also a few chests full of Costume Jewelry to wear in
such a fancy dress ball as this.
 
So, where does this Fourth Power extend, beyond veiling ones own pearls in
a mask of sorrow?  Silence is a two way street.  To borrow a metaphor from
the Goetia, the demons are always calling to you, whether they are howling
your name out over desert dunes, asking freshman questions like "Will
some one Please Please Please tell me about their Ritual Experiences and
their results of same" or "Tarot Cards made my furniture fly across the 
room and chase me to McDonalds for a Big Mac Attack".
 
Attacking these "Demons" just makes them stronger.  They live on attention.
Yet, the gift of Silence (on Usenet usually found between the b & m keys
on your keyboard [note: this is not a reference to the formula in Reguli!])
Such actual "Demons" will shrivel up and turn to dust, blown on the desert
winds.  Others will transform into their true "Elements" and worthy c
converse can commence.
 
Love is the law, love under will.
 
m

--                    
INTERNET:  misha@netlink.cts.com (Michael Glosson)
UUCP:   ...!nosc!ryptyde!netlink!misha
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 435-6181
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: JB
From: twarren@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: 5 Apr 92 12:16:14 CST
Organization: University of Missouri-Kansas City

Sorry folks, no real quoting mechanism. This was from Shaman...

....tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)

>Nothing real is outside physics, by definition.

Hmm.....this is ringing warning bells..

>Physics is the study of that which is.

Hmmm. Flame alert. I disagree, Tim. I would rather say that physics
is the study of what is assumed to be real, in a certain rather solid
kind of way. Physics is the study of what we all agree to call 'real'
in our normal everyday lives. Even physics has to admit that the
assumptions so introduced (matter, space, time,) get fairly weird if
you stray a long way from 'everyday lives' - viz very large or small
values of matter, space or time - so much so as to - IMHO - call into
considerable question the assumptions of physics as a useful model
*of* the world.

I respond:
This bit about the very large and very small is true in a certain sense, but
the conclusion is simply absurd. It is based on the assumption that the study
of physics is one, unified whole -- which it is not. Newtonian physics still
describes the 'real' in our 'everyday lives' just as well as it ever did.

This means that it allows accurate predictions and so allows engineering and so
forth to be preformed. For the most part it doesn't matter to a mechanical
engineer that there is a relativistic correction to the newtonian formulas. The
correction is so small that it is invisible at this level without special
apparatus. Which is why newtonian physics worked in the first place.

Why should relativity or quantum mechanics call into question the use of
physics as a model of the world? Sure, quantum mechanics gets very weird...
but that is because it is describing weird things. So what? Are you proposing a
magickal model to replace it? I'm sure that it has weirdness too.

Shaman's post continues:
>If there is a spiritual world, its rules are rules of physics.

Wrong way about in my book. If there is a physical world, its rules
are the rules of Spirit...

> If it has no rules, then that principle of lawlessness is its
> physical law. --

Agreed.

I respond:
A question though: how can you say that physics is not a good model of the
world (implied by your first statement) and that the physical world (if any) is
ruled by the rules of the Spirit, but then agree with him that if the spiritual
world has no rules that that principle is its *physical* law?

In other words, the first two statements seem to be going in a completely
opposite direction...

Disclaimer: I'm not saying that physics is or is not the best model of the
world, but am differing with Shaman's post. And historically physics *has* been
a very useful model of the world. Most every modern convenience is based on
physics research (like computers? satellites? the list is very long)

-=- Tim