Sources Of Power, concerning where magic is drawn from Options

There was a post somewhere on SMF recently about where magick comes from- once again the search function confounds me so I don't have the post for you. The people who responded to the topic seemed to agree that magick in an external phenomenon. Whether in it is drawn from objects/spirits/gods/exc. or redirected from ambient space, the magus's will is the force that directs the magick.

That conclusion also works with Five standard models of magick.
In Taoist sorcery and internal alchemy sympathy between the body, which is considered a hologram of the larger universe, and some external object is used to alter said object. However, I have never ran across any system other than some bad fantasy books that suggests there is any internal power source that could run a spell.

My question then is what is internal magick. Providing that we assume the magus is part of the Whole from which magick derives, is his power limited (I use them term very loosely) to acts of will that need external power or can some internal source be taped?

Personally, the way I see it is that everything is connected, including sources of power, so that power is neither internal nor external, yet both at the same time.

However, if we assume that the mage is indeed seperate from these sources, I do believe there is a limit to what we can realistically achieve without an external power source, although I'm of the opinion that it would theoretically be possible that we could generate as much power/energy/whatever you want to call it as possible - although this would be extremely difficult; if it were simple we'd all be doing it!

Just my thoughts, probably didn't make much sense but still. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

This post has been edited by NetherSpirit: Jun 18 2010, 05:40 PM

They made scene. I assume something similar in fact. I conceive of the magus as a slightly denser space in the greater field of energy that is the universe. While still fundamentally interconnected to and inseparable from the rest of the universe, the magus has will that is used to manipulate his surrounds. Something of a Taoist/Buddhist cosmology that recognizes the illusionary divisions between subject and object in reality, while providing a conception for how one small part can control other larger parts.

But as fun as that is I am still curious in any concepts that allow for some wellspring of power for within the magus, rather that being the lens to focus external energies. It is only idle thought but it seems that the only power one has is ones Will.

In my belief system, magick is everywhere in infinite supply. I believe there is energy in everything as well as in nothing. Our spiritual bodies also hold their own energies in many ways whether it be something definite such as chakras and energy spirals, or something more obscure and difficult to process mentally such as the energies(both potential and actual) in our very molecular composition.

We are bodies of energy. What we deem "physical", the empirical/chemical composition of things, is more like energy at its basic levels. What makes up an atom? Quarks. And what makes up those? Some weird word. And so on and so forth. But the basic building blocks of the universe are more akin to energy than anything.

I don't want to ramble on(I really could), but basically what I'm saying is energy is everywhere and in practically infinite supply(if not actually infinite).

Although I do believe knowledge is power and the more you know about such things the better equipped you are to manipulate them. So just keep looking into it until you feel you know enough, and then you should be all set.

Good luck on your spiritual journey!

Traditionally, I have been fairly fond of "self powered" magick. I am still rather fond of it, though it's difficult to say just how directly 'self powered' it is if you channel energy to do the magick.

However, I channel enormous amounts of energy just to have enormous amounts of energy, cuz i like it.

So, if I do that to effect magick... is it really "external"?

at any rate. I am not fond of petitioning external beings to do things for me. If I do seek outside help, it will be to teach me how to do things for myself.
Give a Kate a fish, and she eats for a day. Teach a Kate to fish, and she eats for a lifetime.

anyway, aside from channeling energy (which you could regard as just wielding a tool), I am much more of a "do it yourself-er" than most occultists I know.

(nice to see i'm not the only one who quotes frater u d's article there (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )

This post has been edited by Kath: Jun 20 2010, 04:11 AM

I believe there is energy in everything as well as in nothing. Our spiritual bodies also hold their own energies in many ways whether it be something definite such as chakras and energy spirals, or something more obscure... [sic] ...knowledge is power and the more you know about such things the better equipped you are to manipulate them.

Indeed it is so. I have heard it expressed by allegory. The magus is a battery who's capacity is determined by the the extent of knowledge, and the charge is set by the type of energy one takes in.

...it's difficult to say just how directly 'self powered' it is if you channel energy to do the magick.

So, if I do that to effect magick... is it really "external"? ... you could regard as just wielding a tool.

The last part is what gets me confused. At what point does energy become more personal than other energy, the moment human will shapes it, or must it stay confined by some bounds, or tangled with what energy we call life before it is more than a tool. To spout dime store philosophy nothing is truly ours, we can only use it for a bit.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/blablabla.gif) Existential and magickal metaphysics aside there is little use for this inquiry, but I thought I would through it out here and see what the members have to say.

This post has been edited by fatherjhon: Jun 20 2010, 03:15 PM

And to refute dime store philosophy, everything is already ours, we just don't generally realize it to the point of manifestation.
"nothing is yours" or "everything is yours" are really saying almost the same thing. it's a matter of framing the situation with semantics.

Anyway, so say there is X quantity of energy sitting a few meters over there -->
is that external to 'you'?
That really depends on how exactly you define 'you', as a finite selfness? or as something a bit broader in scope?
If I grasp that energy with Will, then it yields to do my Will, is it then 'me'? or something external being grasped?
What if I do more than grasp it with Will, what if I internalize it? Is it then part of 'me'? is it then internal?
but then again, where does 'me' leave off, and the rest of the universe start?
It doesn't.
So isn't internal/external/his/hers/mine/theirs/etc. all just semantics?

But yeah, that does circle around to your dime store philosophy, since personal ownership is an illusion of ego, just as the separation of self and 'all' is.
But that said, when I do magick, 95% of the time it is driven by *my* Will, by *my* authority, and does not involve any other being's magical potency.

If it's all semantics then how did that refute his "dime store" philosophy? I rather dislike logic circles in an intelligent conversation, anyway.

Pointing out that the nature of this subject is in fact very much related to one's perspective, paradigm, and terminology, does not preclude one from being able to disagree, particularly if it is done so in a manner meant to illustrate exactly that point.

Pointing out that the nature of this subject is in fact very much related to one's perspective, paradigm, and terminology, does not preclude one from being able to disagree, particularly if it is done so in a manner meant to illustrate exactly that point.

This is acutely one of the things that prompted me to ask the question in the first place. I have a habit of approaching things from as wide array of view as possible and trying to find where the differences are substantive or just semantic.

The longer I work with energy the less substantive differences in paths and styles become. To further the point, in necromancy (something of a curiosity for me) there is a energy referred to as "death essence" said to erode away the life of the necromancer as he uses it. That would imply that energy is internalized or at least so potent that being near it is hazardous. While other paths like planetary and Solomonic energy is manipulated through an external lotus- seals, planets in such and such alignment, talismans. In other systems like Enoch the energy is possessed by entities while there is way of using that power.

I am not sure how excepted the eastern (hindu, buddist, taosit) understanding of interconnectedness is but it would seem that many systems rely on at least some level of it. Again semantics, you'll find spirits in the spirit model. The will seems to be the only constant factor.

ah, banging on belief systems with a 20 kg sledge looking for what's under the rusty pilings!! - been there done that lol!!!

as you say, most paradigms that have a 'source' of some sort eventually leading to some sort of a super-intelligence, usually appearing as a major figure of the paradigm, such as a marian apparition, or the 'christ of a thousands suns' to mention a few from the christian paradigm - these appearances are usually far from the perceived image of the paradigm, or even that image put out by the paradigm itself - it is indeed an alien presence, comprising the complete energy of the entire universe in one magnificence, and is intensely far beyond even advanced comprehension of its totality, and every paradigm describes meeting these sources, usually unintentionally, and with great emotional quandary thereafter

other paradigms without that 'source' usually have the magnificence appearing in other ways, or as the totality of all - just as the apparition above is compressed, it is just uncompressed back into the totality

one internal 'source' of magic, as i have been taught about it, abides within that 'magnificence', compressed or uncompressed, intelligent or not - it appears as a manipulation of a flow all coming down to manipulating the flow, usually working with entropy, to produce the desired result - just like genetic sequence manipulation to produce a desired result - some say that we make our own reality, others say we are a reflection of reality and to change ourselves is to change what we reflect and thus perceive as reality, thus we change our reality - however you look at it, changing ourselves changes reality - we change our body's cells out daily, and those new cells can be seen as a battery for reality change - the occult science would be the knowledge of genetic manipulation - a new-age-twisted version of internal alchemy perhaps?

there is another one that relates loosely to dimensionality, where some object or something, possibly even a person, contains more of the magnificence than normal and that source can be used to distort reality directly through manipulation of reality by the mind working through the object - the occult science would be the knowledge of how to work with that object or whatever - the unmastered human ego, and thus the hollywood movie industry, loves this one lol !!

This post has been edited by esoterica: Jun 22 2010, 11:41 AM

My point is that you didn't refute anything he said. Circular logic is logical fallacy.

This post has been edited by VitalWinds: Jul 15 2010, 10:22 PM

Ohh I am loving this thread.

I'd say that it's really up to the sub-conscious (and not so much the conscious individual) to determine the paradigm that satisfies it. I think that we all have the idea that all individuals have paradigms that are infinitely different and similar (depending upon which spectrum of extremes we're looking at.) I'm going to jump ahead and say that this isn't annunciating the psychological model noted in the article, its just up to the imagination of the individual.

I come from the basic groundwork in Buddhism/Daoism/Hinduism (I've heard arguments about which one came up with the theory in China first) that everything is an illusion, in the sense that all six senses are inherently non existent. Non-existent in the sense of the idea that 'real truth' is basically beyond our reach right now. Then the question asked next would be "what is real?" I'd say, nothing is \o.o/ and that's totally fine. Since absolutely nothing is truly existent, why in God's name does that even matter? It doesn't. But, its appropriate and nice to acknowledge that.

I'm not sure why, it might be that my paradigm's premature, but I would say that in the end, the difference between an external source and an internal source are ultimately the same when you reach the end of the divine (and arguably endless in our frame of mind) sidewalk.

To answer the question, I'd say that internal magick is essentially energy manipulation that occurs within the confines of what the individual defines itself. Everybody's done the thing where they've exerted their individuality and existence upon another living system and had to go under a battle of the bigger egos and wits to see whether Mr. Smith or Mrs. Adams emerges suddenly two times larger. Internal magick begins with what the individual has been culturally taught to define as an individual. From there, the invididual can go about bending the definition of self and such to encompass whatever needs to be defined, but I think that its really just a manipulation of self.

My point is that you didn't refute anything he said. Circular logic is logical fallacy.

Perhaps "refute" was a poor choice of words.
I presented a somewhat opposing viewpoint, and towards the end of my post pointed out that I don't necessarily disagree with him, but that I think there are many ways to look at the matter, none of which are necessarily a precise representation of the actuality of things.

The phrase, 'circling around' (to something), in conversation, is not really related to the application of "circular logic".


anyway,
While I find your intent to be admirable, I'd just like to point out that if I have seemed confrontational towards fatherjhon, then there has been a misunderstanding.

(IMG:http://www.plotinus.com/images/East.jpg)

Adam Kadmon, there is nothing external in the universe all is reflected within. Power sources are latent energies.

As the embodiment of the universe in its entirety the only power the magi does not know of is that which s/he has not yet conquered within his or herself. Fettered by past karma and present conditioning, to release these bonds would be to emancipate, liberate ones true self and reclaim ones right to divinity in totality as by the claims of many prophets.

Each internal realisation or each stage of personal acclimatization (elemental balance, living by univeral law, as per Maat) lifts the viel of an external, ''reality'' and so on... hence there is nothing external, all is one... the malnipulation of that fact is what we call magick.

This thread started up quick. I have a feeling that this will go somewhere fun so forgive me for prodding a bit further.

I come from the basic groundwork in Buddhism/Daoism/Hinduism [sic] I'd say that internal magick is essentially energy manipulation that occurs within the confines of what the individual defines itself. [T]he invididual can go about bending the definition of self and such to encompass whatever needs to be defined, but I think that its really just a manipulation of self.

As the embodiment of the universe in its entirety the only power the magi does not know of is that which s/he has not yet conquered within his or herself. Each internal realization ... lifts the viel of an external, ''reality''... hence there is nothing external, all is one... the malnipulation of that fact is what we call magick.

:goodposting:Both every well articulated, but iIt seems I’m asking the wrong group for alternate views. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I’m already a Taoist, and do very little but internal alchemy; you don’t need to covert me.

I like how Esoterica put it, so to continue with the 20k serenata:

We all seem to agree that internal/external dichotomy is illusionary to one existent or another, but then we all seem to be approaching this with a lot of eastern philosophy under our collective belts. I wonder then where traditional which craft- not Wicca mind you rather- the folk magick of the Pennsylvania Dutch and many from Europe fit in. Using what seems to be the consensus view here does magick that does have an internal/external divide work in some different way or perhaps they are using the “latent energies” as Mchawi calls them without all the eastern philosophy.

I am inclined to think magick is magick and assume people will discover latent energies as they are needed.

Im inclined to say that it all comes down too will, where that will originates from is the ticket
spells to make something happen that you need are easier, its about inclination what purpose dose it hold? what drives a person..

I'd say that the 3 primary reasons to do something stem from the following
1)Animal instinct, hungry? need sex need warmth need safety, need to protect your chrildren, personal selfish essential stuff gets pretty transpersonal when you accept that evolution needs you to be close to other people an have an ability to imagine what you might need in the future.
2)Understanding, to view a beautiful sunset or a ruined old car can be an uplifting experience, to understand the inner workings of a clock gives you power over the clock
energy is everywhere, everything is made of energy, we all know that, what turns that energy of mundane things into magic is understanding those things, experiencing them and being experienced
by them, in that sence people and animals are easy to understand and be understood in kind so we love them more than clocks, generaly.
understanding is a absolute that doesn't truly exist without a sense of identity and a framework of none existence to balance.
3)Belief, if understanding is the utilization of what is there then belief is the creation of something new by denying the existence of whatever it might not be. To have faith in a magic is to feel its identity, to understand how it's effecting things but to neither identify with nor understand its creation/existence directly.

Thats all quite poorly written but could be summed up quite easily by saying 1)body 2)mind 3)spirit or even 1)mutable 2)fixed 3)cardinal

The internal/external debate was never going to last long, if you ask me its all personal, which to me includes everyone ive ever met everything ive ever seen and everything in the whole bloody universe.

Of coarse trying to define 'sources of power' is futile, words can only chip away at the edges of what is essentialy the kind of stuff that is only revieled when all is gone.
good fun trying though.

First post, lovely forum, just what ive been looking for.