Goetic controversy, Aspect of unconscious or indpndnt being? Options

Ok folks, this one's gonna be doozer.

Over and over again in my studies and on this forum, I keep encountering this intruiging controversy/argument that I can’t help but feel drawn into. It comes into play when usually having to do with Goetic spirits, but I think its relevant for other spirits/gods as well.
It’s basically this: on one side, we have the psychological philosophy that these beings are really aspects of our own collective unconscious, and by contacting, controlling, and/or dominating them, you are in effect doing the same thing to areas and zones within your own deeper self.
On the other hand, we have those who mostly consider this idea laughable, and feel that these beings possess an independent and autonomous self, and that by contacting, controlling, and/or dominating them, you are in effect doing the same to those beings and the energy/powers they possess, and not to anything else (although these beings do have a role and sphere of influence in the universe at large).
Now the question I put to this forum is this: has anyone ever considered the possibility that it is really both, simultaneously.
(Ok, so I have to make a confession before I continue. A part of me feels shameful and unworthy to argue about such things because for the last ten years, I have been what you call an “armchair” magickian. But I am now sick and tired of this, and have recently mustered up the faith and discipline to begin practical training. However, I still have my own personal paradigms which I like to share and discuss, so I will go on.)
In Buddist philosophy, nothing is independent, as all phenomena are more interrelated than we can imagine and has its source in a chain of cause and effect reaching back infinitely, and triggering a chain of cause and effect reaching forward infinitely. Likewise, nothing exists from its own side (do not confuse this with the nihilist belief that nothing exists), as the experience of all phenomena, being beyond the definitions and limitations of the mind, relies on the illusion of the perciever and the percieved, the subjective and the objective; this being a symptom of the ignorant, deluded, “samsaric” mind.
Still with me?
Now the Buddhist concept of the Mind is vastly alien to the Western idea. Westerners, having inherited the Judeo-Christian tradition of spirit vs. flesh, hold on to the idea that the mind, or consciousness, is this little “isolated core” truly separate from all else in an infinite field of space/time, holding in its fabric a bunch of jumbled objects all relating to eachother in infinite ways. The mind, therefore, is this curious little self-reflective mechanism whose source lies solely in the chemical processes of the brain (However, if you’ve seen “What the bleep do we know?”, you’ll know that this old paradigm is being seriously questioned). The brain, (considered a miracle of an object, as its creation was surley either evolutionary chance or the intention of a higher being) and its consciousness is a mystery, but a mystery left to the study of psychology. Things like black holes and ecosystems have nothing to do with the personal conscious and unconscious.
The Buddhist concept of the mind, however, is quite different. Imagine, if you will, the entire universe as a single unified mind, whose nature is like the sky – clear, radiant, without form or substance. Basically, the Ain-Soph, or Shunyata. Awareness that simply is. (“I am that I am”). This is the “nondual mind”.
Now, imagine our mind as being like the cadeuceus-head looking back at itself, staring into the infinite depths of its own radiant intelligence, without knowing itself, beleiving firmly in the reality of its own egohood, and its seperateness from all other things. Whatever lies in its mind, no matter how deep it lies, has its source in its mind. That, I believe, is the suffering spoken of by the Buddha. And that is my argument on the matter of spirits, Goetic or not. It is your own consciousness, your own Buddhic-consciousness.
I hope I’ve given you all something to think about, and I am up to discussing this further.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/blablabla.gif)
Flyingmojo

I am with R.A.W on this one. No model can adequately explain all human experience. As a buddhist (non conformist Zen) I think buddha certainly hit quite a few nails on the head.

I personally believe it's both. A collective conscious manifested these Gods and deities to exist.

I don't really have much further to say. Odd....

Namaste

Ok, so maybe I was a little too wordy. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blush2.gif)
I have a problem with that, I know. It's just I love words so much, I can't help using them.
Basically, yeah, mediocracy, when one stares into the Ain Soph, all concepts and models of the universe (even the Tree of Life itself) fall away like dreams.
But on a more relative scale, Gods and spirits are manifest aspects of the Ain Soph, existing as a precursor[/I] to the personal mind.
For instance, let's say that the Goetic spirits are manifestations of the poisons and confusions of the deluded mind (and not just the human mind, but the universe as mind).
What I mean to say is that when those oppose the aspects-of-the-collective-consciousnness theory, they are supposing that the Coll. Uncon. is some aspect locked in the human mind, having solely to do with the microcosm.
J. Campbell once said that myth comes from the conflicts [and harmonies] of the energies within the human body. But the energies within the human body did not come from the human body. That's all, man.
Flyingmojo

I would agree with it being both.

I think that, on a grand scale, demons are the universes ego. It's not only their personalities, but their energy that engenders their status. I've never met a demon who's philosophy wasn't "comfort trumps all". Now, that could be my limited, spirituo-masochistic mind thinking here.

What they definitely aren't are aspects of our minds. I think that it'd be arrogant of us to think so, IMO.

I would say not only is it both, but every possible explanation. I think everything has validity. The more "feeling" (intensity, time, devotion, sincerity, etc) is put into a concept, the "more" validity it has. That would explain why a Goetic entity does have more power or capability than a servitor - more people over a longer period of time have invested thought into it. If a "new" entity were somehow to attain Goetia status in popularity, I believe they would eventually out-influence the old entities.

Anyone who has ever evoke a Goetic being does not seem to have this dilemma. they all agree that they are independant entities. Else why would a spirit evoked by both you and me at different times be able to say it knew you when I evoked it and vice-versa?
This intellectual masturbation is what keeps us from becoming true magicians. It is what the hindu's call maya, illusion that entraps one like a spider web and fascinates us away from what we should be doing-like I'm typing this when I could be watching old Python reruns...I mean Meditating!
So realize that all this means nothing. Go into a quiet place and explore the mind. Leave the bullshit for the bullshitters.
My humble opinion
Pratyahara

Pratyahara,

FYI, what the Hindu's call Maya is not "intellectual masturbation", but the erroneous experience of all beings as seperate, independent entites.

Anyone who has ever evoke a Goetic being does not seem to have this dilemma. they all agree that they are independant entities.

What the hell are you talking about? Read a few books, and you will see that this is just not true. DuQuette, for instance:

For example, if you haven't read enough of Crowley's works to learn that Goetic demons are "portions of the human brain" or that the "Hell" into which the magickian plunges in order to conquer and command these "demons" is our own subconscious mind...

Follow your own advice:

Go into a quiet place and explore the mind.

Once, spontaneously and without having willed it, I tasted the One Taste. There was no self behind the eyes, there was only God looking into a world that was made up of nothing but God. The 2 serpents of the Caduceus staring at eachother, who are one and the same. Dog, human, sky, tree, ocean - all was God - primordial awareness beyond all duality and conception, beyond all notion of independent self.

And if you think that I am still bullshitting, I think that there are too many magickians out there who aren't meditating too deeply on what they are doing, on what Maya really is, and what lies behind it.

This post has been edited by flyingmojo: Feb 4 2006, 04:32 PM

The whole post is intellectual masturbation. But that's just where I need to be now. Thanks...P

Dear spirit evokers,

Intellectual stimulation is one of the highest activites of the soul according to the ancient pagan philosopher Aristotle (read his Nicomachean Ethics for more). But with that aside, I have always wanted to post this particular question that no one has been able to answer well. It would do us well to get to the bottom of a very difficult post by using knowledge.

If the spirits we evoke are portions of the human brain and the hell into which the magician plunges himself in order to conqer these demons are his subconscious (according to Crowely), then how does a spirit physically manifest itself without using the magician as a mirror to manifest itself. I partially disagree with Crowely because when I once evoked a spirit and completely forgot that I even evoked it (gave thought to it) it came back to visit me when I completely was not thinking of it whatsoever (I did not even ask it to come visit me either). This part of magic has always been one of the most confusing. In other words, the spirit was independent of me but yet dependent because I thought of it when I evoked it. I really need help understanding! In short, what is the mirror that mirrors ourselves for physical manifestation? Or is the spirit dependent and independent from us at the same time?

Mr. Curi

This post has been edited by curi: Feb 5 2006, 11:16 AM

Not sure I would use the word dependent as in the entity depends on us; but I would put a theory forward that entities are separate but not normally visible to us; like when we are reading the newspaper, we can be so involved with what we are reading that we don't notice what is being said on the TV and even not notice the TV is on, however, if we are making ourselves aware of what is around us, we not only notice the TV, but we might also notice a car pulling up outside, the hum of an appliance nearby or someone on the other side of the street mowing their lawn too.

I think that by raising our perception we can be aware of entities too. It is not that they depend on us for existence but that they depend on us being able to sense, see, hear them.

Dear Radiant Star and spirit evokers,

Thank you for your inspirational insight concerning the matter at hand. Well said indeed! Would you say they are a part of our minds, though? It's very much like asking the question "if a tree falls alone in a dense forest, did it ever fall?" What would we say to a magician like Poke Runyon also known as Frater Solomon (author of the book of Solomon's magick) regarding the facial distortion method? How should we analyze the fact that he beleives that the spirits are a portions of the human brain (he shares the same opinion as Aleister Crowely). Is this a psychology that claims that the only reality is the reality that we perceive with our senses? I almost feel as though this is reductionist thinking. There is nothing save ourselves if this holds true. For then all reality is chemical reactions in the human brain that we, as Crowely says stimulate during a conjuration of a spirit. The French philosopher Descartes said, "Cogito ergo sum," or, "I think therefore I am." In other words, the only thing that we know for sure is that we exist because we have the ability to cogitate about ourselves.

Here's a scenario: If I evoke a spirit by using the facial distortion method it seems as though we are the same being (because the spirit is a part of my brain). If I evoke a spirit and scry into a black mirror but do not use the facial distortion method it seems as though, as Konstantinos writes in Summoning Spirits, that the spirit uses ether to manifest. The spirit however, and unlike the facial distortion method, does not seem to be me (though I am aware of it and it of me). And if I ask the spirit to physically manifest the spirit certainly does not seem to be me (a part of my brain) though I make a connection with it. Likewise if five people witness the apparition of that same spirit during a conjuration it would be unlikely, it seems, that everyone one of those persons had their thoughts (chemical brain reactions) lined up perfectly so as to perceive the spirit in exactly the same way. Perhaps two of the persons did not put any thought into the spirit at all but were mere observers and got the same results without any help of magical stimulation of the brain. I don't know, I just find that the facial distortion method makes physical manifestation very difficult to parallel in regards to whether or not the spirit is within us or uses outward objects in order to manifest so that we are made aware of it and it of us. Ahh, quite confusing it seems...

Good day to you and yours,

Mr. Curi

IMHO, the entities of the Goetia are very real and separate from us...but with their continual evoking/invoking their existance has managed to become part of certain facets of the collective and hence, a semipresent form accessible to human experience (even without the necessary rituals). This 'blending' can surely support the varied aspects of spirit and animal-human entities (diefic or non-). I've had many years involved with a variety of non-human spirit entities. I've managed to materialize a few along the way...hell, I should write a book (oh, no! not another book!) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) I leave it to you(all)...believe what you will...I'm content with that! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

Well Curi, many people like to play safe and say that entities are just a part of our minds or they put up an enigma and say that on the one hand, yes they are just a part of our minds and no, they are separate; whether this means they are undecided, or they fear believing the entities are separate or they don't want to put forward a possibly unpopular theory, I am not sure.

When I am mentally exploring the idea, I leave my options open, but if you are asking for a personal view, then I believe them to be distinct beings, there can be no other explanation in my own experience; even if I were to consider that we might be picking up ghostly imprints of entities of human or any other kind that are long gone, they would still be something that was not of my own making and separate.

I always bear in mind that some people have reputations to keep and that to admit to believing in beings on the other side as you might call it, may be inadvisable. Fortunately, I am a complete nobody and free to admit to what others might see as a madness and I am making the most of this freedom in today's very uncertain world while I can and others should do so too in my opinion; you never know when it may be curtailed.

Anyone who has ever evoke a Goetic being does not seem to have this dilemma. they all agree that they are independant entities. Else why would a spirit evoked by both you and me at different times be able to say it knew you when I evoked it and vice-versa?
This intellectual masturbation is what keeps us from becoming true magicians. It is what the hindu's call maya, illusion that entraps one like a spider web and fascinates us away from what we should be doing-like I'm typing this when I could be watching old Python reruns...I mean Meditating!
So realize that all this means nothing. Go into a quiet place and explore the mind. Leave the bullshit for the bullshitters.
My humble opinion
Pratyahara

Well accept for DuQuette, he has evoked several, andstill states they are aspets of the subconscious. Go figure.

However, aspects of one's subconscious don't usually throw things around, aren't usually witnessed physically by more then one person in the room, and don't tend to make offerings dissapear at an oddly quick rate.... <g>

Dear Radiant Star and spirit evokers,

Thank you for your inspirational insight concerning the matter at hand. Well said indeed! Would you say they are a part of our minds, though? It's very much like asking the question "if a tree falls alone in a dense forest, did it ever fall?" What would we say to a magician like Poke Runyon also known as Frater Solomon (author of the book of Solomon's magick) regarding the facial distortion method? How should we analyze the fact that he beleives that the spirits are a portions of the human brain (he shares the same opinion as Aleister Crowely). Is this a psychology that claims that the only reality is the reality that we perceive with our senses? I almost feel as though this is reductionist thinking. There is nothing save ourselves if this holds true. For then all reality is chemical reactions in the human brain that we, as Crowely says stimulate during a conjuration of a spirit. The French philosopher Descartes said, "Cogito ergo sum," or, "I think therefore I am." In other words, the only thing that we know for sure is that we exist because we have the ability to cogitate about ourselves.

Here's a scenario: If I evoke a spirit by using the facial distortion method it seems as though we are the same being (because the spirit is a part of my brain). If I evoke a spirit and scry into a black mirror but do not use the facial distortion method it seems as though, as Konstantinos writes in Summoning Spirits, that the spirit uses ether to manifest. The spirit however, and unlike the facial distortion method, does not seem to be me (though I am aware of it and it of me). And if I ask the spirit to physically manifest the spirit certainly does not seem to be me (a part of my brain) though I make a connection with it. Likewise if five people witness the apparition of that same spirit during a conjuration it would be unlikely, it seems, that everyone one of those persons had their thoughts (chemical brain reactions) lined up perfectly so as to perceive the spirit in exactly the same way. Perhaps two of the persons did not put any thought into the spirit at all but were mere observers and got the same results without any help of magical stimulation of the brain. I don't know, I just find that the facial distortion method makes physical manifestation very difficult to parallel in regards to whether or not the spirit is within us or uses outward objects in order to manifest so that we are made aware of it and it of us. Ahh, quite confusing it seems...

Good day to you and yours,

Mr. Curi

Curri why are every one of your posts an advert for Poke's books? A good book and course can stand alone and does not need every post to look like spam.
That said...His Astaroth approach rocks tho!

The whole aspects of one's subconscious, well magicians feel safer if they are merely aspects of one's self conscious, and therefore viewed as fully under one's control. SOme people probably wouldn't sleep as well at night if they thought the Demons actually existed LOL.

Some good insightful thoughts in this thread (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I have to wonder why this is such an eagerly disputed topic on forums. If this was a useful debate would we not have seen some progress in the discussion before. Here are three examples of this discussion from this forum alone:


**Goetic spirits, physical manifestation
**Entities Are they Real?
**Demons Is it Real or Not?


It's simple, are they independent beings?

Yes: Okay evoke it have 30 non-magicians enter the room after the evokation and describe exactly what they see.
Results: Utter Failure.

Are they part of my brain?

Yes: Okay why do I still crap my pants in awe when they arrive at the end of the evocation?
My brain sure as hell didn't bring me access to those 1620 Heptameron microfiche, or reveal information that was true to the letter when I asked for it.

There are some things that are unprovable and don't need to be examined so minutely. This has been argued since the day men could speak. It's enough to know that it works, and effectively.

I don't need to enter into a six-month intensive scientific study of my olifactory senses and sociological interaction to prove that my Farts STINK.

I Fart, the person standing next to me says "That stinks!"

The action is performed and I see the results, it doesn't need to go any deeper than that and there is nothing to be found by going deeper.

I think the fact that it is so often discussed is an indication of how interesting it is to a lot of people and the fact that no-one appears to have a definite answer applicable in all situations and agreed upon by others - this is often an important consideration for some as most of us have been conditioned to fit in; therefore when you get something that seems to have several different answers, it makes it something people want to continue discussing.

I think where many fall down is to try to understand the experience as being a mundane one instead of accepting that magick is essentially a connection with something more than we are taught to accept as real. We were brought up in the scientific age of reason and proof but usually limited to being able to reproduce something in the exact form. Seems logical doesn't it, but think of this: ask a human being to walk exactly in the same way and tread on exactly the same footprints as he did before without looking down and at a normal pace to prove that he can walk - its almost impossible, yet what he does to carry out that experiment is to walk.

The other reason is that some people ask the question is not because they are serious magickians looking for a reliable answer to the question so that they can further their magick, but many people come into forums like these out of curiosity wanting someone to either tell them what to believe or wanting to experience something magickal to prove things to them one way or the other and then either end up having a bad experience or not wanting to put the effort in to find out. The answer they come up with is entirely personal at the end of it and a magickian who has experienced connection is in no doubt about it and couldn't really care less whether others believe him/her or not. The experience is so much more significant and substantial than a provable point that may or may not score ego-points at a party.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wizard.gif)

I think the fact that it is so often discussed is an indication of how interesting it is to a lot of people and the fact that no-one appears to have a definite answer applicable in all situations and agreed upon by others

Seems logical doesn't it, but think of this: ask a human being to walk exactly in the same way and tread on exactly the same footprints as he did before without looking down and at a normal pace to prove that he can walk - its almost impossible, yet what he does to carry out that experiment is to walk. 

I think we may be along the same lines here because your analogy describes what I find to be problematic. In your situation a human being is asked to walk in exactly the same footprints as he did before.

This idea is proposed to 10 people in bland, dirty, auditiorium.

This is what tends to happen:

• 2 quote bad sixties music lyrics declaring "Nancy Sinatra said These Boots are made for Walking, so indeed we should be able to walk."
• 2 more call on a long dead philosopher without actually understanding anything he said.
• 3 decide to posit scenarios such as "Well pretend I was trying to walk and I had on sneakers, would this help? What if I only had shoes and it was Tuesday?"

Meanwhile of the remaining:

• 1 person begins to walk around and declares it is impossible.
  
• 1 other person begins to walk around and declares that it has been done.
  
• 1 more person begins walking, decides walking in and of itself is pretty cool.

These 3 people have all found the completely correct and valid answer. They all keep walking and go out for Ice Cream and Beer.

Unfortunately the bar and ice cream shop is directly across the street from the auditorium. As these 3 are trying to eat sundaes and get tipsy they notice a rather annoying phenomenon. The 7 in the auditorium continuously yell out

"Can you do it? Can you match the footsteps?"

In between drinks the 3 take turns yelling back "I can't tell you until you are over here!" Yet the interruptions continue.

My previous post isn't meant to be a judgement of whether the entities are real, or if this can even be determined. I think that we agree somewhat that if you really want to know an answer or even try to look for one you have to investigate it.

There are plenty of people in the past and present I admire but I wouldn't take the King of the Junkie's(A.C.) or Pikachu Pokeman Runyon's advice on stock tips, much less a definitive view of the way we interact with the world.

I hope that if we(I) make a point of experiment and conclusion that then everyone can eat sundae's, while the yelling from across the street is reduced to a minimum.

I have to wonder why this is such an eagerly disputed topic on forums. If this was a useful debate would we not have seen some progress in the discussion before. Here are three examples of this discussion from this forum alone:


**Goetic spirits, physical manifestation
**Entities Are they Real?
**Demons Is it Real or Not?


It's simple, are they independent beings?

Yes: Okay evoke it have 30 non-magicians enter the room after the evokation and describe exactly what they see.
Results: Utter Failure.

Are they part of my brain?

Yes: Okay why do I still crap my pants in awe when they arrive at the end of the evocation?
My brain sure as hell didn't bring me access to those 1620 Heptameron microfiche, or reveal information that was true to the letter when I asked for it.

There are some things that are unprovable and don't need to be examined so minutely. This has been argued since the day men could speak. It's enough to know that it works, and effectively.

I don't need to enter into a six-month intensive scientific study of my olifactory senses and sociological interaction to prove that my Farts STINK.

I Fart, the person standing next to me says "That stinks!"

The action is performed and I see the results, it doesn't need to go any deeper than that and there is nothing to be found by going deeper.

LOL Oh this is the best post on this topic one has ever seen!

"As Above, So Below" as the Emerald Tablet says. I think that the Goetic spirits, or any other group of spiritual entities for that matter, can be understood, communicated with and perceived both in many different aspects and on many different levels. Aspects being different forms, manifestations and personalities existing on the same 'horizontal' level of conciousness, and the Level of that consciousness existing anywhere from the densest piece of carbon to the great AYN. I think both a person's own expectations and understanding of a spirit as well as the context of the summoning and the spirit's own agendas will factor into the experience of a summoning.

An analogy that comes to mind is the phenomenon of local aspects of deity in the ancient world. Zeus and YHWH are two classic examples - every member of the confederation would respect and understand the universality of the god - its power, experience and traditions - within that cultural world. At the same time, local tribes and shrines would cling fiercely to their unique aspects of that god, and the holy places and local traditions associated with it. YHWH Tzavaot and YHWH Yireh, for example, would share much but still be understood and manifest differently to their respective worshippers. They probably even had some contradictions in each other's accounts - before monotheistic unification, it was common in the ancient world for different regions to have very different, even opposing understandings of deities, cosmologies, magic, ethics, anthroposophy, etc.

The classic case - Astaroth versus Astarte. I think on the highest levels, the being embodies all good and bad aspects of itself. They can be gods, angels, spirits, demons, or anything else they may need, want, or be requested to be.

Seems to me that this issue reveals two very different approaches for what one uses magick to accomplish.

One approach considers magick as a process for manipulating the external world of which the magick worker is a part. This approach for working magick seems to me once to have been commonly called “low magick.” I have noticed that people who approach magick as a process for manipulating the external world tend to consider evoked entities as separate from themselves.

One approach considers magick as a process for manipulating the internal world of the magick worker. This approach for working magick seems to me once to have been commonly called “high magick.” I have noticed that people who approach magick as a process for manipulating the internal world of the magick worker tend to consider evoked entities as aspects of their ____ (insert whatever term or phrase they prefer to use).

There are other approaches, of course. One such is those who inevitably leap in screaming “It’s neither!” Another such is those who inexorably leap in shouting, “It’s both!” And there are inevitably others.

I have noticed that, during the last fifteen years or so, an antagonism involving people who use those different approaches has intensified. Each group has pet mockeries, condemnations, dismissals, denigrations, etc... that they hurl at each other. The dust often flies as egos fanatically jump up and down and use their staves for furiously drawing lines in the ideological sand - lines that members of the various sides tend to ignore, while onlookers choke on the spiteful spew.

The issue seems to me to depend upon a mutual topic that is more difficult to discuss.

Specifically: what exactly differentiates external and internal compared to each other?

[quote name='Athena' date='Feb 13 2006, 11:55 PM' post='12227']
Well accept for DuQuette, he has evoked several, and still states they are aspects of the subconscious. Go figure.

DuQuette?? DuQuette???? I trust him about as far as I would trust Crowley with my wife and a goat!!! I'm sorry but that guy does not have his head screwed on strait. The fact is; If we all had all of those demons and spirits floating around in our subconscious, we would all be discussing this together in the nut ward! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/haha.gif)

P.S. Sorry for the Thelema Abby inference. But people really need to remember where their info is coming from. Some sources are more than unworthy, i.e. Crowley.