Isn't Magic derived from the sanskrit word maya? Magic
as the manipulation of maya???
--- "Christopher I. Lehrich" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Caroline,
>
> This is an essentially unanswerable question. At
> least as many
> definitions, substantive and otherwise, have been
> proposed for "magic"
> as for "religion," if not more. Furthermore, unlike
> "religion," "magic"
> appears to have rough categorical parallels around
> the world and across
> history, whereas "religion"-like categorizations
> appear quite unusual.
> I would strongly advise avoiding the question
> entirely, or else defining
> on bases relative to your particular object of study
> and refusing
> generalization. This of course makes comparison of
> almost any kind
> non-functional, but it lets you out of certain
> epistemological nightmares.
>
> Probably the most sophisticated comprehensive
> meditation on the problem
> appears in Jonathan Z. Smith's recent book _Relating
> Religion_, but
> already appeared in one of the Meyer/Mirecki
> volumes, under the title
> "Trading Places." Typically, Smith demonstrates the
> non-viability of
> every known approach, then argues that nevertheless
> one cannot drop the
> problem, then proposes no particular solution. He's
> right, of course,
> but rather unhelpful from a constructive point of
> view: new approaches
> are necessary. They will, however, need to work
> from very large-scale
> abstractions. Notions like "intent" and "powerful
> ritual" and so on are
> merely deflections: intent is non-present in text
> anyway, and "ritual"
> is at least as difficult a term as "magic" for
> different reasons.
>
> If you do decide to sit down and read through the
> vast literature on the
> definitions problem, I recommend working through
> chronologically. It is
> all too easy to seize on some seemingly clever
> recent formulation and
> say, "Yes, that's the cutting edge," but invariably
> it will turn out
> that a previous criticism already undermines this
> new formulation.
> Start with Tylor, then work forward. Refuse all
> disciplinary narrowing:
> if you're going to predetermine on a disciplinary
> basis, you might as
> well stick with what the people you're studying say
> and leave it at
> that. If you are really going to read passably
> comprehensively, expect
> this to take rather more than a year.
>
> Yours,
> Chris Lehrich
>
> Caroline Tully wrote:
>
> >Just wondering,
> >
> >This list is called the "Society for the Academic
> Study of Magic" and in the
> >original notification that I saw about the list's
> revival it said "a
> >valuable and exciting resource for academics and
> others interested in all
> >forms of magical practice from any period of
> history, any geographic area
> >and any disciplinary background." So, I'm wondering
> what is meant by the
> >word "magic"? I know, although I've been digressing
> into talking about
> >Neo-Paganism, which I don't really want to do (I'm
> more interested in
> >ancient magic), what I really mean, or what I
> intend mean when I use the
> >word "magic", is magic as in "getting things done
> via supernatural methods"
> >rather than religion per se. (I know there are
> arguments for not separating
> >magic and religion, but I do think there is a
> difference, even if it is just
> >of intent. I suppose some religions, like
> Neo-Paganism are actually
> >"magic(k)al religions"). I'll freely admit that I'm
> not quite up on the
> >current interpretations of the word "magic" in
> academia (although I hope to
> >be better versed in it by next semester). Marvin
> Meyer and Paul Mirecki in
> >"Ancient Magic and Ritual Power" (1995) define
> magic as 'ritual power',
> >empowerment through ritual methods. I know they are
> talking here about
> >Ancient Magic. Do we mean different things when we
> use the word "magic" to
> >describe practices from different periods of time
> and different cultures? Or
> >not. Is this one of those words like say, "Witch"
> is today where there is
> >one word for a plethora of differnet types of
> practitioners?
> >
> >
> >~Caroline.
> >
> >
>
> --
> Christopher I. Lehrich
> Boston University
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
|