Dear all
You could also consider how magick is often dependent on religious
practice -
I was very influenced by views of Lokanath (Mike Magee/ see tantra.com )
in AMOOKOS, an East/West Kaula
tradition that operational magick (abhicara) in this tradition
_requires_ a devotional/religious
preparation/mindset - in mythology its the countless stories of holy men
acquiring magick powers by austerities
or long recitations of mantra etc.
In Kaula, its things such as special mantra recitation combined with
cult acts such as placing (nyasa) flower petals on
a mystical image or form.
So in this instance magic is perhaps an epiphenomenon of
piety.
Same might also apply to Buddhism, which also has a modern taboo against
magick despite the survival of Buddhist magical spells ascribed to the
Buddha.
Buddhist sometime view magic as a side effect of meditation?
The Tantrik might also have a linguistic taboo about Hindu mainstream
religion or brahmanism -
which they are very much part of whilst at the same time antagonistic?
senebty
mogg
> On 05/09/2011 09:40, mandrake wrote:
>
> PS rereading your post perhaps I misunderstood slightly - it is
> indeed unusual to define "magick" as a religion in its own right -
> It certainly can be and I personally as a practitioner see it that
> way. But in this case I was advancing the hypothesis of Hans D Betz -
> eminent
> editor of "The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation" ("The Theban
> Magical Library") where in the introduction he says that the magic of
> this collection is tantamount to
> a new religion because it has many common and usual characteristics -
> ie dealing almost exclusively with deities of the underworld (hekate
> etc) -
> its a new concept to me and one with which i personally agree.
>
> Mogg
>
>
>
|