Magick and Buddhism

[danieLion]

Split from this topic: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=16643

Mike

With respect to results, magick was no different than role-playing, in my case. (My D&D experience provided an interesting comparison; when one casts spells in character, and feels the same way when praying or doing other mystical stuff, it doesn't take much to become disillusioned.)

Same with the rest, really. There's a way for conceiving about self and cosmos and their mutual relationship to proceed indefinitely, which is what most of that involves, and it can be quite enticing... but it's such a waste of time...

While anapanasati and satipatthana are not ceremonial magick, they are Magick.

[convivium]

how are they "magick" they have nothing to do with sex

[danieLion]

how are they "magick" they have nothing to do with sex

Is this a question? Here's a question: what does sex, per se, have to do with Magick?

[danieLion]

My question is this, why 'don't' you practice other methods that you may have experience of....whats your rationale?

My question is this. Why do you seem to be presuming that Buddhists don't practice other methods? Or are you presuming that if you practice some form of Buddhist method that this implies that they are mutually exsclusive to anything not strictly Buddhist?

[convivium]

Is this a question? Here's a question: what does sex, per se, have to do with Magick?

all system of magick, whether white, grey or black, culminate in sex magick.

[convivium]

Ok Ok you Closet Crowley people enough of the Sex Magick stuff....

i'm not a crowley person (quite the contrary); i just happen to be an information addict. kundalini and tantra related practices (including buddhist forms) are all at their core, or culmination, forms of sex magick; that is, they operate and utilize the sexual energy/fluids in different ways, namely, orgasmic, non-organismic, or middle (black, white, and grey respectively). even chastity can be considered a form of magick if it is taken in the wrong way. if one is considering such practices (e.g. kagyu buddhism) then one must work with an a guru. that's rule number 1. they are all psychologically dangerous (and all but the white are de facto detrimental), to put it mildly, more so than any other spiritual practice.

[danieLion]

Is this a question? Here's a question: what does sex, per se, have to do with Magick?

all system of magick, whether white, grey or black, culminate in sex magick.

Is that just your opinion, or do you have any citations to back it up?

[danieLion]

My question is this, why 'don't' you practice other methods that you may have experience of....whats your rationale?

My question is this. Why do you seem to be presuming that Buddhists don't practice other methods? Or are you presuming that if you practice some form of Buddhist method that this implies that they are mutually exsclusive to anything not strictly Buddhist?

Not really what I was asking my friend.

My question was designed to establish that if you had tried a particular practice/tradition and decided not to carry on with it....why?

So, if somene were to answer your OP by saying the practice/tradition they decided not to carry on with was Magick, would you still say that's off topic? For instance, if someone were to say, I was into Magick and was reading Crowley's Eight Lectures on Yoga and when I got to the part where he talks about satipatthana and anapanasati being alternative yet viable methods to the (samadhi via yoga) goals he was writing about in that book, and then I abandonded or deprioritized yoga for satipatthana and anapanasati, would you say that's off topic?

[danieLion]

Ok Ok you Closet Crowley people enough of the Sex Magick stuff....

I don't know what you mean by "closet" here and I have very little interest in sex magick (it is one out of hundreds if not thousands of magickal methods).

[convivium]

Is that just your opinion, or do you have any citations to back it up?

these are the whispered or secret aspects of these traditions. i'm not going to write an essay here; but if you do enough research into them, then you will see that they shares this common dimension. if not, the system in question is not really magick in the sense that the word is commonly used in esoteric circles (however secretly or implicitly). crowley and his schools taught black magic (they expel the sexual energy); samael aun weor, kaygu, nyingma, bon, and certain hindu traditions teach white magick (they do not expel the sexual energy). hope that helps. there are an array of source texts on this site: http://sacred-sex.org/scriptures.html

[danieLion]

Ok Ok you Closet Crowley people enough of the Sex Magick stuff....

i'm not a crowley person (quite the contrary); i just happen to be an information addict. kundalini and tantra related practices (including buddhist forms) are all at their core, or culmination, forms of sex magick; that is, they operate and utilize the sexual energy/fluids in different ways, namely, orgasmic, non-organismic, or middle (black, white, and grey respectively). even chastity can be considered a form of magick if it is taken in the wrong way. if one is considering such practices (e.g. kagyu buddhism) then one must work with an a guru. that's rule number 1. they are all psychologically dangerous (and all but the white are de facto detrimental), to put it mildly, more so than any other spiritual practice.

Again, is this just your opinion, or do you have any citations to back this up?

What's "a crowley person"?

What's "grey magick"?

Did you mean "non-orgasmic" instead of "non-organismic"?

"...even chastity can be considered a form of magick if it is taken in the wrong way..." Everything is Magick, when taken in the right way. You seem to be at odds with what you said in this post when you wrote "buddhism is so broad that i think it contains everything else in one way or another."

Working with a teacher (guru) is a generally good idea for any skill one wants to develop.

Many Buddhist practices are psychologically (and physically) dangerous if not done with the proper set and in the proper setting.

[danieLion]

It would be impossible for me, now, to draw down the moon or do a Tarot spread or create a circle or any of that silliness because none of it is based on right view and all of it aggrandizes the self in one way or another, as I see it all now in retrospect.

Even when events occurred which seemed momentous, it's all with contact as condition...

I agree with you that ceremonial magick is silliness and that's why I've never practiced it. Magick, properly understood, includes sammaditthi, acceptance of anatta and competency in utilizing paticcasamuppada.

[danieLion]

Is that just your opinion, or do you have any citations to back it up?

these are the whispered or secret aspects of these traditions. i'm not going to write an essay here; but if you do enough research into them, then you will see that they shares this common dimension. if not, the system in question is not really magick in the sense that the word is commonly used in esoteric circles (however secretly or implicitly). crowley and his schools taught black magic (they expel the sexual energy); samael aun weor, kaygu, nyingma, bon, and certain hindu traditions teach white magick (they do not expel the sexual energy). hope that helps. there are an array of source texts on this site: http://sacred-sex.org/scriptures.html

I don't need your help. It's the other way around. Your very misinformed.

Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will.*

Illustration: It is my Will to inform the World of certain facts within my knowledge. I therefore take "magical weapons," pen, ink, and paper; I write "incantations"—these sentences—in the "magical language" i.e. that which is understood by people I wish to instruct. I call forth "spirits" such as printers, publishers, booksellers, and so forth, and constrain them to convey my message to those people. The composition and distribution is thus an act of Magick by which I cause Changes to take place in conformity with my Will.

*In one sense Magick may be said to be the name given to Science by the vulgar.
Aleister Crowley, Magick Without Tears

Crowley took great pains to distinguish his system from black magick, and if you were as well informed as you claim you'd know this.

[danieLion]

http://sacred-sex.org/scriptures.html

When I say "citation" I mean something with substance. This is useless.

[danieLion]

...or middle (black, white, and grey respectively)

In Crowley's system (Thelemic) there are three schools of Magick:

The White School: All existence is pure Joy
The Yellow School: All existence is of No Consequence
The Black School: All existence is Sorrow

This is why he considered his system to essentially be a from of White Magick and Buddhism to largely be a form of Black Magick--not becuase it's "evil" or "useless" but only as it regards dukkha (source: the three chapters in Magick Without Tears on The Three Schools of Magick).

These are his stipluative (that means mostly only valid on a linguistically conventional level) definitions. Outside of verbal fabrications, these distinctions break down, as any experienced Buddhist yogi or Thelemic Magician will tell you (hint: both have very much to do with cetanā and samādhi).

[convivium]

This is why he considered his system to essentially be a from of White Magick and Buddhism to largely be a form of Black Magick--not becuase it's "evil" or "useless" but only as it regards dukkha (source: the three chapters in Magick Without Tears on The Three Schools of Magick).

that's something a black magician would say. look at his life and what he did and how he died.

[danieLion]

This is why he considered his system to essentially be a from of White Magick and Buddhism to largely be a form of Black Magick--not becuase it's "evil" or "useless" but only as it regards dukkha (source: the three chapters in Magick Without Tears on The Three Schools of Magick).

that's something a black magician would say. look at his life and what he did and how he died.

That's something someone ignorant of "his life" and "what he did" and "how he died" would say. Besides, what would you know about it? You still haven't cited one source. Hearsay is a poor basis for judging someone. He was not perfect and never claimed to be. Neither are you. Do you want to be remembered by just your mistakes when you die?

[convivium]

You still haven't cited one source.

While the O.T.O. included, from its inception, the teaching of sex magick in the highest degrees of the Order, when Crowley became head of the Order, he expanded on these teachings and associated them with different degrees as follows:[8]
VIII°: masturbatory or autosexual magical techniques were taught, referred as the Lesser Work of Sol
IX°: heterosexual magical techniques were taught
XI°: anal intercourse magical techniques were taught.

[8] Crowley, Aleister. Magical Diaries of Aleister Crowley, p. 241

or, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eroto-comatose_lucidity (sources included)

read all the sources passages, in juxtaposition with this, and it won't be useless to understand the issue at hand.
e.g.

Dalai Lama:
if you really are practicing Kalachakra, you need to have no release or loss of semen whatsoever. Moreover, there is probably no division to be made in this respect between practitioners of the generation stage and of the complete stage. To state this clearly is probably better.

Now, as for the actual root downfall of discarding bodhichitta, this is talking about having the mind that wishes liberation through the bliss of orgasmic release ('dzag-bde grol-ba 'dod-kyi sems). As for this bliss of orgasmic release, some non-Buddhist traditions (mu-stegs-pa) assert that offering a homa fire puja of semen in the reality source of a woman pleases Ishvara (dBang-phyug, Shiva) and that through this one can achieve moksha, liberation. But, liberation doesn't happen like that. Therefore, specifically to stop this mistaken practice, the vow was made that if, with a mind wishing for liberation through the bliss of orgasmic release, one ejaculates one's constituent source energy-drops externally (phyi-rol-du khams-phong-ba), it is a root downfall. Usually, however, when one has and ejaculates semen, there is no thought of wishing liberation through the bliss of releasing it. Thus, it is not a root downfall.

still, the guy inspired a lot of good music e.g. led zeppelin and amebix

edit: i am not in any way advocating tantrism, especially black tantrism (of the sorts i've mentioned in this post before mentioning the dalai lama). having said that, tantric practices must always be carried out under the tutelage of a qualified teacher (guru) and require that one have a highly stable, normal and remarkable sort of character; sexual tantras, at least in buddhist traditions i am familiar, are typically the last stage/tantra and so are exclusive to very advanced practitioners (see, e.g.: six yogas of naropa by tsongkhapa).

[danieLion]

You still haven't cited one source.

While the O.T.O. included, from its inception, the teaching of sex magick in the highest degrees of the Order, when Crowley became head of the Order, he expanded on these teachings and associated them with different degrees as follows:[8]
VIII°: masturbatory or autosexual magical techniques were taught, referred as the Lesser Work of Sol
IX°: heterosexual magical techniques were taught
XI°: anal intercourse magical techniques were taught.

[8] Crowley, Aleister. Magical Diaries of Aleister Crowley, p. 241

or, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eroto-comatose_lucidity (sources included)

Finally something of substance--still, you missed some details. But that is not to the point, which is, that out of the thousands of pages Crowley wrote--and out of the hundreds of practices he endorsed--you single this itsy-bitsy corner out and act as if it's a representative sample of what Magick in its entirety is.

And as for to its relationship to Buddhism, unless you're a monk, none of these things are forbidden. And as for it's relationsip to the OP, it can qualify as something someone tried but gave up, or might try and give up, for whatever reasons they might cite.

[convivium]

you single this itsy-bitsy corner out and act as if it's a representative sample of what Magick in its entirety is.

fine, but it's the culmination or "highest degree" of crowley's system, and likewise for the other tantrik systems mentioned (though they stray in mutually exclusive directions).

And as for to its relationship to Buddhism, unless you're a monk, none of these things are forbidden.

i'm not sure how e.g. that eroto comotose thing could be in line with the 3rd precept. that would definitely complicate my practice. here! drink this for sense restraint, renunciation, and patient endurance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cake_of_Light then masturbate to sleep after some kinky sex trance!