Collecting First-Hand Accounts Of Successful Acts Of Magick

OK guys. This comes from a chat me and Yoseqlo were having on my recent post:

Let’s Discuss: Doing Magick” – http://wp.me/p31b5Q-dq

Read the comments between me and Yoseqlo for more. Here are the snippets that matter:

John (me):

I think that perhaps we’re all approaching this debate from the wrong angle. It may be best to start writing how we were feeling and what we were thinking when we did our most successful acts of magick in the past. We might draw more similarities there. Right now I think we’re using our own terminologies and words of preference. So let’s break those terminologies and words of preference down by describing them in other words. Basically, wherever two people disagree on a terminology or word of preference, let’s “thesaurus it out” by using said word/terminology’s synonym in it’s place, or “dictionary it out” by putting the definition you want instead of a single word/terminology for it. I know it’ll make everything a lot more verbose, but we might figure things out better this way. =)

Reply from Yoseqlo:

“It may be best to start writing how we were feeling and what we were thinking when we did our most successful acts of magick in the past.”

Well, since this it’s in its way to a community I think that would be very beneficial to all of us to try to identify similarities, and certainly that’s the kind of thing that could allow an unified terminology to describe Altered states of mind… with of course, a very little sample, nevertheless a start is a start.

John’s (my) reply to Yoseqlo’s (his) reply: (There’s an Inception joke in there somewhere, I swear. But my pet ouroboros ate it.)

“Yep. And that’s the key here. We need to undo the “Tower of Babel” problem regarding terminology in magick. And for that, we need a sort of “Mage’s Rosetta Stone”. That’s where I’d like to start. Let’s find the similarities in meaning, not so much the differences. If you’re making fire using various methods, the only way to understand chemistry from this is to look at the similarities, not the differences. What’s required for fire to burn in all those situations? Do you need to pray to Hephaestus to make fire every time? Do you need flint and iron, or wood chips and friction? Do you need a magnifying glass and newspaper every time? What’s the underlying similarities between all these situations that end up causing pretty much the same result?

That’s why my next post is going to be so important. It’ll start gathering data. And with data, data trends begin to emerge. And with data trends we start to find evidence, which can suggest a cause or method. And once we understand the *actual* requirements for magick, we can start a much more rigorous study in the field, based on what works rather than pure baseless speculation and endless amounts of downright silly metaphors that end up confusing people like a re-run of the “Tower of Babel” from biblical tales. It’s time to clean the blackboard and start fresh. I say we re-write the books by figuring this stuff out, without the silly spirits, subtle energy, and “information” stuff. Purely a psychological analysis of magick, the minimum mental requirements for its practice, and on top of that other mages can add their baseless speculations about spirits from the “void of the wacky wazoo” or whatever the fluffy trend of the month is (just like its been happening throughout history). So let the collection of first-hand accounts begin! =)”

So that’s what I want from you guys: George, Yoseqlo, G.S., walllum, and anyone else is also welcome.

Tell me what you guys did in your most successful acts of magick. To begin, I’ll design a template and an example (actual real example) which you can use in making your own entries. Please, be thorough and don’t overlook *any* detail. Even the smallest thing is important. Treat this as seriously as an eye-witness testimony of a crime to a police officer. Don’t overlook any detail if possible, because those little things can be the similarities that will help us figure this stuff out.

Once condition, though: do *not* enter any act of magick that was unsuccessful. And do *not* enter any act of magick that was successful after you re-interpreted your intent, or wording, or desires, etc. If the objective in your mind and the result matched, and you did an act of magick to make it happen, than its a valid entry. Let’s begin with the template, and then my example.

– Template

Intent/Objective: Describe exactly what you were trying to accomplish.

Beliefs/Logic: Describe the beliefs you held at the time, why you thought they were correct, how firmly you believed in them, how seriously you took said beliefs, and what logic you figured allowed you to do magick within said belief parameters.

Method of the Act of Magick: Describe the steps as coldly as possible. Just the steps of the act of magick from a “mental actions” perspective. Keep emotions and “altered state of consciousness” separate from this, and explain why those particular steps would work within the logic of your belief system, and why you thought they would work.

Pre-Act State: Describe how you were feeling before the act of magick, how much you desired/wanted/needed your objective, your state of mind, and how your mind was like the few days (or hours) before your act of magick started. Describe tension, anxiety, glee, hope, or anything else you can think of that you were feeling immediately before the act of magick.

Mid-Act State: Describe your act of magick. Describe the “mental actions” you were doing, along with any physical actions as well. Describe the “state of consciousness” you were in, and what methods (mental or otherwise) which were involved. Describe anything like “seriousness”, “unemotional”, “passionate”, “driven”, “tenacious” or any other words you’d care to describe yourself, your thought process, and so forth. To describe your mental actions, use any words you like, but describe each word in terminology you’re using in their fullest detail – “dictionary it out” and “thesaurus it out” if need be. To describe the “state of consciousness” you were in, use words like “excited”, “mellow”, “peaceful”, “serene”, “agitated”, or anything else. Describe precisely the series of steps you took, why you took them (what the logic in doing them was), and what your belief systems at the time were (and how firmly you believed in them, and how serious or not you were taking said act of magick during the time of that particular act).

Post-Act State: Describe how you felt shortly after your act of magick, and what your mental condition was. Did you think of your magickal act thereafter or not? Describe if you felt any tension or relief, any joy or sorrow, or anything else that you were feeling after the act of magick.

Results: Describe here the results you had intended, and after that describe the results you got.

 

– My Example (My Job Sigil From 2013)

Intent/Objective: I was looking for a job, and needed one within a week.

Beliefs/Logic: At the time I believed firmly in Chaos Magick. It seemed logical, and I was fairly good at it. I just discovered sigils a while ago, and I figured “why not give it a shot”. It had worked before, and I figured I’d try it again. It couldn’t hurt, and I couldn’t have less of a job since I was then unemployed. I understood the whole spiel about sigils from Liber Kaos, and I believed it firmly. I did the ritual as described, coldly. I wasn’t confident the sigil would work, but I had to try it – there were no options left, and no where else to turn. But I decided I’d give it my best shot no matter what.

Method of the Act of Magick: I wrote up a sigil for my desires on paper, and later burned said piece of paper. I was in a very intense altered state of consciousness before it happened, very intensly focused, trying to “channel” (or “guide”) through the piece of paper my intense “need” (not want) to have a job. I “felt” (more intense version of visualization) me in a job and having more money, and then I immediately let go of it all to release my desire into “the universe” (I trusted “the universe” and my act of magick to do the rest for me). I then didn’t follow up to micro-manage how my act of magick was doing, but I followed up on every opportunity and lead I was given until I settled on the best opportunity of them all. And it was awesome.

Pre-Act State: Before I was a nervous trainwreck. Shaky, fearful, anxious, nervous. I was in “sheep dip” and I knew it. I tried to settle down with meditation before I began, trying to ease everything out from my mind to do things right. I figured I’d need clarity and focus if I was going to channel the right desire/intent, rather than just random thoughts. I had been sending out resumes, but no job interview requests happened as a result of that.

Mid-Act State: I got a piece of paper and a pen. I started to enter an Altered State of Consciousness, a very excitatory one at that. I played some of the most important music for me, the kind that would get me the most excited, hyped, and eager. I didn’t want something that would overwhelm me, nor something that would detract from my clarity of mind. Simply something that would make me feel “energetic” (read: ready to act, ready to do whatever it took, prepared, confident) and ready to take on the opportunities and challenges which I was preparing for myself. I then “felt” (more intensely visualized) what I wanted (a job), and where I wanted to be (employed), and me in that position (once again, employed), and I “channeled” (read: guided) that “feeling” (read: “felt sense”, or more intense visualization) onto and through that piece of paper as I wrote down a sigil (read: scribbled symbol) to represent that intention. I then reached a climax (read: peak in my altered state of consciousness) where I “spaced out” (or “blanked out”) for a moment, overwhelmed by the music and excitatory state of consciousness, and then let go of that “felt sense”/desire/intent. I then let my act of magick (or: “the universe”) take care of taking care of all the little details. I didn’t want to try and fiddle with micro-managing all the little ways in which it could work; I decided I’d simply keep my eyes open and take whatever opportunity “the universe” threw at me later. My task was do continue doing whatever I could, and create as many openings as possible so that “the universe” could respond to my desire/intent.

Post-Act State: I was calm, if a bit energetic because of the adrenaline rush. Later I calmed down, relaxed, watched some TV and streamed some videos from YouTube, chatted with some friends via Skype, Trillian and Facebook.

Results: Within 24 hours I had two requests for interviews. And within a week I had a job! Later I would have 3 job offers to choose from, one which I accepted (and then later quit). I quit the other one because I had sent out a job application during the week following the sigil, and it was closer to home, was with a nicer boss, and the job was easier and more fun. The results had far exceeded any of my expectations, being an incredibly success! 20 on a d20, for sure. (If you catch that reference, try going out more often. =P )

____

Anyways, that was my actual example. I’d love to hear more from you guys to gather more data – and feel free to question me about my act of magick, as I’ll probably question you guys for further clarification on your reports as well.

(I do have one more example if you guys like… but it’s not very nice. It’s my first act of magick, and it had a rather nasty result. But I’ll talk about it if you guys are interested. It’s more data, but it’s unpleasant. On a small account of death by curse. Which is why I avoid talking about it.)

Advertisements

52 comments on “Collecting First-Hand Accounts Of Successful Acts Of Magick

  1. George says:

    Yeah, we want to hear the nasty one. This is about success, not about morality. And this is all about others gaining from your experiences, so we don’t have to learn the lessons the hard way.

  2. George says:

    Well, I’ll do a slightly different one: information acquisition.

    Passing An Electronics Exam

    Intent/Objective: Passing a degree exam the next day, with not much hope of passing a particular subject. The subject had been pretty poorly presented, I hadn’t a natural affinity for it, and in truth hadn’t done enough work to compensate.

    Beliefs/Logic: I had no specific model of magick at the time, and in fact probably didn’t think of this as explicitly ‘magick’, but I had a general view that reality was dream-like and accommodating of one’s intent; that you could use your mind to access or change things.

    Methods of the Act of Magick: I simply lay down on the floor and detached, breathing deeply, getting into a state of deep relaxation, approaching it similarly to trying to produce an OOBE. I then just held in my mind the intention to do well in the exam the next day, and to feel the good feeling associated with that.

    Pre-Act State: Nervous, worried due to the situation.

    Mid-Act State: Relaxed, open state, feeling connected and optimistic, using the method described above.

    Post-Act State: Relaxed, calm, awake.

    Results: When I came back, letting myself be ‘moved by inspiration’, I went to my desk where I had laid out the past papers for this particular exam, and read over all the questions. I was drawn to two particular calculations, for which I found answers in my electronics book. I worked through these. The next day, four questions were presented in the exam paper, and two of them corresponded exactly to the calculations I had done the previous evening. I performed well in the exam.

    Aside No. 1: The method of ‘opening up to be moved by inspiration’ is a good approach by itself. I have often located friends, etc, using this approach. For instance, not knowing which pub we were to meet in and letting myself be ‘moved’ to the right location.

    Aside No. 2: This brought back some memories. I used to use the Rope Technique for producing OOBEs. It was pretty reliable, although it took quite a bit of courage to continue one the vibrations start to hit. Ever tried it?

    • walllum says:

      Thanks for sharing 🙂
      I haven’t tried to have an OBE for years. The closest I came back then was when I lay face down, imagining myself floating up to the ceiling and looking down at myself, well I woke up with a jolt as I felt myself re-enter my body but have no recollection of leaving it. I had escellent dream recal at the time, so can only assume I fell asleep and awoke a few seconds later before I had the chance to dream.
      I failed so many times at attaining an OBE that I gave up.

      • George says:

        Really, try the Rope Technique (follow that link for alternatives too, the Picture Technique is good for direct lucid dreaming if you just use invented imagery). Lie on the floor to do it so you feel supported. It works really well, but the intense feeling just before “separation” can be a bit intimidating; you have to push through it.

    • George says:

      Another thing come to mind, since the above is related to one of my first brushes with magick (until then I was all about dreams, imagination, memory, psychology, reality – but not really magick).

      While I was at university, on the lab noticeboard someone had put up a notice advertising a book called How To Get A 1st Class Degree (the top grading in the UK, see here). So I ordered one. It was a little self-published book with a blue cover and some white hand-drawn clouds, and its content was essentially about entering a relaxed state and summoning the experience of having achieved a 1st, doing that daily, and following your inclinations subsequently. It did go into more detail. Psychology + magick. (Or better to say psychology = magick, to some extent.)

      Quite a few books of the period did that crossover: apparently psychology, but then adding that little step in a section here and there. For instance, Ursula Markham’s Elements of Visualisation talks about using your imagination for relaxing, memorising, and so on – but then also extends into using it to get car parking spaces and to exert other influences. (My exact copy.)

      It – the first book – probably had a lot of influence on me; it had an ‘atmosphere of possibility’. It’s still in the cellar somewhere with all my other teenage esoteric books; I should dig it out.

    • Yoseqlo says:

      Thanks for sharing.

      “I simply lay down on the floor and detached,” With detached did you mean like physically relaxed (no tension in the muscles)?

      “similarly to trying to produce an OOBE.” Was a held belief that if you relaxed enough you will get closer to the OOBE and therefore get what you want in a state between dream & awaken?

      “Relaxed, open state, feeling connected and optimistic…” Connected to universe or with the situation you wanted?

      ” ‘moved by inspiration’ ” Did you mean like excited, knowing something about a topic, just confident in yourself with no much reason, or an intuitive (direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process) feeling that anything will just end well?

      Sorry if these question’s answers seem too obvious, just want to check if we are on the same page and, well I am not a native in Eng, so want to be sure I’m understanding it well.

      PD :
      ” I used to use the Rope Technique for producing OOBEs… Ever tried it?” Yup. Never got that far with it, was a strange feeling like pulling out the perception out of the body, but never was able to actually achieve the OOBE.

  3. johnwaskins says:

    – My First Spell (Death Curse)

    Intent/Objective: To curse someone else such that it would end their life.

    Beliefs/Logic: At the time I was a fledgling mage. No real experience, I just believe in spirits.

    Method of the Act of Magick: I used the methods prescribed in the Necronomicon Spellbook by Simon. (I know. Bad way to get into magick, lots of fluff, etc. But I didn’t know that at the time.) I used my own ritual, and gave a small drop of blood as sacrifice.

    Pre-Act State: I was furious. Plain and simple. But I just wanted to get even.

    Mid-Act State: I wrote down the sigil in blood after reciting the prescribed words. I destroyed the piece of paper afterwards. I did this while in intense rage, whilst chanting.

    Post-Act State: I felt like a weight had been lifted, as the heavy emotions and ominous tone dissipated.

    Results: I got my results. And how. Shortly after the curse we became good friends, and I had deeply regretted that curse. I did everything in my power to undo said curse. I thought I had succeeded in dispelling it. One month later, the target was diagnosed with cancer. The last few months of his life he had lost bowel control, couldn’t walk as his bones were dissolving due to the cancer, and his skull started to melt due to cancer and chemotherapy eating away the calcium he had remaining. He spent his days in a hospital, or on a wheelchair. It got to the point where the doctors sent him home with a lot of painkillers because there was nothing more they could do for him. His suffering ended a few months after I moved here. My guilt during the whole thing was terrible. And there was nothing I could do.

    In the end, that was my first experience with magick. A curse that backfired and that I couldn’t undo. Success, but at such a price that failure was a bargain by comparison. After that, I stopped doing magick for a while. I later returned, but since then I’ve been much more cautious. I and offer this warning to all mages; do not experiment with curses. They aren’t worth it. You can’t undo them, and the price of a permanent consequence due to a temporary emotion is a burden you’ll be left with forever hereafter. If you value your conscience, take a or a week or two, and think it over. Give your head some time to cool off. You’ll be glad you did.

    • George says:

      The inability to take things back is interesting. “Once a blessing is given, it cannot be undone.” Once you’ve launched something, that’s it.

      I wonder how one can effectively undo things. Probably not by undoing; you have to create a new thing, a next chapter to the story, to follow on. You can’t dispel a curse; you have to give a blessing?

      • johnwaskins says:

        Well, that was a while ago. You can’t go back to change the past, but you can move forwards and make a better future. Regret is something you can live with, or you can do something about it. Redemption can be very constructive and motivating.

        • George says:

          I meant more that you said this:

          I did everything in my power to undo said curse. I thought I had succeeded in dispelling it. One month later…

          In other words, is there a way to undo mistakes, whilst they’re not yet ‘finalised’? If I’ve done a spot of magicking, how can I override it / redirect it?

          • johnwaskins says:

            Hhmmm. Normally, yes. The thing is, remember how if you’re worrying about an act of magick working and you try to micro-manage it, that it tends to fail miserably? Well, this was the opposite of that.

            I was terribly worried it *would* work, rather than it would fail. And it then succeeded spectacularly, to my horror (yes, I know – the words spectacular and horror shouldn’t be used in the same sentence together, but you understand what I mean so I’ll spare you the lengthy explanation).

            So yes. You *can* change the outcome of a spell. By worrying if it will fail, it will fail. By worrying it if will succeed, it will succeed. Basically, the micro-managing and worrying and focusing spent on a spell after its been cast is as much of a spell as the one you did in the first place. So the things you focus on afterwards do have an affect. Normally people are worried of “lust of results”. My first spell is proof that it can be used to make your spells work, rather than fail, so long as you exploit that “bug” (or maybe its a feature?) in how magick works.

            But a bigger question isn’t if you can undo mistakes… but if you do an act of magick now, if something you’re doing between then and the outcome can affect the outcome. That’s difficult to know unless magick has a physical cause to it. Because otherwise you’ll end up with un-testable experiments. If I do spellX and I don’t know how spellX has an affect on the world, how can I be sure spellX worked in the first place and that my interference the second time around wasn’t just me failing at casting spellX properly?

        • George says:

          Yeah, repeatedly imagining the “terrible outcome” is essentially creating/reinforcing that outcome (just as my How To Get A 1st Class Degree book recommended doing a daily exercise of imagining that result).

          But a bigger question isn’t if you can undo mistakes… but if you do an act of magick now, if something you’re doing between then and the outcome can affect the outcome.

          That’s really what I meant: interrupt the outcome. Certainly, to know for sure you’d have to experiment – – – I don’t think we need to worry about a physical cause here, surely?

          So, I ‘cast a spell’ to have someone have an illness, simply with imagination and intention. By some mechanism (or none), this is seeded into the universe as a future experience for me. (Note that here: Magick is about generating an experience for yourself, even if it involves the experiencing of another person’s state.)

          The question is, can I then re-imagine-with-intention that they are healthy? After all, performing a healing is effectively this, and someone’s initial illness might well have been the result of a spell (perhaps one they have unwittingly cast upon themselves).

          • johnwaskins says:

            Well, sort of. If I have a spell to cause someone to lose their job next week, and I try to undo that spell before then, how could you know if you succeeded in the first spell if the person retains their job after said week has passed?

            Basically, did you succeed at both attempts, or fail at both, or fail at the first and succeed in the second? How can you know this, if the result can only be obtained after X amount of time? Because you can’t know whether or not you your spell worked or didn’t until the outcome is present, you can’t determine for certain if any intervention upon said spell would have worked or not either.

            Think of it this way. Imagine you throw a coin into a trashcan. Now, it could enter the trashcan or not, but you can’t know until next week. However, you can ask someone to put it in or out of said trashcan for you, but you can’t know if they’ll do it or not, nor will they tell you if it was on the outside or the inside already. Basically, the same confusing mess is happening with magick. If you do a spell, what confirmation do you have it worked at all? How can you tell if canceling it worked either? This is why we need some physical means to determine if someone’s spell worked in the first place before we can dig further into those questions. Otherwise, we might think we’re good at canceling/dispelling spells, when we could just be really really bad at casting successful spells in the first place.

        • George says:

          Yeah, you can’t. Okay, but we just have to accept that – it’s just in the nature of one-off life circumstances. And in that situation, I don’t care: I just care that the “bad outcome” doesn’t happen, whether because my original spell didn’t work, or that my overriding spell did.

          If we have faith in our magick at all though, then we have to generally assume “correct method = good chance of results”, and that if we’re using the same method that has worked previously for other things, that we are right to be careful and trusting. In other words, we must already have established that we are pretty good at casting spells from past experience. (Otherwise we probably wouldn’t worry about having to cancel them anyway.)

          I get your point that, generally this is something you’d have to test, to see if ‘cancellation’ works and what is required to do it. If experientially we find that the result tends to correspond to what we last ‘envisaged’, that goes some way towards though.

          • johnwaskins says:

            Well, if we’re just looking for results, we can do that, sure. But we can’t test it objectively. That’s the point I’m trying to make.

            From my personal experience, you can dispel an act of magick, yes. But you can’t know if your first spell worked or failed until the outcome has happened, and if the first intention failed to occur, you can never really know if you dispelled the first spell or if the first spell failed. My point was technical.

            However, you are correct. Obtaining the desired outcome in whatever the current moment is, is what’s important to the mage. Not yesterday, not five minutes from now; simply what’s desired now is what a mage shoulod focus on. If he doesn’t want his past desires to occur, he should focus on changing the present or future so they don’t come to pass. Should a mage wish to avoid making rash decisions, he should seek to be more cautious with his actions before he takes them.

        • George says:

          All good points. I do get the “objectively” point, but there’s no way around it in this instance; we can’t travel two paths simultaneously (although sometimes we can “know” what would have happened, or “know” what will happen when at the crossroads).

          And that’s essentially a great summary: one’s focus should be on using one’s (magickal) actions in the present to bring about the future (or near-present) that one desires, regardless of has been set up (or is remembered now as being set up) in the “past”.

    • Yoseqlo says:

      Thanks for sharing John. Take in count that if magick is able to damage someone at that level, the same principles could save a live as well.

      Reading the George’s response. I think he has a point there. I got that in technical, the “dispell” seems to go nowhere, but you said something that caught my attention. That thing about doubt of failing vs doubt of success, it suggests there are different kinds of doubts, I wonder if there are types of doubts that instead of affect the act negatively it will not affect the normal performance or even enhance chances of success.
      You can’t know if you cancelled a spell, but you can compare mental processes. I think it worth testing. At least to verify the common belief in the community that doubt is always against the mage.

      • johnwaskins says:

        Well, the key takeaway from it is that “lust of results” can be split into “worrying about failure” and “worrying about success”, and both are equally good at achieving the thing you’re worrying about. Which means worry doesn’t mean “anti-magick” by default, it simply is one more means with which to do magick if you know how to properly exploit it.

        As for comparing the mental processes, that’s one thing. But you can’t do it objectively, just subjectively. Meaning you can’t have empirical evidence, only intuitive evidence.

        • Yoseqlo says:

          You can try. Like in social studies and compare results with a control.
          Have a group focused on one kind of worry, another in the other kind and a third control group, then compare all groups’ results. Did the groups of the worried did equal, better or worse than the control?
          Or compare results within the same group in before-after. Have a measured % of success of the group, then make them try the kinds of worry, then measure if it has any difference with the previous base results.

          • johnwaskins says:

            It would be interesting. Although the question is, how could you objectively compare these subjective mental variables, and what tests would you do as your control, and how could the chance of X happening or not be made stable and controllable during the experiment equally amongst both groups? Lastly, how large of a sample would you need to determine this?

        • Yoseqlo says:

          how could you objectively compare these subjective mental variables?
          You can’t for sure, but that doesn’t understimate that certain pattern of thought can’t be followed, like comparing a negative attitude with a positive one, you can’t be sure what’s going on on their heads, but based on their behavior you can conclude they have a different thought pattern.
          I think that in this testing, just give the subjects the order of perform the act with a certain doubt pattern (A, or B) immediately after doing it. Then, make them fill a report of what their precise thoughts of doubts was, just to write them down, in order to corroborate that presented a kind of doubt, at least.

          what tests would you do as your control?
          It’s a commonly used in psi studies. You will probably don’t like it, but it’s an easy way to test out an specific effect in controlled environment. Using a random number generator. Have two categories of numbers, say below

          5 and up to 5, and said to each group (at random from the categories) to focus their intent to achieve a result in the category. Then, the next day run the generator a fixed number of times, I’m thinking one per subject.

          how could the chance of X happening or not be made stable and controllable during the experiment equally amongst both groups?
          The results should be at least like in the control group measure, if significantly differs from it, we have reasons to think it could make the performance worse or better.

          how large of a sample would you need to determine this?
          Well, depends in the population you want to measure, a very specific ones, like the members of a forum, or a group of people at a school, town, city, state, country. The population should be defined with an exact number to determine it.

          • johnwaskins says:

            No. The problem with using small sample sizes is that you end up with false positives more frequently. You need a very large sample size in order to rule out the coincidences you might find on occasion, that could be a red herring (expression used to mean misleading conclusion or misleading evidence) if you’re trying to find scientific results.

            Remember, a large sample size helps rule out inconsistencies. So sure, getting four people to pick one number from 1 to 4 on their first day, and have it show up the following day for all four of them is a slim chance. But if you only do this one day, the chances of it working are around 0.4%. Not unrealistic, but not likely. Or maybe you go through five hundred people, looking for someone who picks a number one day and it shows up the next four days. While you might be inclined to think that this is evidence that said person is psychic or has some powers, and thus move said person to a “special group” for further screening, you’re actually ending up with the same 0.4% chance as before, just in a different context, and with a sample size of 500 there’s a good chance one or two people will fit that assuming your sample is completely random (and that’s the worst-case scenario here).

            So you have to take much, much larger sample sizes. Experiments with far many more probabilities. That’s for the Subtle Magick test, though.

            As for the behavioral study, that’s a different matter. You need to find ways to objectively measure or quantify the “doubt level” was. Or to specify exactly what the doubt was, assuming that they were aware of what the underlying doubt was being caused by (instead of something their mind was focusing on while their subconscious mind was doubtful because of something they weren’t conscious of at the time). Meaning you end up right back where you started.

            These Psi studies all suffer from this symptom. You need a much larger sample size. You need to have repeatable experiments. Sociology can do this, and we have good examples of this. Psychology, neurology… but Psionics doesn’t have nearly the same degree of repeatable, verifiable studies. Out of all the objective studies carried out, only the ones which are successful are successful tend to be shared by the Psionic or OEC communities. The unsuccessful ones (which skeptics are ready and eager to share links to) aren’t as widely discussed on Psionic or OEC communities. That’s because of something called Selective Perception, something which reader G.S. commented on a while ago. So while I do see your point, it just isn’t yet backed up by the findings. I’d like to find ways to train skills needed to reliably test and prove the existence of this phenomena, as well as finding ways to more comprehensively experiment this. (Also, why would the person being tested be exposed to the number they’re trying to generate. Couldn’t it just be hidden from them, and the results recorded, in order to help make the test more objective? Same goes for keeping the researchers in the dark, essentially making a double-blind test.)

        • Yoseqlo says:

          Mhm… yeah, you’re right. As you said in the past, it seems APM would be more easy to measure without mistaking it with luck, I guess, well, if done consistently… or even if don’t, just appear matter from nowhere or that something moves without any apparent physical force applied to it, even if it just happen once, there’s no way to mistake it for whatever reason.

          • johnwaskins says:

            Yep. That’s why I developed APM. Without APM, we’re going to have a *much* harder time proving magick objectively. It doesn’t require large sample sizes, it’s quick, you can see results immediately, you know where the source is (the mage) and where you’d need to put any scientific instruments (near the target) to find out what’s happening. There’s no chance of it happening by accident, so it rules out coincidences entirely, and since the result is physical you don’t need people to interpret the results. It’s either there or not, and a machine can confirm it without human assistance (by looking for a dark speck on a piece of glass).

    • George says:

      Random article I came across: here, related.

      Never underestimate the power of your intention. It is the will that drives you. Most people are not even aware that situations that have occurred in their lives have occurred because of their own intentions. Let me share an example…

  4. hektorcorp says:

    This seems like an interesting experiment. I am new to this discipline and even though I have never thought about magick at all before reading your blog, I think I may have been using it a lot in the past. It is rather difficult to describe it in the format you proposed because it’s something I used to do MANY years ago so I don’t remember everything very well and because it was a different kind of “ritual” from the kinds you described, so I fear this might end up to be a ‘lengthy’ comment but I’m sure you won’t mind 😛 (also I’m not a native english speaker so please forgive me if I made stupid mistakes)

    • Intent/Objective:
    I was finishing middle school and there were several things that could turn my life in a stressful mess, exams, not-so-nice classmates, oral tests and in general pretty much everything connected with school. I don’t think this will sound too strange to anyone ears, it’s a difficult age. The method I’m going to describe was something I used to try and make my day less shitty.

    • Beliefs/Logic:
    That’s where it gets interesting. I noticed that very often there were streaks of bad days, good days, bad days, good days like in a sort of periodicity, so I made up a nice system to explain this.
    Imagine a metaphorical ’empty space’ with a big round ‘sun’ made out of hexagons which radiates “positive things” in every direction. Then there’s ‘me’ as a single point in that space with a ‘moon’ in an elliptical orbit that occasionally shields me from the rays of the ‘sun’ leaving me in the dark. (btw I knew this was simply a mind trick but still it was more fun to believe the other way, and I really did!) I think it’s obvious to see the correlation of this with the streaks of bad days/good days.

    • Method of the Act of Magick:
    So, I drew a very nice diagram of this universe with the hexagon-filled sun in the upper left corner and ‘myself’ with, in an elliptical orbit, the moon/shield. And that was my workspace, the whole point of this was that I could modify the moon’s orbit by “sending” it proper instructions.
    If I felt the next day it would have been a terrible day, I’d write on a piece of paper some lines of a weird programming language I made out inspired by Pov-Ray. It was something along the lines of
    shield {
    translate 30*x
    rotate
    }
    and then I’d glue it at the bottom left of my diagram. That was it. I would then proceed to forget about all of this the following day while my code ‘executed’.

    • Pre-Act State:
    Pretty worried for what I feared for the day that would follow.

    • Mid-Act State:
    There was no altered mental state or OOBE or climaxes or any of this. The paper was cut into a rectangle of precise measures and the code was written on it. I was very serious and concentrated, but still focused on the informations I had to write.

    • Post-Act State:
    I usually did this ritual at night so I’d go to my usual activities trying not to think of what could happen if it didn’t work out, but still quite relieved from it.

    • Results:
    I’d been doing this for about an year and it’d work most of the times and even my bad days where more bearable. I’m sorry I can’t give you a more precise experience but as I said, all of this happened a long long time ago.

    I was very surprised to see some similarities with the Magick you describe in this blog, so I thought to share it.

    Also I love the way you’re making this more community-oriented, I’m studying to become a mathematician and I liked very very much the kind of abstraction that come with ‘making a model of Magick’ and also the formal and rigorous way you approach this field.
    It’s something you don’t see so often (or at all) in other occult/magick-centered blogs or forums on the internet. So, thank you for your time 🙂

    • George says:

      That’s great – you basically modelled the problem as a little abstract universe, and then performed operations on it!

      It’s interesting that in magick, we’re generally operating on a representation of the problem, even when the representation of the problem ‘looks really like the actual thing’ (e.g. imagining what you want to happen as a detailed image).

    • johnwaskins says:

      No problem. I’m just glad others have felt helped by my blog and that there’s such an appreciation for the way I’ve tried to shape my content and blog with my community-centric approach.

      What you described as being “very serious and concentrated” could also be considered an Altered State of Consciousness. Think about it this way: when you’re meditating, you’re calming your mind and slowing its activity rate down to a more manageable level, and that’s an Altered State of Consciousness. The same is true about Drumming, Dancing, Twirling, Chanting, and other Excitatory Altered States of Consciousness, except they excite the mind by speeding up its activity rate. These are the two major types of Altered State of Consciousness: Excitatory and Inhibitory, to speed up or intensify ones mental activity, or to slow down and decrease the intensity of ones mental activity.

      But there’s a third type. A “colder” type of Altered State of Consciousness. It doesn’t revolve around “exciting” or “inhibiting” the mind. Focus, seriousness, concentration, commitment… all of those can fall neatly within this third type of Altered State of Consciousness, and the same is true with Distraction, “Spacing Out”, daydreaming, and so forth. A rapid shift in one’s State of Consciousness, such as noticing you were “Spacing Out”, is a sign you were in two different Altered States of Consciousness. When you’re hyper-focusing on something (to the point that you can barely hear or see anything else), you’re also in an Altered State of Consciousness, because when you’re distracted by something (like a loud noise or a quick shift in the light levels or colors in the room) you’ll get that same effect. It takes a bit of time to enter the desired Altered State of Consciousness, but losing it is quick.

      Ones “Un-Altered State of Consciousness” is your everyday State of Consciousness. Anything that diverged from it or takes time to change it is an Altered State of Consciousness. If you’re ever moved from an Altered State of Consciousness, you’ll most likely be moved back to your Un-Altered (read: regular/normal) State of Consciousness. So while you were using an Altered State of Consciousness, its just not the one that most mages use with magick. But this is a good example of just how simple magick is to do and that you don’t need any kind of special/formal training, and how there’s very practical, easy-to-do magick that anyone can do on their own. And that rituals/spells don’t have to involve blood or human sacrifice or anything like that, and that magick can be practical and easy-to-do with none of the traditional stereotypical requirements (like wand, cowl, hood, sword, cup, pentacles, etc). Overall, good job. And welcome to the fold. =)

  5. Yoseqlo says:

    Thanks for sharing hektorcorp.

    Your previous model seems pretty creative and aesthetically pleasent for sure. Did you had any interest like in the Occult or any approach to the esoteric at that age or you kind of thought was more like a positive thinking thing?

    “There was no altered mental state…” Maybe it was. Taking the “Altered state of mind” as any mental sensation-process other than the regular one (the one which I suppose we have for default most hours a day, except when sleeping).

    • johnwaskins says:

      Yep. That’s what I mean by altered state of consciousness. Any state of consciousness other than the one we use most often.It can be emotionally-charged, intensely focused, meditation, distracted, “spacing out”, or anything else. As long as it diverges noticeably from your regular state of consciousness, it counts! =) And if you can use it for magick, all the better.

      • George says:

        An altered state isn’t necessarily required if you are doing representational stuff. For instance, check out William Boroughs’ use of The Cassette Recorder As Magickal Weapon:

        [Once, eating at a café in London], “William was treated with great disdain, with rudeness beyond belief. Crass, crude, rude, nasty and aggressive, insulting behavior quite beyond the acceptable pale of manners. Such was the rudeness and unpleasantness experienced by William that he swore never to eat there again. But, more than that, his disgust and anger was so intense and intentional, so unforgiving and angry in the moment that he felt quite compelled to experimental ‘sorcery’ (his word to me, take note). What form did his curse take? Here follows the first lesson in contemporary intuitive and functional magick.

        “William took his Sony TC cassette recorder and very methodically walked back and forth in front of the offending café, at breakfast time and other times of the day, making a tape of the ongoing street noises that made the sonic background of its location. A field recording encapsulating a typical day via street sounds. Next he went back to his apartment and at various random places on the same cassette he recorded ‘trouble noises’ over bits of the previous recordings. These were things like police car sirens, gunshots, bombs, screams and other types of mayhem culled primarily from the TV news. Then he went back to the café and again walked up and down the street outside playing the cut-up cassette recording complete with ‘trouble noises’. Apparently the tape does not need to be played very loud, in fact just a volume that blends in so that passers-by on the other side of the street, or a few feet away would not notice the additional sounds as implanted fictions. This process was repeated several times, quite innocuous to any observer. ‘L’hombre invisible’ at work. Within a very short time, the café closed down! Not only did it close down, but the space remained empty for years, unable to be rented for love, or money.

        • johnwaskins says:

          Very good. =) Although I’m not sure about that. I’m sure he was emotionally-charged when he made those recordings, when he was walking down the streets, and I’m sure he was in very intense thought (possibly focus) whilst walking. It’s difficult to say he wasn’t in some form of Altered State of Consciousness, even if the apparent climax of his act of magick was happening. The moment when one actually does an act of magick (the mental part of act of magick) is very different from the physical ritual. You can dance to signify when you start or end an act of magick, but that doesn’t mean the act of magick is happening in sync with the physical ritual you’re performing.

          Likewise, Excitatory and Inhibitory Altered States of Consciousness aren’t the only Altered States of Consciousness possible. You also have intense thought, focus, concentration, determination, empty-minded “spacing out”, daydreaming, distraction, sensory overload, and so many others. These don’t fit it neatly with “Excitatory” or “Inhibitory” Altered States of Consciousness in the traditional sense, and have been largely ignored by modern magickal practices, despite being so common and also explaining that people do magcik on a daily basis without hardly noticing. It would also encompass a far wider and broader scope of what is magick, helping to make magick a much larger field than it currently is. =)

  6. Yoseqlo says:

    Mhm… the altered state of mind can be tricky, but in my opinion I do think is one essential factor of the act.

    I’m aware of that case, and certainly we mages work with representional (depicting objects, figures, or scenes as seen/felt) stuff all the time, but the altered state could have been present at any of the steps of the ritual, like when he was recording, editing, or playing the tape.

    • George says:

      That’s a good point, I’ll backtrack – because in truth, the process of ‘doing art’ probably means you’re in at least a slightly altered state anyway. Even just a prolonged period of action with (magickal) intention actually involves a type of focus which is a different state. So, yeah. 🙂

    • George says:

      When I was first into doing sigils, I would just let myself become “lost in the act” and then let go of it in the end, by suddenly switching my attention to the TV or something, rather than doing some kind of “charging” or “launch”, mainly because I hadn’t read up on it properly, because I thought that relaxing corresponded to “making a connection”. It worked quite reliably. Which is what first made me think that maybe it doesn’t matter what you do, but what you’ve decided you’re doing it for. (But of course, I was basically doing just the same thing, just less consciously.)

      • johnwaskins says:

        I used to do the same thing. And it worked remarkably well. The ritual, act and belief system don’t matter, neither does the energy, spirits, ethereal cardboard cereal box, or whatever the “inter-dimensional/aethereal deus ex machina” you happen to believe in.

        I think mages need to step away from their tendency to “deus ex machina” away magick by coming up with pseudo-scientific explanations. We need to go back to bacis. What works, what doesn’t. Relieve ourselves of the assumptions, and unburden our knowledge from the theory we’ve made up. Intention and commitment really do a lot more to explain magickal theory and practice than “energy” or “software” explanations ever have (or likely will).

        • George says:

          Yeah –

          In the end, what really seems to work is “decision + action + commitment”, and everything else is just whatever way you’d like to ‘imagine’ it working for convenience – whether that be software, spirits, remodelling an underlying universal field, or whatever.

          There’s nothing worse than trying to explain magick in terms of “physics”, but then including non-physical, non-mechanical parts. Just admit you are describing mental experiences and structures, are assuming these somehow affect physical experience, and be done with it. There is a limit to how ‘sciencey’ you can make this stuff in that way.

          And a key thing is, are explanations useful? If they provide a way in, then it’s fine. Anything goes. But to say the images you are picturing in your head correspond to a real physical process if false; it simply represents your intention in the form or language of mental objects, and the exact details are probably optional and don’t really matter.

          • johnwaskins says:

            Yep. Agreed, and this is a very common misconception by young mages. It’s like fundamentalist christianity about magick, by taking metaphorical or symbolic representations as literal 1:1 truths. Kind of sad, really, that mages who are supposed to be “enlightened” will so easily fall for the same traps they criticize others for falling into.

        • George says:

          Also: the notion of “the unconscious” is a bit of a ‘black box’. Does this mean ‘dark areas of the mind’, or does it effectively mean “everything you’re not conscious of” – i.e. pretty much the whole universe.

          If the latter, then saying that you transmit your intention to the unconscious mind is to say that the universe takes care of it for you, basically.

          • johnwaskins says:

            I meant it in terms of the “dark areas of the mind”. You’re just looking back at what your brain was doing so you can repeat it, not so much how you were doing it. So you’re getting closer to the ITA-Gap, but you’re not closing the ITA-Gap entirely.

  7. George says:

    Anyone else with some first-hand accounts? This was potentially going to be an interesting thread. (Well, I guess I should come up with some myself too.)

  8. Yoseqlo says:

    Intent/Objective: To meet some person from an online forum, face-to-face in a specific date.

    Beliefs/Logic: This was long ago (well, like four or five years ago). I was starting in the magick based on the Ophiel author’s books, (“Art & Practice of the Occult”). Said paradigm was based in rituals around “elemental” forces of water, earth, fire and air with some more concepts from the Cabala like the three of life and its sephirot’s influences, but all the time (and along their books) he stated that it all was symbolic, that we shouldn’t take objectively the concepts, they were all representations of the inner realms (the self) and the world which lets us act upon in order to change different aspects of our life.

    Before going into magick, I came from the Psionic’s community, the Energy model, which to my understanding was half a supposedly unmeasurable objective energy to manipulate and a point of connection to influence the world via changing its properties to fit our wills.

    Method of the Act of Magick: Probably my first (conscious) ritual-less spell. At that time was mainly in the Ophiel’s model, but in advanced books he talked about magick without rituals by means of something called the “astral light”, that basically was willing something very much, visualize it clearly as HD and paranormal factor involved to explain the phenomena (the astral light being something in each person and as a sort of primal god, making ourselves kind of demiurges able to change reality with the thought).
    So, I think I could do the thing. I wasn’t very good with visualization (and still ain’t), not sure how to contact said astral light (the author promised another book to explain it further… but died before it), but I have the will.

    Mark the date in a calendar and think of the target person and about meeting every day. Then, for longer times, mostly when have plenty of time, think about the target and meeting. Then think of it constantly. And then, think of it like more than half of my thoughts were focused on the person and meeting, trying to visualize the whole situation at the best of my (un)ability.

    Pre-Act State: At that time I was a very angry person for personal reasons. Thing is, I was easy to get angry and a tendency to gather hate to turn it into rancor from which I dedicated most of my time to hate specific people for any situation. I hated the person I wanted to meet. This person was a natural talent, while I was struggling for years to attain minimum results, that person actually didn’t like when perform very powerful results. I envied that person, wanted to show it what real power is, so wanted to meet said person in a specific date that will allow me to get better, better than the person. So, set a specific date to one six months apart which I think will be enough to me to get better. I will meet that person, face-to-face. Aside I thought at that time that in order to do something to a target you must have a clear representation of the thing in order to be effective, so if I wouldn’t become better than the person, I will know how the person will look like, therefore be able to attack and cause effects on it.

    Mid-Act State: This spell was on the long-term, exactly six months of daily work, so it is pretty extensive. However, I’ll try to describe the essential of it. I mainly recognize two stages of it. Strong willing and Obsession. There have to be a point in the middle, but not sure when it happened and to be honest not able to recall if it happened or if took place how it felt either.

    Strong willing: I have determination. In the mental aspect, I was more used to recall past experiences which I could blame on, then visualizing things that want happening, but have a little basis in imagining people I hate suffering horribly, so I have some ground.
    Was me, the person, and this person’s face of fear and terror before me, letting it knows that there was no escape from me. I didn’t visualize any details, all I knew is that the person lived in my country but, several km far away from my city, so the possibility of meeting the person was unlikely, but not impossible. I wanted to have an advantage over the person, I will know it, but the person will not be able to recognize me from the forums (because I remained as an anonymous hater, part of my plan to not contact the person in order to keep me away its radar, you can’t f*ck with something you can’t recognize).
    As I wasn’t very good with visualization I thought being persistent will do the trick.
    Intese hate, the kind of makes your skin burn and your chest overwhelm. And, must admit some excitement too, the idea of meeting the person just made me feel a kind of joy to see this person’s face in despair.
    How much I wanted to meet said person? Let’s say if a subjective scale were done from which 1 is don’t want it and 10 desperately need it like a drug addict looking for a dose. I think it would range between 8 to 9.5 from day to day.

    Obsession: I’ve never fallen in love, but I think there has to be something along these lines, just with love instead of hate. This person was the first thing I thought every morning, and last thing before going to sleep. In the bad days, I have hopes in meeting the person, in the good days I fantasize about how joyful will be when know that person. The fantasy got weirder, I imagined will not just be stronger than the person, but a god in front its eyes, like throwing thunders, flying, and asphyxiate the person with the mind in a Darth Vader fashion. I think probably loose mind. I verified the calendar (I had a pocket calendar with the date marked) several times a day and keep fantasizing.
    How much I wanted to meet said person? Let’s say if a subjective scale were done from which 1 is don’t want it and 10 desperately need it like a drug addict looking for a dose. I think it would be around 11.3 (then it would mark ERROR and explode).

    Post-Act State: I’m not sure if it was a post-act in this case, but it will probably will be set when the date arrived and wasn’t any visible means of that meeting to happen. I was very desperate, and disappointed, but you know, I was into it, I wouldn’t let anything tell me otherwise about what I wanted, not even reality or logic, so, I got on total denial, the date has arrived, but the day hadn’t ended so against any notion of reality I keep the fantasy in my mind.

    Results: That date, in the night, this person’s online mate posted some photos of someone in the person’s fans post (yeah, the person has its fandom)… Like the obsessed I was, I recollected any clues on the person’s physical appearance, they all matched. The next day, the photos were deleted and the person said that wasn’t real. Hard to believe.

    See, I was a very different person back on that days, it’s something I don’t feel very proud of, but it taught me that magick wasn’t a child’s play, and that you can survive the Chronozon.

    • johnwaskins says:

      Thanks for sharing. It’s interesting just how different people’s acts of magick are when they’re novice mages. You seemed to use the most strongly contrasting emotions of strong desire that you could find, and did a prolonged act of magick over various months until it worked for you. Very cool. I would normally just do acts of magick with small symbolic acts, sometimes physical sometimes mental, most often a combination, and it would last no more than 10 minutes at most and then the result would just appear. Sometimes the result would be huge, sometimes it wouldn’t be very much, sometimes complete failure. But that’s what learning is all about, isn’t it? =)

  9. Yoseqlo says:

    “… different people’s acts of magick are when they’re novice mages.”
    I think there is something along the lines of doing the process with less models and systems influencing the mind that leads to a more natural work. The bless of ignorance. The side effect of it could be wasting time in models that wouldn’t lead you to anywhere or couldn’t make you achieve your full potential, that is why a lack of knowledge is not an option, but need to be the right one.

    “But that’s what learning is all about, isn’t it?”
    Yup. Especially before the mage settle down into its favorite model. But, nonetheless some experimentation could make you realize a blind spot in the act, or the exception to the rule that force theory to expand further to cover more cases.

    • johnwaskins says:

      Yes and no. “Ignorance is bliss” may be a somewhat fair criticism, but I’d prefer to be more thorough, like this:

      The less you try to define or explain “what magick can’t do”, the less it’ll be unable to do for you. If you define or explain magick within narrow parameters, your magick will work within those parameters and thus the limitations you created. If you don’t want those limitations, don’t try to define it narrowly or don’t try to explain it narrowly. And if you want even more freedom and even fewer limitations, don’t bother with explanations or definitions in the first place! =)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s