In what sense is the purpose of a ritual initiation not dependent on some b***s*** proposition concerning magic.
In the sense that the "proposition concerning magic" in question is not BS. In the sense that some ritual initiations are efficacious as regards their stated aim (the conference of ritual/magical power).
In what sense is the purpose of a ritual initiation not dependent on some b***s*** proposition concerning magic.
In the sense that the "proposition concerning magic" in question is not BS. In the sense that some ritual initiations are efficacious as regards their stated aim (the conference of ritual/magical power).
Well, I'll be the judge of what I consider BS or not and attempt to convince you, accordingly.
Are the distinct qualities of the magical powers conferred evident in any sense other than what was supposed about maybe any cultural or cognitive phenomenon we know little about?
Are the distinct qualities of the magical powers conferred evident in any sense other than what was supposed about maybe any cultural or cognitive phenomenon we know little about?
Are the distinct qualities of the magical powers conferred evident in any sense other than what was supposed about maybe any cultural or cognitive phenomenon we know little about?
I'm not sure what your question is.
I'd like to know what statements can be made about magic which are more significant than any alternative interpretation I or anyone else could come up with, on the spot, just shooting the crap.
Magic is notoriously difficult to define. Adding to the difficulty is the overlapping but distinct category of mental powers: clairvoyance, telepathy, telekinesis, and so on.
One common and general definition of "magic" is: causing a change in the external world, in accordance with the will, by means that are not currently understood in terms of science.
I am most familiar with Tibetan tantric Buddhist magic. This is related to, but distinct from, Indian tantric magic. In Tibetan Buddhism, there are four basic categories of "enlightened activity" (phrin las), which broadly correspond to four different kinds of magical feat. The four types of activity are: pacifying (illnesses, negative circumstances, etc.), enriching (wealth, wisdom, etc.), magnetizing (power, lovers, etc.), and subjugating (demons, enemies of the Dharma, etc.).
So for example, an "enriching" practice might have as its goal effecting an increase in wealth or fame. Not necessarily one's own wealth and fame, although that is possible too. The success or failure of the ritual has as much to do with following the proper procedure as with the motivation; if one has a positive intention, and directs the practice toward the ultimate liberation of all sentient beings without exception, that kind of transcendent motivation adds a great deal of potency.
In order to practice this kind of magic, one must first receive a ritual initiation. Following the initiation, one must receive instruction in the particular details of the practice: what materials are required, what one has to visualize or recite during the practice, and so on. It is very well structured. It is not like Joseph Smith's ad hoc adaptation of Masonic rites (which are already basically watered-down Egyptian magic).
Alfredo: Magic, magicians, Theism, and BS... hmmm Yeah, I think you have it Alf! Can't have one without the other... To be a magician / BSer, unless one is born with the qualities and skills, attendance at an institute to be certified in the BS craft is generally required to master the craft. When one concludes there is no science in theology -- simply memory-work, then creative Quackery is readily observed, but generally goes unnamed. . . Slander and all that messy fact-evasion stuff... Really does bear down on good honest folks just wanting to live an uncomplicated life among friends; free of fears, threats, rituals and tribalism. Enjoy life! Roger (one time a.k.a. JussMee;-)