East vs. West, Mystic vs. Magick, and other illusory Dualities...
There is a prevailing misconception in many magickal circles that there is some sort of fundamental difference betwixt the Eastern and the Western spiritual Traditions. The Eastern paths are said to be more inclined toward mysticism, whereas the Western way is thought to be more magickal in emphasis. It is my intention to show why this dichotomy, like all dichotomies (and certainly all generalizations), is .
First, to define my terms, the term "mysticism" is here used to refer to the general practices of attaining at-one-ment with the (absolute), which could also be said to focus attention and works toward the intangible, the subtle, and the "psyche". Generally speaking, mystical practices are, by nature, non-intrusive. Acceptance is the key word when it comes to mysticism, and the practices of mystics in general.
The term "magick" is here used to refer to the general practices of changing the external world, working in the world of dualities, which could also be said to focus attention and works toward the tangible, dense, and the body (think of the flesh). Generally speaking, magickal practices are, by nature, intrusive, in that they impose the desire for change upon the external environment. Change is the key word when it comes to magick, and the practice of magi in general.
In many people's minds, if they think of an Eastern spiritual seeker, they often think of either the lone hermit or the member of a large ashram. Either way, many people often think of monks "emptying" themselves of themselves. They will often think of the Hindu hermit, or the Buddhist monk. If they think of the Western Esoteric Tradition, they think of various alchemists and magi, of which John Dee and Paracelsus come to mind.
What many forget is the various shamanic practices found in many Taoist sects, Tibetan Buddhism, and Shinto (which is the native Japanes shamanic Tradition), which are plentiful proof of Eastern magickal Traditions. And let us not forget that the Chris+ian mystics (or those on the same path) have been quite plentiful over the millennia, proving the prevalence of Western mysticism.
An interesting note is that both paths can be seen as paths of Change, in that the path of the magi--the sorcerer, the shaman, the creator--creates a Change in the (so-called) external, objective world. In hir focus upon attaining at-one-ment with (whatever they personally conceive of and label as "god"), the mystic Changes themselves--within. Mysticism often seems to lead to non-attachment to the world of form, and all of its infinite things. Magick often seems to stress attachment to the world of forms, and how to manipulate (man-i-pulate?) the tides of Change.
And so many ascenders climbing Mount Change (which seems to be a big focus of the so-called "new age" movement) bicker over whether to follow the path of magick, or the path of the mystic. Such seems to be the problem only of those who have yet to Experience the ultimate oneness of ascending the same Mountain (mount-in?). As has been reported by many on both paths, they are all really one path, in that they arrive at the same destination:
The so-called Observer and Observed, or Internal and External Worlds, become One. That is to say, they unite, they fuse, they mesh.
And then you could say that there is nothing to "unite" with.
And then again, maybe that's just a matter of Perspective.
First, to define my terms, the term "mysticism" is here used to refer to the general practices of attaining at-one-ment with the (absolute), which could also be said to focus attention and works toward the intangible, the subtle, and the "psyche". Generally speaking, mystical practices are, by nature, non-intrusive. Acceptance is the key word when it comes to mysticism, and the practices of mystics in general.
The term "magick" is here used to refer to the general practices of changing the external world, working in the world of dualities, which could also be said to focus attention and works toward the tangible, dense, and the body (think of the flesh). Generally speaking, magickal practices are, by nature, intrusive, in that they impose the desire for change upon the external environment. Change is the key word when it comes to magick, and the practice of magi in general.
In many people's minds, if they think of an Eastern spiritual seeker, they often think of either the lone hermit or the member of a large ashram. Either way, many people often think of monks "emptying" themselves of themselves. They will often think of the Hindu hermit, or the Buddhist monk. If they think of the Western Esoteric Tradition, they think of various alchemists and magi, of which John Dee and Paracelsus come to mind.
What many forget is the various shamanic practices found in many Taoist sects, Tibetan Buddhism, and Shinto (which is the native Japanes shamanic Tradition), which are plentiful proof of Eastern magickal Traditions. And let us not forget that the Chris+ian mystics (or those on the same path) have been quite plentiful over the millennia, proving the prevalence of Western mysticism.
An interesting note is that both paths can be seen as paths of Change, in that the path of the magi--the sorcerer, the shaman, the creator--creates a Change in the (so-called) external, objective world. In hir focus upon attaining at-one-ment with (whatever they personally conceive of and label as "god"), the mystic Changes themselves--within. Mysticism often seems to lead to non-attachment to the world of form, and all of its infinite things. Magick often seems to stress attachment to the world of forms, and how to manipulate (man-i-pulate?) the tides of Change.
And so many ascenders climbing Mount Change (which seems to be a big focus of the so-called "new age" movement) bicker over whether to follow the path of magick, or the path of the mystic. Such seems to be the problem only of those who have yet to Experience the ultimate oneness of ascending the same Mountain (mount-in?). As has been reported by many on both paths, they are all really one path, in that they arrive at the same destination:
The so-called Observer and Observed, or Internal and External Worlds, become One. That is to say, they unite, they fuse, they mesh.
And then you could say that there is nothing to "unite" with.
And then again, maybe that's just a matter of Perspective.