Burn this book

[sara_super_id]

Alister Crowley wrote in one of his seminal works The Book of the Law, instructions to burn the book upon completion of reading. Now I think it is a rare thing for readers and devotees to actually do. But what freedom and meaning that very act has for the seeker who reads it. However equally meaningful is refusing the burn the book

Comments

[beauty_forashes]

Not to me, I just do what feels natural and I'm grateful I live in a society and a time that allows me to do just that. I don't see any need to rebel against anything, or perform any actions that I see as heretical. To me, that would seem more like emo kids playing satanist to show off that they're so hardcorez, not like anything having remotely to do with what I'm doing, or trying to achieve, it's silly to me and a waste of time. Just how I see it. *shrugs*

[sara_super_id]

Well, I doubt most folks who take up rebellion and make a break from prescribed and limiting social rules and norms are foolish teenagers. I think it would be worth you reconsidering your reaction and stereotyping. A lot of people who take up witchcraft and make a ritualistic break from the constraints that hold them back from power are full grown adults who make the choice to abandon the chains and free themselves.

[beauty_forashes]

I didn't say they aren't, I said how it would seem like to me if I were asked to do it. I make my own choices and do my own thing and don't see anything to rebel against. The need to rebel doesn't free a person, IMO, it enslaves them.

[sara_super_id]

I am confused by your statement that "the need to rebel doesn't free someone, it enslaves them."

I think of African Americans and Women parading in America to demand the vote. That rebellion was revolution, to free them from slavery. The same can be said of many rebellions throughout history.

I am not trying to tell you to rebel against anything, but only wondering if you should consider how you think about things. Just going along with the status quo would mean continued enslavement for many people. A significant act to display the break and the rebellion is quite the rallying force.

[brock_tn]

Transgressing societal rules solely because they ARE societal rules is still letting those rules control your actions.

Which is part of the basis of Uncle Al's famous saying "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the Law; Love under Will." The true magician acts in accordance with his Will, and not as he is expected to by others. Although it is, granted, not entirely unexpected that the magician's Will at least on some occasions be congruent with what a modern society expects of its members.

[sara_super_id]

I certainly agree. Just disobeying every rule and law because it is law and rule is not the defining role of the witch. In fact it would be just as slave to the rules via their opposite as following them without question is.

Some of these rebellions recommended by Crowley and Husson seem to be initiating acts to free one to act as one will rather then by the law. I was interested musing on this subject today.

I still find value in many rules and laws. However, I do think now and then about the rites our ancestors and teachers subersively challenge us to face. Should we choose to take them on, or write them off as uneccessary as long as we do not act in fear or out of blind obedience we are challenging norms in a critical way.

[brock_tn]

It depends, I suppose, on how trammeled one feels by conventional religion, or by societal expectations. I suppose that where someone does perceives themselves to be terribly restricted and confined a deliberate act of transgression might feel liberating.

But, consider too how much MORE conformist society was in 1969 when Mastering Witchcraft was first published. This was during the time of the Summer of Love and the Woodstock Festival, when the issue of rebelling against expected social norms was a MAJOR issue in both North america and in most of Western Europe. People raised in the very conformist circumstances that existed before that time were far more likely to need some sort of a transformative act, some personal equivalent to Hernando Cortez' decision to burn his ships on the coast of Mexico, so that it's clear that there is no going back to where they were before

[peter]

I would agree, though I still see some value in breaking them as part of initiation as to truly get to the point you're describing then you would have to be at a place mentally where you were completely fine with disregarding society and I see it as a step towards that objective.

Of course not everyone would require that step though. But I could imagine it aiding some people a great deal.

[dyta93]

Very interesting debate question.

I think it is more of a question on what faith and belief is and to challenge your faith in effort to remove illusions and falsehoods that are of no use to one's development, hence suggestions of acts that would defile those things that we were taught to hold sacred (put in more of the context of the author and his/her culture and time). If one questions specific faith and belief elements, it does not mean that they necessarily discard them but examine them for truth and validity.

[devitahanet]

; ) Of course it does !

[mageoflamancha]

Thanks for the topic(S), as is so often the case, it helps stir the mind and trigger old patterns to be considered again

[sara_super_id]

Thanks, I strive to only post when I have a question I have been pondering deeply myself and haven't seen discussed a lot. Please feel free to pose questions that come to your mind as well.

I like how you describe how it plays into your own witchcraft to both hide in plain sight and to push the boundaries when it is magically useful or just plain the right thing to do.

I see my teachers, which includes authors on magic, pushing with trickster lessons for the readers to take that first chance, to learn how the power of transgressing feels and therefore how to harness it and hopefully when to use and when not to. Some authors teach by example, others by bad example, don't you think?

[mageoflamancha]

I do indeed. Some authors are so useful, because their stuff is SO good,others because it is SO bad. Douglas Monroe jumps to mind- anyone on the fence about the need for decent research will get push off by this guy.

You may not wind up on the side I'd prefer to find you on, but you'll have to decide whether credible research matters to you or not.

I'd say the biggest area of concern are the bland authors, nothing great, nothing horrid that are a waste of time. As long as they inspire strong reactions growth can happen.

[sara_super_id]

Sometimes I go for stuff that people claim is discredited, but often I find the very reason it was discredited intrigues me or I disagree with the claims against it altogether. For example, I find that Ann Moura is subtly very careful to distinguish when she is telling something her mother and grandmother told her from things that are general neo-paganism or her own creations. Anytime she doesn't say, my mum always said, you can assume she didn't learn it from mum. And anytime she says Green Magic is...you can assume it is her own neopagan ideas. She has a different take on neo-pagan ethics informed by her raising that is interesting. I like to say witches can be karmic retribution--and I think her point of view on it matches when she says not to do magic on other witches--it could really backfire if you do so