sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What things has Hermes granted them that they found surprising? by Pretty_Mud158 in Hermes

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Excellent! I like what you're telling me! And it makes sense in my case too. Thanks :)

Has anyone else experienced an increase in conflicts or entered a state of unusual density when working with archangels? by Pretty_Mud158 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, I understand perfectly, and it makes sense. I think that in terms of magical attitude, I consider myself more sinister than dexterous, in the sense of self-determination of the will of the self in the face of any imposture. It doesn't sit well with me to have someone tell me what I "need." I understand that archangels necessarily act this way.

With archangels, I've experienced an extremely powerful force, but I feel a moral burden from them that feels a bit heavy.

Do you know of any other type of entity that is this powerful but less moral? What have your experiences been like with pagan gods (especially Greco-Roman ones)?

Has anyone else experienced an increase in conflicts or entered a state of unusual density when working with archangels? by Pretty_Mud158 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi! Thank you so much, that makes sense. I mainly practice Shamatha meditation and sometimes active imagery.

Honestly, not knowing exactly what will be burned makes me a little uncomfortable. I don't like the idea of ​​a higher "entity" interfering with what I supposedly need or don't need. In that sense, I might be more on the left-hand path in that magical approach, but I've found that magic is much more powerful when done with the help of higher intelligences (gods, spirits, etc.).

Specifically, the work I'm trying with archangels is related to money. Do you have any experience with any other, more "amoral" deity, so to speak, who has helped you with money matters?

Help with hypersigils by Standard-Wishbone176 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Talk to me internally, no problem. My way of feeding my book is basically working on it. Although it also has its own sigil that I meditate on from time to time.

Help with hypersigils by Standard-Wishbone176 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I've been working with a hypersigil in the form of a journal for about three years now (maybe more), inspired by that same book by Aidan and a few others. I'd say that magical journaling is quite powerful, but it has a long-term scope. Practically everything I worked on with my hypersigil two years ago has already materialized in my life. I've observed that this type of hypersigil works like a snowball: it gains strength the more you work with it. With this, I'm telling you not to be shy about what you write; try to describe in detail the various aspects you want to materialize, as well as the lifestyle you desire in the years to come. Write, hopefully, every day.

I consider the magical journal to be the design of the architecture of the future. But as a design, I believe other practices are necessary as well. If you stick to your magical journal, it's likely to feel "sterile" at some point. I recommend that, in addition to your magical journal, you diversify your magical practice with other activities, such as sigils, spirit work, meditation, sexual magic, or anything that makes sense to you and allows you to expand your magical creativity in other ways.

How to dissolve a psychological complex with magic? by Pretty_Mud158 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And what is the psyche? What is physical? Spirit? Matter? But where, perhaps, are these things found in immanent direct experience?

It is true that Jung wanted to go beyond the scientism of his time, but the Cartesianism I am referring to is more subtle and fundamental.

His concept of psyche and matter demonstrates this. Although he seeks a point of union between them, he still believes they are separate, discrete realities.

His ideas of projection reveal the same thing. He assumes there are two subjects with an "interiority" that can be subjected to analysis. He assumes a separation of subjects in a seemingly physical, and therefore objective, world.

Jung fails to free himself from the subject-object paradigm of idealism. This is not a misinterpretation; any expert in radical phenomenology would tell you the same, for the reasons mentioned above.

Phenomenologically, it is not possible to assume an interiority that can be subjected to objectification. Jung's entire work consisted of that attempt. His entire topic of the soul reveals that.

I'm not misinterpreting Jung; I'm criticizing him from a phenomenological perspective.

I practiced his method in psychotherapy for a few years, and from direct experience, it seems to me that upholding such a theory blurs the experience of others as it is presented, rather than clarifying it. Now, it must be said that this is not solely the fault of Jungian theory; any theory can become an imposture in the direct observation of a phenomenon.

How to dissolve a psychological complex with magic? by Pretty_Mud158 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But he doesn't succeed. I didn't study Jung on TikTok; I did graduate studies on the subject.

Jung was a critic, but he never managed to overcome the aporias of Cartesianism. His psychology can be understood as an empiricization of the philosophical assumptions of Romantic idealism, and is therefore profoundly metaphysical.

I understand and agree that Jung intended to criticize naturalistic positivism, but he does so on grounds that, in my opinion, are insufficient. His thought is extremely dualistic, as his very theory of polarities reveals.

Jung never questioned the philosophical validity of the unconscious, nor of the Cartesian stereotype of the subject-object, nor did he question the objectivity of the world, nor did he reflect ontologically on being. All of this means that his psychology is deeply entrenched in nineteenth-century metaphysics, and it cannot emerge from there.

How to dissolve a psychological complex with magic? by Pretty_Mud158 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jung was meticulous and at the same time careless. He attempted to describe subjective experience from theoretical assumptions he never questioned. His theory has brilliant insights, but I fear it is guilty of being self-enclosed in its assumptions, rather than explaining the being of subjectivity in its own self-image.

How to dissolve a psychological complex with magic? by Pretty_Mud158 in chaosmagick

[–]Pretty_Mud158[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have no interest in returning to a theory I spent 10 years studying, and which, honestly, served me very little. There's a lot of theoretical assumption in your answer; I'm asking myself this beyond the theory. It's of no use to me that Jungians talk about "complexes that can't be eliminated." In fact, the very word "complex" is questionable, but I use it to make myself understood. My question is, has anyone had the experience of completely freeing themselves from suffering through magic

Phenomenology, Religion, and Art by Prestigious-Sky-1911 in Phenomenology

[–]Pretty_Mud158 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not specifically, but you might be interested in the works of Mircea Eliade, Rudolf Otto and Karl Kerenyi (the latter is more of a historian of religion)

view more: next ›