Friday, March 18, 2011


I believe in the power of belief.
Belief: it does not power magick, it provides limits.

This was one of those problems ye olde Chaotes ended up with after mis-reading Spare. A number of authors, seeing how he attacked small belief structures, thought that belief was the raw power behind magick. They were, in fact, wrong. What Spare asserts is that there is a triangle of necessities required for a wish to become successful: Belief, Desire, and Will. Only through the successive utilization of all three does the person generate a response.

Except in dreams or in the mind's eye/imagination. In that place, Belief changes. And if we can transcend our smaller, limited beliefs we can open ourselves up to the All and ride out on a tide of desire like sharks in an ocean...

But belief is not a tool for empowering spells. Shifting one's belief structure does not create more belief, out of no-where. It forces one to look at the way they treat alien beliefs, and how their presuppositions are forcing them into a line of thought that could be other-wised widened.

To nab a couple quotes:

To work with one’s ego is to begin an inner alchemy, the aim of which is not to ‘destroy’ or ‘transcend’ it, but to move from a state of fixation (ego-centric) to a condition of mutability (Exo-centric), which is capable of constant revision and change. This is what is meant by the phrase ‘letting go’, and of dissolving the idea of mind as separate to the world. The Ego remains as a point of ‘I-ness’ which gives meaning to experience, yet the contents of the psyche become much more fluid.”
- LOON, Apikorsus.
“…the clever man, so-called, the man of talent, shuts out his genius by setting up his conscious will as a positive entity. The true man of genius deliberately subordinates himself, reduces himself to a negative and allows his genius to play through him as it will…”
- Aleister Crowley, Moonchild.
“The Absolute is unbecoming and sterile if unbelieved. What is Truth? This question implies colour-blindness; it is asked rather as if Truth were an unrelated fact, thing, or abstract, the reason being that we do not conceive of it as multiple, varied, universal, or complex, but always as abstract. For there are many kinds of truth and all our truths are arrived at through negatives—what has no beginning has no becoming; what is without form has no meaning. Truth is of all things past, actual and potential in the conceptive—therefore Truth is relative. What is true for me may not be so for you, and what is true now may not be so later, or at other times and places, hence truth has a chronology in space and 'time-space truth'. There are the truths we create from our 'as if' realities—environment, character, temperament, learning, etc. Truth is also born of our known and latent beliefs so that to the insincere truth is baffling. Truth may be induced by the obsessive, by faith, or by something committed: these are the 'personal truths', the 'as if truths'. I assert that when accurately reorientated to time and place, and may be called 'sidereal truths'. 'Absolute truth', if any, is the immediate truth, the instant, already in yesterday, so never is. All reality, all life, all truths are of yesterday, and tomorrow is the beginning of another yesterday and gives 'commutative truth'… but I am sick of all categories, nominalism and all bloody science—so enough of Truth, and, like Pontius Pilate I wash my hands of it. Too much truth in me already…”
- Austin Spare, The Logomachy of Zos.
None of this, however, means that Neither-Neither can't be made use of to create free-belief. This, however, is somewhat different and would require another, much lengthier discussion. (What Spare calls 'free-belief' is created by destroying small, inhibiting or otherwise belief structures and using the emotional energy created by such destruction to instead create art, etc.)

EDIT: Check out Scribb's post.

No comments: