Thoughts About Love Spells

Here is a topic that I often get people asking me questions about, and I am usually reluctant to discuss it. Since this topic is so often asked, I have decided to weigh in and give my readers my perspective on this kind of magic.

Love magic is typically considered one of the main elements of “low magic,” right up there in importance to money magic, magical healing and magical retaliation, or getting justice through backhanded mechanisms. I don’t usually write about love magic because I have found it to be not particularly useful or efficacious, particularly if it is targeted on a specific person. My opinion is essentially that if you want to really mess up a potential relationship possibility, then by all means, use love magic on your desired target. Of course, there are ethical considerations as to whether or not you are justified in performing such magic, but I have found that those who do it are so obsessed with their targets that such considerations don’t even register.

In my opinion, projecting your will upon another and dressing it up with spirits, energy, sigils, dolls, pictures, ancestors and even some hoodoo based alchemy in order to target an innocent person so that they would love and desire you against their will could be considered highly negative magic, since the intent is obviously to dominate someone’s will. I have often thought that the next best thing to outright cursing someone is casting a love spell on them, particularly if they are not in the least bit attracted or interested in the perpetrator.

If you work such a magical operation and it’s successful then you have overturned someone’s will in an obviously deceitful and disreputable manner just to satisfy your fancy. Do you think that all is fair in love and war? Well, think again! If that were true then date rape and other forms of sexual assault would be legal and even encouraged. It would also be quite acceptable if the potential victim struck back and murdered their assailant. If love is your object then it hardly helps you if you are engaged in a veritable war with those whom you would shower with your affections. Love is one thing, and dominance is altogether another thing. It is important to be clear about your intentions and what you want to accomplish, since if your objective is confused then all else is even more murky.

Magic always has some basic ground rules that are practical and even obvious. A completely non-magical and practical approach to achieving a relationship should follow some basic steps, and no amount of magic can make them happen if there isn’t a mutual interest between the two parties. What I have found is that magic often makes these stages either more difficult or more complicated then they already are. Also, many people have the belief that magic will somehow make something that is highly improbable or impossible happen, as if it were a miracle.  

Here are the practical steps, and I think that just about everyone knows this on some level. If you love someone, then that love must be perceived by the other person and returned in some fashion if anything is going to develop. The whole process of courting a potential lover is getting that exchange to occur. This is called mutual attraction, and if it doesn’t exist or even have the potential for existing, then forget about anything further happening. Thus getting your beloved’s attention so that they will focus on you is the first important step. However, that is just the beginning. You have to somehow appeal to what that other person desires in some manner (or stumble upon it by accident), so changing and augmenting how you look, act and even smell is important. I might also add that people who are considered naturally attractive usually have more confidence in their ability to attract others to them. The rest of us who are not so endowed must make the best of what we have. Yet certainly attractive clothes and an attractive style can make up for what one lacks in stature, physique and appearance - at least to a point.

There also has to be a social connection between you and the other person, and you have to have something in common with them. At some point if this process is going to be successful, then you have to access and gain an intimate social contact with them, and it has to be situations that are periodically repeated (like dating). Obviously, courting in our post-modern world, despite how fast everything happens around us, still takes time and patience, but seduction can happen very quickly. This is true even though a successful sexual encounter doesn’t necessarily mean that there will be a romantic relationship as well. Relationships between people are quite complex and also quite fluid, and anything can happen to either enhance the connection or destroy it completely. The most important consideration is that you can’t control everything that happens, and as they say, sometimes you get the bear and sometimes the bear gets you.

I think that the most difficult and problematic aspect of looking for love has to do with the fact that unlike many other things in our lives, we can’t really control other people. We can try, but it eventually fails, even for the most sophisticated of manipulators. This is also why I believe that working love magic on someone is so difficult, since it is a form of continuous domination. For example, you have forced someone to love and desire you who wouldn’t normally be so disposed, and as the enchanter, you have to always be glamorous, mysterious (or at least your underhanded intentions have to be invisible), and you have to always be engaged with feeding that love spell so it can be maintained. It’s a lot like pretending to be someone you aren’t and somehow over time, keeping up the pretense.

When the truth is discovered by the victim of such magic (and it usually does happen at some point), then the perpetrator of that magic experiences a full and complete reversal or backlash. The ensorcelled individual suddenly realizes that their lover is a fraud and not at all attractive or even interesting, and this makes them not only enraged by the deceit but also repulsed by the one who has been deceiving them. It’s doubtful that such a catastrophe could ever be mitigated, and usually it represents a profound end to such a relationship. It is, in a word, an emotional train wreck, and worse, it often attracts a lot of public attention. The victim usually is not content to just slip away, they also have to let everyone they know that they have been deceived and outrageously defrauded, thereby justifying why they spent any time with that disreputable scam artist they have so recently dumped. Besides, the victim’s friends were probably wondering about that as well. This kind of occurrence happens even without magic, and to outsiders it is highly amusing. It’s also the kind of situation that is used in romantic comedies. Yet in real life, it represents a terrible tragedy without a happy ending that is best avoided by being honest.

That’s why I think that working love magic on a specific person is not only unethical, but it is also fraught with possible failure. We can embellish ourselves to a point so we can be seen as attractive, but in the end, we have to be who we are, and that includes our flaws and unattractive qualities, too. It’s something that is unavoidable - we just are who are and nothing more. Pushing the envelop on this stark reality is to perpetrate a fraud, and if a relationship is to emerge from an initial infatuation, then it must be followed by honesty and integrity.

Another thing that typically happens when someone tries to cast a love spell is that they haven’t made certain that all of the practical steps that could potentially build up a relationship have been done first. In other words, there isn’t an established link and social process for a relationship to occur. They might be lazy or just confused, or they might think that the other person is the perfect match for them, as if willed by fate itself. Thus they will believe that the potential for love is mutual when it actually isn’t mutual at all. Then to confound matters they’ll work a love spell hoping that whatever shortcomings are in play (if they are even aware of them) they will somehow achieve their desired outcome. The psychic energy that they are projecting won’t be able to reach the target because there isn’t any link, but that magic will have to go somewhere, and it does. What happens is that the love spell rebounds back onto the perpetrator and causes them to become obsessed with the object of their desire. They have managed to merely ensorcell themselves, and then their odd, creepy behavior will completely turn off the person that they are unwittingly stalking. In my experience, this is usually what happens when someone attempts to cast a love spell.

In my humble opinion, working a love spell on a specific person is really a bad idea. I always try to talk someone out of this kind of approach if they happen to tell to me about it. Usually, I only hear about the failure and the collateral damage, and it elicits from me a typical face-palm kind of response. Yet human nature is what it is, and the question remains, what can a person do to magically help them attract a lover and build a rewarding relationship? My response is always the same - make yourself desirable and lovable, and then let nature take its course. Make certain that you have a wide social network of people that you actually visit and spend time with, and learn to be open, kind and compassionate to others. You can help yourself by being presentable and attractive in your chosen social network, and also by learning to listen and empathize with others. Where magic comes into play is to address any internal issues that you might have that would obstruct or keep you from having a relationship.

You should also do this simple and practical exercise. Ask yourself these questions and make certain that you get clear answers. Are you open and available for a relationship right now? Are your expectations too high or do you judge others too harshly before even knowing them? Have you cleared yourself of all of your previous emotional baggage or relationship histories. If you are pining for someone with whom you once had a relationship or if you are seeking someone who would never want to have a relationship with you then you will have to eliminate this obstacle before you will be able to find someone. These considerations are so practical and basic to human relationships that they don’t require any kind of occult interpretation or intrusion.

Finally, I would like to say forget about finding your soulmate or that pre-destined love that you have been looking for your whole life! Besides, soulmates aren’t discovered, they are made over time with a lot of hard work and effort. If you can eliminate these erroneous romantic ideals from your head and be open to any possibility, then you won’t be disappointed. Perhaps the most important bit of advice that I could ever give any magician who is seeking a lover is actually quite simple. Do you want to work magic to get a lover? Then work that magic on yourself! In other words, use your magic to discover the lover within you and then you will find a corresponding lover in the material world. It’s really that simple, even though it took me decades to truly realize it.

Frater Barrabbas

Science, Religion and Magick

A savvy and intelligent occultist and ritual magician would never attempt to rewrite scientific knowledge nor would he or she attempt to prove that religious doctrine is somehow objectively scientific. A wise occultist knows that there are very important boundaries between what science has determined and what religion has determined. Magick, as a practical spiritual discipline, occupies that nether region or undefined domain that lies somewhere in between science and religion. A smart ritual magician wouldn’t make assumptions that oppose scientific thought, such as denying physical evolution or climate change on one hand, nor would he or she deny that religions are based on subjective spiritual truths that can’t be proven or measured, only experienced.

As I have maintained previously in my articles and in my books, science has its domain and religion has yet another domain entirely. Perhaps they might intersect here and there, but they remain exclusive to the objective and subjective worlds in which they occur. Where problems arise is when science denies the possibility of subjective spiritual truths or when religion attempts to make its tenets objective or as absolute truths. Sacred writ is allegorical and based on subjective spiritual truths and science is governed by the scientific method. One perspective cannot over-rule the other, and they should, therefore, live happily side by side. This is especially true when you consider that science has done a pretty good job in defining the objective physical world, and religion has been good (more or less) at defining the subjective spiritual reality. Yet we live in a secular society so that our very freedoms to believe, worship or practice our faith as we choose is not dictated by the government. So, living in a secular nation, using the fruits of technology as driven by science, and choosing to believe and practice our spiritual faith in whatever manner we choose is the foundation for a diverse, harmonious and democratic society. 

Unfortunately, we human beings live in a world of consciousness that intersects all of these realities, and at times, due to the nature of our subjective experience, they can seem to blend or merge into each other, even they are and should remain distinct. While dreams, imagination and intuition play very important roles in both religion and magick (and I might add, even science), they need to be disciplined so that they won’t lead us to make erroneous assumptions about ourselves and the world that we live in. Magick, much more so than religion, can be a great source of personal and subjective misinformation, especially when we take those experiences that we had while undergoing conscious transformation out of the context of our subjective experience. Even if other individuals who were either with us when we underwent this magical experience or who performed the same rite at a different time might make what is experienced by the individual more objective if it is corroborated by a group, it doesn’t make it an objective physical fact that can be tested by the scientific method. This particular issue with the nature of subjectivity represents one of the critical areas where magick can cause delusions or supply us with erroneous assumptions.   

Problems arise when someone takes religious doctrines (or occult tenets) and attempts to understand them as an objective physical reality, or correspondingly when science attempts to explain away or deride the paradoxes and inexplicable events that lie within the subjective experience of the observer. What we get when these domain boundary incursions occur is either pseudo-science, aggressive atheism or religious literalism, all of which are fraught with erroneous assumptions and overly simplistic explanations. As magicians who work with the shadowy fringes between the objective physical world and the subjective spiritual world it is our responsibility to carefully judge and understand the basis ofo both worlds. Simply put, it means that we should not attempt to overly objectify our subjective occult experiences, since in doing so we will open the door to personal delusion and adopt a propensity for mythic thinking. We should also be able to recognize hyperbole when it emerges in the declarations of scientists, religious leaders or particularly other occultists. 

We saw this contrast between world views on display when Bill Nye recently debated physical evolution vs. creationism with Ken Ham, who happens to own and operate the Creationist Museum in Petersburg, KY. To declare that the world is not older than 6,000 years based on the chronology of the Old Testament Bible is to open oneself to ridicule and derision, since there are trees alive today that have been measured as being older than 6,000 years. Even Pat Robertson, who has publically maintained some pretty ridiculous notions rejects “Young Earth Creationism,” saying that it gives secularists and atheists grounds to ridicule and reject Protestant Christian theology. What wasn’t in evidence at the time of this debate was a corresponding agreement in either Catholic or Jewish circles, who seem to have an altogether different perspective for interpreting their sacred literature. I never heard of any Jewish Rabbi or Catholic theologian argue for interpreting the Bible literally, and I think that this is a key point that they seem to understand and that fundamentalist Christians don’t, and these different groups are reading the same texts!

In my opinion, and it would seem that it is an accepted fact in many religious organizations, sacred writ consists of allegories disguised as spiritual truths, but these truths were never meant to contradict or replace the theories as generated from the scientific method. To force these religious truths into direct contradiction of established scientific theories is to foster a kind of pseudo-science that is more mythic than factual. That is how I would classify such hypotheses as Creationism or Intelligent Design. Correspondingly, there has lately been a lot of public buzz about a new hypothesis called Biocentrism that attempts to explain away the possibility of an objective physical world governed by the objective although relative phenomena of space and time. What might not seem obvious to the layperson is that Biocentrism, Creationism and Intelligent Design are all unprovable religious-based doctrines, as we shall see.

When unqualified individuals attempt to re-explain or abrogate scientific theories without any evidence or for that matter, any counter theory, it ends up promoting the worst kind of pseudo-science. This is the crux of the problem facing our post-modern age. We seem to be haunted by the profound absolutist beliefs and propositions of our pre-scientific past and are unable or unwilling to embrace what modern science has been able to aptly prove. While it is true that we don’t have all of the answers and that the scientific community continues to mature and develop its understanding along with the tools they use to demonstrate and prove their scientific hypotheses, there is more than enough of a foundation to be able to determine the boundary between the objective and subject worlds.

I believe that it is important for occultists and ritual magicians to understand this important boundary between the objective and subjective domains of their experiential worlds and to ensure that their beliefs and perspectives are scientifically “neutral.” What occultists and ritual magicians want to avoid is attempting to reinvent the metaphorical wheel when the “wheel” has been so well established and is an integral part of the world that we live in. To attempt such an exercise in futility is to invite ridicule and mockery from those not so aligned to occult and metaphysical truths. Let’s face the reality that someone else’s hypocrisy or hyperbole is quite amusing to us, but it isn’t so amusing when we are the butt of the same kinds of jokes. If we proceed in a manner that respects the accepted theories of science and the also the tenets of religion and occultism, and thereby avoid making unwarranted claims on the objective world, then we will experience our occultism and magical phenomena in a sane and rational manner. What we experience subjectively must be kept within its individual context, but it still should be subject to the scrutiny of peer review. Such a regimen is not only optimal, but it should be pursued in exclusion to other more dubious approaches.

This brings me to the topic of my article, and that is to deliver some ponted opinions about Biocentrism. There’s an old adage that if something sounds too good to be true then it probably isn’t true. This could be an important truism as to why Biocentrism has become popular amongst New Age types but is not accepted by the scientific community. When the biggest name of those either agreeing with or promoting your scientific counter-theory is Depak Chopra, then your hypothesis is already in trouble. I say this without any disrespect to Depak Chopra, whose writings I have found interesting and useful. However, he is hardly the objective judge of a new approach to interpreting Quantum Mechanics, which, by the way, has spawned a lot of hopeful imaginings from occultists and metaphysicians who have grasped onto an overly-simplified version of this discipline in order to explain metaphysical or spiritual phenomena. Still, I digress from the topic. I have read the book “Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe” written by Robert Lanza, MD with Bob Berman, and I must admit that it did indeed intrigue me at first.

Biocentrism is a hypothesis that defines the material world as having arisen due to the impact of consciousness acting as the “observer” so that the universe, which was in an indeterminate state of probability, became resolved into a material universe predisposed to supporting life. This is a case of the tail wagging the dog in order to explain what might otherwise be a minor paradox. Thus, Robert Lanza has reversed the basic scientific assumption that living conscious beings evolved out of an essentially lifeless and soul-less material universe. Those who are occult students will immediately see that this is the Mind Before Matter perspective that has been prevalent in occult metaphysics and is a staple of the religious theology of the west.

So, according to Dr. Lanza’s hypothesis, consciousness was the driver for the materialization of the universe. This would mean that this field of consciousness would have had to exist, or perhaps pre-exist, from the very beginning of the universe. It would almost seem that Dr. Lanza is proposing some kind of intelligent design by an unknown conscious entity or by a field of unified consciousness, but he doesn’t quite go that far. Instead, he just doesn’t define what that disembodied consciousness actually is. In fact, he fails altogether to define what consciousness is, and this is a subtle but fatal flaw in his entire hypothesis. At least in the occult metaphysics of the Mind Before Matter theme, the mind that existed prior to the manifestation of the universe is obviously either a Deity or represented by the Neoplatonic definition of the One.

I admit that I was intrigued by Lanza’s speculation since it turns our notions about the nature of the universe and the power of human subjectivity into the reverse of what scientists have been saying since the 19th century. Such a hypothesis, if it were true, would put the subjective mind into the driver’s seat for all material creation, and that would shine a whole new light on such occult practices as magick. After getting excited by this new perspective, I decided that the prudent thing for me to do was to browse the web and read what other scientists thought of his hypothesis. What I found is that the scientific community has flatly rejected what Dr. Lanza has written, and I might add, for some really good reasons.

This debate between the New Age proponents of Biocentrism and the adherents of accepted physical sciences, such as those who are on the cutting edge of Quantum Mechanics, reminded me of the debate about physical evolution between Nye and Ham. While Dr. Lanza does at least understand the science of Quantum Mechanics from the perspective of the layman, he is not an accredited physicist. He is, in fact, a medical researcher/engineer of some renown. However, despite his disdain of New Age fads and beliefs (as stated clearly in his book), Lanza has become something of a darling amongst the New Age populous, and his ideas about Biocentrism are already being mutated to propose concepts and ideas that he never states in his book. You can find a website here that pretty much demonstrates what his backers think and how they are using Quantum Mechanics to bolster all kinds of metaphysical truths. There is even a video on that web page that has captured Lanza’s basic public presentation of Biocentrism, just in case you want to get the gist of his hypothesis without having to read his book.

Unavoidably, the scientific community has also responded to Biocentrism, and I might add, they have more or less excoriated his hypothesis quite completely. It would seem that Dr. Lanza’s popular book has taken some basic Quantum Mechanics experiments and given them an interpretation that they were never intended to support. You can find a good critique of Robert Lanza’s Biocentrism, and also Depak Chopra, in an interesting website managed by Indian scientists (Nimukta) who know all too well the metaphysical sources of this hypothesis. As I have stated previously, the argument about a conscious universe is a staple of the occult Mind Before Matter perspective, and it is a tenet that has not been scientifically proven so far. In fact, the scientific evidence still supports the Matter Before Mind perspective, and I doubt that will change in the future no matter what shape or form science takes. As occultists, we can appreciate the scientific perspective on this issue, and we can also see the spiritual truth associated with the occult and metaphysical perspective. Both represent the greater truths about the universe and the nature of the human spirit, yet one is materially objective and the other is spiritually subjective. 

Some of Dr. Lanza’s seven principles of Biocentrism are very popular and in evidence today amongst those who are engaged in occultism and magick. Lon Milo Duquette has stated that the reality of occultism is all in our minds, it’s just that our minds are a lot bigger than we think. This might presuppose that Mr. Duquette is aware of Dr. Lanza’s hypothesis, but the similarity is rather compelling whatever the truth. However, the fifth principle for Biocentrism is the main argument, and in it you can see an interesting bias appear. That principle is basically stated as, “The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around. The ‘universe’ is simply the complete spatiotemporal logic of the self.” Lanza’s premise that “life creates the universe, not the other way around” is pretty much taken from the annals of ancient metaphysics and western occultism in general. It is also the underlying theme for most religious cosmogony, and it is the crux of the debate between Creationism and Evolution. We can find it variously promoted in the New Thought religious paradigms of the turn of the 20th century, and it is also evident in the New Age.

Robert Lanza has come up with this startling perspective because he has followed the Quantum Mechanics maxim that it is the power of the observer who determines what is perceived when performing and measuring the results of the behavior of sub-atomic particles. In other words, Dr. Lanza is interpreting this classical QM theory that all matter requires a conscious observer in order to collapse the probability field and determine an outcome. Of course if we take this to its ultimate conclusion, then we would expect the mind to formulate all reality and that physical reality doesn’t really exist. It reminds me of the New Age maxim that we make our own reality, although the opposite is a more powerful but obvious truth - that reality shapes and makes us who we are. The error in this logic is that the physical world does have an objective and verifiable quality despite the fact that how we perceive it is derived from our sense organs.

For instance, light still has objective and measurable qualities that determine the spectrum of colors that we observe, since these are represented by different wave lengths as detected by the nerve cells in our eyes and processed by our brains. (We don’t just make up the colors in our head as an interpreting factor.) This is also true about time and space, while they might be relative, they are still an objective fact. Our minds are indeed powerful, but they are bounded and limited by physical laws that uniformly affect all of us. If this were not true, then our world would be run by mentally projected magical powers and not by technology that is based on physical laws.  

Robert Lanza has made pronouncements that have overly simplified and distorted the actual science of Quantum Mechanics. He disregards the most important question that his hypothesis leaves unanswered, namely, if conscious life shaped the universe then why is the origin of life quite recent compared to the relative age of the universe. Consciousness is localized to living beings with a brain yet somehow it is expanded to encapsulate cultures and languages, thus making it a shared phenomenon. This is part of the mystery of consciousness that has yet to be tackled in a satisfactory manner by scientists. Then there is the question, is consciousness energy, and if so, what kind of energy? While energy itself might be indestructible, the death of the brain causes all body-centered consciousness to cease. Consciousness seems to be beyond and prior to the material brain (according to metaphysicians), but there is no objective truth, so far, that would lead scientists to presume that this is indeed a fact. Dr. Lanza’s hypothesis also says that space and time aren’t objectively real, but in fact they are real, just not absolute. In this, I believe that science has the better explanations, even though there are still some questions not yet answered.

We can see Biocentrism (like other creationist based beliefs) functioning as a typical domain distortion between a religious based philosophy and empirical science, and as such, it should be taken with a grain of salt. Occult philosophy declares the principle that the Mind originated before Matter, and Science has declared the opposite theory, that Matter precipitated Mind. Both perspectives present an element of truth, but the context for either one is completely different. One is a materialistic and objective perspective, and the other is a spiritual and metaphysical perspective. Thus, both are true as long as they retain their appropriate boundaries. It is foolish for occultists to meddle with science and engage in pseudo science, and it’s probably foolish for scientists to attempt to define or debunk spiritual beliefs based on physical laws.

A quote from the website Nirmukta seems to define the nature of the problem of Biocentrism and why it is a seductive but erroneous proposition. According to the latest cutting edge scientific perspective on Quantum Mechanics, the nature of the “observer” has been redefined in a significant way, and there is experimental evidence to back up that hypothesis.

“A different resolution to the problem of interfacing the microscopic quantum description of reality with macroscopic classical reality is offered by what has been called ‘quantum Darwinism.’ This formalism does not require the existence of an observer as a witness of what occurs in the universe. Instead, the environment is the witness. A selective witness at that, rather like natural selection in Darwin’s theory of evolution. The environment determines which quantum properties are the fittest to survive (and be observed, for example, by humans). Many copies of the fitter quantum property get created in the entire environment (‘redundancy’). When humans make a measurement, there is a much greater chance that they would all observe and measure the fittest solution of the Schrödinger equation, to the exclusion (or near exclusion) of other possible outcomes of the measurement experiment.”

This new hypothesis in QM pretty much destroy’s Lanza’s hypothesis since the environment itself can be the witness, and also that there are multiple copies of the quantum property and the “fittest” is the one that gets measured. So it would appear that consciousness (i.e., a direct observer) is not required to collapse a probability field into an observable material manifestation. After fully examining what the scientists had to say, I found that the hypothesis that they provided which debunks Biocentrism is far more interesting and compelling. I have always found science to be intriguing and fascinating because it establishes the nature of the objective universe that I live in. I also know that science is limited in what it can study and prove, and I am at peace and comfortable with the ambiguities, the realm of the unknown, the mysteries of mind and spirit as well as the established scientific facts. 

Will science ever be able to define consciousness or determine the nature of the human soul? While the nature of the physical phenomenon of consciousness that is associated with the human brain is something that can be measured and could be experimentally proven, I suspect that the human soul and even the nature of Spirit itself will be far beyond the boundaries of science, at least for the foreseeable future.

Frater Barrabbas

Spiritual Ancestors as Heroes

Recently I’ve had a very unpleasant experience arguing with an occult pundit (Nick Farrell) who basically called me a naïve fool because I honor my spiritual ancestors and treat them as heroes. Because I celebrate and honor my spiritual ancestors and treat them with a certain amount of reverence I am considered a dupe and a fool. The reason for this criticism, of course, is because I happen to revere such individuals as Alex Sanders, Gerald Gardner, Aleister Crowley, MacGregor Mathers, or any other number of occult founders and trail Blazers. I take an uncritical and positive outlook on these individuals because they have had such an impact upon my own workings and study. Maybe that’s being naïve and stupid, since in our current time it’s so trendy to be cynical, negative and disparaging of the occult luminaries of the past. I have been called a pathetic hero worshiper and that makes me the worst possible judge of anyone’s character, especially those who have been dead nigh these many years. Yes, I admit it, I’m rightfully found guilty of hero worshiping, but I think that I have an important reason for taking this stand.

It’s not as if I haven’t read about these individuals and know all too well that they were human beings with human failings and flaws. I have also talked to individuals who personally knew Alex Sanders and the consensus is that he was quite a disreputable character. There seems to be no lack of stories about things that Alex did that were notorious and completely over-the-top. It seems that everybody has an opinion about Alex who knew him, and most of those opinions tend towards the negative. There are some people still living today who absolutely despise Alex and have few or even no fond memories of him whatsoever. Someone once told me that Alex was the kind of man who hated to work and so chose a life that was materially precarious when all he had to do was keep a regular job, and that would have made his life and the lives of those he supported more stable.

So, Alex Sanders was something of a gold brick. He was also reputed to be a great storyteller (another way of saying "liar") and had to be the focus of attention at all times. He invited the press and even the police to his very public gatherings in order to garner as much publicity as possible. That’s hardly the kind of stellar image that one would consider either heroic or worthy of emulation. Even so, Alex was a trailblazer and started his own tradition. He was an avid experimenter and tried to mix all sorts of different occult disciplines together into a workable whole. His tradition invited many different and divergent people together under one large tradition. Many of the first gay and lesbian witches that I met years ago were Alexandrian, and this was also true of the first African American and handicapped members. Alexandrian Witchcraft was the “big tent” tradition, and this was before other traditions appeared that catered to specific social collectives, such as the Dianic tradition. Perhaps we can turn a blind eye to his various flaws and bad behavior if we focus instead on what he contributed to the pagan and witchcraft movements. The world needed Alex Sanders, warts, obnoxious behavior and all.

What then is a hero? How do we define what a hero is in our culture today? Is Superman or Mighty Mouse good examples of the iconic hero? What about the antiheroes that are found in Marvel comics? Are they to be considered heroes as well? I found myself pondering the definition of a hero, but then I remembered that a good place to find that definition clearly established would be reading what the author Joseph Campbell had to say about it. Joseph Campbell says, “A hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than one’s self.” Well, that seems simple enough, but does that fit the heroism of being a spiritual founder? Additionally, Joseph Campbell says that a hero brings back a “boon” to his community. Basically, Mr. Campbell is referring to the hero’s journey, and the object of that journey is to return something back from the underworld into the world of light. The hero also manifests a steadfast virtue in what they have contributed to their community, despite all of their flaws. According to Campbell, heroes are indeed flawed because they are so human. They are, in word, us. A cartoon hero on the other hand often lacks the kind of humanity necessary as the foundation of being a hero. Despite being flawed, the hero becomes a role model that inspires the rest of us to be better than we thought we could be. A hero is also inspired by an “inner calling.”

I believe that if we take what Joseph Campbell has defined regarding a hero, we can easily apply that definition to individuals such as Alex Sanders, Crowley, and Mathers - not to mention Gardner and many others. As heroes we would expect them to be terribly flawed on the one hand, but also inspiring and the bringer of a profound new way of thinking or practicing occultism on the other. All of these founders had that in common with each other, and all of them were egregiously flawed. To accept their gifts while repudiating their characters or disparaging them could be construed as being highly ungenerous, if not cynically and selfishly motivated. We all owe these founders a certain amount of respect and consideration because we have accepted their gifts and use them in our work; since to behave otherwise is to show oneself as greedy, power-hungry and soulless. I am not advocating that we turn a blind eye to the flaws and imperfections that were so highly on display by these founders, but instead we should really focus on the gifts that they bestowed us. All I am saying is that you can appreciate the history without having to assassinate the character of those trailblazers who came before us. After all is said and done, their gifts were certainly important to us occultists.

Because I’m an Alexandrian witch, then Alex Sanders is one of my spiritual ancestors. Since I also work the Golden Dawn system of magick, at least in part, then MacGregor Mathers would be considered one of my spiritual ancestors. I have to also include Alister Crowley as one of my spiritual ancestors because I have benefitted greatly from reading his work and I was also a member of the O.T.O. Gerald Gardner would be yet another spiritual ancestor in my witchcraft and magical lineage. There are probably many others as well, but that’s the group of ancestors that I’m willing to talk about. So, these four individuals who are founders of their respective traditions make up part of the overall lineage that I have followed as both a witch and a ritual magician. As representatives of the various streams that make up the current of spirituality and magick that I follow, I believe it is important to venerate the memory of these individuals because as magical heroes they have given the world great gifts, and I happen to use those gifts.

We, as ritual magicians, do not stand alone or in isolation. Our practices, whether or not we have been inventive and creative, have come down to us from the work of many other hands across the centuries. This is the whole basis to the perennial philosophy, and while we may add a greater or lesser share to this knowledge, we have received what our spiritual ancestors have passed on to us. Therefore, lineages are important and represent the combined streams that seamlessly joined together to formulate the work and practice of each initiated ritual magician. Our lineages are not exclusive to those founders whose tradition we were initiated into, since each and everyone of us has borrowed extensively from other sources. We are, in a word, a melange or mixture of many different traditions and strains.

To give respect and veneration to the founders of our tradition and practices, we receive from them empowerment, since this opens and establishes the connection between us and them. While this might function as an egregore of a tradition, it is not limited to that vehicle, but could represent the single contribution of some brilliant luminary in the past. Therefore, to use the gifts of our spiritual and magical founders is to be empowered by them. And if we are to retain a certain amount of grace and positive intent in our practices it is important for us to not only acknowledge them, but also to venerate them. This means not just respecting them and their gifts, but also giving them offerings and periodic acknowledgment. This is a Pagan thing to do, to honor our ancestors, both those that are genetic as well as those who represent the lineage of traditions and ideas that we follow. We act this way to retain a certain amount of honor for ourselves and for our work. Just as we give offerings to our genetic ancestors in order to function as modern pagans, we should also give offerings to our spiritual ancestors as well. We do this despite their history and notoriety as flawed human beings who had many failings and even engaged in disreputable activities. This is not white washing or wishful thinking, or even a terrible naïveté; it is a pagan way of honoring those who came before us. It is also how we honor the gifts that they courageously sought and achieved for our benefit.

Now, when we consider everything that I have written up to this point, you can see the ideas that I am promoting and even celebrating as a witch, ritual magician, initiate and adept. I believe that being faithful to the founder and the trailblazer of one’s spiritual lineage is an important part of being an adept. It is not naïve nor foolish to venerate one’s spiritual ancestors, just as it isn’t foolish or naïve to venerate one’s genetic ancestors. It is part of being a pagan and a magician, and so in this context to behave and comport oneself in this manner is honorable and generous. After all, wouldn’t I want people to behave in a respectful fashion to me after I have gone to great lengths to give them the lore that I have labored upon for so many years? Do I want people to disparage me for my all too human failings and personal flaws while at the same time greedily using my ideas and writings for their personal betterment? I believe that that is the real issue regarding the honoring and veneration of spiritual ancestors. How would you like to be treated disparagingly by posterity in the future when you are unable to defend yourself, and even worse, when those same people are still using your ideas and rituals?

While it is so trendy and cool to be cynical, disparaging and cleverly negative to anyone who is a founder or trailblazer, or even someone who could be considered a magical hero, I think that it is despicable and deplorable behavior which only serves to define someone who is actually bankrupt of any original ideas and morally a scoundrel. This might sound like harsh criticism, but I see it as a powerful antidote to the popular sentiment of iconoclastic thinking that seems to be the trend in postmodern occultism today. I stand against that kind of thinking, which I suppose makes me something of counter force in popular thought. Then again, I think that I have good reason for acting and believing as I do because I have found that the popular consensus contradicts both good Pagan theology as well as good magical practice.

Frater Barrabbas

Coming Forth from Darkness

It’s been many weeks since the last time I wrote anything to my blog. The truth is I have been fighting against a very terrible malady. That malady that I have been fighting is the inability to sleep normally like ordinary people do. It has taken me from October until now to be able to sleep normally with assistance. I am now using a CPAP machine to help me breathe normally at night when I sleep. For those who have never suffered insomnia or sleep apnea, I have to tell you getting a full night’s sleep is extremely important. My struggle against insomnia also included a struggle against Ambien dependency. I was taking Ambien for 47 nights straight before finally deciding that I had to stop taking it altogether. During that period of time, I got to experience some of the more nasty side effects associated with that drug. So, I experienced night sweats, anxiety attacks, hallucinations, nausea, and vertigo. I functioned as if in a cloud, not being able to focus on anything that was outside of my periphery.  I even experienced forgetfulness, absentmindedness, demented imaginings and all sorts of dark fantasies. It was somewhat horrific when that happened, and thankfully, it was brief and I was able to pull myself out of it by the strength of my will. I am certain that it would have gotten much worse if I had continued taking Ambien, although I would have run out of my prescription well before then.

I went through two weeks of withdrawing from Ambien and now I’m no longer taking the drug. This change has made me feel so much better about everything. I’ve read all sorts of horror stories on the Internet about the drug Ambien, it’s pernicious powers of dependency, addiction, the particular gruesome withdrawal side-effects, and I now know that they are not exaggerated. Our culture seems to be obsessed with the use and sales of illegal drugs, but very little is said about the effects and use of pharmaceutical drugs that are prescribed by doctors. This whole process that I’ve experienced has been quite an ordeal, and one that I don’t want to repeat. As I become accustomed to the CPAP machine I will begin to experience normal sleep cycles without any other aid. I am happy to report that I have achieved that goal.

Good health is very important for anyone, especially occultists. If you are waylaid by sickness or poor health, how can you ever focus on spiritual things and the subtleties of the occult world? And I might add, that good health is not something that you can take for granted. When we are young, most of us experience good health throughout our 20s, 30s and even into our 40s. Yet it is foolish to take good health for granted at any point in our lives. This state of solid physical health must be maintained, especially when we get older. I have stated in previous writings that being in a state of good health is an important foundation for the practice of magic. It’s pretty hard to work magic if you are distracted by poor health or your vitality is sapped by disease and physical stress. I have acknowledged this lesson and I realize that I must work ever harder in order to maintain a modicum of good health. To tell you the truth, this is my most difficult occult ordeal. If I want my life to have value and to be enriched in my autumn years then I’m going to have to regularly work out, stay active, diet and eat sensibly, or face a painful and disease ridden old age. The key here is to have quality life in your autumn years, yet so many of us are sadly kept from that goal.

From time to time I have seen news statements, messages, and various Facebook feeds announcing yet another occult luminary or important pagan founder succumbing to bad health and even death. There was a time when many of these folks were young and in their 20s, and the movements they were a part of were also young. We all assumed that life was good and that we and our movements would last forever. We thought we were immortal and above and beyond the cares and concerns of old age and declining health. Perhaps some of our numbers were culled by accidents or mishaps, or even the tragedy of excessive drug use or alcoholism. These things happened to other people that we may have known or not known, so they were easy to ignore or to forget. And now that we are getting older we realize that we are not immortal and that how we have lived our lives will certainly help to determine how it ends. Now we know that we are not immortal and that all of us will someday die. Some of us will die a lot sooner, and some of us are actually quite sick and dying right now.

All of these thoughts about mortality and death seemed to be very much a part of my spiritual process in the last few months, and I even began to think about the end of my life. I had performed some divination and knew that I wasn’t going to die, of course. Yet the topic of death had quite a powerful impact upon my mind. Maybe, this was an important wake-up call for me to pay attention to so that I might live a little longer and better.

While undergoing the most extreme and dark parts of this ordeal I was also reading about the ancient Egyptian book, the Amduat, which is all about the nocturnal cycle of the god Re as he makes passage through the underworld from the setting of the sun to the dawn of the next day. The ancient Egyptians believed that the sun passed under the earth during the night. The sun god rode in his solar boat through the 12 gates and was assisted by many gods and the blessed dead to achieve his victorious daily emergence from the Gateway of Dawn. This daily cycle of the sun god was actually an important part of the ancient Egyptian funerary rites and represented the cosmogonic cycle in which the pharaoh played a very important part. This cosmogonic cycle was also analogous to the cycle of the hero and the cycle of initiation. Since five stages are associated with the cosmogonic cycle in the hero’s journey, there are only 17 stages that actually involve the full transformation of the hero. If we were to amplify those five stages to 12, then we would have an approximation to the Egyptian cosmogonic cycle. So, I have been focusing on each hour or stage of this cycle as I have been undergoing my recovery from sleep deprivation. It has been a very interesting synchronicity to assist my struggles to fully recover while reading this book.

There were times when I was reading this story of the sun god’s passage through the underworld as a meditation piece just before I went to bed that I imagined myself on the solar boat with the sun god, helping him to fight the forces of darkness. The whole process seemed like an analogy for my struggle to become well. Because sleep, dreams and death seem so connected in our minds and in our culture this mystic underworld journey seemed most appropriate to me. I could also consider this entire process to be transformative, representing for me not only a healing journey but also a kind of initiation. Now that I’m on the mend I’m quite certain that what I have gone through has been an initiation and a powerful spiritual awakening.

The book that I was reading was written by Andreas Schweizer and it has the title “The Sungod’s Journey Through the Netherworld: Reading the Ancient Egyptian Amduat.” I liked reading this book because the author really got deeply into the psychological impact of the underworld journey. Mr. Schweizer is something of a Jungian psychoanalyst so his interpretation of the Amduat is very much influenced by the teachings and writings of Carl Jung. If you are not into Carl Jung then the constant references to the collective unconscious would probably be quite annoying. Yet I found it quite helpful and insightful because I believe that the writings and teachings of Carl Jung are very important for occultists and practicing ritual magicians. You might disagree, but that is my opinion and I stand by it. Even though neurologists have pretty much debunked the concept of a collective unconscious, there still appears to be something about a cultural collective that has a powerful influence on those individuals living through it. I think the final word about the cultural collective, conscious or unconscious, has still to be written. I also believe that science will probably discover not only a psychic but perhaps even a neurological basis to the collective unconscious.

So, I’ve returned to the blog world and this is my first article in quite some time. I don’t know how frequent I will be posting new articles since the demands of my job, my health, and my relationship will take precedence over my writing, at least for the time being. I have quite a huge backlog of articles to write since there is been so much that has been going on in the electronic occult community that I would like to comment on and put forth my opinion. Some of these discussions may be a bit old, but that won’t stop me from writing about them. I hope to have an article written perhaps once a week or maybe once every two weeks. I’ll see how things work out and you will surely know the results.

Frater Barrabbas

Autumn Celebrations Before Winter

Autumn is my favorite time of the year without a doubt. I may have grown very partial to late spring because of the harshness and the length of winter up here in the tundra, but I have always felt my best in the autumn. It’s almost as though the cooling off of the days, the smell of wood smoke and the barrage of colors registering from golden yellow, orange, red to brown, truly inspires me. What I am not crazy about are the hunters shooting off their shot guns at the water fowl in the shallow lakes that surround our house. They typically start shooting just before dawn, so it can be a rude awakening for those unaccustomed to hearing gun shots in the early morning hours. Also, there is no gradual drop in temperatures living up here, since winter comes quickly and without much in the way of an announcement. We have already had a bit of snow on the ground, and with the freezing weather now in play, it’s only a matter of days before our first really big snow storm changes the autumn fully into winter.

Speaking of rude awakenings, I am still battling my problem with sleeping. I have eliminated my habit of reading in bed before sleeping and moved the alarm clock out of my view (off of the night stand) to make that part of my bedroom darker and better for sleeping. No more eying the clock at odd hours of the night or morning. I have also tried to eliminate any and all distractions to preparing for bed, and with this single minded approach I have had some success. I have some good nights intermixed with bad nights, but overall, I am still suffering from some amount of sleep deprivation, and this is a problem. I going to have to elevate my response so that I might overcome this issue, and that means seeing a pulmonologist and visiting a sleep clinic.

What seems to be happening to me is that I dream far too much, my sleep has too little non-REM sleep or deep sleep, and that I often wake up after five or six hours of sleep and then have difficulties getting back to sleep again. It is a real physically debilitating ordeal for me, and one that I have taken very seriously. It’s only a matter of time before the cause is identified and then the solution will be applied. I have checked out the various sleep web pages and I have followed nearly of what they have suggested. I am temporarily taking Abien, and that seems to allow me maintain my sleep uninterrupted, but it is likely that I have some kind of sleep apnea. I think its time to apply a more intensive regimen under a doctor’s supervision, of course. I hope to have all of this resolved before December arrives.

Until such a time, I must defer to my health issues and not focus as much as I have on my writing. Thus, there will be a hiatus of a few to perhaps several weeks without any blog articles. I apologize for the lapse, but it is necessary, considering the dire nature of the health issues that I face. If I can lick these issues, then I will be able to ease back into writing my usual interesting and informative articles (as I have done previously) for my public to read and enjoy. I would also like to mention that there are a lot of articles in the archives already, and it isn’t too difficult to use the topic index on the left had side of the blog web page below all of the other displays and blog based data. Check out some of the older articles and I am sure you will find some real gems there.

Hope you all had a wonderful Samhain and Thanksgiving, and with a bit of luck and insight, I will return soon to the blogosphere.

Frater Barrabbas

A Few More Thoughts About Christianity

Someone didn’t particularly care for the article “Thoughts About Christianity” which I recently wrote. She didn’t leave any comments on my blog article, but gave me quite an earful on my Face Book page. She also didn’t like the fact that I disagreed with her statements criticizing my article, and even though I was also doing my day job, she insisted that I engage in some kind of dialogue with her about her opinions. I really don’t have a lot of time to engage in long conversations on the internet and I avoid it where possible. I figure that if someone wants to comment on my article they can leave a comment through the online blog. This person, whose name was Susan, appears to be retired (according to her FB page data) and probably has a lot more free time than I do. So, I decided to air her comments on a blog article and respond to them when I had the requisite amount of time. She does make some valid points, even though the tone of her arguments are the kind of whining “both sides do it” sort of logic that sets my teeth on edge.

First of all, she said that I seemed to be bashing Christianity or somehow being insulting to Christians by writing a culturally opposing perspective regarding what I think is the blatant sectarianism found in aspects of Christianity. Let’s keep in mind the fact that the culture of this country is Christian dominated. If you want a definition of vested privilege, then being white, male and Christian, not to mention wealthy, are four parts of the overall equation. Those of us who are not Christian get to deal with public perceptions and media exploitation that are quite overall negative and even at times, nasty. If you are a Jew, then you’re a greedy, grasping Christ-killer. If you are a Muslim, then you’re a terrorist. If you are Mormon, then you are a cultist. If you are an atheist, then you are a secular oppressor of good Christians. And if you are a witch or a pagan, then you are a Satanist, child molester, ritual murderer, drug dealer, and whatever else is foul and evil. Granted, there are many Christians who are religiously tolerant and they might even be in the majority. As I said in my article, I respect anyone’s religious activities and beliefs so long as they don’t impinge on my own rights. What I have a problem with are those sectarians who believe that their religious beliefs and practices are the only true ones, and the rest are either due to tragic ignorance or diabolical instigation.

Does it seem that I have a chip on my shoulder or that I am somehow biased and poisoned regarding the faith of Christianity? Well, I have had to deal with quite a lot of cognitive dissonance in my career as a witch and a pagan. I have been preached at, called names, temporarily held against my will while others fervently prayed over me, and even threatened by supposedly good and faithful Christians. Perhaps they were just doing their religious duty as they saw it, but as long as they interfered with my right to worship, then they were decidedly and completely in the wrong. Even the couple who initiated me into witchcraft, Bill and Sharon Schnoebelen, became fundamentalist preachers and Bill wrote a book entitled “Wicca: Satan’s Little White Lie” that continues to be quoted and used as evidence that witches and pagans are actually an evil cult.

All you need to do is check out Witch Hunts on WitchVox to see the list of current lecturers and authors who are telling lots of Christians that witches and pagans are evil worshipers of Satan. I even have the misfortune of living in the congressional district represented by Congresswoman Michelle Bachman and I have to deal with her embarrassing rants about paganism and the evils of witchcraft. Others might find her to be a champion of Christian virtues while others just laugh at her idiotic statements. I don’t find her funny at all. Instead, I find her sentiments to be a chilling reminder that our religious freedoms cannot be taken for granted.

This is a cultural battle and instead of being too generous to other side (or turning the other cheek) we should at least stand up for our own rights and beliefs. We shouldn’t be idle when others are actively defaming us. Other faiths respond to bigoted attacks and so should we. We don’t seek to proselytize or convert others to our faith, we just want to be allowed to worship in peace and security. That doesn’t seem to be much to ask for in our so-called free society, but it can’t be depended on or maintained unless we are vigilant against those who might try to take our religious freedoms away from us. This is a real social issue in our post-modern times and to ignore it or pretend that there is equality, by saying that both sides do it, is terribly misinformed.

So, Susan starts out accusing me of being one of many who are hurling insults and bashing the other side without any significant point being made. In fact, she felt that my article was, for the most part, irrelevant and pointless.

“Christians bashing Pagans, Pagans bashing Christians. Each scorns the other for limitless reasons. And though I am not on the proverbial fence [whatever that means], I am weary of the contrasts and comparisons, insults, and rhetoric hurled at different belief systems.”

My only issue with Christianity, or for that matter, any religion, is when it promotes itself as the exclusive truth. A Monotheistic Deity is universal, and that means that it excludes all other Deities. It also paints atheism as a rejection of that truth. When I meet Christians, particularly Esoteric Christians, I have no problem with them or their faith. They don’t judge me or consider me an infidel. I see them as pleasant religious people engaging with their faith, and how they worship is no concern of mine. Of course, if they make it a point to defame members of my religion, then I have a problem, and all it really takes is to just ignorantly deny the validity of what I believe. Certainly, I don’t deny the validity of what anyone else believes, even if they happen to be an atheist and don’t believe in any religious creed whatsoever - it is their right to do so. 

“Although I enjoy educational discussion, I prefer to not impugn either faiths to explain my understanding of what it means to be the creature that I am.”

Not only was my previous article educational, but it didn’t impugn Christianity. It only decried sectarianism. That was the whole point of the article! Obviously, it was something that Susan missed when she read it. Some people pretend to be neutral and fair, while I don’t see any need to disguise what I believe for the sake of appearances. 

“The question of magic and Christians enjoying elaborate displays of its practice is not a subject important enough to address, however, those people who choose to worship as they will, ‘an it do no harm’, are considered, according to the Apostle Paul, ‘a law unto themselves’.”

The actual quote that Susan took from the New Testament was from Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, chapter 2, verse 14 through 16. Quoting it in full gives that phrase which she used a much better context.

“For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.”

When you examine the entire passage then it becomes more problematical. Paul isn’t excusing people who work magic as long as they are not harming others, or who choose to worship differently than others. They all get judged in the same manner when the end-times are nigh. Additionally, the term “Gentiles” that he uses was actually about non-Jewish pagans who were ignorant of Christ, and anyone in our epoch who is or once was a Christian doesn’t at all count as a “Gentile.” Susan quoted this biblical passage out of its very important context, naturally.

Perhaps a clearer quotation from that same work would be from Chapter 2, verses 11 and 12: “For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;”

This statement is obviously highly sectarian. It doesn’t matter if one is a Christian or a pagan, all will get judged in the same manner by the same universal God. Of course, I would reject such an idea since I strongly believe that it doesn’t apply to me. Even so, there’s lots of sectarian opinions in that epistle (just as there are in other books of the New Testament). Quoting from it is a real problem if you are not a follower of the One True Religion.

While Susan might state that the question of whether Christians can legally work magic within the tenets of Christianity is irrelevant; it was a topic that others in the blogosphere commented on recently. I was just adding my opinion to that of others.

“Belief in the Holy Spirit is a bit tricky. My personal belief is we are all connected by a spirit which lies dormant in some while others have a personal relationship with this masculine/feminine phenomenon known as spirit or spirits, however you please. This unforgivable sin against such spirit is ambiguous in the various scriptures as they are written, but to not acknowledge the devine [sic] in one’s self would be death, bodily and spiritually. Either way, a mortal infraction.”

While I might agree somewhat with Susan’s statement that everyone is connected to each other and everything else in the world (including animals, plants and rocks, etc.), those who don’t believe in anything spiritual are not spiritually or bodily dead. That is absurd, and it does show an unwitting contempt for those who don’t believe in religion. It is better to state something as part of one’s experience and to leave it at that, instead of implying that others are not as “enlightened” who don’t also believe it to be true. Therefore, it can’t be a “mortal infraction” unless there is a universal truth or sectarian premise that is actually valid. I know quite a number of atheists and they are often more thoughtful and ethical than those who are supposedly governed by their religion. Thus, the concept of Spirit must have a very wide definition, much wider than anyone currently knows.

I admit that I responded to her critique with a certain brevity and then informed her that I disagreed with her opinion. At that moment, I just didn’t have any time to elaborate all of my points. Susan responded with a certain umbrage at my supposed unwillingness to have a dialogue with her. It was kind of like a temper tantrum. Here’s what she wrote in reply.

“Are you often misinterpreted, sir? According to you, your last article ruffled a few Christians.”

My last article, written some years ago, floated the idea that the historical Christ was a myth and that there wasn’t any actual evidence that he existed. I still think that this is a valid point, and I backed it up with the scholarly work that I found online written by another author. I have since let this whole matter drop because I can’t prove it to be a fact. (Scholars have pretty much dismissed this line of reasoning, but I still have my suspicions.) Anyway, a couple of people strongly objected to it and left their comments on the blog article.

“And throughout this article, I detected a certain amount of sarcasm veiled in defensive passivity.”

I’ve never considered myself as “passive” anything. I think if you read the article you will find that I am quite passionately and aggressively against sectarianism. And for good reasons, too.

“Perhaps some residual resentment for those who read your previous article. But your paper, 'Thoughts About Christianity', was a bit scathing.”

Scathing, if one is an ardent sectarian, but to an Esoteric Christian, probably not at all critical. And resentment, how can I be resentful with comments posted about an article written over three years ago? Holding a grudge that long takes way too much energy. I have better things to do.

“Read it again and you'll see it. I meant no personal disrespect; just an observation on the intensity of your convictions, and a contribution of my take on Jesus' meaning of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit.”

The tone of Susan’s comments are actually scathing and harsh towards me and maybe even a bit passive-aggressive, too. (She does mean to be disrespectful, but she doesn’t want to be responsible for appearing to be so.) I don’t see an open and objective examination of my written article, just a bunch of complaints and groundless criticism. I do have a certain passion in my convictions, but then again, I have often been complimented for that. I also found very little of substance in Susan’s rebuttal about the definition of a sin against the Holy Spirit. I believe that I captured it quite well in my article by stating that it is most aptly used as a judgement against apostasy. Of course, Susan has to round out her umbrage with a final insult, and I quote it in full.

“If you are a sinner and should be shunned by the Christians for your beliefs, perhaps they should choose different reading material, or, you could hand them the first stone.”

I am already shunned by sectarian Christians for my beliefs and practices, as I have previously stated. I also doubt that anyone who is sectarian will bother to read my article, but you never know. I wrote this article for witches and pagans to demonstrate to them the inherent hypocrisy that it is alright to practice magic and occultism if you are a Christian, but it is not OK to switch religions and then practice occultism and magick. Or for that matter, to practice occultism and magick as a pagan or witch in a Christian society supposedly surrounded by the truth.

As for handing them the first stone to clobber me with, I won’t give any sectarian the opportunity to do so. I am also not bound by any ethical rules that says I shouldn’t either defend or avenge myself on someone who threatens me or my loved ones. I am a full fledged witch in that regard, and I don’t have a problem with working malefic magic on someone when it is justified. I hope that revelation doesn’t shock anyone (especially Susan), but then again, welcome to the real world. There are a lot of ugly, brutal and evil people in the world, and I would hopefully keep them from storming the gateway of my home and world. There are also a lot of good people, too, but I don’t need to protect myself from them. (At least, I hope I don’t.)

Think my viewpoint is too extreme or prejudiced? Just to give you an idea of how crazy right-wing fundamentalists are, how about examining this recent quote from the spokesperson of the American Family Association.

“Upset that the AFA was included on an Army training session’s list of hate groups, AFA spokesman Bryan Fischer on Friday charged that the Armed Forces will use ‘lethal force’ against Christians and Tea Party activists, and may even ‘surround’ the hotel hosting next year’s Values Voter Summit.

‘The military is being conditioned to use weapons on the American Family Association. The soldiers are being conditioned in their brains to think of evangelicals, Tea Partyers, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council as domestic enemies that may have to be neutralized by lethal force,’ Fischer maintained. ‘The people you got to watch out for, you may have to turn your tanks on, are American Family Association.’”

Based on the above rhetoric, it is quite likely that a few of these inflamed Christian sectarians might actually start some kind of armed insurrection in the not too distant future. Those who are Pagan and Wiccan authors would be easy and tempting targets, indeed.

Nuff said about this issue.

Frater Barrabbas

Thoughts About Thelema and Other Musings

I really don’t care what anyone else thinks, but I have always found Aleister Crowley to be a truly great and profound writer about magick and other occult topics. His prose is actually quite satisfying to read, and to me he is concise and very logical. Even his most abstruse and difficult works are capable of being understood by the average intelligent person. Whatever his lifestyle was like, his reputation or the kind of person that he was makes little difference today, because what we have to judge him by are his written works, rites and his Thoth Tarot deck. 

Already, Aleister Crowley is fading into legend. So it is nearly impossible for anyone to be able to present a proper biography about him, although several authors have made the attempt. Even though his history is quite copious when compared to Mathers, so many of his contemporaries had a very different perspective or opinion about him. Some hated him, some worshiped him, and many vilified him, and yet others saw him as either a writer, poet or an adventurer without any unusual attributes. (For instance, there was a lengthy article about Aleister Crowley in the Atlanta Journal Constitution during the early 1930's that discussed his world travels, mountain climbing exploits and literary skills (poetry), but didn’t mention anything about his occult practices.)  There has also been a lot of misinformation spread about Crowley, so much so that very little of the legendary data about him can even be trusted. Really, all we have are his works, and that, in my opinion, is worth far more than what most of us have achieved in a lifetime.

I have to sheepishly admit that I couldn’t hold a candle to Crowley’s brilliance and masterly writing talents. The only literary area that I am not greatly impressed with is his poetry, most of which was rather competently mediocre, but even within that media, he has a number of poems that rival the masters. To this day, I still like pulling out one of his books that I first read years ago and start to read it anew. It amazes me that I still find new insights and information even after reading the same book, ritual or chapter for the umpteenth time. That shows just how deep Crowley was, and also how brilliant. What is more amazing than the writings of Crowley are many of his later disciples, from Frater Achad, Israel Regardie (albeit, reluctantly), Kenneth Grant to Lon Milo Duquette, Jake Stratton Kent and David Shoemaker. No other magical tradition has spawned so many brilliant occultists and magicians, in my humble opinion. (They make my own tradition look quite hollow and empty.)

However, when it comes to engaging with the spiritual system of Thelema then I have to part company with the tradition that Crowley inaugurated. You see, I am a big fan of Aleister Crowley’s writings, but I am not much of a Thelemite. I like the first chapter of the Book of the Law (Liber Al vel Legis), but the other two chapters are not very compelling. I also don’t find a lot of spiritual value for myself personally in the religious aspects of Thelema, even though I do find it more meaningful than most other spiritual systems. 

When it comes to spirituality, I am a true witch because I just can’t find greater meaning for myself than having a direct experience with the domain of Spirit. Religious institutions based on sacred writings (or “spirituality by the book”) are not very attractive to me, perhaps because of my need to see and experience everything myself. Thelema doesn’t abrogate personal gnosis like some religious creeds do, in fact it encourages it. Still, I feel that once something is written down, even if it is as brilliant as the Book of the Law, it is open to critique. I find myself cherry picking the parts I agree with and mentally arguing with the parts I don’t agree with while reading. I just can’t accept sacred writing as some kind of absolute truth because I think that spiritual truth is relative, and human linguistics is an imperfect science. I also don’t believe that sacred writings are written or dictated by deities or spiritual avatars; they are written by people, inspired perhaps, but still human.

I have been a member of the Ordo Templi Orientis, or O.T.O., and I have enjoyed the initiations and the companionship of other magicians in that organization. (I am no longer an active member in that order, for reasons stated above.) I have also had the unfortunate experience to meet some really obnoxious and jaded asshats, but overall, most of the Thelemites that I have met are very smart, talented, creative magicians and occultists. In fact, I could say that I prefer their company over the company of many other occultists simply because I feel that I have more in common with them. What I don’t have and can’t share in is the religious dimension of Thelema, and that is my loss. It certainly doesn’t reflect on Thelema or Thelemites if I am unable to see the Book of the Law as the premier sacred writ or Aleister Crowley as the prophet of the New Aeon. I just don’t believe that, so I would be a very poor Thelemite indeed.

I draw my perspectives from my own experiences, and I have found over the years that Thelema, as nominally defined as the True Will, is just one of four very important sacramental systems. I have written all of this into the rites of the Gnostic Tetra-sacramentary of the Order of the Gnostic Star, but I have left a lot of room for other members to draw their own conclusions. In that ritual context, Thelema is joined with Agape, Thanatos, and Eros as the four powers of Gnosis. While Thelema is the True Will, Agape is Platonic Love, Thanatos is Spiritual Transformation and Eros is Sexual Vitality. I believe that a balanced system of magick should have all four gnostic sacramental systems represented equally. In fact, I actually have in my ritual repertoire a Mass rite for each of these four systems.

Of course, when all four sacramental systems are joined together, they produce a fifth, which is symbolized by the Star, or STELLA, the unique essence of Spirit. Thus, the Order of the Gnostic Star acts as a keyword phrase and an emblem for the tetra-sacramentary as it is resolved within the Star of Gnosis. However, for Thelema, just as for the other three sacramental systems, words fail to encapsulate the true meaning of this specific current of gnosis. Thus, a Book of the Law would be too limiting to a greater understanding of Thelema (in my opinion), and this why I have problems with it. 

In my opinion, each and every person must apprehend their own gnosis within each of the four sacramental systems. I have found that a lot of Crowley’s rites and even some of his occult poetry have helped me to acquire my personal gnostic experience of Thelema, and for that boon, I am grateful and I owe him a debt of gratitude. However, I am not bound to Crowley’s view of Thelema, and I have other insights that would be considered outside of the classical perspective of that creed. Few understood the profoundly gnostic and magical dimensions of Thelema as well as Crowley did, but to rely solely on what he wrote is to come up short, in my opinion.

It is for this reason that I honor Aleister Crowley, but I am not a Thelemite in the classical definition of that term. I feel an affinity to Thelema and Thelemites, but to me it is just one of four different sacramental systems and not the exclusive answer. For that answer, I have had to move beyond words and rites, and enter into the domain of pure Spirit. In that ecstatic void of unified consciousness, I have experienced many things and I have found them to be the core of what I know as truth. Yet I had to be fully immersed in that world and momentarily oblivious to the affectations of mind and body. I believe firmly that each and every one of us should approach our magical spirituality in the same manner, deeply, independently and through intense personal experience. Everything else is just other people’s opinions and thoughts, with or without any relevance or shades of truth to the individual seeker.

Frater Barrabbas