Magic Monday

[ecosophia]

It's just on midnight, so we can proceed with a new Magic Monday. Ask me anything about occultism and I'll do my best to answer it. With certain exceptions, any question received by midnight Monday Eastern time will get an answer. Please note:  Any question or comment received after then will not get an answer, and in fact will just be deleted. (I've been getting an increasing number of people trying to post after these are closed, so will have to draw a harder line than before.) If you're in a hurry, or suspect you may be the 143,916th person to ask a question, please check out the very rough version 1.0 of The Magic Monday FAQ here. Also: I will not be putting through or answering any more questions about practicing magic around children. I've answered those in simple declarative sentences in the FAQ. If you read the FAQ and don't think your question has been answered, read it again. If that doesn't help, consider remedial reading classes; yes, it really is as simple and straightforward as the FAQ says. 

The picture?  I'm working my way through photos of my lineage, focusing on the teachers whose work has influenced me and the teachers who influenced them in turn. Last week's honoree, Violet Firth Evans aka Dion Fortune, had the great advantage of coming of age when the British occult community was close to its apogee, and she had plenty of teachers. Some of them, such as Moina Mathers, have already appeared here; some of them, such as Maiya Tranchell Hayes, apparently didn't leave any photographs behind -- but there are several others, and this is one of them: Frederick Bligh Bond, who was the official church archeologist at the ruins of Glastonbury Abbey between the two world wars, and discovered a whole series of lost features by digs that just happened to go to the right place. Then it turned out that there was no "just happened" about it; he was using spiritualistic methods to talk to the spirits of long-dead monks, who told him where to dig. The church threw a fit and dismissed him, but he went on to publish several volumes about his experiences, at least one of which can be downloaded for free (here). Dion Fortune studied with him for a while and also did trance work with him; her connection with Glastonbury continued to the end of her life, and in fact she's buried there.

Buy Me A Coffee

Ko-Fi

I've had several people ask about tipping me for answers here, and though I certainly don't require that I won't turn it down. You can use either of the links above to access my online tip jar; Buymeacoffee is good for small tips, Ko-Fi is better for larger ones. (I used to use PayPal but they developed an allergy to free speech, so I've developed an allergy to them.) If you're interested in political and economic astrology, or simply prefer to use a subscription service to support your favorite authors, you can find my Patreon page here and my SubscribeStar page here. 

 

I've also had quite a few people over the years ask me where they should buy my books, and here's the answer. Bookshop.org is an alternative online bookstore that supports local bookstores and authors, which a certain gargantuan corporation doesn't, and I have a shop there, which you can check out here. Please consider patronizing it if you'd like to purchase any of my books online.

And don't forget to look up your Pangalactic New Age Soul Signature at CosmicOom.com.

With that said, have at it!

***This Magic Monday is now closed. See you next week!***

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Quantitative measures provide certainty. A high GPA means tells me I’m doing well academically; a First Class Boy Scout has progressed further than a Tenderfoot; a college degree (used to) indicate the mastery of a specific body of knowledge. Qualitative values are...fuzzy... and don’t allow for comparison, so you have no idea where you are on the map. And if you don’t know where you are on the map, then you’re lost. And being lost is, well, bad.

That’s the narrative I’m fighting, anyway.

Re: Greetings!

[diletpoly]

Aha! Thank you, the idea of looking back at my notes never even entered my head for some reason!

Re: Astrological Calculations

[(Anonymous)]

I think typically people just use existing libraries for working with the Swiss Ephemeris.

There are a lot of unexpected astronomical concepts you'd need to learn and data format conversions you'd need to set up. There are also problems of principle: how do you define the relationship between the direction to a planet and the horizon given atmospheric lensing near the horizon? Can the horizon be different than 180 degrees, and in that case is the entire sky in first through sixth houses for someone who is underground, or in imaginary-numbered houses if that's what the formula for the visible horizon angle with atmospheric lensing would say for someone underground? How do you even define the "true Lunar node" beyond a certain degree of precision since the obvious way would require entire counterfactual moons which would have their own gravitational consequences? How do you define the direction to an object given relativistic light speed delays and gravitational lensing near the Sun? What if the object is behind the Sun: do you track the hypothetical gravitational path that would have been followed by non-interacting particle like a neutrino at near-light speed if it had come from the object, passed somewhere through the body of the sun, and ended up at the Earth? (that's the solution the Swiss Ephemeris uses) How do you project the precession of the earth when there are fractal wobblinesses involved? (even JPL doesn't have an easy good answer to this since it would have to involve probabilities, so everyone just uses a best-fit curve because it's not off by much on any reasonable timescale)

Re: Astrological Calculations

[(Anonymous)]

There a also programs like https://solarfire.info/ that do this

The calculations and algorithms have already been made.
Check out the

https://theastrologypodcast.com/2023/04/05/calculating-astrology-charts-by-hand/

[(Anonymous)]

I've wondered the same thing.

Just spitballing, but you could try sealing your working space with linen (or, in principle, silk). Does that mean, like, linen carpets, linen wallpaper, and linen ceiling hangings? Seems like a fire hazard. Maybe if you had drywall with linen fibers in the gypsum, or the thin paper where the paint goes was made of linen? Get some finely macerated linen fiber and repaint with linen-infused paint?

I don't know if the principle here would be more like making your office like a leaded room, or like a fully sealed Faraday cage without any openings above a certain diameter. If electrical wires conduct the relevant kinds of etheric charges then that could also be a problem.

Maybe have yogurt or kombucha fermenting or plants in your working space?

If the problem was above etheric level then I don't know, maybe decorate your walls with hexafoils?

[(Anonymous)]

Glad to hear it's not just me. Thank you.

[ecosophia]

That's a question I'm not really qualified to answer, as I haven't put in the necessary time meditating on the nine worlds, the three deities you've referenced, etc.

[ecosophia]

Sure. Now list everything that quantitative measures leave out, fail to measure, and falsify. When you can do that as quickly as you can list the good parts of quantitative measures, you're most of the way there.

Re: Astrological Calculations

[jpc_w]

Once upon a time, Springer-Verlag wrote a Yellow Book on astrological algorithms.
Unfortunately, that's no longer in their catalogue; however, there are books on astronomical algorithms you may be able to repurpose.

There were books on the subject written in the '70's and '80's with source code such as <"https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Programming-Astrologers-Michael-Erlewine/dp/0866900993">Computer Programming for Astrologers, but at this point they are all out of print, very hard to find, and written in unstructured code.

Your best bets are a good university library, or groveling through the source code of something like the open astro project, and then asking in their forums for text references.

Good luck.

[gullindagan]

Fair. Thanks. I'll keep meditating.

[(Anonymous)]

So, you got your cheddar cheese and your pepper jack cheese; your mild peppers and your hot peppers; your spicy Korean sauce and your nuclear Korean sauce; and so on down the line. Does the heat of a sorcerer’s food, or lack thereof, affect his magical endeavors?

—Princess Cutekitten

Re: Astrological Calculations

[ecosophia]

You can find instructions for doing that in any of these books:

https://archive.org/details/max-heindel-simplified-scientific-astrology
https://archive.org/details/guidetoastrology00raphiala/mode/2up
https://archive.org/details/sphericalbasisof00dalt/mode/2up

[ecosophia]

Keep in mind that Jung was an occultist who pretended to be a scientific psychologist. He was good at playing the part, but scratch his system and you get standard early 20th century occultism. That is to say, yes, individuation is Jung's name for the goal sought by most classic Western occult systems. What he calls the Self is what a lot of mages call the Holy Guardian Angel or the Higher and Divine Genius. He has a slightly different way of invoking that, using dreams and artwork instead of ritual and meditation, but it combines very well with existing magical methods -- and now that Jungian psychology is dropping out of fashion among medical types, it's fair game for us occultists. ;-)

[ecosophia]

It depends very much on what spiritual goals you have and what material goals you have. Occult training goes very well with a career as a freelance writer, which is why so many occultists have made their living writing; you need a strong will and a vivid imagination for both, so they support each other, and they don't interfere with each other to any degree. If I'd set out to be an occultist and a stockbroker, I'd have made a mess of one, the other, or both, because those aren't anything like as compatible. If you choose your spiritual and material goals well, and work hard at both, yes, you can achieve both at roughly the same time.

[ecosophia]

Nope. I know hoodoo doctors who like their food so spicy it would strip the enamel right off my teeth, ceremonial mages who like their food so bland I can't taste it at all, and a lot of other occultists who, like me, fall into the space between. We all seem to get good results.

[(Anonymous)]

Say, just a thought: Tunesmyth’s ever-growing prayer request list may be a fine source for your practice. It is for me!

OtterGirl

[(Anonymous)]

That’s so interesting, do you know why Jungian psychology is falling out of fashion?

From what I’ve read of Man and His Symbols so far there seems to be an implication at times that the religious, Gods, dreams, etc, are all in our heads as symbols or archetypes as opposed to being anything literal or external from us, if that makes sense? Kind of like how some practitioners today think demons for example are totally fine to work with because they’re not literally demons, just shadows aspects of ourselves, if that makes sense? I realize Jung wasn’t the only contributor to this book but do you know if he held the view that say spirits and demons and the like are just aspects of ourselves or is this just him being kind of sneaky about being an occultist?

Saturn Return

[(Anonymous)]

I'm approaching my first Saturn return over the next several years. I'm assuming planetary charity should be part of the mix, but is there anything further that would help to weather the storm? I am comfortable with the methods taught by the Golden Dawn, Druid Magic Handbook, and Fellowship of the Hermetic Rose.

Self Discipline Affirmation.

[jruss]

Hello ArchDruid, as the title says, I'm trying to think of a good affirmation to finish what I start as I always seem to struggle with starting and abandoning projects.

Speaking of wanted to share this https://youtu.be/HH_R9f1fE2Q Scott Adams' affirmations lesson. Including the one he used to become the successful creator of the Dilbert comic strip.

[robertmathiesen]

Nineteenth-century source criticism did ascribe those particular verses of Exodus to the J source. See, for example, G. R. Driver, Introduction to the Old Testament (many editions, 1891-1914). That the J source was written by a woman is pure speculation by Bloom, so far as I know.

[ecosophia]

1) Because the entire field of psychology, like that of medicine, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the pharmaceutical industry these days. Nobody in either field wants to cure or heal people any more; it's all "management," meaning they keep you sick but able to function, because a patient cured is a customer lost. That's why so many Americans these days are on antidepressants and other drugs, far more than actually benefit from them -- it's all about sales. Teaching people to deal with their psychological problems, outgrow them, and become self-actualizing human beings is anathema to the current psych field, since it doesn't sell pills and it doesn't keep people dependent.

2) Jung stressed over and over again that the archetypes are objective realities -- even if they're just patterns hardwired into our brains, they can crush us or heal us with equal ease. The idiots who insist that demons aren't real because they're just expressions of the Shadow archetype have no clue what they're messing with; screw up in your dealings with the Shadow archetype and you can end up huddled in a corner, rocking back and forth in a state of complete psychotic collapse. The archetypes are transpersonal, and they're more powerful than anything the conscious mind can use against them, which is why people go crazy sometimes.

Me, I think the archetypes are even more transpersonal than Jung thought; I think they are reflected in, rather than part of, the depths of our minds. But even from a strict Jungian perspective they are nothing to fool around with.

Re: Saturn Return

[ecosophia]

In my experience -- and I've been through two Saturn returns now -- the crucial point is to face the hard lessons head on, and don't try to run from them. Saturn returns can be a source of immense strength and healing once you do that, but if you try to duck out on it you'll just make your life miserable. Figure out what you need to do to deal with your problems and do it, no excuses, no whining, and you'll come through in good shape.

Re: Self Discipline Affirmation.

[ecosophia]

Before you try to use an affirmation for that, I recommend doing a lot of journaling to figure out what's behind the habit of not finishing what you start. I had to deal with that when I was a lot younger, and I realized after a lot of reflection that it was rooted in childhood miseries: I was labeled "gifted," and what that meant in practice was that nothing I ever did was good enough for my parents and teachers. So I got into the habit of deliberately failing, since that way I got the same reaction without having to waste the effort trying to meet expectations that would always recede as fast as I approached them. Once I realized that and dealt with all the old anger and misery and shame I'd piled up, I had no further problem completing projects. Take some time to journal and remember, and see what you turn up; that's often more effective than just trying to shove on past with an affirmation.

Re: A car and a driver walked into a bar...

[kimberlysteele]

Sorry to put this in so late -- it is the planes as an analogy to one of those stick figure family window decals:

Another useful image I have found helpful in understanding the planes is that of the stick figure family window decal commonly found on suburban mom vans. The decal consists of crude drawings of the family the car belongs to and their pets. On the physical plane, the sticker is a strip of plastic stamped with ink much the same as any other decal. The plastic is a petroleum byproduct. On the etheric plane, the decal’s plasticity creates its vibe or vibration. It will be affixed to the car window for a number of years via static electricity, and its clinginess Its durable properties belong to the etheric plane. When it eventually peels off and becomes plastic waste, its brittleness and tendency to curl will be etheric plane characteristics. On the astral plane, we begin to deal with the stick figure images that were mere ink in relief on the physical plane. Science as we know it dismisses the images as important or meaningful, and by skipping those meanings, renders itself incomplete and piecemeal. To a squirrel who peers at the van from a tree, the images mean nothing, and in that sense the modern scientist who dismisses the importance of the images resides on the same intellectual level as the squirrel. To most people, the images and the way they are depicted elicits an emotional response. Some will respond with hatred: they will be mildly irritated, with the thought that family decals are kitschy virtue signals that need to be filed under Nobody Cares. Some will like the sticker and want to buy one for their own mom van someday. Some will be filled with sadness and longing because they cannot have children. Most won’t care one way or another, but they won’t have any trouble understanding what the decal represents. On the mental plane, the abstract concept of family comes into play. Each stick person on the decal has their role in the family. The family is the concept that inspired someone to make the stick person decal in the first place. Other concepts that made the creation of the sticker possible are the innovation of cling plastics from petroleum and the invention of the car. None of these mental plane attributes of the sticker have any particular human emotion attached to them, but without them, the sticker would not have come into being. Subtler than the mental plane are the three subtlest planes: spiritual, causal, and divine. In there somewhere is the causal plane, and this is the plane where the idea of family first took root. I’ll speak only for myself, but at this point the planes become too subtle for me to understand. This plane has to do with the causes that gave rise to the mental concepts of the sticker.

Re: Temple technology update

[(Anonymous)]

Huh. I guess I don't have much advice about that, since I don't think of things in a way where there's really a gap that can be wedged open to fit an idea of aether. My opinions about how space carries phenomena are just the (common) idea that maybe the Kaluza-Klein gimmick that makes electromagnetism a purely "geometric" phenomenon like gravity will probably turn out to generalize further so that all forces will prove to be geometric, and the (novice) idea that it's kind of troubling that the easiest way to learn quantum mechanics involves presupposing space-like slices even though the geometry you're slicing up is different for different parts of the wavefunction with different mass distributions, and the (perhaps overly clever semi-informed dilettante) idea that Wolfram and Goraud don't seem to be doing anything wrong and they might have a fundamental correct reformulation of how we should be conceiving of the relation between spacetime, quantum possibility, and mass-energy density. (For what it's worth, the Wolfram-Goraud paradigm is slightly less confusing than quantum mechanics the way it's normally taught: there aren't any complex numbers, just cumulative curvatures between nearby paths in branching-space.)

I don't have a physical intuition for why the Aharonov-Bohm effect would have to happen (other than following a little of the discussion of monodromy in the Wikipedia article), so I guess I'm not qualified to have a position on what it means about the idea of aether.

I guess I was saying that the meaning of "physics" versus "paraphysics" in this context is kind of awkward. Most of physics proceeds as a tower of in-principle deductions from either the Standard Model or general relativity (depending on the regime, with contradictions between the two at high energies), but the in-principle deductions don't seem to leave space for something like a higher force that blends with electromagnetism, nor does the whole thing easily leave room for adding simple new forces that would produce such observations. That's what Sean Carroll is arguing in the paper, about why certain quantum-mechanical calculations and experimental findings would seem to to pin down a lot of higher-level phenomenology. Results that bypass all of that, without implying any particular direction to try generalizing the Standard Model or general relativity, are sort of automatically "paraphysical" in one sense, especially if they involve seemingly mentalistic qualities rather than quantities or simple geometric entities.

But maybe JMG was making a different distinction between "physical" and "paraphysical". A more commonsense distinction would be that a phenomenon is "physical" if you generally get the same predictable third-party-observable result from the same experimental setup, and the setup and result take the form of something impersonal like the motions of an object or a pattern of light or heat or the composition of a material, and there's an understandable mechanism-like relationship passing through an understandable region of spacetime (or, if it's a quantum thing, at least an understandable region of possibility-space). And a phenomenon is "paraphysical" if the effect necessarily involves some kind of intermediating intelligence (not plausibly built from known matter cleverly organized), or is inherently related to percieved meaningfulnesses and synchronicities, or doesn't particularly relate to any spatially or temporally mediated mechanism (known or discoverable).

Huh. I guess the Wikipedia page on Kaluza-Klein theory mentions that you can get extra fields if you relax the "cylinder condition" that makes the extra geometric dimension not have hard-to-calculate consequences beyond electromagnetism, the condition they usually enforce by supposing the extra dimension is curled down to a 23-Planck-length-radius circle. That's one potential direction for generalization. And it does seem like the sort of thing that would produce phenomena that would fit into some of the same physical scenarios as electromagnetism...

Apparently one Paul Wesson has worked out some things about those fields. I don't know how Wesson's conclusions interact with the implications of Carroll's argument.