Intent

[kokopelle]

My lovely mate and I had an interesting talk this weekend. I was looking over The Key of Solomon the King (Clavicula Salomonis) by by King of Israel Solomon and S. L. MacGregor Mathers. This classic book is the basis of much ceremonial magic. Wulfwalker told me that she had spoken to a ceremonial person who swore that he did not use magical intent in his work. What is magical intent? One definition of it is that magical intent is associated with some form of desire at least equally powerful, and difficult to forget. If this is the case then the ceremonial person was correct. He did not embrace his work with desire. Instead he worked by rote, relying on the correct methods to make things happen.

This may be the case, but Wulfwalker and I believe that some degree of intent is involved with any magical working. In our thinking intent is necessary even if it is just a purposeful focus on an outcome. Purpose is a close cousin to desire, and hence even the ceremonial guys cannot completely escape the grasp of intent.

In the end Wulfwalker and the ceremonial person agreed to disagree. We suspect that the gentleman had a definition of intent that he could not approach. It had become something of a four letter word for him, at least in respect to how he did his magic. Wulfwalker says that the ceremonial person could not come anywhere near the word intent. Instead he said it was all about the mechanics. In this word, mechanics, was tucked away purpose, focus, and something like intent. Interesting...

Comments

[elnigma.livejournal.com]

That person might not have intents, but CM usually involves having a ritual purpose. Mysticism is more the going for the feeling of closeness to some aspect of spirit, rather than a concern over getting X done.

[greensh.livejournal.com]

I would both agree and disagree with you when I look at shamanic "magic". I'll write more about it another time.

[elnigma.livejournal.com]

Shamanic IMHO, like CM, but using different approaches and techniques and a different tradition - it is sometimes out there to communicate with other beings for connection and wisdom, other times it holds a practical purpose.

[greensh.livejournal.com]

That's the short of the long of it... good insights!

[greensh.livejournal.com]

Here is a question for you... is there a form of magic(k) that is almost-purely CM or purely Mysticism? Are these words that can be used with a near absolute finality or are they just yardsticks to say that "Tradition X" is 90% CM , "Tradition Y" is 90% Mysticism and "Tradition W" is 50/50 of each?

[chimerae.livejournal.com]

There are very different magical engagements.

In our culture, ego engaging is so constant most people have no capacity to imagine much less practice magic without intent.

The thing intent does can arise from different sources. Sometimes it's a thought that arises from the shadow in the group mind of a gestalt engaged circle (coven or whatever) and there the practice of magic is to engage the risen intent and sort of ride it/ herd it into a healthier pattern. This form of practice always reminds me of how surfers describe dealing with the ocean, except in order to do it, you have to be so completely in the experience that you can't even engage it like looking for a wave --you just know that the nature of nature is that something will rise up and you meet it because you're there.

There's another form of magical practice that's essential mysticism where the individual consciousness dissolves away so even the thought of intent in the practice of magic is impossible. Thoughts of intent do rise up there but they are neither executable nor really authentic but more like the way thought arise to be released in Buddhist meditative practice.

And then there's forming an intent, getting behind it, and moving to make it so.

The funny/ironic thing is that many people who declare they are practicing without intent really aren't and many who think they're practicing with intent are doing the other things as part and parcel of their experience, but not noticing the extra experiences they're having because their ego is distracted by the intent.

[greensh.livejournal.com]

I agree with your last statement. There is a paradox here that the practitioners may be only vaguely aware of. IMO, more often than not they, the practitioners, believe the story line only because they've been taught it and have not experienced enough to break out of the party-line.

Why have a party line? You have to start somewhere. The dough must be kneaded before it rises. The entire concept of purposeful misdirection by teachers is fascinating to me. The reasons for the subterfuge by teachers are well intentioned, and sometimes absolutely necessary, but they are only part of a dynamic magical experience that cannot ultimately be pinned down to absolutes of "all intent" or "no intent".