/x/ - Paranormal

973-eht-namuh-973


New Reply
Sage
X
Message
Files Max 5 files32MB total
Password
[New Reply]


Board Rules
- No succ posting
- Don't Shill e-Celebs
- Only post lewds in lewd thread or spoilered


5866a3ee7aae6d35451bc4f86190be2039ab97e3d6e9d386a1c30f216d8088f8.png
(309.7KB, 640x611)
Hello guys I'm trying to learn magick, can you provide me with some good material for beginner?
>>330 (OP) 
For some reason I cannot post the books myself, so here's what I recommend for you to find yourself:

Israel Regardie - The One Year Manual
Jan Fries - Kali Kaula
Franz Bardon - Practice of Magical Evocation

If you want to look around 8fringe (check the questions thread), look for a compilation of posts by a user named "khan" and an anonymous guide to gods called "Your divine family". The former is perfect for beginners, the latter a somewhat more intermediate but still worth a read.

Also some advice:

1. Try to avoid evoking/invoking low-level entities or demons until you've learned about yourself to your fullest metaphysical extent. If you want to invoke/evoke, stick to gods- real, good gods. Avoid imaginary, evil, or fictional ones.

2. If for some reason you start seeing synchronicities on black cubes and other cult-of-saturn shit, mentally replace those with golden spheres instead. Evil exists, but learning that you have zero need to fear it is valuable. 

3. Every source of human magickal knowledge has a dogma of some kind. It's too easy to become attached to dogma because you've found something to be connected to. The sooner you figure out how to let go of your dogma, the less you'll be weighed down by it.

4. NPCs and Fedoras are convinced that mystical things are nothing but delusion. Schizos and paranoids are convinced that delusions are nothing but mystical things. Both run on the same mental spectrum of ignorance, and are typically the result of someone not being able to accept a cosmic truth or fact.

The sorcerer is different because the sorcerer knows the importance of looking at something as-is.

5. Sturgeon's law is real. There are a lot of books with either low-level tripe repackaged as something new, utter trash faux-science, or at worst, literal-cult-indoctrination-traps. Not all of it as bad as sometimes a schizo-tier rambling could lead to an insight about something else you read, but those are few and far in-between, and the knowledge gained typically is only tangentially-related to the material.

6. Relax. Take it easy, going in this with a mindset of rest will pay dividends on progress. learn to observe your thoughts by randomly talking what comes to mind, and then focusing on those random words.

7. Have faith. You'll make it.
Replies: >>336 >>371 >>501
>>334
>Franz Bardon - Practice of Magical Evocation
why not Initiation Into Hermetics instead? it's the same author but you have to read his previous work before jumping into evocation
Replies: >>341
>>336
Because I'm just going on what I have, personally and didn't know about that book.

Thank you for putting that there.
let me guess OP you want to learn magick to grow taller?
Replies: >>353
>>330 (OP) 
Here is an archive of a dump of literature related to what you're looking for.

https://archive.is/GrATo
>>349
sob yes
Replies: >>360
0d89d9b64904fb02a03033ae87e6c59ed066785e5cee3690fb837d329754b6a9.jpg
(157.4KB, 440x440)
>>353
gotem
Replies: >>362
>>360
Please don't laugh.
Isn't magic and generally anything related to demonic or evil or just bad in general?
I don't want anyone falling into the same bullshit rabbit holes I got into while I was younger. It was a big waste of time, so let me save you all some time.
There is no "magic." If it works, it is natural. The things people like to call upon isn't magic, and treating it like it is only makes it harder to work with since "magic" implies it's not real. 
In a sense, it's a lot like what >>334 posted, namely number 5. You're wasting time if you're looking into books about "magic."
Hopefully this makes sense and doesn't seem completely schizophrenic, it's just that adopting this mindset has helped me improve my own life quite a bit.
Replies: >>379
>>371
No I don't understand you at all. Elaborate.
>makes it harder to work with since "magic" implies it's not real. 
But I don't think it isn't real. Is this some sort of law of attraction thing where you don't doubt yourself constantly?
>You're wasting time if you're looking into books about "magic."
But the post you referred to recommend me two books about magick.
Replies: >>382
>>379
Not him, but what he's saying is that the term magic has a connotation which your mind will naturally relate to fiction. Even if you try to override the connotation in your mind, there will be some natural doubt there caused by society and upbringing.  As such, when performing any kind of ritual or whatever, you shouldnt think "I'm doing magic" because your brain will immediately begin doubting itself as you said.
Start with divining, if anything. It's the least concrete, the most fun, and only condemns you to eternal suffering on a coin toss, not immediate mortal peril.
Divination techniques can be rediscovered through trial and error, which allows you to twine your practice with whatever worship you attempt (and gives feedback on how real or fickle whatever you're worshiping is), it's empirical, and there are some living practitioners who have documented their work. 
For best effect, avoid ambiguity. Divination of "fate" is theoretically powerful, but not useful in your immediate future. For practical reasons, you want to pick up one with ritual, where that ritual informs you on the correct decision to both trivial and non-trivial choices. You use the trivial choices to gauge how effective your divination will be for non-trivial ones, and how refined your practice of ritual is.
Some hot options:
>Dactylomancy
Divination by rings, which can be as simple as using a precious metal ring and seeing how it wavers for a simple 'yes' or 'no' question (good), to tying it in with alchemical tradition and coordinating a full divining table. (more effort, potential reward, may suit your taste)
>Gyromancy
Spin around like a retard, fall over on a letter, repeat. Excellent for worship that demands movement (circumambulation could be twined in, easily), that is said to induce faintness, or requires dance. Produces usable words and sentences, but not very quickly.
>Onomancy
Divination by names. Find or create a cipher by which you interpret names and start applying it to those you interact with. May help lead you to "unique people," or tell how to modify your behavior around them for best results.
>Bibliomancy (general)
Pick your favorite manuscript, or the most practical one, ask a question, and drop it on the floor. Really, there's a lot of ways to get a "random passage," but that's what it usually looks like. Extremely practical for asking questions, but very loosely interpreted; as a result it may even be able to provide advice you don't know you need yet (while still sometimes answering immediates). 
>Myomancy
Mice have a unique position in Abrahamic faiths especially that makes them a great "double-dip" option for any sort of druidic worship. Keep a pet mouse, pay close attention to its behaviors, particularly if it has any reliable patterns before bad things happen to you or near you, as well as things like the weather, bouts of luck, or before life-altering decisions you are unsure on.
not op but thanks for everyone's suggestions :^)

>>334
>If you want to invoke/evoke, stick to gods- real, good gods
Is there a good resource on how to invoke/evoke gods? Feels like most of the info I'm finding online is just larp. I'm mainly interested in invoking greco-roman gods or some of the vedic/hindu pantheon.
Replies: >>504
CwJhMp1VUAAf2YS.jpg
(75.1KB, 720x483)
>>330 (OP) 
Interested in sex magic, succubus summoning and all that jazz? I don't have any material to provide because I learnt through a friend, but here's some tips.

1. DON'T attempt to summon something like your waifu or whatever, just try to summon a sexy lady, but not a already existing fictional one, as you could accidentally summon the real one from their universe, and tear a hole in the fabric of reality.
2. If you want to make your dick bigger, I suggest having a look at the books in this thread (if you haven't already), as some of them detail object enlargement, which in my experience works fine on organs in the right condition.
3. In regards to the above if you want to make an object fuckable (as in giving it an orifice) keep in mind that those holes could lead to anywhere in other dimensions. You don't want to stick your dick in the crab dimension or the dimensions aids originated from.
BTW I realise after posting I've mentioned dimensions more often than I thought, I suppose fuckmagic and alternate realites go hand in hand. Feel free to ask me about dimensionology if you're curious about that.
Replies: >>513
>>501
Try starting with historical or anthropological texts describing shrines and practices and getting a good modern rendition of your own set up. I recommend Mycenaean Tree and Pillar Cult and its Mediterranean Relations (10.2307/623870) in particular; I remember it having some pretty decent descriptions of altars and such.
Navigating LARP is a pain in the ass, but you can usually sort it out when people start trying to take a mystical approach to science, instead of a scientific approach to mysticism, or (as in the case of pre-Crowley magic) a mystical approach to mysticism -- no explanations, no rigor, just ancient powers.
Stick to those sorts of things.
>>503
>Feel free to ask me about dimensionology if you're curious about that.
ok
how do i travel to another dimension
Replies: >>538
59a.jpg
(32.1KB, 341x512)
>>513
Kill yourself.
As someone who doesn't really believe in the supernatural - how is magic (or at least one of its varieties) actually supposed to work? Does it merely increase the probability of things going the way you want them to go, or does it physically shove the atoms and whatnot into the desired direction?
Replies: >>551
>>546
There isn't a systematized explanation for "magic" as one thing, many have claimed to be magical for many reasons.
Here are the broad categories where people trying to practice magic typically fall under:
>Magic is derived from a being outside the grasp of corporal reality, in short, religion. Alien but known beings that transcend what we understand to be possible intercede directly (with intent). When you are lucid dreaming, and you begin to fly, what motive, quantum-compliant force is allowing that act? In the same way that you can 'ignore' limitations in a dream, these beings are said to be able to do so with reality. Some forms of supernatural belief fall under this when you wouldn't expect them to; long before Crowley, the nigromancy many of his beliefs are derived from were first practiced by, and developed by, the 11th and 12th century Catholic church. Notably, the magic is always attributed DIRECTLY to the entities summoned/bargained with, all you have is your own knowledge of corporeal reality, and favors over them. Humans may transcend humanity and collect some of these powers, but this is dependent on their conversion into being an inhuman being that meets the prior criteria, not something they can do "naturally," and it's never that they have power over some science fact, but that they can simply ignore fact entirely in exerting their will within whatever domains they've gained control over. Ex: "to make fires that burn from nothing, fueled with nothing" (magic) vs making "to make fires creating and heating oxygen from nothing" (still ultimately bound to the mechanistic nature of reality)
>Magic is derived from some presently unknown facet of human ability, usually with nonsense of something about psy-energy, electricity, magnetism, and holograms. Reality is susceptible to human perception, and therefore certain elements of reality, and ritual or belief is just a lens by which to focus this energy. Magic is, in the end, 100% compliant with real science, we just don't know how yet. If someone thinks real hard and starts a fire with their mind, is it 'spontaneous,' or fed by a fuel source we simply don't understand? Some powers that feel like people are ascribing to an outer entity wind up being a thinly veiled version of this type, as well. For example, someone who insists they have blessed luck may in fact ascribe that blessing to some spiritual practice they perform- not the entity that they dedicate that practice *to*. Another example is how certain new-age forms of Christianity say that blessed people with good attitudes somehow repel demons, win in fact doctrine has always asserted it's because blessed people keep the presence and favor of God, which falls under the last category. Also includes people insisting that humanity in general collectively causes phenomenons, and most consciousness wogging.
>Magic is derived from a third party non-entity that envelops our surroundings, like gravity, but it isn't conscious. Mostly the same as the above, but it does not originate from humans, and it isn't something you can worship. Posits that there are repeatable patterns of behavior that trigger supernatural phenomenon, but that the ways and reasons are complex and not well understood. By far the most cult-y of the three, ironically enough, and may invade and insert itself underneath legitimate religion or humanist beliefs. Karma, Feng Shui, number cults, even the 'holy spirit' in many new age Christian practices, and astronomy in general, these are secularized under the nose of adherents. When was the last time an astronomer actually explained why it works, rather than asserting that it simply does, or that some form of 'energy' or 'fate' is powering it? Feng Shui, as another example, originated from a complex set of beliefs regarding dragons, their preferences, and supposed final resting place, that is before dragon worship was gutted from Chinese doctrine- now, many practitioners are deriving their beliefs from pure trial and error and hearsay.
For your specific question, let's say we have a toy boat and a deep plastic bin. You have a great obsession with making the boat float in the bin, but you don't have any water on hand. Regardless, you drop the boat. Suddenly, the boat is suspended in mid-air, because:
>Your fervor was felt by the spirits of dead plants and animals processed to synthesize the plastic, and as you have opened your body to them through the rituals of the tribes of the Amazon, they can work now through you, mystically catching the boat in the air. If anyone were to test this phenomenon, it would be as though the boat simply stopped without cause. Gravity never even factors in.
>Your fervor is the thing that caught the boat in the air. You are exerting a typically imperceptible psychic force on the boat sufficient to hold it in the air. Maybe your power is heightened by the environment's attunement to psychic energy, or your fully charged JO crystal. Gravity works, but it is beaten by raw human power.
>You have tried this experiment several thousand times in places that had urban legends of boats floating when they should not, whether they're flipped over, sunk in battle, or just shoddily made. As was fated, you have finally located a place here boats can float without needing water, at least under these precise conditions- and who knows what they are. The time of day? Alignment of planets? The precise angle of the Earth's magnetic pole? Gravity works, but it is beaten by the destiny of this place, whatever causes it.
Replies: >>555
>>551
So... If i wanted i could make dragons real?
Replies: >>556
>>555
Yes, if you believed in one of those three broad categories of magic, and your belief was correct (or naturally powerful). Respectively, here are some examples, pulled from my ass:
>You run a Komodo dragon farm and pray to Njord to grant you a true dragon through their sacrifice and keeping.
>You think really hard and dragons are real. The only reason dragons aren't real yet is because you aren't thinking hard enough yet.
>There is a dimension in which dragons are already real. By performing a great deal of shenanigans, you can go there. You think the method to hop dimensions has something to do with colliding waveforms and laylines.
I don't do magic, so I have no basis to tell you which of the above is right, or any real practice that would grant you dragons, but I can say that these three general views barely coexist with each-other and it's probably only one of the three that's real.
witcher_thumbs_up.jpg
(58.7KB, 670x378)
>>330 (OP) 
1. Give victim a coin
2. Turn your back to them, telling them to place it in a random hand and hold that hand up to their head
3. Give it a silent count of 5 and then tell them to put it down with the other hand
4. Whichever hand is lighter (from the blood draining away) is the one holding the coin
5. This does not work on dark negroes

23 replies | 5 files | 20 UIDs
Connecting...
Show Post Actions

Actions:

Captcha:

Instructions
- news - rules - faq - source code -