- Joined
- Mar 7, 2022
- Messages
- 32
- Reaction score
- 74
Since it's been added to the library recently, what better time to crack open a discussion about this legendary book. Inspiring works from al-Buni and the Picatrix all the way to Ficino and Agrippa, what can we learn from this theory of the magic art?
I thought it'd be nice to have an open discussion, no set topic or purpose besides whatever catches our eye in the text.
I know for me I'm intrigued by his explanation of how prayers work. If capital-G God is immutable and unchangeable and has everything planned, why does prayer work? How can he send a storm and then avert it based on prayer, wouldn't that mean He changed his mind? And if he is the only true God, why do all these heatens pray to their other gods and get results? On this, he writes:
"Moreover, it ought not to be thought of God that He who is in every way immovable may be in any way moved by the prayers of men, no matter how great the desire with which they may be expressed. But, with God having been prayed to, the matter of the elements is moved by prayers, as we say physically, which, in the first place and principally through the celestial disposition, receives such motion that we proffer simply metaphysical causes. Since therefore, entreaties to God are made by men of devoted mind and of willing desire with due ceremony for inducing some motion in a subjected matter, the desired effect follows, the harmony in the first place procuring ail things in every thing."
There is an almost Chaos Magicky feel to his philosophy. Routinely throughout the book he says how prayers not only to God but even to things that don't exist still retain some effect on the material world because of the "rays" released by ritual acts (or any acts, for that matter). He writes how words and names with no inherent power or meaning to them can still eventually give off magical rays based on how people use them.
First reading this, it made a lot of sense to me. If spirits have a common reality, how can their experiences be so different? How does one person invite the wrath of God by stepping on a Quran while millions of other LHP/Satanists/etc. can freely perform any blasphemy they like without consequence? Perhaps then there is no spirit being offended but rather the consequences of releasing such and such rays in such and such context. The "central ruling unity" of a Muslim who ascribes great psychological weight to a Quran is more likely to be negatively affected by its burning than to someone whom it is just a book.
Ultimately, I like the compromise al-Kindi draws. It strikes a balance between the free spirit of Chaos Magic, where anything at all can release rays that affect the world, but still grounds it in the context of the surrounding cosmos. Belief and ritual acts will ultimately be empty if the surrounding rays pervert and frustrate your work.
To add on, I feel like this theory also explained well for me those little actions for magic. Why would it be more preferable to have a taglock of a target if this is an energetic art? Or why is it more efficacious to leave charm bags near to the target if the conceit of this arte is spooky action at a distance? The theory of rays nuances them well, I think.
To be fair, it is also basically just a form of the energetic theory, but without privileging a specific force like prana or what have you.
I thought it'd be nice to have an open discussion, no set topic or purpose besides whatever catches our eye in the text.
I know for me I'm intrigued by his explanation of how prayers work. If capital-G God is immutable and unchangeable and has everything planned, why does prayer work? How can he send a storm and then avert it based on prayer, wouldn't that mean He changed his mind? And if he is the only true God, why do all these heatens pray to their other gods and get results? On this, he writes:
"Moreover, it ought not to be thought of God that He who is in every way immovable may be in any way moved by the prayers of men, no matter how great the desire with which they may be expressed. But, with God having been prayed to, the matter of the elements is moved by prayers, as we say physically, which, in the first place and principally through the celestial disposition, receives such motion that we proffer simply metaphysical causes. Since therefore, entreaties to God are made by men of devoted mind and of willing desire with due ceremony for inducing some motion in a subjected matter, the desired effect follows, the harmony in the first place procuring ail things in every thing."
There is an almost Chaos Magicky feel to his philosophy. Routinely throughout the book he says how prayers not only to God but even to things that don't exist still retain some effect on the material world because of the "rays" released by ritual acts (or any acts, for that matter). He writes how words and names with no inherent power or meaning to them can still eventually give off magical rays based on how people use them.
First reading this, it made a lot of sense to me. If spirits have a common reality, how can their experiences be so different? How does one person invite the wrath of God by stepping on a Quran while millions of other LHP/Satanists/etc. can freely perform any blasphemy they like without consequence? Perhaps then there is no spirit being offended but rather the consequences of releasing such and such rays in such and such context. The "central ruling unity" of a Muslim who ascribes great psychological weight to a Quran is more likely to be negatively affected by its burning than to someone whom it is just a book.
Ultimately, I like the compromise al-Kindi draws. It strikes a balance between the free spirit of Chaos Magic, where anything at all can release rays that affect the world, but still grounds it in the context of the surrounding cosmos. Belief and ritual acts will ultimately be empty if the surrounding rays pervert and frustrate your work.
Post automatically merged:
To add on, I feel like this theory also explained well for me those little actions for magic. Why would it be more preferable to have a taglock of a target if this is an energetic art? Or why is it more efficacious to leave charm bags near to the target if the conceit of this arte is spooky action at a distance? The theory of rays nuances them well, I think.
To be fair, it is also basically just a form of the energetic theory, but without privileging a specific force like prana or what have you.
Last edited: