NewAge as The Other

[HoldAll]

Scholars of various disciplines use "the Other" or "Othering" as "viewing or treating (a person or group of people) as intrinsically different from and alien to oneself" (dictionary definition) often as a way to distinguish oneself from persons or groups considered inferior, for example in the context of colonialism with the ruling colonisers looking down, and discriminating against, the 'primitive natives'.

I've noticed such a tendency myself when it comes to New-Age bashing, which I'm ashamed to say (ok, not so ashamed) I enjoy no end because I used to run with that crowd for a couple of years on account of my then yoga teacher girlfriend, and boy, did I meet some space cadets and seriously deluded wackos back then… You might have noticed that I don't have very much compunction to resort to Othering but jokes about

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

aside, it helps to me to define what I'm actually about in the occult arena and what I definitely don't want to be seen dead to do, think or believe because it would too much smack of NewAgeism.

Now the standard scholarly work on what NewAge really means in Wouter J. Hanegraaff's "New Age Religion and Western Culture" (which I'm hesitant to share because it's not an easy read, interminable footnotes on every page, etc. although the guy writes entertainingly for a serious author) but I haven't read it yet and don't want to engage in a scholarly discussion about what NewAge really is or hear about outrageous love&light specimens that make you cringe for days. Instead, I would like to engage in some creative Othering and use that shamefully discriminatory tool to find out if we share some common ground with 'them', maybe weed out some prejudices (and create new ones ), or identify beliefs or pratices even NewAgers would find weird or incomprehensible.

I'll start: It's not entirely true that NewAgers sport rose-tinted spectacles all the time and want to live in a world where all is sugar and spice and everything nice. It was my observation at that time that some of them definitely were prepared to look closer at their less-than-spiritual side and engage in some sort of shadow work (Jung used to be held in high regard, no surprise there). At the same time, they seemed to be deathly afraid of magic in all its forms, even of the most pious white-lighter variety. Affirmations were ok, various 'healing' (= guided relaxation) too, but no rituals, please, spare the innocent! I wonder now if this was a holdover taboo from the days of all-pervading Christianity where praying to the saints for intercession was ok but anything more than that a demonic iniquity.

So: How are we in this forum different from all those NewAgers (except that we don't want to be like 'them')? Is it a readiness to engage in critical thinking and use common sense where appropriate? A habit of doing more thorough research? A willingness to actually interact with the numinous instead of just passively believing in it?

 

[Khoren_]

When I started in the "New Age" it was all about superficial understandings. Love and light and none of the deep work that involves, you know, actual work. There's also a tendency of "New Age" groups to tend towards cultish behaviors - especially a reliance on an elder that will "reveal the secrets" to you directly. Given that a LOT of what New Agers have coopted - much in the same way with any cooption - has historical, or even more practical, roots to actual magical processes.

I think a good example is the use of "intention" and "crystal grids". The first thing I am always going to bash is The Secret. Now I have not read it, admittedly, but I have seen the results of this type of thinking very directly. The idea is that if you simply "intend" something to happen, or "manifest it" into reality, it will simply happen. It mentions nothing about accessing the subconscious, using external forces to push your intention to the world, or even working towards the actual thing itself, merely that if you believe it will happen hard enough, it will. As for crystal grids, yes there is historical evidence that certain crystals, gems, and even types of clusters have certain properties, but these crystals have to be actively worked with, grown alongside, and not simply "placed in a grid". Crystals are core to some of my practices, but they are not used as a literal thing. They are representations of certain higher actions that have been performed outside of simply setting them into a grid, coupled with personal workings that accentuate the meaning behind these crystals.

I haven't met a single New Ager, or at least one that hasn't dived past the typical "mass produced books" type of new ager, that has actively gone through a DNotS, let alone performed any actual shadow work. Given that most of them, even to the point of some NeoPagans, simply accept things that are shoveled their way by whatever popular writer they last read, there is also definitely a level of critical thinking that isn't being generated, especially if the author is simply trying to con their "followers" into buy their newest book.

I think the next thing that should be pointed out is probably the Spirit Science, Scientology, and Rebirther type veins of people who go off the deep end and practically claim that all of human history as we know it is distinctly wrong, and actually the Egyptians had Electricity, and the Mayans had Internet! Yet their evidence isn't grounded in anthropological claims, but hand waving and general misunderstandings of what particular architecture "stood" for or acted as.

There are definitely veins in historical magic where this sort of thought process took hold for centuries (looking at you Agrippa) but generally, I think the majority of modern magic, at least anything more rigorous than Wicca, has a sort of academic or scientific stint to it. Sure the Chaos Magicians are over there screaming barabaric and inventing new gods while the Thelemites are practicing the same rites they have been for two centuries, but at the very least, there was a vein of "we have had multiple people do this independently and come out on the other end with strikingly similar results." I have yet to see anyone who considers themselves "new age" (which is getting less and less, thankfully) go "Oh yeah, I definitely performed a yogic exercise and reached a state of trace where I was actively fed information by a spirit I have been working with for years."

Now mind you, there are very few new agers who actively seek out work with other entities, or even understand things beyond their superficial enclosures, but I'm sure there are some. I personally rag on "new age" as the kind of people who say they "smudged the demons out of their house" but literally just lit some sage and waved it about, or the kind of people who do Yoga everyday, but do none of the actual yogic/tantric work that is supposed to be involved with it, or, my favorite, the kind of people who think "witchcraft" is "not placing a welcome sign at your front door because it's inviting malefic entities".

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I've never really paid much attention to New Agers; maybe I've been lucky and not been trapped in a corner with one. I didn't bother reading any New Age books during my research, as, well, they didn't seem 'serious' enough. I did read 'The Secret', however, and it annoyed me almost as much as Paulo Coelho's 'The Alchemist'.

'The Secret' is the perfect example of what I always complain about: Practice without any real idea about what they're doing. Buying a toaster and then using it to heat up your bathwater

I bought it in the vague hope they would have come to some useful conclusions. To no avail.

 

[Morell]

I was following new age youtube channel for a year, local one in my own language. It started like spiritual news channel, but turned into its own spiritual channel hating magic and certain people. I was watching one certain guy as He felt good to me, his energy felt good, he was humble, even asking people for telling him if he makes a mistake in his claims. But that changed over time, in I think 3 motnhs I felt his energy to turn ugly to me and he lost his humbleness. I tested it by noting quite a mistake in his mathematics in one video, which lead only to my comment being deleted and him stopping asking for people to point out his mistakes.

On interesting note, I one day bought Jasmuheen book on Divine Nutrition, offering her brethianism way to reach state with no need for food. At first look it felt to me as good idea, I counted the money I would save if not eating and that really made it attractive. Glad that I already had some occult knowledge, as the exercises felt like the weakest ones I ever saw.
However after reading the book, thinking about it and doing my research I found the book valuable in new way. I have it locked away like Necronomicon, because it is book that really kills. There are real people who died believing in those teachings. I think it to be unwanted gift from New Agers. What occult collection would be really complete without some really dangerous book?

 

[Xenophon]

One who is fighting for turf cannot afford to start sharing ground. This is doubly so when dealing with those of questionable competence.

Post automatically merged: Sep 10, 2024

I've never really paid much attention to New Agers; maybe I've been lucky and not been trapped in a corner with one. I didn't bother reading any New Age books during my research, as, well, they didn't seem 'serious' enough. I did read 'The Secret', however, and it annoyed me almost as much as Paulo Coelho's 'The Alchemist'.

'The Secret' is the perfect example of what I always complain about: Practice without any real idea about what they're doing. Buying a toaster and then using it to heat up your bathwater

I bought it in the vague hope they would have come to some useful conclusions. To no avail.

I love the line about toasters and bathwater.

 

[Anziel_Merkaba]

I will say one thing, while new agers are fruitier than a pina colada, they do have a point about mentality being the most important part of achieving your goals... it's just everything else they do is completely bass ackwards with only the shallowest of thought put into their practices.

The Starbucksification of spirituality indeed.

 

[Xenophon]

All this being said, the New Agers do sometimes provide an escape hatch from a foundering religion. (And, like any escape hatch, it were well not to linger there.) I come from a blasted part of the planet where even, say, Eastern Orthodoxy was viewed "outside the Christian mainstream."

 

[Altan]

I've been in both crowds, and in my opinion the magic/occult "crowd" and the new age "crowd" would realize they are just a more diverse crowd when the barriers are taken down. Misconceptions passing off as opinions abound in both arenas, and I have met more crazies on occult forums than I have ever encountered at a new age expo. New age types don't go off and launch astral attacks when they think the verbal inflections of your post stepped on a mental toe or two.

Where I like to be is right where they meet, and where each side tends to not like to admit that there is such a place. I would just call it being creatively esoteric or esoterically creative. Forget the occult/arcane terminology. I want revelation and eureka, and all that I experience as self coming together in a symphony of awareness that makes the world take notice.

Of course, the world is perceived to take notice when one's inner senses are awakened to experience it. Or else one wants the five sense to declare the world has taken notice, and that is just not cool unless it is circumstantial to one's deeper intentions regarding the magic and mystery etc.

Interestingly, occultists and new agers do meet. They meet in the cultivator. In magic(k), this is the initiate undergoing training. In the new age (same as the old age) ideology, you have the mystics and masters that have also undergone training. The problem is that this overlap does not include the ignorant and misinformed. It does include the formerly ignorant, who for a little understanding nourished a pretty strong commitment to their paths. There was no argument or even place to argue. You did it because something deep called, and the rest was not a guaranteed success.

So if you consider modern magic and the new age, both are 19th century fabrications in Western thought, with poster children being Theosophy for the new age and the Golden Dawn for modern magic(k). I would say those interested in the esoteric (that covers both fields) replace the modern and new terms with broader views of magic (which is applied cultivation), and mysticism (which is the power behind magic).

 

[Xenophon]

I've been in both crowds, and in my opinion the magic/occult "crowd" and the new age "crowd" would realize they are just a more diverse crowd when the barriers are taken down. Misconceptions passing off as opinions abound in both arenas, and I have met more crazies on occult forums than I have ever encountered at a new age expo. New age types don't go off and launch astral attacks when they think the verbal inflections of your post stepped on a mental toe or two.

Where I like to be is right where they meet, and where each side tends to not like to admit that there is such a place. I would just call it being creatively esoteric or esoterically creative. Forget the occult/arcane terminology. I want revelation and eureka, and all that I experience as self coming together in a symphony of awareness that makes the world take notice.

Of course, the world is perceived to take notice when one's inner senses are awakened to experience it. Or else one wants the five sense to declare the world has taken notice, and that is just not cool unless it is circumstantial to one's deeper intentions regarding the magic and mystery etc.

Interestingly, occultists and new agers do meet. They meet in the cultivator. In magic(k), this is the initiate undergoing training. In the new age (same as the old age) ideology, you have the mystics and masters that have also undergone training. The problem is that this overlap does not include the ignorant and misinformed. It does include the formerly ignorant, who for a little understanding nourished a pretty strong commitment to their paths. There was no argument or even place to argue. You did it because something deep called, and the rest was not a guaranteed success.

So if you consider modern magic and the new age, both are 19th century fabrications in Western thought, with poster children being Theosophy for the new age and the Golden Dawn for modern magic(k). I would say those interested in the esoteric (that covers both fields) replace the modern and new terms with broader views of magic (which is applied cultivation), and mysticism (which is the power behind magic).

Guilty as charged. A lot of we magi are just wankers with a darker vibe. I would like to say that our traditions offer avenues for genuine self-perfecting that the New Agers lack. Whether I can actually back that claim in my own person is the whole question, innit?

 

[HoldAll]

I still wonder about the NewAge's abhorrence of magic though… Wikipedia classifies New Age as a New Religious Movement, which reminds me of the explosion of scholarly interest in magic in recent years where some scholars still see religion and magic as polar opposites (only one of many schools of thought, hotly contested and held to be superseded by many), the main difference allegedly being that in religions, the gods are supplicated with the believers humbly submitting to divine will, while magicians on the other hand strive to forge their own fates by supernatural means, enlisting the help of gods or spirits for their own personal aims; the latter has been always contentious ever since the Neoplatonists in Late Antiquity claimed that magic was only licit for attempting communion with the gods (theurgy) and not manipulating them for one's own gain, as e.g. in the PGM.

It's almost as if the Christian orthodox claim of Early Modernity (Ficino, Pico della Mirandola, etc.) had been revived according to which only 'natural magic', i.e. the exploitation of the magical properties of crystals or herbs as talismans (with due consideration of astrological conditions) without any involvement of spirits whatsoever, was allowed. My obervation is that NewAgers regard ceremonial magic as somehow impious (although they'd never use that word, of course) like those Ancient and Renaissance philosophers. They might create power objects but draw the line at consecrating them. They might pray to their gods or spirits but entertain a strong aversion to actually conjuring them. Magicians only ever feature as legendary characters in their myths, safely tucked away in the past, although the 'evil sorcerer' seem to be a popular trope as well (sometimes the narratives of NewAge books are difficult to tell apart from children's fairytales). The idea that someone in their midst performed practical magic would probably threaten their well-ordered pastel-coloured cloud cuckoo lands, that's at least my theory.

 

[Xenophon]

I still wonder about the NewAge's abhorrence of magic though… Wikipedia classifies New Age as a New Religious Movement, which reminds me of the explosion of scholarly interest in magic in recent years where some scholars still see religion and magic as polar opposites (only one of many schools of thought, hotly contested and held to be superseded by many), the main difference allegedly being that in religions, the gods are supplicated with the believers humbly submitting to divine will, while magicians on the other hand strive to forge their own fates by supernatural means, enlisting the help of gods or spirits for their own personal aims; the latter has been always contentious ever since the Neoplatonists in Late Antiquity claimed that magic was only licit for attempting communion with the gods (theurgy) and not manipulating them for one's own gain, as e.g. in the PGM.

It's almost as if the Christian orthodox claim of Early Modernity (Ficino, Pico della Mirandola, etc.) had been revived according to which only 'natural magic', i.e. the exploitation of the magical properties of crystals or herbs as talismans (with due consideration of astrological conditions) without any involvement of spirits whatsoever, was allowed. My obervation is that NewAgers regard ceremonial magic as somehow impious (although they'd never use that word, of course) like those Ancient and Renaissance philosophers. They might create power objects but draw the line at consecrating them. They might pray to their gods or spirits but entertain a strong aversion to actually conjuring them. Magicians only ever feature as legendary characters in their myths, safely tucked away in the past, although the 'evil sorcerer' seem to be a popular trope as well (sometimes the narratives of NewAge books are difficult to tell apart from children's fairytales). The idea that someone in their midst performed practical magic would probably threaten their well-order pastel-coloured cloud cuckoo lands, that's at least my theory.

If the spirits do my will after I drop hints, it doesn't count as my actually doing magick? Cool. Reminds me of Lincoln's tale of the gent who quit drinking. Accepting an offer of lemonade, he noted that he couldn't be blamed if someone had added whiskey, "unbeknownst to meself."

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I still wonder about the NewAge's abhorrence of magic though… Wikipedia classifies New Age as a New Religious Movement, which reminds me of the explosion of scholarly interest in magic in recent years where some scholars still see religion and magic as polar opposites (only one of many schools of thought, hotly contested and held to be superseded by many), the main difference allegedly being that in religions, the gods are supplicated with the believers humbly submitting to divine will, while magicians on the other hand strive to forge their own fates by supernatural means, enlisting the help of gods or spirits for their own personal aims; the latter has been always contentious ever since the Neoplatonists in Late Antiquity claimed that magic was only licit for attempting communion with the gods (theurgy) and not manipulating them for one's own gain, as e.g. in the PGM.

It's almost as if the Christian orthodox claim of Early Modernity (Ficino, Pico della Mirandola, etc.) had been revived according to which only 'natural magic', i.e. the exploitation of the magical properties of crystals or herbs as talismans (with due consideration of astrological conditions) without any involvement of spirits whatsoever, was allowed. My obervation is that NewAgers regard ceremonial magic as somehow impious (although they'd never use that word, of course) like those Ancient and Renaissance philosophers. They might create power objects but draw the line at consecrating them. They might pray to their gods or spirits but entertain a strong aversion to actually conjuring them. Magicians only ever feature as legendary characters in their myths, safely tucked away in the past, although the 'evil sorcerer' seem to be a popular trope as well (sometimes the narratives of NewAge books are difficult to tell apart from children's fairytales). The idea that someone in their midst performed practical magic would probably threaten their well-ordered pastel-coloured cloud cuckoo lands, that's at least my theory.

Shows how little I know about New Age! New Agers against magic? To quote Terry Pratchett when he heard that JK Rowling did not class her books as fantasy: "What the **** did she think she was writing then?"

As I've said before, I view religion as a moral code coupled to a (mostly) rubbish way of doing magic. So New Age definitely a religion then

 

[Xenophon]

Shows how little I know about New Age! New Agers against magic? To quote Terry Pratchett when he heard that JK Rowling did not class her books as fantasy: "What the **** did she think she was writing then?"

As I've said before, I view religion as a moral code coupled to a (mostly) rubbish way of doing magic. So New Age definitely a religion then

I thought Rudolph Otto said it better. "Religion has become morality tinged with sentimentality."

What did J.K. Rowling think she was writing? Best-sellers. Mega-buck bessellers, and the Devil take all genres. Actually though, for some people cosplay (which Potter has spawned plenty of) becomes an alternate reality. Sort of a collective soft-schizophrenia. When reality sucks, you pretend it's something else. Your alter-ego supplants the original one, and all your buds have your back.

 

[HoldAll]

Shows how little I know about New Age! New Agers against magic? To quote Terry Pratchett when he heard that JK Rowling did not class her books as fantasy: "What the **** did she think she was writing then?"

As I've said before, I view religion as a moral code coupled to a (mostly) rubbish way of doing magic. So New Age definitely a religion then

In "Interview with a Wizard", Pete Carroll says on the topic of fiction (p. 51):

For entertainment, and perhaps some enlightenment, read anything and everything by Sir Terry Pratchett, one of the few novelists who wrote about
magic from an insider’s perspective. I guess it’s okay to mention that now that he has sadly left us.

I've always wondered about that, he always seemed to well informed about ancient occult lore and magic in general.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

In "Interview with a Wizard", Pete Carroll says on the topic of fiction (p. 51):

For entertainment, and perhaps some enlightenment, read anything and everything by Sir Terry Pratchett, one of the few novelists who wrote about
magic from an insider’s perspective. I guess it’s okay to mention that now that he has sadly left us.

I've always wondered about that, he always seemed to well informed about ancient occult lore and magic in general.

He read and used a lot of science as well

His main thing though was that he was very good at exposing the foibles of human nature in the most positive way possible.

"Sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That's what sin is. Don't do anything I wouldn't do, if you ever find anything I wouldn't do."

 

[HoldAll]

To return to the topic of NewAge, what's so tragic about its adherents is that their belief systems don't really evolve. In my brief time with them, the worst possible condemnation of someone was that he wasn't 'spiritual' at all or that she wasn't really 'self-aware', which was their way of Othering people who hadn't swallowed the same red pill as them, and if you were doubtful of certain aspects of their multi-varied creeds, it was like "If you believe in chakras, you have to believe in UFOs and Atlantis too!". It was bad form to mention that this or that doctrine had already been debunked more than 50 years ago, or that their holy guru (here's looking at you, Sai Baba!) had been caught with his fingers in the till or some other inappropriate place; it was just not done. There was a certain dogmatism in the NewAgers I met, just like in the Sixties counterculture - "You're either with us or with the Establishment!". You were part of some invisible clan, and any skepticism could get you expelled.

The more sensible books on magic, on the other hand, have the dictum "Doubt everything!" already in their introduction (and a few of them even point out the paradoxical part because when you also doubt doubting everything, that means… right). I guess you have to be a sceptic because you're in fact acting on the occult information you acquire (and thus avoid getting burned) and don't simply see it as a means to catapult you into NewAge lalaland.

Post automatically merged: Wednesday at 2:57 PM

By "getting burned" I meant of course "suffering accidents", not literally getting burned at the stake. Incorrect information could also lead to simple failures, or not achieving the results you are aiming for.

 

[Sabbatius]

There was an old girlfriend of mine who participated in the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and was insistent that I join in at Mount Shasta. Needless to say after the event, I stopped even talking to her. The event was full of bad mockeries of Yoga and horribly interpreted astrology based on bad writings of "Consciousness Gurus."

 

[Altan]

The problem I have is that there is no such thing as a New Age belief system. The term applies to the belief that times are changing for the better, and that is treated as an archetype rather than just the nature of human experience. Otherwise, most are just into self-cultivation and healing type practices that occultists might even recognize.

The channeling can be a con or one's subconscious having a moment, but magic users used children for that all that time when they dealt with demons. Occultists also have long lists of correspondences with minerals, plants and symbols having power to affect mind and world. It isn't about belief, but about being sensitive enough to sense that substances have impact energetically.

The rest isn't about the content of the ideas, but about style, behavior and character, which is more about the person than the particular slant of the ideas they honor.

Outside those stereotypes, magic brings out events we want, and "manifesting" does the same.

 

[Mars]

I was following new age youtube channel for a year, local one in my own language. It started like spiritual news channel, but turned into its own spiritual channel hating magic and certain people. I was watching one certain guy as He felt good to me, his energy felt good, he was humble, even asking people for telling him if he makes a mistake in his claims. But that changed over time, in I think 3 motnhs I felt his energy to turn ugly to me and he lost his humbleness. I tested it by noting quite a mistake in his mathematics in one video, which lead only to my comment being deleted and him stopping asking for people to point out his mistakes.

Not new age, I do make videos about spiritual, occult and all that. I would love any feedback you have, since I want to make the best youtube videos possible and become successful with it to change the things in the world that constantly get on my arse.
(As if possessed by the god Apollo)

Also anyone else that reads this post. Tell me what sucks, what made you bored etc. I try to make indepth videos; both interesting for those that never heard of these topics while bringing something new for those that did.

I have a few longform and a few shorts. Posting regularly.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Romolo]

How are we in this forum different from all those NewAgers (except that we don't want to be like 'them')? Is it a readiness to engage in critical thinking and use common sense where appropriate? A habit of doing more thorough research? A willingness to actually interact with the numinous instead of just passively believing in it?

Very good questions.

A podcast I'm following (Emergent Wisdom) deals exactly with this topic

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. It is a very thoughtful one, because the makers are aware of the pitfall of the moral superiority of "not buying into a cult", of being the other (more educated, more advanced) magician. They touch on many of the points that "we" (the others, who have not taken the chill pill) observe regarding new age spirituality: the tendency to get away from earthly troubles ("spiritual by-passing") and avoiding shadow work, the (cruel) positive thinking (you are what you deserve), the cultural appropriation / spiritual shopping mall and hyperconsumerism (expensive retreats), beauty cult (Instagram models becoming influencers), proliferation of pseudoscience (quantum this, quantum that), etc.

As much as I believe this critique is valid, I'm sure a similar roasting can be made about us, the "other" magicians, the hardcore occultists and magicians that we believe to be. I always think of Gurdjieff's advice "put an end to your antipathy and get closer to people that you want to reject". I would rather sit down with a new age adept and connect, read cards, have a laugh, go for a walk, exchange experiences. I'm reminded of another powerful thought of Italian writer Leopardi: it is not difference that repulse us, but the similar, the near-identical. This thought has proliferated in the arts as the Doppelgänger. In the other, we see aspects of ourselves, of our shadow. We need to face our doppelgangers and understand them, get closer to them.