What is Magic?

[Mohammed Salah]

Magic is a tremendous theme that hold many overlaping branches, religions, philosophies, ideas.....etc
A huge maze
but what is magic about?
I found three major definitions
1-Aleister Crowley (Magic is the art and science in causing change in conformitywith will)
2-Dion Fortune (Magic is the art and science in causing change in conformity or Psyche with will)
Although highly accepted and approved between all Occult circles, but I feel it is not enough for holding the core quintessence of this divine science.
So the above mentioned I feel that they focusing on the outcome of magic and slightly on the quintessence of it.
3-Papus in his monumental work - A practical treaties on elementary magic - posted an all-compassing definition
(Magic is the science for understanding God, through understanding the nature of universe and the nature of Man)
because God no creature arrives to his holiness level to get a full understanding of his operations and wisdom, so Man can only feel God holiness through study and contemplation the mechanisms of the Cosmos and the inner operations of Man.
So I think Papus`s definitions touches the inner intimate core of Magic idenity.

 

[Ananda]

What you need to know is that magic is haram, according to Islam.

 

[Morell]

What you need to know is that magic is haram, according to Islam.

On a forum filled with magic practitioners... who cares? Besides it wasn't that much forbidden considering huge libraries of Islamic occultism.

I find trying to ban magic quite stupid and hypocritical.

 

[Van Horne]

What you need to know is that magic is haram, according to Islam.

So is ham! You should try it, it's freakin' delicious!

Post automatically merged: Nov 18, 2025

An interesting approach by Valentin Tomberg:
"There are three kinds of magic: magic where the magician is the instrument of divine power - this sacred magic; magic where the magician himself is the source of the magical operation - this is personal magic; lastly, magic where the magician is the instrument of elemental forces or other unconscious forces - this is sorcery."

 

[MorganBlack]

Well, magic is now thought of like art. Once art became about self-expression, then anything you express is art. Quality is a secondary consideration.

I'd love to see an evidence-based timeline of Magic and magical thinking as a wiki project. From the rise of shamanic magical symbolic thinking by Homo erectus 500,000 years ago, to capital 'M' Magic in the Mediterranean Greco-Roman world , to Dragon Ball Z chaos magic with Goku as a god. (Yes, it's a thing.).

 

[Van Horne]

Well, magic is now thought of like art. Once art became about self-expression, then anything you express is art. Quality is a secondary consideration.

I'd love to see an evidence-based timeline of Magic and magical thinking as a wiki project. From the rise of shamanic magical symbolic thinking by Homo erectus 500,000 years ago, to capital 'M' Magic in the Mediterranean Greco-Roman world , to Dragon Ball Z chaos magic with Goku as a god. (Yes, it's a thing.).

Good points and a very interesting idea!

Magic changed over time with changing needs and capabilities of Human civilization. From basic things like finding food (and someone to mate with), healing sickness and fighting enemies or getting filthy rich to more sophisticated goals like gaining wisdom, finding peace of mind or self-expression. For some tasks magic became obsolete through science, but others still need a little help from the other side! Especially personal struggles, that's a main reason for why there is still an interest in it, I guess. Still, science cannot answer every question and it lacks empathy, religion in its common forms is to dogmatic and lacks personal freedom and control, for magic is proactive.

 

[Amur]

Collapsing quantum states I would say. To manifest either a dead schrödingers cat or an alive one (it's in both states before you observe it )

 

[FireBorn]

Magick just is. It is humans trying to do somersaults to define it. Magick never changed, we did.

How we get there is wide and varied. So long as we get there. If you get there with a specific system, good for you. Just get there.

Personally, I dont bother defining it. I just experience it. Way smarter men have tried for thousands of years and failed to define it. It is my opinion that if you can define magick, you left the current and turned it into a math problem. You missed it entirely.

 

[Van Horne]

Magic changed over time

Magick never changed, we did.

Agreed! I have to specify: the purpose of magic...

 

[taschr]

I've always appreciated the Buddhist take on the magical powers which is that they are side effects of spiritual advancement. Attempting to structure a foundational model beyond this will only generate doubt, which is the first great hindrance that one must overcome on the spiritual path.

 

[Romolo]

Magic is a jar of molten snow kept in a drawer. A red ribbon tied to a branch in the woods. A serpent-shaped branch held in a cool hand. A phrase whispered thrice at a crossroads. The ontologies (what is good? what is bad? what is beauty? what is justice?) will not get you to the core. You will just circle around it. In worst case you will end up in a place that has nothing to with your question at all.

 

[Lucien6493]

Well, magic is now thought of like art. Once art became about self-expression, then anything you express is art. Quality is a secondary consideration.

I'd love to see an evidence-based timeline of Magic and magical thinking as a wiki project. From the rise of shamanic magical symbolic thinking by Homo erectus 500,000 years ago, to capital 'M' Magic in the Mediterranean Greco-Roman world , to Dragon Ball Z chaos magic with Goku as a god. (Yes, it's a thing.).

If art is the commodification of self-expression then yeah, quality doesn't even come into the picture. Neither does magick though. At least I hope not. In India, which is where I think this idea originally came from, art (as a creative process) was seen as a metaphor for the human condition, and by extension, of the journey an individual self within the Maya of time-space might undertake back to its identification with the Self, in which case art is magick in much the same way that Crowley saw yoga as a cultural variant of the Great Work of theurgy. As to how Alan Moore understands the idea, I have no idea though I can relate coming from a whole family of artists. Above the abyss (or in Samadhi) the whole Western language-game knotwork of utility/high art/low art becomes utterly meaningless, everything subsumed by Art as the love-play of the gods and their Shakti, but I would not go so far as to extend the courtesy to Goku.

 

[Hermetika]

An interesting approach by Valentin Tomberg:
"There are three kinds of magic: magic where the magician is the instrument of divine power - this sacred magic; magic where the magician himself is the source of the magical operation - this is personal magic; lastly, magic where the magician is the instrument of elemental forces or other unconscious forces - this is sorcery."

I really like this definition. It got me thinking about why I'm drawn to the magical arts in the first place...To me, this definition is breaking down how energy, spirit, consciousness can make its way into and out of form in which case, we all have access to it. But It also demonstrates how the role and skill of the mage is to discern which force is at play and the best way to work with it: repel, flow or direct it. In this sense, magic is the skill utilized by the mage to discern, work with, and manipulate the unseen forces. The intentions, culture, resonance etc of the mage will filter and influence the outcome.

 

[P.Finder]

It’s interesting how, when several perspectives appear in one thread, such a multifaceted term begins to reveal itself more holistically.
Since I’ve been in contact with the Buddhist tradition for quite a long time, the view close to me is that magic (or abilities, siddhis) is the result of spiritual development, practice, or blessings.
Just as a gift can be innate, it can also be a blessing received through a Lineage, a Teacher, or a Tradition.


From the perspective of the Western Tradition, Crowley gave a very concise definition of magic.
I also resonate with this one, quote:
"Magic is the Path of evolution and liberation of consciousness, a path of reducing its conditioning, transcending limitations, and moving beyond dissatisfaction."

 

[Robert Ramsay]

For the practical side of it, magic is being lucky on purpose.

Also, I side with Alan Moore who says that art and magic are basically the same thing.

 

[MorganBlack]

To quote King Mob, in the 'The Invisibles', a comic from author and chaos magician Grant Morrision, "Magic is making the bread fall butter-side up."

Dr. Jeffrey Kripal , author, paranormal and mind researcher, and Chair in Philosophy and Religious Thought at Rice University once said, "Religion is art that has forgotten it is art."

To both I'd add, "Magic that has forgotten it is Art is just religion."

 

[Robert Ramsay]

To quote King Mob, in the 'The Invisibles', a comic from author and chaos magician Grant Morrision, "Magic is making the bread fall butter-side up."

Like I said, being lucky on purpose

 

[MorganBlack]

Man, it gets so much harder to come of ecumenical definitions of magic once we leave the inclusiveness and precision of Chaos magic. I like people seeking their own definition. We have to change the bigger shared Story we are in, imho, and that is part of it.

So I am also totally fine with Folk Catholics who might define magic as, "God's power moving through the world." Which is very similar to Van Horne's very interesting quote from Valentin Tomberg above. I just mentally rewrite "God' as the Neoplatonic Nous as the "code" of reality, and the Demiurge as the fictional character who's playing as the big local server daemon in this part of the MMO we are in. Maybe over in some other sub-quantum slice people over there have Thor, or Goku, or whomever, where they have spawned or jump gated to.

In my personal cosmo-conception I like to straddle a line which is just fuzzy and plausible enough I don't trigger the grey goo of scientism to hunt me down like a materialist Shoggoth wearing the skinned face of Richard Dawkins. Run away!

 

[IllusiveOwl]

I've come to understand magic in the simplest of terms as an attunement between the all pervasive non-egoic All and the egoic entities which manifest within it and are made of it, therefore with enough Will and focus can realize that profound connection and influence it (reality) through that connection.

Ritual and the Art only exist to focus, intensify, and direct that Will.

 

[MorganBlack]

Nice, IllusiveOwl.

Sounds like we have a similar cosmo-conceptions. Agreed. Mistaking the avatar you're playing for one's divine self ( replace with your preferred language) is never a good idea, imho. But we all start there.

Reading conversations here on WF, I've noticed a big sticking point centers around what people think is the "Above" and what is the "Below." In my view spirits, and other egoic (individualized) entities wouldn't exist in the "Above" which can be seen more as the primordial "code" level of reality of infinite consciousness , and makes , with all of our involvement - the localized quantum flux for us to hang out in and take on roles, here at the "app" level of reality. Like this avatar I'm playing in daily life for my enjoyment and amazement.

Jake Stratton-Kent, who uses the same grim as I, is much more "pagan" (app level) in his worldview than I ("Code and app") , even while in his earlier writing he had no problem talking about the "code" level.

We all keep running in circles around each other talking code from different programming languages (to extend the metaphor, not to imply that reality is a computer.) usually results in just more theological debates, battling nomenclature, and esoteric jargon instead of focusing on practices, which why I suspect JSK jettisoned it completely , at least publicly, and moved to a Sublunar Below-only model to encourage people to get into the circle.

From JSK's Cyprian's Offices of Spirits:

In Western thought since before the Christian era and well into it, it was
held that the sublunary sphere was the whole extent of changing Nature.
From the Moon outwards everything was One, eternal and immutable.
Physics, as such, only applied below the Moon. Not until Copernicus was
this distinction challenged, until eventually Thomas Kuhn 3 physicist,
historian, and scientific philosopher 3 could speak of seeing change in the
incorruptible heavens as the epitome of a scientific paradigm shift. ...

It is important to understand that the sublunar world in Late Antiquity
was the so-called 'World of the Four Elements'.


The Celestial realm is one of the Three
Worlds, along with our Earth and the Underworld, a subject that awaits its
place.


These seven are briefly definable as:
1. The Moon, uppermost, obviously enough. However, note the
distinction, whereas in later schemes the Moon is depicted as inferior to the
planetary and stellar worlds (besides hypothetical 8super-celestials9), in this
and earlier conceptions the Moon rules the night sky, and is leader of the
stars.
2-5. The four directions, attributable to winds or elements (the latter too
being a historical concept are a secondary idea to directionality).
6. The Earth.
7. The Underworld.
Many occult models do not emphasise 3 if they even acknowledge 3the
importance of the Underworld as a concept, and the emergent utility of this
schema begins by doing so.