The supernatural: real or crap

[indjaseemun]

The teachings of Madam Blavatsky are fascinating and so are her books. But what about her supernatural claims? I can accept writing in trance, astral projection, "enlightment", visions, a lot of things. But what about "materialization", telekinesis, telepathy, etc., abilities that she claimed to have. I'm starting to research the occult because even if the paranormal claims are false, it's a legitimate brain change body of techniques. Please, people who have researched the occult, write your toughts.

The guy who made the topic Occultism in metal: Please write about this for me (magic). You wrote things on that topic wich show that you believe that magic can alter the world (not just the mind).

Somehow this is very important for me to know. I'm very interested on the opinion of forum members. Devamitra, you seem to have researched those subjects, to what conclusion did you come: Can magic or other supernatural things alter the physical world?

Was blavatsky and others who claimed those powers only doing it to attract people to their philosophies?

I'm going to read Autobiography of a Yogi soon.

[Nimbostratus]

If there's any evidence of magic effects in the world, you should seek in parapsychology, not in novels or even philosophical texts. Even when I think that James Randi challenge is crap (that kind of challenges are proposed by creationists and HIV deniers and they remain "unchallenged") I'm skeptic enough to not put my money in any parapsychological experiment I've seen this far.

Altering the mind, well, that's different. When you have been on drugs as well as reached the samadhi through "traditional methods" you can notice a subjective difference, even when a picture of the brain could show similar patterns. In this subjective, non-experimental, traditionally attained samadhi, sometimes, some people, talk about prophetic capabilities, which couldn't be explained as simple hallucinations, and that in such case, would be tremendous coincidences. As I said, this is not verifiable.

If you have ever experienced this, you know what I'm talking about. Otherwise, it is reasonable to not believe given no external evidences... all what I can do is to enforce the demarcation criteria between science and religion, and support religion as a cultural manifestation that can bring a reverent view of the world when done properly.

I'd like to talk about Theosophy here, but I better recommend you this reading "Theosophy, History of a Pseudo Religion" by René Guenon.

Good luck with Autobiography of a Yogi, please drop a line about it when you have read it.

[Ymir]

I believe the occult requires a state of mind where shooting a fireballs from your hands would have little more significance than the act of flushing the toilet. Perhaps they are real or perhaps they are not. It would be interesting if I could read peoples' minds but I don't see what that would mean in the grand scheme of things. It would just be me doing something.

Reality is pretty "magical" as it is.

[indjaseemun]

This may be a little pathetic, but I feel that some answers like "Oh reality is already magical as it is" or "Why use drugs if you already have this beautiful reality?" or, if a guy is starting to self discipline and finds out that self beating and fasting work for him someone says "Why do that, your body is your temple you must not deny food  to love yoruself etc..." show that the person saying this actually believes in magic, or would like to know how drugs feel like.

I mean, those answers seem to me like trying to confort the other person for leading it to believe the subjet asked about is not valid, not worth pursuing etc, like, "Don't research magic. It's a waste of time.", "Don't do drugs. You will think you discover many things on those pot and mushrooms, but in reality, it's all just a drugged out fantasy trip". Somehow a lot of time this comes from people who extensivly research magic or use a fair amount of drugs (and at that time they certainly tought those things were good for them).

Am I being foolish? Anyway, there is a side of me that ultimately does not believe in magic, sometimes not even on conciousness after death.

Octople: Please talk about teosophy if you'd like. I know a website where I can get this book in portuguese and another one by him about Spiritism. But I have a lot of books to read, so The Autobiography(...) and Guenon's books will have to wait some time. I will send you a message when I read the books. But I'd like to know what you got from the book about teosophy, or rather, what guenon wanted to say.

I also don't know about the scientific experiments. I just know there were some scientist who believed the phenomena.

Ymir: OK

[cthulhu666]

I mean, those answers seem to me like trying to confort the other person for leading it to believe the subjet asked about is not valid, not worth pursuing etc, like, "Don't research magic. It's a waste of time.", "Don't do drugs. You will think you discover many things on those pot and mushrooms, but in reality, it's all just a drugged out fantasy trip". Somehow a lot of time this comes from people who extensivly research magic or use a fair amount of drugs (and at that time they certainly tought those things were good for them).

This may be true but it's also practically common knowledge.

Am I being foolish? Anyway, there is a side of me that ultimately does not believe in magic, sometimes not even on conciousness after death.

Consciousness after death? I'm curious as to why you would ever believe in such a phenomenon.

Personally I think 99% of it is crap. There are more important things to spend your time on rather then researching magic. I do however believe there are such things you could consider "spells", such as where Gaahl is being interviewed and just stares at the interviewer for at least a good 3 minutes after he made an extremely stupid comment. I got a good laugh out of it but the point is the silence combined with that cold stare made that guy really think about what he just fucking said. I can't remember which documentary is was but it was black metal related so I'm sure you could find it if you looked hard enough.

[indjaseemun]

I know I exaggerated, but my beliefs on those areas is that magic, if not able to make changes in the physical universe (altought it does, because it changes the brain.) can offer mental benefits. I already believe that a lot of people entered altered planes of existence without drugs, utilizing the magical techniques, and some other lesser things like obtaining benefits trought magic wich is no more than positive thinking. It is also good to notice that phenomena such as astral projection, shamanism, trances in wich people gain power, invocations (wether the subjects invoked are real or not, it shows that people have a power of talking with deeper dimensions and the mind utilizes archetypes for that, even if it's the mind talkint to itself) really happen.

In the book Octople mentioned, there is a part that quotes a teosophist asking adepts to start thinking collectvly around a desired tought wich they wanted people to consider, like reincarnation, repeatedly for days, as to create "form-toughts". Now at the beggining this might sound stupid, but not to one who considers that every action is meaningful (and it is). For example, if there is a situation wich would be suitable for the person who did such focused thinking to bring reincarnation up, he might be more inclined to do it after that tought concentration, or, he might be more open to realize when he can act as to spread that view, after his mind has been conditioned for that. Consider the other adepts who did that exercise, and their varying mental powers, and you have a positive result on the goal desired (spread the word on reincarnation). That is of course a tiny example. I guess that is why it's called "The occult". We live reflexions of realities of thousands and thousands of years ago, results from actions, beliefs and philosophies very old actually still dwell in our world, "occult".

I can totally understand the mentality of someone who feels there are more important stuff to research and to do than the occult, but somehow since I was a kid, probably because I was brought up on protestantism and always heard of god, heaven, hell, the soul, I was drawn to mystical stuff, as well as horror movies, and now I feel that researching the occult is important, because it also brings self knowledge, and ultimately there is always something occult, even if only inside ourselves, worth pursuing, knowing, talking to, communicating to.

The American Nihilist Underground society obviously researched (or better yet prozak) these subjects extensivly, we can tell from various parts of the site.

[Saif al-Malik]

Instead of proto-new-age nonsense like Blavatsky and her colleagues, one should aim for true esoterism and piety as the guiding force.  Discover and explore Guenon, Nasr, and then some of the prominent modern scholars of religions for explanations into those paths.  These are all methods and ways to attain nearness to that supernatural presence which evades and is yet there.  Whether or not you view the question in terms of historicity or of a greater reality with a semblance of order will define the answer in your heart.

The introductory works of the traditionalist authors like Guenon's "Crisis of the Modern World", "Reign of Quantity and Signs of the Times", "East and West", and Evola's "Revolt Against the Modern World" are crucial to understanding the rift between what we call Modern and Traditional thinking and living.

[indjaseemun]

Thanks, I surely intend to read all those books. But why would you say blavatsky's writings are nonsense? Could you elaborate on this? I admit never having read a whole book by her, I just stumbled across texts on the net, but I'm already reading some books so it's gonna take some time before I study the occult with more depth. I really got into her after hearing about the Enlightned Masters. Deep down I think that wichever fantasy representation of the divine most inspires and fascinates a person is the best to start following, and what is really important on the teachings is the body of techniques (meditation, yoga, etc.). Things like believing there are ascended masters like Serapis Bey, Koot-humi, etc. may be good for dividing your improvement into areas (each "ray" is an area) and the devotion you give to those archetypes reflect on your progress on the area ruled by each one. Thinking like that, every religious system is just a "key" to this dimension, not really important if the entities like krishna, christ, really ever existed. That's why they talk so much about vibrations: If a guy believes in the pink bunny and another believes on some ancient god, but they concentrate the same concept on them, it may be that they are doing the same thing, or the same vibration. It really is easier for some to get into such matters devoting yourself to a deity, that's why I think mystics are very practical, atheists will not believe, but the brain of the spiritual person is more rational: It creates myths that it can believe thus rising the power up.

Just exposing some views as I think more about my conception of the occult, or the divine.

I would like to ask everyone to really write a lot on your answers. I'm really curious. Or maybe you all are just clueless too

[Nimbostratus]

As

Instead of proto-new-age nonsense like Blavatsky and her colleagues, one should aim for true esoterism and piety as the guiding force.  

That's right, teosophy is proto-new age, an universal syncretism made of poor understandings of Buddhism, Hinduism and also Christianity, shaped into a new religion which creates its own new gods (ascended masters), and calls it "esoterism". That's why we have mainstream esoterism among new-agers without any formal compromise to a specific tradition.

Just exposing some views as I think more about my conception of the occult, or the divine.

I would like to ask everyone to really write a lot on your answers. I'm really curious. Or maybe you all are just clueless too

You have to compare both versions of esoterism, the one from the traditionalist school (Guenon and pals) and Teosophy. The philological interpretation of the traditionalist school is far more accurate, doing it a more difficult reading and less attractive for the public than theosophy. If you read the book I posted, you will notice that Blavatsky lacked a correct understanding of the terms she used, therefore resulting in a blending of her influences in spiritism, she lacked technical quality in her work and it was hidden by her assumptions. Her interpretations are not a way to understand traditions, but precisely, they are their own interpretations molded into a new, and unnecessary "religion".

If you want to approach the supernatural, live with one orthodox religion, otherwise you are a thin lone wolf moved by rational curiosity, dwelling in forums for cosmic answers.

[indjaseemun]

Well, you guys are just ponting out that teosophy is a blending (teosophy = the study of god, in all religions) but that doesn't make it bad. Neither does the fact that she got some things wrong (nobody's perfect). But I will quit talking about teosophy, let me read some books and the guenon book dennouncing it. Then I'll make another topic about teosophy.

But I'd like to see more people posting here

Octuple: Are you from South America?

[JewishPhysics]

I've yet to encounter any supernatural or paranormal claim that does not have a rationale, natural explanation.  Not to mention the ridiculous amount a charlatans, snake oil scams, and con artists associated with these things.  I'm going with 100% crap, ... to no one's surprise.

[Nimbostratus]

Well, you guys are just ponting out that teosophy is a blending (teosophy = the study of god, in all religions) but that doesn't make it bad.

But in the process it became a new religion on itself, and unnecessarily, even more if you're against multiculturalism.

Bad esoterism? Well, not that bad in comparison to new-age, but in contrast to perennialist esoterism is like having Spiritual Healing by Death vs Beyond Sanctorum by Therion, haha.

[Eleison]

"The miraculous phenomenon cannot help but exist given that one has the supernatural, on the one hand, and the natural, on the other.  The supernatural, moreover, is not the contra-natural; it is itself "natural" on the universal scale.  If the Divine Principle is transcendent in relation to the world while at the same time embracing it within Its unique substance, then miracles must occur; the celestial must sometimes break through into the terrestrial, the Center must appear like a flash of lightning on the periphery.  To take an example in the physical realm, inert matter is of little worth, but gold and diamonds cannot fail to appear therein.  Metaphysically the miracle is a possibility which, as such, must necessarily be manifested in view of the hierarchical structure of the whole Universe."  Frithjof Schuon - Logic and Transcendence

This basically explains the relationship between the supernatural and the natural, in that they are not differ in degree of manifestation, not in essence, hence why the supernatural is evident.  One further thing that should be qualified is that what is usually referred to as magic is nothing like a miracle as defined above, rather magic usually refers to any science which has as its aim the extraction of physical effects from non-physical causes.  The applied nature of this science explains its lowly position among the traditional sciences, and also the interest it has for many of our contemporaries, despite their skepticism.

[God Almighty]

Hyperspace.

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ma/gallery/hyper/index.html

Super-natural is natural beyond itself, supernature is the product of evolution.

[Vuvuzelas Belong In Metal]

Even when I think that James Randi challenge is crap (that kind of challenges are proposed by creationists and HIV deniers and they remain "unchallenged") I'm skeptic enough to not put my money in any parapsychological experiment I've seen this far.

I understand your concern with this, but to me it just seemed they were doing it to call out people like Sylvia Browne.  First and foremost.  Had anyone passed the test I'm sure they would've rewarded the money.

Reality is pretty "magical" as it is.

Semantics.

Personally I think 99% of it is crap. There are more important things to spend your time on rather then researching magic. I do however believe there are such things you could consider "spells", such as where Gaahl is being interviewed and just stares at the interviewer for at least a good 3 minutes after he made an extremely stupid comment. I got a good laugh out of it but the point is the silence combined with that cold stare made that guy really think about what he just fucking said. I can't remember which documentary is was but it was black metal related so I'm sure you could find it if you looked hard enough.

Semantics again -- its really just a way for people to show that what they're doing is extremely doing and nothing can be worth commented upon regarding the original statement.

--

This supernatural crap is a waste of time.  Go ride a bike and practice an instrument, instead of focusing on this stuff.  It's not even worth discussing because there's nothing of value within looking for the supernatural or paranormal.