Magic – do you believe in it?

[osho]

I am reading one important book now named Cause. Principal and Unity and essay on Magic by Giordano Bruno. This book is really an opener if one wants to know some of the less defined human sentiments, love, bonds and realities, something. An Italian philosopher, cosmologist and the like. I have been introduced to him by one member on the forum with whom I now maintain a sour relation and yet I owe to the person for all I come to know about this great treasure of knowledge. I do not know whether or not you have read this book and if you have you will share your experience with us. He was an icon and in fact was martyred. This great thinker was an authority on many domains of knowledge and was a renaissance incarnate. I am thrilled to read his books thanks to the grace of the one I am distant from in my association.

I put forth a few quotes I have come across of Giordano Bruno. I am reading it seriously and yet I have not arrived at any conclusion I can draw from what I have read. He is really a fountain of inspiration; he had spoken on so many philosophical things with great authority. I am acquainted with through ftil, one intellectual member of this forum. I am indebt to her though I was at issue with her over some emotional questions. He was an alchemist and his thoughts on God, the universe, fate, theology are staggering.

It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people
Magicians can do more by means of faith than physicians by the truth.


Our bodily eye findeth never an end, but is vanquished by the immensity of space.

I can imagine an infinite number of worlds like the Earth, with a Garden of Eden on each one. In all these Gardens of Eden, half the Adams and Eves will not eat the fruit of knowledge, and half will. But half of infinity is infinity, so an infinite number of worlds will fall from grace and there will be an infinite number of crucifixions.

[Paulclem]

What do you mean by magic? Ritualised magic which uses materials and elements to produce an effect, or the use of thought?

[osho]

What do you mean by magic? Ritualised magic which uses materials and elements to produce an effect, or the use of thought?

I mean the use of thought and in fact there are certain domains of thought and understanding that can be comprehended through magic and at times our reality can be better defined in magic terms since science is at its infancy and to delve into something deeper we indeed a magical way

[BienvenuJDC]

That all depends how one would particularly define magic. If you separate the divine set of miracles, then no I don't. However, even the miracles were particularly set in a certain time for certain intended purposes which are accomplished and done.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Nope.

[Charles Darnay]

Bruno divides "magic" into three broad categories of Divine, Natural, Mathematical. I will not claim to be an expert on his philosophy, but here is how I take them.

Divine - I'll leave this one off, it's what you think it is. I have never been partial to the "miracle" or deus ex machina form of magic

Natural - this is pretty much science before the explanation is provided. There was a thread here recently (started by Juniper I think) about unexplained natural phenomena.....this is what he is getting at. Just because scientists could explain certain aspects of Nature, does not mean they invented them, but rather are part of Natural magic.

Mathematical - this one confuses me the most. It deals with conjuring based on symbols, words, or images - but what I get from it is that Mathematical magic is really Art.

So based on this, I do subscribe to the latter two forms of magic.

Mostly I agree with the concept of "magician as wise man." For that's all magic really is, the wisdom to see, understand and create in whatever field: whether religious, scientific, or artistic.

[Varenne Rodin]

Great answer, Charles!

[Lokasenna]

Well, let me put it this way...

By means of the correct incantation, I can have you summoned against your will to a place of torment, where you will be stripped of all your possessions, your voice, and you will trapped forever in a place totally removed from the real world.

It's called a subpoena. We still practice magic, you see, but today with have lawyers instead of wizards. By the correct assembly of sounds and letters, they can do almost anything to you - the system works because, deep down, the vast majority of society today believes in the law. Which is exactly why magic was percieved to exist by our ancestors - because, through the perception filter of belief, it seemed to work.

[Paulclem]

The use of thought to influence people? Yes. I don't need to believe in it because I've been subject to it. It's a narrow definition of magic.

It is said that at a certain level of meditational attainment - that power, such as knowing other's minds, is what occurrs. Why don't we see them use this? Because it is supposed to be a by-product of the state, and not the aim, which suggests the effort to attain this level just to acquire these powers would not be worth the effort.

[BienvenuJDC]

Bruno divides "magic" into three broad categories of Divine, Natural, Mathematical. I will not claim to be an expert on his philosophy, but here is how I take them.

Divine - I'll leave this one off, it's what you think it is. I have never been partial to the "miracle" or deus ex machina form of magic

Natural - this is pretty much science before the explanation is provided. There was a thread here recently (started by Juniper I think) about unexplained natural phenomena.....this is what he is getting at. Just because scientists could explain certain aspects of Nature, does not mean they invented them, but rather are part of Natural magic.

Mathematical - this one confuses me the most. It deals with conjuring based on symbols, words, or images - but what I get from it is that Mathematical magic is really Art.

So based on this, I do subscribe to the latter two forms of magic.

Mostly I agree with the concept of "magician as wise man." For that's all magic really is, the wisdom to see, understand and create in whatever field: whether religious, scientific, or artistic.



If you had seen the version of The Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court with Bing Crosby, you see an example of "magic" that was performed. The real Merlin, whoever he/she might have been in reality, may have been someone who understood some undiscovered technology that seemed magical to the people of the time.

[Paulclem]

Bruno divides "magic" into three broad categories of Divine, Natural, Mathematical. I will not claim to be an expert on his philosophy, but here is how I take them.

Divine - I'll leave this one off, it's what you think it is. I have never been partial to the "miracle" or deus ex machina form of magic

Natural - this is pretty much science before the explanation is provided. There was a thread here recently (started by Juniper I think) about unexplained natural phenomena.....this is what he is getting at. Just because scientists could explain certain aspects of Nature, does not mean they invented them, but rather are part of Natural magic.

Mathematical - this one confuses me the most. It deals with conjuring based on symbols, words, or images - but what I get from it is that Mathematical magic is really Art.

So based on this, I do subscribe to the latter two forms of magic.

Mostly I agree with the concept of "magician as wise man." For that's all magic really is, the wisdom to see, understand and create in whatever field: whether religious, scientific, or artistic.

Bruno missed thought magic. Divine - disputed. Natural - not magic at all.

Mathematical magic is really Art.

I don't think that's what was intended - art. It probably refers to numerology, astrology, rituals with candles etc , Kabballa, and things like rituals for raising the dead. Clearly there are few witches on litnet.

[JuniperWoolf]

It's called a subpoena. We still practice magic, you see, but today with have lawyers instead of wizards. By the correct assembly of sounds and letters, they can do almost anything to you - the system works because, deep down, the vast majority of society today believes in the law. Which is exactly why magic was percieved to exist by our ancestors - because, through the perception filter of belief, it seemed to work.

Cool. I guess that would mean that money is mana. On it's own it's completely useless, but because of our perception it has amazing powers to do just about anything.

[Varenne Rodin]

If you had seen the version of The Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court with Bing Crosby, you see an example of "magic" that was performed. The real Merlin, whoever he/she might have been in reality, may have been someone who understood some undiscovered technology that seemed magical to the people of the time.

Like Jesus. ;)

[BienvenuJDC]

Like Jesus. ;)

Not going there....this is a new year. So, what kind of magical things do you believe in? I think that "imaginations" can be quite magical at times.

Imagicnations...

[Varenne Rodin]

I like mythologies. I like illusions. I like make believe, but I don't believe in anything. "Psychics" are funny.

[BienvenuJDC]

I like mythologies. I like illusions. I like make believe, but I don't believe in anything. "Psychics" are funny.

I love mythology. I have a story in my head that I'd love to write, but I can't stick to it. It explains the myth of Jason and the Argonauts.

[osho]

I love mythology. I have a story in my head that I'd love to write, but I can't stick to it. It explains the myth of Jason and the Argonauts.

Why do you not share the story?