Conference hydra::dejavu

    :-).. well put, Beth..

    :-)
    
    ... or ... on the other hand... maybe you won't.. :-)

    I don't know, wal... where was love when you wrote that note?   

    Oh really?  What about confusion? :-)

    >if you have love in your life, you don't need anything else.
    
    Well in the past I have found that a healthy heart is a necessity. I
    had plenty of love but it wasn't doing me a lot of good.

    Jamie.

    I tend to favour the food and drink side of things, myself.
    
    Laurie.

    Oh, and another thing. My mother used to say "When the bills come in
    the door, love goes out the window". As true a word, as I ever heard.
    
    Laurie.

    You're mother used to say that? 
    
    Gee... my mother used to say that too.
    
    Maybe there's some subconscious network of mothers... I'll bet they're
    in the Illuminati.. :-)

    You're right, Mary!  That would explain alot!! 
    Gosh, it's all so clear now....
    
          Ilu-mom-nati
    
    That's how they can always tell when you've done something wrong. 
    Hmmmmm.
    
    - Russ 

    My wife and I spent a lot of courting time with me in full time study
    at Brighton Poly (South Coast of England), and her working in
    Edinburgh, where I met her.
    
    Had Roberta not had the money to fly down to Gatwick to see me, it is
    almost certain we would not have got married, or continued the
    relationship. Love has to be very strong indeed to justify an overnight
    trip on the Stagecoach from Edinburgh to London, tube to Victoria,
    train to Brighton. One time I took the this route up to Edinburgh for a
    weekend, I spent more time travelling than I did at home.
    
    We only stayed together because of her money. A 24 hour round trip to
    see your woman is pretty hellish.
    
    Romantically Yours
    
    Dougie
    
    

DPDMAI::MILLERR 

:-)

HAMER::MONTALVO 
    
>    i.m.o., everything we are and everything we do is because there is no
>    love in our lives.

     Strange statement, wal... it assumes a lot.. for one thing, it assumes
     that there is "no love in our lives"... pretty wierd assumption.

    
>    why are we attracted to magick? 

     Because magick is a part of what we are... like sex is.

>    what prompts us to read tarot cards, palmistry; 
>    yearn to have out of body experiences? 

     The fun of it.

>     why do we seek to validate our life's experiences by seeking advice 
>     and approval from others?

      Who says we do?  Humans are social animals.  Are cattle seeking to
      validate their life's experiences by seeking the company of the herd?    

>    if while you're in love, and you don't even think of eating, then
>    what does it matter, if things which are not so essential to our
>    life as food, get done?

     ... well... cause you'd die?     

>    love is is.
    
     True enough... 

   > why are we attracted to magick? what prompts us to read tarot cards,
   >     palmistry; yearn to have out of body experiences?
    
    To learn for the love of learning.
    
   > why do we seek to
   >     validate our life's experiences by seeking advice and approval from
   >     others?
    
    Some of us are trying to eradicate this behavior, for it is unecessary.
    
    And yes, LOVE IS.
    
    Beth

    Why eradicate the unnecessary?

    I think that I'll manage to pass on this one.

    Jamie.

    .19
    
    Jim and Tammy Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, the little candles with the coin
    boxes underneath in St. Bernard's church, ads in the Fitchburg Sentinel
    to Saint Anthony, Michael Milken (for the rich and smug)... Rodeao
    Drive in Beverly Hills.. the most expensive piece of property in
    California.. owned by the Catholic Church... advertisements in the back
    of the National Enquirer offering talismans....
    
    .... same as it ever was .... same as it ever was .... same as it ever
    was..

    
    Re: .18
    
    Well, aside from being unecessary, it can be very harmful to your
    self-esteem (especially when those you look to have negative values by
    which they judge you).
    
    Beth

    
    But wal, getting back to the main point, is there a similarity between 
    the Catholic votive candles (to be burnt during Mass as prayer for 
    someone) and what you believe candle magic to be?  Why do you perceive
    candle magic as negative?
    
    I can understand why the sigels listed in the previous response are
    negative, but must all sigels be evil?  As I said before, opening doors
    is okay, you just gotta be careful which ones you open.
    
    Beth

    what's the difference?

    I mean... isn't surrender a choice also?  

    
    
    Ah, but what if "thy will" to be done is that my will be done?  And, of
    course, I DO choose what is my will.  Yet, at the same time, I am
    surrenderring to another's will.
    
    This still doesn't address the original topic.
    
    Beth :-)

    re: Walster,
    
    A minor point, my impression is that 
    _lust for results_ is considered a negative factor in 
    several magic(k)al traditions, including some which use candle rituals,
    *and* including some which many people categorize as 'black.'
    
    If lacking _lust for results_ is a critical part of 'egolessness,' then 
    the distinction about candle magic in general being different from
    the use of candles in prayer is more fuzzy than was implied in some of the
    previous notes.
    
    							todd

    re .31
    
    If that's what candle magic is, why do you consider it evil?  When I
    was a child, my mother and all her friends used to burn candles
    (usually for "luck" or "money").  There were several gypsy shops in the
    neighborhood (I forgot what they were called, there's a name for them)
    that would prepare the candles to your specifications, or if you told
    them what you wanted to happen they'd custom mix a candle or incense
    for you.  
    
    As far as I could see the results were totally subjective - if you burn
    the candle this week and next week your spouse gets a raise, is the
    candle responsible? - but I don't see what's so bad about it otherwise.
    
    Ginny

>    if you burn a candle to capture the heart, mind, soul of another
>    person, where is his free will?  
             ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^
    
    Maybe it snuck out through the mind with those dogs that used to live in 
    the mirrors ?  
    
    								todd

    :-)

    RE: -1
    
    What a load of old rubbish... Do people really believe this stuff?
    
    Laurie.

    >What a load of old rubbish... Do people really believe this stuff?
    
    Well it sells candles Laurie.

    Jamie.

    
    I'm assuming .34 was a response to .33
    
    >>    if you burn a candle to capture the heart, mind, soul of another
    >>    person, where is his free will?
    >             ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^
    >
    >    Maybe it snuck out through the mind with those dogs that used to
    >live in
    >    the mirrors ?
    >
    >                                                                todd
    
    Who says that burning candles is for the binding of a person?  In the
    case of votive candles in Catholicism, you bind your prayer to the
    candle, and how it is answered is God's will.  What I do is much more
    blind; I get an urge to bind energies in some manner at some time. 
    Sometimes, I see a bit of what the binding aims for.  Other times, I
    don't.  I do KNOW (in a way that skeptics would say can't be done) that
    what I do is "right" (it is non-harmful on all layers/realities, works
    with "what should be" rather than against, and is a part of what should
    be;  I chose to do, I didn't have to)
    
    My main point being that candle magic or sigils are NOT inherently
    evil, but that the purpose to which they are used is as evil as the
    intent of the manipulator of this things.  Just as with ALL magics.
    
    Magic is.  It is not good or evil.  It is just a tool.  What you do
    with it may be good or evil (or neither ;-), but that does not make the
    tool evil.  Is a hammer evil because someone used it to kill another or
    destroy an item?
    
    Beth

    
    Laurie,
    
    Please do not turn this topic into a criticism of others beliefs.  I
    would like this topic to be a discussion amongst those who do believe
    as to what their definitions of candle magic and sigils are, and
    related issues.  There have been enough discussions on belief
    elsewhere; please take it there.  OR suspend your disbelief and accept
    (on a temporary basis, for the purpose of mental exercise) that magic
    IS real, and what it's impacts are.
    
    Thank you,
    Beth

    re .40 Beth
    Thank you for entering that suggestion, put ever so kindly.  Hopefully
    it will have an effect!

    
    
	Some information on Magic used by the church utilizing
    	candles among other things.
    
	It is well known to students of practical occultism
	that of all substances, water is one of the most easily
	charged with force.  It may readily be induced to absorb
	influences of any particular type, and will retain this
	unimpaired for along periods of time.  We see analogy of this
	on the physical plane, for we know that water which has
	stood uncovered in a bedroom during the night is unfit for
	drinking purposes, because it has absorbed into itself all
	the impurities cast off during that period from the physical
	bodies of the sleepers.

	It is found that it may equally readily be charged with
	magnetism of any type, either for good or evil purposes.
	This fact seems to have been well known to those who established
	the ceremonies of the early Christian church.  Even at the
	present day upon entering any Roman Catholic church, we find
	at the door a stoup of Holy water, as it is called; and it
	will be observed that the faithful as they enter dip their
	fingers into this water and make with it the sign of the cross
	upon their foreheads or breasts.   If interrogated about this
	practice, they tell us that it is in order to drive away from
	them the evil thoughts or feelings and to purify them for the
	services in which they are about to take part.   The ignorant
	and boastful protestant probably regards this as an instance
	of degrading superstition; but, as usual, that shows only that
	he knows nothing of the subject.

	Any student of occultism, who will take the trouble to read in
	the Roman prayer book the office for the making of Holy water
	cannot fail to be struck with the fact that it is undoubtedly
	a definite magical ceremony.  For the purpose of the consecration
	of Holy water, the priest is directed to take clean water and
	clean salt; and he commences operations by a process which is
	called the exorcising of the salt and the water.  He has to
	recite certain forms which, though by courtesy they are called
	prayers, are in reality adjurations of the strongest type.

	He adjures the salt and the water successively in the most
	determined language, commanding that all evil influences shall
	be driven out from them and that they shall be left clean and
	pure; and as he does this he is directed again and again to
	lay his hand upon the vessels containing the salt and the water.
	Evidently, the whole ceremony is a mesmeric one, and the
	objectionable influence, if there be any, would be driven out
	by the time the priest had finished his devotions.  Then having
	purified his elements -having removed from them anything that
	might be undesirable- he proceeds to magnetize them vigorously
	for a particular and definite purpose.

	Once more, he recites determined adjurations, and is directed
	again and again as he uses these powerful words to make over the
	elements with his hand the sign of the cross, holding strongly
	in mind the will to bless.  This means that he is saturating
	both the salt and the water with his own magnetic influence,
	specially charged and directed by his will for this clearly
	defined purpose -that wherever this water shall be sprinkled,
	all evil thought or feeling shall be driven away before it.
	Then with one final effort, he casts the salt into the water
	in the form of a cross, and the ceremony is completed.

	There are some priests who simply go thorugh all this ceremonial
	as a matter of form, without putting any thought or strenght into
	it, but there are many others to whom the ritual is intensely real
	-men who throw strength and force into their proceedings; and
	naturally in their case, the water is heavily charged with powerful
	magnetism and a decided magnetic result is produced.   Consecrated
	water is used in many other of the ceremonies of the Church, like
	Baptism, or in the act consecrating burial grounds.

	Almost every object utilized in the service of the Church was
	originally consecrated in the same manner; the vessels of the
	altar, the vestments of the priest, the bells, the incense -all
	had their special services of blessing.   In the case of the
	bells, they were permeated with certain rates of vibration and
	a certain type of magnetism, the idea being that the thoughts
	and feelings which these suggested should be spread abroad
	wherever the sound of the bells travelled -a perfectly scientific
	idea from the point of view of the higher occult physics.

	In the same way, the incense was specially blessed, in order that
	this blessing might be showered wherever its perfume penetrated,
	and that its scent might drive away all evil thoughts and
	influences from the church in which it was used.  The student of
	occultism cannot but see that all these are manifestly survivals
	from a time when practical magic was thoroughly understood in the
	Church.  There is hardly a single ceremony among those used either
	in the Greek, Roman or Anglican Churches which has not behind in
	some true occult significance, though in these days many people
	go through such ceremonies merely as a matter of form, and never
	think that there may be something real and weighty behind them.
	In the older days, people were not only less skeptical, but also
	less ignorant, and those who arranged the ritual of the Church
	knew very well what they were doing.
                                   

    re .42 Gutierrez
    Thank you for entering that interesting information.

    
    Okay, so although I didn't get to read some of the responses before
    they were deleted, it appears that most objection to sigels and
    candles is the usages of these.  And, given the nature of humans to
    take advantage of each other, and for some to strive for power and
    control over others, negative usage may be more common than positive
    usage.  So, instead of banning usage, educate.  The more knowledge
    everybody has, the less likely another can use that knowledge against
    them.
    
    Beth

    There is no scientific evidence that this stuff works... so why ban 
    it or educate about it?  Just ignore it..

    Heck I am not evil ;-)!!!!
    
    
    Lynne Sigel!!

    
    Ah, Mary, but scientific proof can only come after someone has believed
    without the scientific proof.  Then that someone finds a means to
    convince a scientific community.
    
    Although I find I have somewhat of a belief, I doubt I will be the one
    to convince a scientific community, as I do not have the time or the
    money to devote myself to this task.  I have a family to support,
    first.  Any experimentation is for personal edification only, and I do
    not expect it to pass any rigorous test criteria (since I am the only
    detection and measurement device I use ;-).
    
    Beth

SITBUL::GRIFFIN 
    
>    Ah, Mary, but scientific proof can only come after someone has believed
>    without the scientific proof.  
    
     Too bad... looks like learning is for children and fools then, huh?  
    
>Then that someone finds a means to convince a scientific community.
    
     Is the scientific community incapable of convincing itself?  Must it
     be spoon fed and coddled while it kicks it's feet, strikes out at
     those around it and has it's little tantrums?
        
>    Any experimentation is for personal edification only, and I do
>    not expect it to pass any rigorous test criteria (since I am the only
>    detection and measurement device I use ;-).
    
     As am I... 
    
     That brings us back to the point where discussing these things is
     childish and a waste of time then... doesn't it.... especially in
     a forum where one is expected to have rigorous scientific test
     criteria in place before venturing an opinion or discussing an 
     experience... Laurie is right... it's a childish waste of time
     to even talk about it... fools that we are.

   <<< Note 1746.48 by VERGA::STANLEY "what a long strange trip it's been" >>>

>                                                    especially in
>     a forum where one is expected to have rigorous scientific test
>     criteria in place before venturing an opinion or discussing an 
>     experience... 
    
This is untrue.
                                                 
Dougie

    >Ah, Mary, but scientific proof can only come after someone has believed
    >without the scientific proof.  

    Not entirely true. The scientific community was not looking for the
    transistor when it proved that transistors were possible.

    Jamie.

    
    Good point, Jamie.
    
    So, scientific truths come about two ways: accident, or belief followed
    up with an acceptable proof of some sort (leaving definition of
    acceptable to the reader).
    
    Beth

RE: .51 (Beth)

>    So, scientific truths come about two ways: accident, or belief followed
>    up with an acceptable proof of some sort (leaving definition of
>    acceptable to the reader).

    Or the experiment can start out as an attempt to *disprove* something
    and end up changing the beliefs of the experimenter.  Or the
    experimenter may have little feeling for which of alternatives may be
    true and may design an experiment to distinguish them.

    Example: Michaelson and Morely were quite sure that they would detect
    a directional difference in the speed of light according to the aether
    theory.  The question was how much in what directions (i.e., what
    was the direction of flow for the aether?).  The null result was
    not an accident, and not unthought of (previous experiments had come
    up null, but an exceptable theory existed why there would be some
    first order cancelations of effects to create a null effect;  M&M
    had an accuracy which supposedly would measure the second-order, non-
    canceling, effect) but was definitely not what M&M expected.  This
    result formed the basis for the Special Theory of Relativity and
    therefore for the other theories based on it (e.g., General Relativity,
    Quantum Electrodynamics).

				    Topher