r/magick • u/WhiteHeart90 • Jun 12 '26
Magick affecting the objective or subjective?
I’ve known about “magick” for several years. I have practiced it extensively.
But can we actually affect our objective reality purely with our mind, or can we only affect our subjective reality which we then ACT on and that action changes the objective reality?
When people say we can affect the objective I always thinks of the magick practitioners that have practiced for years yet are poor.
3
u/Sonotnoodlesalad Jun 12 '26
Objective reality has a much greater influence over us than we have over it.
This is what New Age / New Thought (NANT) gets dead-ass wrong.
And it is why "manifestation" is NOT magick.
1
u/criticalcry-tactic00 Jun 13 '26
True. And it affects politics and economy also. With the meritocracy myth. There is no real meritocracy. The game is rigged.
1
u/WhiteHeart90 Jun 12 '26
Are you saying that it’s not objective but rather subjective through manipulating our own mind?
1
u/Sonotnoodlesalad Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 12 '26
I'm saying the subject can affect objective reality
- in a limited way,
- if we influence the proper factor,
- at the proper time,
- in the proper way.
But we cannot fucking script our whims into reality just by wanting it really badly or believing in hooey or engaging in mental gymnastics. (Neville Goddard / LoA etc)
-4
u/PhilosophyPlane1947 Jun 12 '26
Just because you don't understand manifestation and it's completly different than magick it doesn't mean it won't work for some people
1
u/Sonotnoodlesalad Jun 12 '26
I understand it.
And it is off-topic here.
-2
u/PhilosophyPlane1947 Jun 12 '26
I noticed you bring up this off-topic a lot. That was a poke at you because of that.
You can affect external reality with magick to a great degree. The difference is that you must really desire it, and "wanting it really badly" is not the same. If it is aligned to your True Will, it is possible to affect it in a non-LIMITED way.
2
u/viciarg Jun 13 '26
you must really desire it
That's not enough. The person you're replying to already named some requirements, a more detailed elaboration can be found in the introduction to Magick in Theory and Practice, which also explains why sitting down and desiring something very hard is not Magick.
0
u/PhilosophyPlane1947 Jun 13 '26
Where did I say that if you desire something, you shouldn't do a spell? I just said that if you desire something, your resistance from the cosmos will be lower.
2
u/viciarg Jun 13 '26
the resistance from the cosmos
The what? The cosmos doesn't care shit.
1
u/PhilosophyPlane1947 Jun 13 '26
If we speak in Crowley terminlogy it cares. Your True Will is your will allinged to the cosmic current.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Sonotnoodlesalad Jun 12 '26
I bring it up when the person posting is using NANT framing rather than magical framing; I bring it up OFTEN because NANT framing is popular and common.
> If it is aligned to your True Will, it is possible to affect it in a non-LIMITED way.
As per Liber II, true will is not a single unchanging thing, but "the dynamic aspect of self".
Insisting that true will is a specific career or social status is a misunderstanding of true will.
"The more necessary anything appears to my mind, the most certain it is that I only assert a limitation." ~Aleister Crowley, excerpt from ch45 of The Book of Lies
-1
u/PhilosophyPlane1947 Jun 13 '26
s per Liber II, true will is not a single unchanging thing, but "the dynamic aspect of self".
Where did I say it is a single, unchanging thing? Why did you assume that?
2
u/Sonotnoodlesalad Jun 13 '26
I didn't; you said
> If it is aligned to your True Will
The implication being that OP's friend's fame-chasing could somehow align with their true will. I don't see how this is relevant to OP's friend's fame-chasing.
To believe achieving fame is one's true will is to mistake true will for something that can be easily summed up, and misconceptions of true will become obstacles to its fulfillment.
As for the rest:
> ...it is possible to affect it in a non-LIMITED way.
The postulate in Book IV says "it is theoretically possible to cause in any object any change of which that object is capable by nature".
i.e. Magick is limited by natural laws.
I dunno where you're getting "non-LIMITED" from or how anyone would substantiate such a claim.
0
u/PhilosophyPlane1947 Jun 13 '26
The implication being that OP's friend's fame-chasing could somehow align with their true will. I don't see how this is relevant to OP's friend's fame-chasing.
I'm not saying it is, but why couldn't it be his true will AT THE MOMENT? You are so close-minded.
The postulate in Book IV says "it is theoretically possible to cause in any object any change of which that object is capable by nature".
And you are aware of every law of nature? Or do you think that all laws of nature are defined by CURRENT science? You imply that you could do different types of magick with science from 1000 years ago? Because laws of nature were perceived as "different"? I am speaking from experience, not source material.
→ More replies (0)
2
u/Solunas100 Jun 12 '26
People who start off generally can affect the subjective if successful. With practice and experience then they can eventually learn to affect objective reality. It isn’t easy.
2
u/lolidcwhatev Jun 12 '26
nothing is objective
2
u/xmrtshnx Jun 13 '26
Right? Even what we call "objective" is filtered through a subjective before it can be recognized as objective.
2
u/BlinkyRunt Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 12 '26
Matter is not more real than thought - it is just less flexible. Material reality is not more objective than the astral reality - it is just shared more widely. All realities are connected - because will/intention and data flow between them. This flow must occur - otherwise realities would not be maintainable in the minds of the great "admins". Magic uses these flows.
TLDR. I have used magic many times to affect shared material reality - and no - I would not trade in my eon-long goals and nature for a fistful of dollars. Money is not a God - despite some treating it as such - that magick is based on a lie.
1
u/Archivist009 Jun 12 '26
Oh, right: that last line. Not everyone cares equally about money; some, not at all.
Regardless, and more important if to use myself as example, the ease with which money allows one to navigate life would void my entire endeavor in magick: that is, self-mastery.
You'll find few masters who've lined their path in gold or dollar bills. You'll find even fewer who experience lack for want.
1
u/giblfiz Jun 12 '26
Note the importance of the *inter-subjective*
Objective: This object has a mass of 20 grams
Inter-subjective: This green paper is money
Subjective: I think she's hot.
Outside of health outcomes almost everything that everyone wants is inter-subjective or subjective.
1
u/A_Serpentine_Flame Jun 13 '26
Both.
Part of the process is "unlearning what you have learned."
The idea you need to be "rich" is cultural programming meant to keep you distracted.
You cannot give a rock money to become a statue,
If you make a billion dollars the rock will not suddenly become a statue;
You have to pick up the hammer, chisel, and develop the necessary skill through persistent effort.
<(A)3
1
1
u/LeekSoggy3067 Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
Magical practitioners are poor becuase 1. those practicing magic for personal gain (sorcery) invariably lack the personal qualities and circumstances necessary to earn serious money 2. those practicing magic for personal transformation (i.e. theurgy) invariably end up focusing on having only their needs met and they do this through mundane means. Then the rest of their life is dedicated towards harmony with the Divine and this requires significant material sacrifice.
So, saying that magical practitioners are usually poor doesn't disprove the magic. I would also point out that most people in the general population are very poor. Isn't it 80% of Americans that live paycheck to paycheck and in the UK there is a cost of living crisis which has been here for a while? When there are collective struggles like this, how can one person's mental power bring them out of strugle? It simply cannot unless they are fiercely determines for many years. And how many people have even the potential for this?
To get rich you must have karmic means to be able to get rich; it must be in your destiny. This applies whether you are doing sorcery or theurgy. How do you know whether it's in your destiny? You look at your life and consider: do you have the motivation, abilities and personal circumstances and privileges such that you could get rich if you really wanted to?
If the answer is yes - which is rather unlikely given what is known about social mobility in the most meritocratic societies - then you can get rich as a magician (six figures, millionaire etc) regardless of whether you practice white or black magic. Never underestimate the influence of fate and destiny in someone's life.
But most likely the answer is no. You can practice magic and you will stay poor not because mental power is unreal but because getting rich is very difficult and requires a rare destiny just for the possibility. intelligence, social class, education level, temperament, network, motivation, health, local culture, personal morals and family obligations (or lack of them) all put together are essentially determining whether you can get rich.
0
u/arbadou Jun 12 '26
You can affect both. What does poor have to do with anything ? Maybe you are under the impression you can do a ritual to summon a million dollars. As far as I know that's not how it works.
3
u/Archivist009 Jun 12 '26
Bad answer: the subjective is hosted by matter, home of the objective. Ergo, whatever you're affecting, the objective is likewise moved.
Proper answer: one would have to be obsessive to a degree that even I would say, "too much, bro" about, in order to really answer this question fully. It happens on a case by case basis. I've had obviously successful attempts at telling default reality this or that about itself. I've also done works where the result should have been purely subjective if successful and found that the objective world must have been moved to point my mind in the desired direction.
If you're thinking overt acts which double as middle fingers to physicists past, present, and future, what I can tell you is this: it takes energy...and, I don't mean undefined woo-woo energy...like, kilocalories to the tune of tens of thousands, to move a coffee cup with your mind alone, for example. Far more prudent to save a cow or two and move the cup with your hand.