THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.paranormal.spells.hexes.magic,alt.magick,alt.pagan.magick,alt.satanism
From: nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nagasiva yronwode)
Subject: Curses and Free Will (was Cursed)
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 04:22:12 GMT

50001012 Vom 

ea-Angel:
>> Do u think someone can curse you... If you dont believe they can?

the question is, as my charming, lovely wife has indicated, somewhat
more complex than this. in my laborious and taxonomical way, I'd
break it down into these parts:

	a) the person doing the cursing
	b) the curse
	c) the target of the curse
	d) the circumstances surrounding the curse
	e) the results of the curse

in the consideration of whether someone can indeed bestow a curse,
therefore, we must take into account whether the person who is
issuing it is capable of actually doing it properly, if they have
whatever may be deemed to be "what it takes" to actualize it.
this might be some kind of connection to spirits, some magical
reservoir of energy, some authority to command either of these or
some power-language, the knowledge required to manipulate whatever
hidden magical mechanisms may be required, etc.  

the second element would be the curse itself, whether it had the
proper energies, content, strength, or resonance so as to be
communicated to the target from the source, whether that be the
person who cast the curse, or if it be some object or place that
passed the curse onto the recipient. 

the target of the curse is a third factor, because this individual
could be of variable susceptibility to magic, particular types of
magic, or curses. closely related to this is the factor of the
circumstances surrounding the curse, which could include some
kind of protection that the target has prepared, the presence of
a being or magical tool which intensifies or impedes the effect, etc.

following from these are the results of the curse, which could be
delayed, or take effect immediately, perhaps even affecting the
target's progeny if sufficiently strong.

the beliefs about the curse would constitute one of the 
circumstances surrounding the cursing event.

sri catyananda :
> "The consent of the victim" -- that is, a belief that there is a
> necessity of the victim of a curse to "believe" in his or her
> victimization for it to be operative -- is often discussed in
> materialist cultures and it sometimes forms part of a refutation against
> the possibility of any kind of magical (or religious) practice. However,
> it is not strictly a materialist belief, because it presupposes that
> magical activity is possible and can be performed upon someone as long
> as they consent to believe in it. That is, it does not dispose of magic
> as a "series of coicidences" or "advanced psychology" or the like.

no, but it can become a kind of sociological explanation.

> Therefore, i call it a materialist-magical theory, in which a person's
> choices about belief (materialist or magical) will determine how much --
> if at all -- magic can affect him or her. 

this leaves what REALM of effect the curse might inhabit undefined.
that is, it might be an effect which can be described in purely
materialistic ways (as through mob psychology and placebo).

> Similar to this materialist-magical notion is the "Alice defense"
> ("You're all a pack of cards!") whereby sheer DIs-belief in magic is
> thought to protect one against a magical attack. This is more strictly
> materialist than the "consent of the victim" theory -- but magicians
> sometimes call it a form of "unconscious magic," in that, they claim,
> the potential victim creates a powerful MAGICAL shield through disbelief
> in magic. :-) 

actually "Who cares for you? You're nothing but a pack of cards!"
(Dodgeson/Carroll, "Alice in Wonderland", chapter XII). I wonder
whether this is truly more materialistic. some who have claimed
this through the years in forums like alt.magick seem to have
maintained that belief is a sort of magical force, and that
CONTRARY belief is a kind of banishing or protective spell in and
of itself. this perspective would be less materialistic than, say,
the anthropologist who thinks of magic in terms of cultural cues,
knowledge, and the investment in magical ideas leading to outcomes
determined by psychology and self-delusion. 

> What you believe is ultimately your own choice. 

is it REALLY? epistemologically (:>), it is an intellectual blind
spot (compare to the optic nerve and looking at faint stars) as to 
whether or not we can choose our belief or if we are caused to make
this choice by the combined configuration of the cosmos and our
role/place within it. the issue is free will vs. determinism.

love,

nagasiva
-- 
FREE HOODOO CATALOGUE! send street address to: catalogue@luckymojo.com
mailto:nagasiva@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html ; mailto:boboroshi@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/ 
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired