Re: Black Magic (was: Serial Killers and Macabre Violence: Ideas?)
- --- In email@example.com, "kmlightseeker"
> Hi Logos,
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "logosx87"
> <logosx87@> wrote:
> > Keith,
> > I remember reading a very interesting article by an
> > It had a title along these lines: "The Advent of Ahriman andWestern
> > Brotherhoods." In it, the author talked about experimentation onthese
> > animals as being unintentional black magic. The people who do
> > kinds of things are unconscious of it, but they are literallyenergies
> > practicing black magic.
> It seems to me that this activity must have some effect, such as in
> the example you cite. Emotional energies translate to psychic
> which in turn have an impact.remained
> This might be difficult to explain to those who are focused on the
> outer/surface level of the world.
> (Comments on Bundy interspersed below:)
> > An update on Bundy:
> > Have been reading Ann Rule's "The Stranger Beside Me." Ann was a
> > close friend of Bundy's before he ever started killing and
> > fairly close to him up until his execution. My expectations goingsomewhat
> > into Bundy's life were that I would eventually shatter my
> > sympathetic view of him and regard him on the same level assomeone
> > like Andrei Chikatilo or Otis Toole. However, the book has onlyfed
> > my opinion that he was more of a "fallen" individuality. I admitbut
> > that there must have been some weakness in his spiritual makeup,
> > I don't believe he didn't have an I or any humanity to him.escaped
> > His crimes were utterly disgusting. Perhaps forty young women
> > brutally murdered in their prime... Yet Bundy is not a thoroughly
> > rotten person. In his numerous letters to Ann Rule, he showed
> > immense intelligence and humor. He was quite personable. Highly
> > intelligent and... dare I say it? Admirable? Not only was he an
> > excellent and polished student of law and pyschology, but he
> > from prison twice. Once by jumping out of a courthouse window andBundy
> > hiding in the mountains. He limped, nearly emaciated, with a
> > sprained ankle, through a mountain range in the middle of winter.
> > Not just any winter, but a winter in Colorado. The second time
> > starved himself to 140 pounds (he was 6'0"), cut a small hole inthe
> > ceiling of his cell, and shimmied through. No one knew he wasgone
> > until the next afternoon.I
> > I am not at all condoning his crimes, but I won't share the "That
> > evil piece of shit, I hope he rots in hell" attitude towards him.
> > also refuse to put him in the same category as other serialkillers.
> > I desperately, desperately want insight into this man. He was a
> > liar, a manipulator, and a murderous pervert... But there was
> > to him, which can't be said for most serial killers.unbiased
> > Another thing I've observed about Bundy is his exclusivity. Most
> > serial killers are a threat to everyone. They are viciously
> > and unpersonable, antisocial and unattached emotionally toeveryone
> > they know. Bundy was not. Only when a murderous impulse overtookhim
> > did he go out and kill. Not only that, but he killed one type ofwhich
> > woman: college age, long-haired and brunette, with slender build.
> > Bundy, before and after the killings, made friends everywhere. He
> > was highly social and witty. He was a man of his word. He took a
> > room with some people and promised to help with the yardwork,
> > he did dutifully and often. He loved his girlfriend's littlegirl,
> > going so far as to buy her a rose for her birthdays andorganizing
> > parties for her. Bundy admired Ann Rule, probably would never hadended
> > ever conceived of harming her. Nor his girlfriend. After he was
> > imprisoned, she told him she was living with another man and
> > their relationship. He still loved her after that, though he hadno
> > reason to. If he was simply involved with people to furtherhimself,
> > as so many people claim about him, why would he still love her?He
> > had two other women fawning over him at that time, not to mentionhis
> > Ann Rule standing by him. Bundy showed no anger over the loss of
> > girlfriend, only sadness. I don't think this shows completewas
> > emotional coldness and I think it disproves the theory that Ted
> > just possessive of his girlfriend. He would have been outragedhad
> > that been the case.even
> > Back to his exclusivity. Bundy wasn't a threat to everyone or
> > most people. The horrible side of him seemed to be almostseperate
> > from the rest of him, only showing itself in certain conditions.to
> But for those who want to live (most of us), it is untenable to live
> with a potential threat that has access to the community. There is
> fear of death, but there is also the practical side of being able to
> live and not have one's life ended by another intrusive agency.
> > Maybe he was possessed? What else could have made a generally
> > friendly, intelligent, sane (he WAS sane. every psychiatrist came
> > the same conclusion), witty, and ambitious man with a lovingby
> > girlfriend and parents torture and murder numerous women? Judging
> > this information, I come to the conclusion that he wasn't himselfnaive
> > when he did these things... Yet the fact that he meticulously
> > planned these murders points to the fact that he was.
> > I just don't get it. Sorry for rambling. Perhaps I'm being too
> > and investing too much into this study of what many peopleconsider
> > to be a bag of shit, but I can't help it. I look at Ted Bundy andI
> > see an utter tragedy.inhuman.
> It is a tragedy that some people are treated as worthless or
> Do they deserve it, is it a tragedy that specific individuals arecan
> shunned for certain inhuman acts they commit? I say start at the
> beginning, and contemplate the role of society in shaping
> psychological pathways and moulding individuals. If certain humans
> be inhuman to others in a community, is not that community alsoinhuman
> responsible for the outcomes? How much is it responsible? How
> is human society?Hi Guys!
> Posession by evil spiritual agencies is a difficult one - how do we
> know when this is so? If immorality exists in the situation, it's
> probably a pathway and an open door for evil beings to come in.
Well,not writing this in any belligerent mood,but honestly
I just don't see why people would find Ted Bundy so
immensely interesting! Imo every aspect of him has surely
been described and explored rather thoroughly in classic
well-known psychopathology. Ted Bundy was a sex freak,thus
he made a deal with evil Spirits,inviting them to enter
and gradually take over his astral body,and the rest is
history. In medieval theological terms we might say Mr.
Bundy sold his soul to the Devil. This of course is very,
very tragic,but there is really no mystery to it,the exact
same thing has happened to so many others before him.
I personally find a figure like Charles Manson 10 times
more intriguing complex and enigmatic,because Manson does not
easily fit into preconceived scientific knowledge,be it
natural or occult. If Dr.Steiner had been here,he might
have given one lecture about Ted Bundy,after that there
would be nothing more to say,but I feel certain Steiner
could offer a whole SERIES of lectures about C.Manson
and The Family. Well,just for the record,I do not feel any
sympathy for C.M.,but I do find him interesting.
Ah,just voicing my opinion,some might disagree
- Tarjei wrote:
> I've found the old email, but half of it is missing -Okay, cool!
> it was on an old CD in a different format for Eudora,
> and it's barely readable. (I can see that I brought
> up the subject on the old "Spiritual Science" list in
> January 1999, which I recall brought on quite a stir with
> Bobby Matherne.) And the irony of it all is that the
> text disappears in the middle of this thing about
> Jung and Steiner, so I'll share what I have and add
> from memory. I'll be happy to contact Waage for a
> replay, but he may be out of town and out of country,
> because he hasn't been answering lately.
> What brought this up between Waage and myself inThank you for this, Tarjei.
> 1996 was the topic of Andrei Belyj - the Russian poet
> with that moving description of Rudolf Steiner at
> http://uncletaz.com/belyi.html which was also I
> think published at Frank's SCR -
> Anyway, Waage commands fluent Russian and has spent
> many years there, made his name as reporter in Norway
> because he's an expert on Russia and Russian literature,
> and then he's also an anthro and he flipped when I
> mentioned Belyj, whom he found very exciting, so he
> told me a lot of stuff - such as the guy (Belyj) wrote
> eight autobiographies, including his book about Steiner
> and Blok, and one of those had been published in 1992:
> "Geheime Aufzeichnungen. Erinnerungen an das Leben
> im Umkreis Rudolf Steiners".
> This book is a strange rendition of some sort of psychotic
> breakdown that happened to Belyj while he was in Dornach -
> and Waage says this book "was written ten years later with
> a little eerie absolute faith in the reality of something
> that must have been hallucinations and distorted perceptions
> (about anthroposophical spies who climb the trees outside
> his window, for instance.) I myself am waiting for the
> publication of a three volume cultural history that Belyj
> wrote, and that are lying in the archives in Moscow.
> One gets kind of full of his autobiographies after a while."
> Waage then talks about Magnus Ljunggren's doctoral thesis,
> a study about Belyj he recommends, this study is about Belyj
> and Steiner, but because Ljunggren is a convinced Freudian,
> he views the entire relationship as a wish by Belyj for a
> homo-erotic fructification of Steiner(!). The book still has
> lots of important information. In 1994 another book by
> Ljunggren had been published about a friend and later
> polemical opponent of Belyj, namely Emil Medtner:
> "The Russian Mephisto". Big parts of this book are about
> Belyj and Steiner, and then there is what Waage calls
> "the raisin inside the sausage": Namely that while Belyj
> had found his teacher in Steiner, Medtner had found his
> teacher in Jung. And here the old 1996 email text breaks,
> so what I recall is that when Belyj and Medtner were
> friends, Belyj would fill Medtner with anthroposophy and
> make an anthro out of him more or less, perhaps by bringing
> him along to Steiner's lectures. And then later, when
> Medtner became Jung's patient and pupil or whatever and
> went into psychotherapy with him, he gave him all this
> anthro-babble he had picked up from Belyj, or perhaps some
> of it directly from Steiner when attending his lectures.
> So there he is, Medtner on Jung's couch (I guess) with
> his eyes closed being instructed to talk about his childhood
> (I guess) and he gives him anthro-babble - the cosmology
> and the full package. And Jung writes all this down,
> fascinated, and he develops his theory of dreams and
> symbols and such, indirectly inflence by Steiner through
> Belyj and Medtner!
> That's all I've got on this. This is basement stuff, man,
> because it's so rumorous sort of, and it's something I bet
> the Hole Dwellers would like to get their teeth into some
> of it, so I hope I haven't been one of the hens in that
> feather story but simply repeated faithfully what I've heard :)
> Frank wrote:That's very interesting, too. Frank, today I've been reading from
> Jung never mentioned Steiner in his writings (as far as I
> know) and didn't even accept the possibility of reincarnation
> until nearly the end of his life (Dreams, Memories, Reflections.)
hypnotherapist Michael Newton's book, "Life Between Lives." A few
things came to my attention. One of them is something he calls
Atlantis Attraction, which involves conscious thoughts that interfere
with the subconscious unfolding of details about lives lived in the
past. In this case, a client might have learned a great deal about a
particular period in history, "a conscious attraction to certain well-
known events and familiar myths." He says that when these attractive
aspects of the past drive memory and distort recall, the need to
disengage conscious thought interference arises. He does this by
asking the client to pause (while under hypnosis) to review his or
her memories, to verify location. This can push away the conscious
thoughts and open the channel to the unconscious. He says faulty
reporting also arises out of something he calls Famous Person
Syndrome. He tells about three Marilyn Monroe cases he had; in one of
these, the client came to realize she was not a reincarned Marilyn
but instead a housekeeper for the actress.
And here is something else interesting: "In life between lives
regression, the good news is that once in the spirit world the
conscious mind does not seem to interfere to any great degree with
the superconscious except when reviewing past life incarnations."
A little later on, he says: "Truths may initially be clouded by
desired fantasies, strong belief systems, repressed fears, or simply
unhappiness with a current life the client thinks is dull."
Then: "Memories that you suspect are faulty through conscious
misconceptions can be handled by gentle challenging of critical
questioning." (The words "conscious misconceptions" stand out here.)
And just one more thing, he emphasizes the need to do something that
reminds me of the idea of reframing, or "thickening" a too-thin
story: "Moving back and forth in various time frames while going over
the same ground is effective."
I don't know, you may or may not find this of value. For some reason,
I'm fascinated by these ideas.
Cheers from the couch,
> Sweet non-Jungian dreams,