Author Topic: The witch that doesn't cast spells. (Read 4130 times)

Ndoki · « **on:** August 31, 2014, 03:47:43 am »

So just a forewarning, my introduction to paganism was actually with wicca, so most of my knowledge of spells comes from that.

Note: as I've said in my introduction I try to mix spirituality and logic, and this has a small basis in the law of the conservation of energy and the butterfly effect chaos theory.

Anyways, I came to understand spells as basically a manipulation of energies to serve a desired purpose. Unfortunately this made me think that those energies had to come from somewhere, and in essence I was taking already existing energy from somewhere else in nature. So I started to wonder: would that not mean I was interfering with the energies around me, and taking them away from where they were deemed to be needed in the first place by whomever was running things? Isn't dabbling in magic causing possible harm to others, or even the planet, in ways that I couldn't possibly ever begin to understand?

As an example, if I were to cast a spell for, say, cleansing. As far as I understand that's a water based spell (forgive me if I'm completely wrong on that, just bear with me) couldn't I be depriving rain from a farmer's crops elsewhere? Rain that the goddess intended for him to have? Should I really be messing with things when I don't fully understand the consequences behind them, or the outside effects of them?

Anyways, that's my conundrum I've been wondering about for a very long time. It's because of this that I always avoided casting spells, and thus used to tell people who asked that I was a "witch that didn't cast spells". I'd like to see your opinions on the matter and maybe glean a little clarification. There's also a chance I could just be completely wrong about my ideas of how magic works as well.

Also sorry for being so blunt and long-winded, I don't mean to offend or challenge anyone's beliefs.

Faemon · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2014, 04:10:55 am »

Quote from: Ndoki;157792

So just a forewarning, my introduction to paganism was actually with wicca, so most of my knowledge of spells comes from that.

Note: as I've said in my introduction I try to mix spirituality and logic, and this has a small basis in the law of the conservation of energy and the butterfly effect chaos theory.

Ah, well, on the one hand, and yes, the scientific term does work with some very strict rules that don't seem to consider or apply to the metaphysical.

So, I say that I've outgrown the "energy" paradigm because when magic does work, it doesn't to me evidence that it operates within the limits of scientific energy. Besides, if magic energy were scientific energy, then we'd be using magic instead of technology.

No, we don't know completely how it works...but then, that doesn't mean that using water magic or water energy to cleanse and banish a space is what causes draughts. instead of just because we don't know how it works automatically means that we know it wreaks devastation...or that we can even consider or jump to that conclusion...because that's still presuming to know how it works. You know?

Quote

Also sorry for being so blunt and long-winded, I don't mean to offend or challenge anyone's beliefs.

Don't apologize, you'll fit right in here

carillion · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2014, 04:13:51 am »

Quote from: Ndoki;157792

So just a forewarning, my introduction to paganism was actually with wicca, so most of my knowledge of spells comes from that.

Note: as I've said in my introduction I try to mix spirituality and logic, and this has a small basis in the law of the conservation of energy and the butterfly effect chaos theory.

Anyways, I came to understand spells as basically a manipulation of energies to serve a desired purpose. Unfortunately this made me think that those energies had to come from somewhere, and in essence I was taking already existing energy from somewhere else in nature. So I started to wonder: would that not mean I was interfering with the energies around me, and taking them away from where they were deemed to be needed in the first place by whomever was running things? Isn't dabbling in magic causing possible harm to others, or even the planet, in ways that I couldn't possibly ever begin to understand?

As an example, if I were to cast a spell for, say, cleansing. As far as I understand that's a water based spell (forgive me if I'm completely wrong on that, just bear with me) couldn't I be depriving rain from a farmer's crops elsewhere? Rain that the goddess intended for him to have? Should I really be messing with things when I don't fully understand the consequences behind them, or the outside effects of them?

Anyways, that's my conundrum I've been wondering about for a very long time. It's because of this that I always avoided casting spells, and thus used to tell people who asked that I was a "witch that didn't cast spells". I'd like to see your opinions on the matter and maybe glean a little clarification. There's also a chance I could just be completely wrong about my ideas of how magic works as well.

Also sorry for being so blunt and long-winded, I don't mean to offend or challenge anyone's beliefs.

Lots of witches don't cast 'spells'. As for the energy, there's a lot of energy in the human body. Also, in wind, water and just the ambient energy being expended by those around you.
The energy necessary to create a spell ( if one believes such things can happen) has never been quantified but would hardly be noticed by the global and galactic power that surrounds us, I believe.

But of course I've always believed one shouldn't be cavalier with any kind of phenomenon/activity one doesn't fully have an understanding of. You won't see me trying to do electrical or electronic repairs. Good with plumbing, though. I understand the principles.

Ndoki · « **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2014, 04:19:46 am »

Quote from: carillion;157795

As for the energy, there's a lot of energy in the human body.

I find it interesting you should mention that. One of my other upcoming questions was going to be about charms. A long time ago on a few different occasions I made some that worked amazingly well, but only used your own energy, which I consider a safe exception.

Also thanks a bunch for your replies. Definitely some food for thought.

:

carillion · « **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2014, 04:35:43 am »

Quote from: Ndoki;157797

I find it interesting you should mention that. One of my other upcoming questions was going to be about charms. A long time ago on a few different occasions I made some that worked amazingly well, but only used your own energy, which I consider a safe exception.

:

There you go: environmentally friendly charms:D: . In the same way we use wind-farms to create electrical energy, you can recycle/redirect energy already in motion around you into a spell without causing any global disruptions. Besides, the 'Butterfly effect' depends on initial conditions, doesn't it? So you would have to determine where your spell *was* in the non-linear system you are concerned about and...good luck with that:eek:

Jenett · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2014, 01:45:42 pm »

Quote from: Ndoki;157792

Anyways, I came to understand spells as basically a manipulation of energies to serve a desired purpose. Unfortunately this made me think that those energies had to come from somewhere, and in essence I was taking already existing energy from somewhere else in nature. So I started to wonder: would that not mean I was interfering with the energies around me, and taking them away from where they were deemed to be needed in the first place by whomever was running things? Isn't dabbling in magic causing possible harm to others, or even the planet, in ways that I couldn't possibly ever begin to understand?

It sounds like you've got several different approaches tangled together, and that's part of where your complications are?

So, first of all, my take on it is that all things have energy (that includes us). There's also a lot of things that are net energy producers in the world - and that includes both the sun and the planet. (A very small amount of the sun's energy actually gets used: f'ex, Wikipedia tells me that in 2002, there was more solar energy that hit the earth in an hour than all the forms of energy than people earth used in that year, just to give a sense of proportion.)

So, one way of doing magic is to use purely your own energy (the same way you'd use your own energy to clean the house or go for a walk or dance or whatever). It's your energy, you get to do what you want with it. This is the form that a lot of folk witchcraft uses: you're using your energy or maybe the energy in herbs or materials you're using to make things go, but it's basically like you use the energy in the food you eat to make yourself go: it's a small amount, and can be managed sustainably.

Another way is to use some of that extra energy, that isn't doing anything else - for which the usual sources are most commonly sun and earth, but lots of other things have more energy than they're going to use. (Just like we can also use wind power and water mills and so on.)

There are certainly abusive ways to use other things energies - but there's also a bunch of perfectly reasonable ones, like, say, asking a friend to help you move furniture, where you're using your friend's energy, but you're not taking *all* of their energy. Or like lying on a patch of grass and reading a book, when no one else wants that bit of grass. You're not using up anything particularly, in other words, or what you're using is within the grounds of an agreeable negotiation.

This second method is also something that works in magical systems that call on the elementals or other entities (which in some systems includes deities). In that case, it's often "If you come help me move my furniture, I'll buy the beer and pizza after." sorts of arrangements: the entity lends you energy for whatever thing, you give them something that pleases them in return. Just as with moving furniture and beer and pizza, the thing you get and the thing you give don't have to be the same thing, just things that are agreeable to the parties involved.

Quote

As an example, if I were to cast a spell for, say, cleansing. As far as I understand that's a water based spell (forgive me if I'm completely wrong on that, just bear with me) couldn't I be depriving rain from a farmer's crops elsewhere? Rain that the goddess intended for him to have? Should I really be messing with things when I don't fully understand the consequences behind them, or the outside effects of them?

See, this is where the confusion comes in. Cleansing can involve water, yes, but you're using the water you'd be using for physical cleansing. So yes, if you live in California right now, it might well be better to choose a method that doesn't involve excess use of physical water - but a cleansing spell is generally using water as the conveyance for the energy, not for the energy itself. (Just like when you have a shower or a bath, you're using the water to wash away dirt and whatever, and as a conveyance for soap.)

Many cleansing spells are just adding an energetic layer to the physical stuff you'd already be doing - for example, adding a bit of energy to energetically cleanse a room while you sweep it, or to cleanse you while you're having a bath or shower to clean your physical body.

Now, there *are* magical methods where you might be draining a significant amount of energy from a particular source, or might be messing up larger energy flows. This is one of the reasons people often advise against weather magic, because that's an area where you can get it wrong fairly easily and potentially effect a large area if you do.

Healing is another kind of magic where it's tricky. You might try and heal the wrong thing and cause more problems. People whose medical issues are caused by too *much* of something (cancer, auto-immune disorders, some other things) probably don't want anyone to feed those things energy. Likewise, you wouldn't want to drain energy from a system that's not working correctly.

This is part of why a lot of people want direct consent for healing work, because direct consent means you can talk to the person about what you want to do to help them, and they can decide if they want that.

In other words, the issues tend to be about being aware of the interaction of complex systems, rather than always about the initial source.

Ndoki · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2014, 02:16:40 pm »

Quote from: Jenett;157834

See, this is where the confusion comes in. Cleansing can involve water, yes, but you're using the water you'd be using for physical cleansing. So yes, if you live in California right now, it might well be better to choose a method that doesn't involve excess use of physical water - but a cleansing spell is generally using water as the conveyance for the energy, not for the energy itself. (Just like when you have a shower or a bath, you're using the water to wash away dirt and whatever, and as a conveyance for soap.)

I realize now that I didn't do a very good job explaining my example. By water I meant calling upon the diety or element or energies of water, not physical water.

However even so the rest of your post shows that it wouldn't be an issue anyways, just felt I should clarify.

Either way, that was one of the best explanations I have ever heard, and I think I have my answer. I think most of my problem was the assumption that spells were guaranteed and forcing the elements to do what you want, and not an agreement or a trade. I don't know why it never occurred to me that they could simply fail if they were impractical or too demanding in the grand scheme of things or that a proper trade wasn't offered.

Thank you, everyone.

Jenett · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2014, 05:02:21 pm »

Quote from: Ndoki;157838

I think most of my problem was the assumption that spells were guaranteed and forcing the elements to do what you want, and not an agreement or a trade. I don't know why it never occurred to me that they could simply fail if they were impractical or too demanding in the grand scheme of things or that a proper trade wasn't offered.

Welcome!

On the point above - that *is* one method of doing magic. But it's certainly not the only one, and it's not generally the one that most people assume for witchcraft and folk magics. (The 'I bind and compel this entity to do this thing' is more a ceremonial magic method.)

The other thing is, for many purposes, it's not like you're using up an entity's entire focus.

F'ex, I'm a librarian, and I like answering questions, but the vast majority of questions I get asked do not actually take all my concentration or all my energy for the day. (Good thing, too!) So, I can sit here and answer you, but I'm also idly house cleaning, and talking to people in chat, and remembering I need to put more food in the cat's food dish, and about to settle in to working on a project, and so on.

For a lot of smaller magics, the amount of attention an elemental or deity or whatever has to pay to what you're doing is pretty small, and they can do a lot of those in a given time period without neglecting bigger things (like droughts and major effects.) And you can help rebalance it by asking for help for something that's relatively easy for them, but then giving offerings/attention/a bit of your energy back in a different form that helps replenish them. It's not a simple math equation, but it's not one sided, either, or at least it doesn't need to be.

NightQueen · « **Reply #8 on:** September 02, 2014, 03:33:27 pm »

Quote from: Ndoki;157792

So just a forewarning, my introduction to paganism was actually with wicca, so most of my knowledge of spells comes from that.

Note: as I've said in my introduction I try to mix spirituality and logic, and this has a small basis in the law of the conservation of energy and the butterfly effect chaos theory.

Anyways, I came to understand spells as basically a manipulation of energies to serve a desired purpose.

Others have answered more astutely than I, but I'd just thought I'd add, that in that sentence you have described every activity a person can possibly do. If I turn on my stove I am manipulating energy into heating my food. Not to mention the energy I manipulated just in lifting my arm to turn on the stove in the first place. I'm not sure what the difference between manipulating energy mundanely versus magically would be in the grand scheme of the universe. Physics teaches us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed so, everything we do is just a manipulation of energy in someway, shape or form.

Quote from:

Anyways, that's my conundrum I've been wondering about for a very long time. It's because of this that I always avoided casting spells, and thus used to tell people who asked that I was a "witch that didn't cast spells". I'd like to see your opinions on the matter and maybe glean a little clarification. There's also a chance I could just be completely wrong about my ideas of how magic works as well.

Also sorry for being so blunt and long-winded, I don't mean to offend or challenge anyone's beliefs.

Not to be overly pedantic, but I would not describe a person who does not practice magic as a "witch". They might be a Wiccan, or any other pagan religion, but they are not a witch in my mind. I've never been particularly fond of the tendency of some Wiccans (and popular culture) to use Witch as a synonym for Wiccan. I realize that the word Wicca comes from the Middle English word for witch, but using the words interchangeably implies (at least in my mind) that there are no non-Wiccan witches, which is obviously untrue.

Jenett · « **Reply #9 on:** September 02, 2014, 04:54:59 pm »

Quote from: NightQueen;157982

I'm not sure what the difference between manipulating energy mundanely versus magically would be in the grand scheme of the universe. Physics teaches us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed so, everything we do is just a manipulation of energy in someway, shape or form.

In my own practice, I view magic as change in accordance with will, and taking place through some mechanism that is more art than science. (If I go to put a computer on a cart, I am exerting my will to change the local universe, but I can measure what I'm doing, how much I'm lifting, etc. if I really wanted to. With magic, I'm creating change, but the functional mechanism is more opaque.)

Quote

Not to be overly pedantic, but I would not describe a person who does not practice magic as a "witch". They might be a Wiccan, or any other pagan religion, but they are not a witch in my mind. I've never been particularly fond of the tendency of some Wiccans (and popular culture) to use Witch as a synonym for Wiccan. I realize that the word Wicca comes from the Middle English word for witch, but using the words interchangeably implies (at least in my mind) that there are no non-Wiccan witches, which is obviously untrue.

It's actually a little more complicated than that: Wicca is in its more traditional forms, a witchcraft religion, so generally speaking, anyone who is in an initiatory trad of Wicca is likely also witch, and a number of people who aren't in initiatory trads. (This is why they were used interchangably for a good while, because until the explosion of eclectic Wicca and eclectic 'I'm using Wicca as a label because it's easier' pretty much every Wiccan *was* also a witch.)

There are strands of people who identify as Wiccan but say they never use magic. When asked what casting a circle is, there is often a lot of blinking. I do know a number of Wiccans who rarely do *spells*, mind you, but there's more kinds of magic and more kinds of witchcraft than spells.

carillion · « **Reply #10 on:** September 02, 2014, 05:38:50 pm »

Quote from: NightQueen;157982

Not to be overly pedantic, but I would not describe a person who does not practice magic as a "witch". They might be a Wiccan, or any other pagan religion, but they are not a witch in my mind. I've never been particularly fond of the tendency of some Wiccans (and popular culture) to use Witch as a synonym for Wiccan. I realize that the word Wicca comes from the Middle English word for witch, but using the words interchangeably implies (at least in my mind) that there are no non-Wiccan witches, which is obviously untrue.

Don't you think this a little proscriptive? There are people who, by many definitions, are practicing 'magic' but they wouldn't call it that and who also wouldn't identify as a 'witch',nor are they wiccan and they may not be religious.

I agree that it's irritating to have the terms 'wiccan' and 'witch' conflated but that still leaves a broad field of people who are not easily categorized (nor should they be) by what they may or may not do as defined by someone else. Just my opinion.

NightQueen · « **Reply #11 on:** September 02, 2014, 05:52:56 pm »

Quote from: Jenett;157988

It's actually a little more complicated than that: Wicca is in its more traditional forms, a witchcraft religion, so generally speaking, anyone who is in an initiatory trad of Wicca is likely also witch, and a number of people who aren't in initiatory trads. (This is why they were used interchangably for a good while, because until the explosion of eclectic Wicca and eclectic 'I'm using Wicca as a label because it's easier' pretty much every Wiccan *was* also a witch.)

There are strands of people who identify as Wiccan but say they never use magic. When asked what casting a circle is, there is often a lot of blinking. I do know a number of Wiccans who rarely do *spells*, mind you, but there's more kinds of magic and more kinds of witchcraft than spells.

To be fair I don't know a lot about Traditional Wicca, but from what I gather that a member of a trad coven would by definition be practicing witchcraft or magic by taking part in their coven's rituals (simply by the nature of those rituals) even if they never cast a spell or perform any other type of magic outside of those rituals, so I agree that all trad Wiccans are witches.

On the other hand, if you a solitary (self-identified) Wiccan and you don't practice magic of some kind (and I agree there are many forms of magic), then I would not describe you as a witch. YMMV of course. I may just feel that way, because for me my magical practices don't stem from my religious beliefs. The two things are separate in my mind. I call myself a witch, but it describes (for me) the things I do, not what I believe. I realize that's not necessarily true of everyone else.

And to be quite frank, I don't really care what individuals call themselves, my real problem is when someone says something like, "Witches do/don't do *blank*," when they really mean Wiccans, do or don't perform a certain practice. That's the danger in using the terms interchangeably in my mind anyway.

BTW I'm not implying that anyone here says things like "Witches do *blank*". I've seen it elsewhere and it bugs me a little and I think it's a perception by the general population that Wicca equals all Witchcraft or all witches are Wiccans.

I probably was being a little on the nitpicky side in my original post.

NightQueen · « **Reply #12 on:** September 02, 2014, 06:36:48 pm »

Quote from: carillion;157990

Don't you think this a little proscriptive?

I'm honestly not sure what you mean by this. There's certainly nothing wrong with not being a witch.

Quote from:

There are people who, by many definitions, are practicing 'magic' but they wouldn't call it that and who also wouldn't identify as a 'witch',nor are they wiccan and they may not be religious.

Then I wouldn't describe them as witches (or maybe I would, but not to their faces :whis:). I suppose in my mind, much like the use of the term pagan here, I would say that a witch is someone who practices witchcraft or magic in some form, and identifies themselves as a witch. I wouldn't describe a person who had vaguely Wiccan-ish beliefs but didn't identify as a Wiccan, a Wiccan either.

Quote from:

I agree that it's irritating to have the terms 'wiccan' and 'witch' conflated but that still leaves a broad field of people who are not easily categorized (nor should they be) by what they may or may not do as defined by someone else. Just my opinion.

I respect your opinion, but I think that you may be assuming that I'm somehow assigning values to these terms. I'm not. There is nothing good about being a witch or bad about "just" being a Wiccan. I just think that the terms we use to describe ourselves should be as accurate as possible. It's one thing to not have a term to describe yourself, it's another to use an inaccurate one. Did that make any sense? Heaven knows my own beliefs and practices are not easy to categorize.

Sophia C · « **Reply #13 on:** September 03, 2014, 02:52:07 am »

Quote from: NightQueen;157992

I just think that the terms we use to describe ourselves should be as accurate as possible. It's one thing to not have a term to describe yourself, it's another to use an inaccurate one. Did that make any sense? Heaven knows my own beliefs and practices are not easy to categorize.

Don't forget that there are cultural differences with the way these terms are used, though. In the UK, almost no one calls themselves a Wiccan. I even know Gardenerians who simply call themselves witches. Most Wicca-influenced eclectics go by the term 'hedge-witch' here.

Terms are only useful if they make sense to your society. If I went around calling the pavement a 'sidewalk', no one here would understand me. The same goes for a term like 'Wiccan'. It's not used here, so I wouldn't impose it on someone who doesn't call themselves that for cultural reasons. It's only 'accurate' to the extent that the meaning makes sense to everyone around you.

NightQueen · « **Reply #14 on:** September 03, 2014, 04:03:13 am »

Quote from: Naomi J;158016

Don't forget that there are cultural differences with the way these terms are used, though. In the UK, almost no one calls themselves a Wiccan. I even know Gardenerians who simply call themselves witches. Most Wicca-influenced eclectics go by the term 'hedge-witch' here.

I didn't know that Wiccan wasn't widely used in the UK. I'll be aware of that in the future. Thanks.