158 lines
9.6 KiB
Plaintext
158 lines
9.6 KiB
Plaintext
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
This article was written by Mike Nichols for the Magick Lantern BBS. It may be
|
|
freely distributed provided that the following conditions are met:
|
|
(1) No fee is charged for its use and distribution and no commercial use is
|
|
made of it; (2) It is not changed or edited in any way without the author's
|
|
permission; (3) This notice is not removed.
|
|
This article may be periodically updated by the author; this version is current
|
|
as of 9/28/88. Contact Mike Nichols at The Magick Lantern BBS [(816)531-7265,
|
|
7pm. to 11am., 300 baud ONLY] for more recent updates, or to leave your own
|
|
comments.
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
'Of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps the most fatal to true
|
|
happiness.' -- Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHARMED, I'M SURE
|
|
The Ethics of Love Spells
|
|
=========================
|
|
by Mike Nichols
|
|
|
|
|
|
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|
|
|
|
To gain the love of someone: On a night of the full moon, walk to a spot
|
|
beneath your beloved's bedroom window, and whisper his/her name three times to
|
|
the nightwind.
|
|
|
|
--Ozark love spell
|
|
|
|
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to be an immutable law of nature. You are interviewed by a local
|
|
radio or TV station, or in some local newspaper. The topic of the interview is
|
|
Witchcraft or Paganism, and you spend the better part of an hour brilliantly
|
|
articulating your beliefs, your devotion to Goddess and nature, the difference
|
|
between Witchcraft and Satanism, and generally enlightening the public at
|
|
large. The next day, you are flooded with calls. Is it people complimenting
|
|
you on such a splendid interview? No. People wanting to find out more about
|
|
the religion of Wicca? Huh-uh. People who are even vaguely interested in what
|
|
you had to say??? Nope. Who is it? It's people asking you to do a love spell
|
|
for them! This used to drive me nuts. I'd take a deep breath and patiently
|
|
explain (for the thousandth time) why I won't even do love spells for myself,
|
|
let alone anyone else. This generally resulted in my caller becoming either
|
|
angry or defensive, but seldom more enlightened. 'But don't you DO magic?',
|
|
they ask. 'Only occasionally,' I answer. 'And aren't most magic spells love
|
|
spells?', they persist. That was the line I really hated, because I knew they
|
|
were right! At least, if you look at the table of contents of most books on
|
|
magic, you'll find more love spells than any other kind. This seems as true
|
|
for the medieval grimoire as for the modern drugstore paperback.
|
|
|
|
Why? Why so many books containing so many love spells? Why such an
|
|
emphasis on a kind of magic that I, personally, have always considered very
|
|
negative? And to make matters even more confusing, the books that do take the
|
|
trouble of dividing spells between 'positive' and 'negative' magic invariably
|
|
list love spells under the first heading. After all, they would argue, love is
|
|
a good thing. There can never be too much of it. Therefore, any spell that
|
|
brings about love must be a GOOD spell. Never mind that the spell puts a
|
|
straightjacket on another's free will, and then drops it in cement for good
|
|
measure.
|
|
|
|
And that is why I had always assumed love magic to be negative magic.
|
|
Years ago, one of the first things I learned as a novice Witch was something
|
|
called the Witch's Rede, a kind of 'golden rule' in traditional Witchcraft. It
|
|
states, 'An it harm none, do what thou will.' One uses this rede as a kind of
|
|
ethical litmus test for a spell. If the spell brings harm to someone -- anyone
|
|
(including yourself!) -- then don't do it! Unfortunately, this rule contains a
|
|
loophole big enough to fly a broom through. It's commonly expressed, 'Oh, this
|
|
won't HARM them; it's really for their own good.' When you hear someone say
|
|
that, take cover, because something especially nasty is about to happen.
|
|
|
|
That's why I had to develop my own version of the Witch's Rede. Mine
|
|
says that if a spell harms anyone, OR LIMITS THEIR FREEDOM OF THOUGHT OR ACTION
|
|
IN ANY WAY, then consider it negative, and don't do it. Pretty strict, you
|
|
say? Perhaps. But there's another law in Witchcraft called the Law of
|
|
Threefold Return. This says that whatever power you send out, eventually comes
|
|
back to you three times more powerful. So I take no chances. And love spells,
|
|
of the typical make-Bobby-love-me type, definitely have an impact on another's
|
|
free will.
|
|
|
|
So why are they so common? It's taken me years to make peace with this,
|
|
but I think I finally understand. The plain truth is that most of us NEED
|
|
love. Without it, our lives are empty and miserable. After our basic survival
|
|
needs have been met, we must have affection and companionship for a full life.
|
|
And if it will not come of its own accord, some of us may be tempted to FORCE
|
|
it to come. And nothing can be as painful as loving someone who doesn't love
|
|
you back. Consequently, the most common, garden-variety spell in the world is
|
|
the love spell.
|
|
|
|
Is there ever a way to do a love spell and yet stay within the parameters
|
|
of the Witch's Rede? Possibly. Some teachers have argued that if a spell
|
|
doesn't attempt to attract a SPECIFIC person into your life, but rather
|
|
attempts to attract the RIGHT person, whomever that may be, then it is not
|
|
negative magic. Even so, one should make sure that the spell finds people who
|
|
are 'right' for each other -- so that neither is harmed, and both are made
|
|
happy.
|
|
|
|
Is there ever an excuse for the make-Bobby-love-me type of spell?
|
|
Without endorsing this viewpoint, I must admit that the most cogent argument in
|
|
its favor is the following: Whenever you fall in love with someone, you do
|
|
everything in your power to impress them. You dress nicer, are more attentive,
|
|
witty, and charming. And at the same time, you unconsciously set in motion
|
|
some very powerful psychic forces. If you've ever walked into a room where
|
|
someone has a crush on you, you know what I mean. You can FEEL it. Proponents
|
|
of this school say that a love spell only takes the forces that are ALREADY
|
|
there -- MUST be there if you're in love -- and channels them more efficiently.
|
|
But the energy would be there just the same, whether or not you use a spell to
|
|
focus it.
|
|
|
|
I won't attempt to decide this one for you. People must arrive at their
|
|
own set of ethics through their own considerations. However, I would call to
|
|
your attention all the cautionary tales in folk magic about love spells gone
|
|
awry. Also, if a love spell has been employed to join two people who are not
|
|
naturally compatible, then one must keep pumping energy into the spell. And
|
|
when one finally tires of this (and one will, because it is hard work!) then
|
|
the spell will unravel amidst an emotional and psychic hurricane that will make
|
|
the stormiest divorces seem calm by comparison. Not a pretty picture.
|
|
|
|
It should be noted that many spells that pass themselves off as love
|
|
spells are, in reality, sex spells. Not that there's anything surprising in
|
|
that, since our most basic needs usually include sex. But I think we should be
|
|
clear from the outset what kind of spell it is. And the same ethical standards
|
|
used for love spells can often be applied to sex spells. Last year, the very
|
|
quotable Isaac Bonewits, author of 'Real Magic', taught a sex magic class here
|
|
at the Magick Lantern, and he tossed out the following rule of thumb: Decide
|
|
what the mundane equivalent of your spell would be, and ask yourself if you
|
|
could be arrested for it. For example, some spells are like sending a letter
|
|
to your beloved in the mail, whereas other spells are tantamount to abduction.
|
|
The former is perfectly legal and normal, whereas the latter is felonious.
|
|
|
|
One mitigating factor in your decisions may be the particular tradition
|
|
of magic you follow. For example, I've often noticed that practitioners of
|
|
Voudoun (Voodoo) and Santeria seem much more focused on the wants and needs of
|
|
day-to-day living than on the abstruse ethical considerations we've been
|
|
examining here. That's not a value judgement -- just an observation. For
|
|
example, most followers of Wicca STILL don't know how to react when a Santerian
|
|
priest spills the blood of a chicken during a ritual -- other than to feel
|
|
pretty queasy. The ethics of one culture is not always the same as another.
|
|
|
|
And speaking of cultural traditions, another consideration is how a
|
|
culture views love and sex. It has often been pointed out that in our
|
|
predominant culture, love and sex are seen in very possessive terms, where the
|
|
beloved is regarded as one's personal property. If the spell uses this
|
|
approach, treating a person as an object, jealously attempting to cut off all
|
|
other relationships, then the ethics are seriously in doubt. However, if the
|
|
spell takes a more open approach to love and sex, not attempting to limit a
|
|
person's other relationships in any way, then perhaps it is more defensible.
|
|
Perhaps. Still, it might be wise to ask, Is this the kind of spell I'd want
|
|
someone to cast on me?
|
|
|
|
Love spells. Whether to do them or not. If you are a practitioner of
|
|
magic, I dare say you will one day be faced with the choice. If you haven't
|
|
yet, it is only a matter of time. And if the answer is yes, then which spells
|
|
are ethical and which aren't? Then you, and only you, will have to decide
|
|
whether 'All's fair in love and war', or whether there are other, higher,
|
|
metaphysical considerations.
|