Hypnosis and
Ritual Magick
by Philip H. Farber, June 23, 1995
(Posted here by Wes Penre: March 09, 2006)
There
are certain people who have the ability to communicate with a purity and
intensity that most can only aspire to.
Aleister Crowley was
definitely one of these people, an acknowledged master of language and, if
anecdotal evidence serves us, able to create profound experiences merely by
his presence. We may also speculate that some measure of this talent, acting
on himself, was responsible for his great feats of discipline and
self-transformation. Of course, Uncle Al was not the only one who has had
this kind of ability. George Gurdjieff (for instance) claimed to be a potent
hypnotist, who could affect changes without the knowledge of his students.
We can ascribe this power of subtle communication, if we wish, to many
religious and political leaders throughout history. But do we understand how
it works? And, beyond that, is it useful to us in our True Will?
George Gurdjieff and Aleister Crowley
For lack of a better term, we can call this
ability 'hypnosis'. That term is somewhat misleading as it may, in some
minds, narrow the focus down to a few techniques of dubious usefulness.
While we certainly can include the stereotyped watch-watching of the
old-time hypnotherapist, and the senseless antics of the stage hypnotist,
these are an insignificant (and fairly useless) aspect of hypnosis. For our
purposes, we can allow the term to include such a wide variety of techniques
and phenomena that we might as well redefine hypnosis as "an understanding
of the methods of communication and their usefulness in affecting change."
By this definition it can be understood, for the magician, as an additional
set of tools for "causing change to occur in conformity with Will."
A new understanding of hypnosis began in the
middle and late twentieth century with the work of psychotherapist Dr.
Milton Erickson. Erickson, confined to a wheelchair for most of his life,
was an exceptionally keen observer. He was able to map out, in his mind, any
number of parallel avenues of communication that ranged from the most
obvious verbal forms, to a whole range of things that are often lumped
together in the category of "body language." Erickson was able, for
instance, to monitor a patient's breathing and heart rate, strictly from
external cues -- what he could see with his eyes -- while listening and
communicating in the complex course of his therapeutic work. He soon
discovered that this ability was incredibly useful in understanding and
creating dramatic and lasting change in his clients.
While
Erickson may have been one of the most powerful psychotherapists ever, his
techniques were never adequately explained until the studies of Richard
Bandler and John Grinder in the 1960's and 70's e.v. Bandler and Grinder
applied the Cartesian linguistics of Noam Chomsky, as well as a cybernetic
approach, to describing what Erickson and other effective therapists were
doing. They broke the techniques down into manageable chunks that could be
easily taught and, in the process, spawned the field of Neuro-Linguistic
Programming (NLP). Unfortunately for the common experimenter in
consciousness, NLP was (and still is) marketed in the form of extremely
high-priced workshops aimed at therapists and (look out!) businessmen who
could use the techniques to increase sales and, thereby, their own temporal
power. On the more positive side, the information has now disseminated to
the point where there is an enormous body of published work (a partial list
appears at the end of this article), and a persistent magician (who is
already adept at gleaning esoteric information from obscure writings) can
find some very interesting ways to enhance his magickal practice.
That's the background in the smallest of peanut
shells. Of course, magick frequently is work done on oneself, rather than
the doctor/client method of the therapeutic setting. Fortunately, almost all
the techniques of Ericksonian hypnosis are adaptable for self-hypnosis --
and, even better, adaptable for use in a ritual setting. The implications, I
believe, are enormous, ranging from the general ability to improve
concentration and memory, to very specific methods for enhancing Golden Dawn
and Thelemic types of ritual.
To begin with, Ericksonian technique is
essentially compatible with Thelemic code. It is practically impossible to
make someone do something against their will with hypnosis, which is why
traditional hypnosis only seems to work with a small percentage of the
population. Ericksonian hypnosis is effective with practically everyone, if
performed properly, but it is virtually impossible to get someone to do
something against their True Will, whether that is known to the conscious
mind or not. I learned this by trial and error in the course of my
experimentation, and I would expect others to verify or dispute any such
statements of mine with similar experimentation.
Hypnosis of this type depends on suggestion,
rather than command. A statement such as "You will go into a trance"
generally produces a response such as "Oh? How am I going to do that?" or,
more commonly, "Up yours!" On the other hand, a verifiable statement
followed by a suggestion of possibility, "You are sitting in a chair, and
you can become comfortable sitting that way," can produce a more readily
observable effect of relaxation. Even better, allowing for a wider range of
choice, for instance "Which chair can you be most comfortable in?"
presupposes comfort in the chair that may be chosen, and prepares the
hypnotizee for becoming comfortable. Are you comfortable with this yet?
|