"What is the difference between 'magick' and 'magic?" is a question a lot of people new to witchcraft will ask themselves at some point.
Anyone researching magic or witchcraft on the internet, in books or anywhere else, will come across the words 'magic' and 'magick'. This is something that often confuses people, as they seem to be referring to the same thing. And, for the most part the are.
The use of the spelling 'magick' is largely believed to have started with Aleister Crowley. He offers one explanation as to why he used this spelling in his book 'Magick in Theory and Practice'.
“In my third year at Cambridge, I devoted myself consciously to the Great Work, understanding thereby the Work of becoming a Spiritual Being, free from the constraints, accidents, and deceptions of material existence. I found myself at a loss for a name to designate my work, just as H. P. Blavatsky some years earlier. "Theosophy", "Spiritualism", "Occultism", "Mysticism", all involved undesirable connotations. I chose therefore the name "MAGICK" as essentially the most sublime, and actually the most discredited, of all the available terms. I swore to rehabilitate MAGICK, to identify it with my own career; and to compel mankind to respect, love, and trust that which they scorned, hated and feared. I have kept my Word.”
Another theory that a lot of people subscribe to is that he chose this spelling for numerological reasons. In Numerology 'k' corresponds with 11, and 11 is a powerful number denoting psychic ability and deep insight.
A lot of people who chose to use this spelling do so in relation to Wicca. This is a little unusual as Aleister Crowley was not Wiccan. In fact the majority of significant figures within Wicca (including Gerald Gardner), used the spelling 'magic'.
As a general rule of thumb, if you see the spelling 'magick', it is usually in relation to a form of ceremonial magic. However, as with a lot of things within witchcraft, it comes down to personal choice. A lot of magical practitioners use the way they spell it as an expression of the path they follow. Some simply use the same spelling as the person that taught them. Some take it from their favourite witchcraft books or websites.
Either spelling is neither correct nor incorrect, and you can see examples of them both on all manner and type of literature and websites.
“In my third year at Cambridge, I devoted myself consciously to the Great Work, understanding thereby the Work of becoming a Spiritual Being, free from the constraints, accidents, and deceptions of material existence. I found myself at a loss for a name to designate my work, just as H. P. Blavatsky some years earlier. "Theosophy", "Spiritualism", "Occultism", "Mysticism", all involved undesirable connotations. I chose therefore the name "MAGICK" as essentially the most sublime, and actually the most discredited, of all the available terms. I swore to rehabilitate MAGICK, to identify it with my own career; and to compel mankind to respect, love, and trust that which they scorned, hated and feared. I have kept my Word.”
Another theory that a lot of people subscribe to is that he chose this spelling for numerological reasons. In Numerology 'k' corresponds with 11, and 11 is a powerful number denoting psychic ability and deep insight.
A lot of people who chose to use this spelling do so in relation to Wicca. This is a little unusual as Aleister Crowley was not Wiccan. In fact the majority of significant figures within Wicca (including Gerald Gardner), used the spelling 'magic'.
As a general rule of thumb, if you see the spelling 'magick', it is usually in relation to a form of ceremonial magic. However, as with a lot of things within witchcraft, it comes down to personal choice. A lot of magical practitioners use the way they spell it as an expression of the path they follow. Some simply use the same spelling as the person that taught them. Some take it from their favourite witchcraft books or websites.
Either spelling is neither correct nor incorrect, and you can see examples of them both on all manner and type of literature and websites.
No comments:
Post a Comment