snoo posted:

imagine hating women this much

KirbyKhan posted:

snoo posted:

imagine hating women this much

Regarde Aduck posted:

lol spr was maybe hitting the low hanging fruit a bit too hard with those posts, i think ultimately snoo was trying to have fun, but 2 week probe lmao

Dokapon Findom posted:

SPR pissing people off in the specific way she did is the real reason she was banned imo. They just caught her on a technicality

Smythe posted:

you may want to review the circumstances surrounding her ban, op.

Dokapon Findom posted:

Also I lol every time I see Larry Parrish's tiny permaban. Why is it so small??

Dokapon Findom posted:

I saw the whole thing and don't give a poo poo she lied. I question the decision to remove anyone of a group statistically more likely to incur self-harm/suicide from a community that they feel a part of...

Somebody answer this!!

speng31b posted:

this is the multidenominational witchcraft thread

Dokapon Findom posted:

So you're all just going to stonewall me instead of answering re: Larry's extra tiny icon

Dokapon Findom posted:

So you're all just going to stonewall me instead of answering re: Larry's extra tiny icon

Dokapon Findom posted:

So you're all just going to stonewall me instead of answering re: Larry's extra tiny icon

Endman posted:

it’s a shame they’re useless, because sigils look cool

http://jur.byu.edu/?p=6396 posted:

Augustine believed that words, as signs, were objects of the senses and merely a manifestation of something else. It is the reality that lies behind the sign, whether an object of the senses or the intellect, that is the actual object of true knowledge.

[...]

Augustine maintains that signs are “things,” meaning that their ontological value resides in their ability to cause one to think of something else beyond the impression they themselves make upon one’s mind.

Squizzle posted:

Al! posted:

waiting until january 1st to start incorporating steamboat willie into my sigils

Al! posted:

waiting until january 1st to start incorporating steamboat willie into my sigils

speng31b posted:

this is the multidenominational witchcraft thread

Sextro posted:

I don't know anything, but I do know that this movie is my favorite witch content atm.

quote:

Elaine, a beautiful young witch, is determined to find a man to love her. In her gothic Victorian apartment she makes spells and potions, and then picks up men and seduces them. However her spells work too well, and she ends up with a string of hapless victims. When she finally meets the man of her dreams, her desperation to be loved will drive her to the brink of insanity and murder. With a visual style that pays tribute to Technicolor thrillers of the 1970s,"The Love Witch" explores female fantasy and the repercussions of pathological narcissism.

yellowcar posted:

alchemy gave us the discovery of phosphorous in which a guy was boiling vats of piss until it glowed in the dark

in short, dudes rock

LITERALLY A BIRD posted:

Sigils are a little interesting conceptually if you're used to thinking of words and symbols not as lifeless pathetic "language" but as representations of intent. Again, I know more about this in the context of hieroglyphs (lit. sacred carvings in Greek, "God's words" in Egyptian) but awareness of the concept was carried over into Christianity by celebrated Christian convert St. Augustine.

So when you think of magic as a form of communication between the spellcaster/magician/witch and the Power That Is, words (or signs, or sigils) are the expression of desired magical intent. Sigils, like language, are by definition made up; and like language, are useless unless they demonstrate meaning understood by both halves of the equation of communication.

That is to say, if anyone here is a witch that believes in sigil magic, since the author of those particular sigils laid out the design of the sigils themselves and also specifically what each sigil is intended to do upon inscription, I would from a purely theoretical standpoint see them as less useless than most. You still need to be talking to someone that's able to grant the request or demand involved in your communication, but that's something!

Hooray!

https://z-library.se/book/24179574/8ac536/enheduana-the-complete-poems-of-the-worlds-first-author.html posted:

One example of a Sumerian word that is central to Enheduana’s poems but is still poorly understood is me, traditionally pronounced with a long, open vowel, so as to rhyme with Spanish que.
...
As noted in the Introduction, a central term in Enheduana’s treatment of power is the me, a concept that continues to puzzle Sumerologists.13 The word literally means “to be” or “to exist,” but it is used as a noun. It is clear from literary and religious texts that the me were seen as the province of the gods: they would hold the me in their hands and derive their power from them. In Inana’s Descent to the Underworld, Inana is tricked by her sister Ereshkigal into leaving behind the me that adorn her body at the entrance to the underworld. Without the me, Inana is stripped of her powers, leaving her defenseless against Ereshkigal’s attacks: it is by wielding the me that Inana can impose her awe-inspiring terror. It would seem, then, that me refers to the fundamental elements of existence—“that which is”—and that the gods controlled the cosmos by exerting power over these elements.

But the me is an even trickier concept than that. When the Babylonian scholars translated the word into Akkadian, they rendered it as parṣu, “ritual.” This is not necessarily to be understood as a religious ritual of the kind performed in the temples. In this context, parṣu may refer more generally to something that was done again and again to sustain human society: institutions such as kingship, agriculture, metalworking, craftmanship, and sex, which were all seen as me. These me were not just cosmological elements that merely existed, like hydrogen or gravity, but activities that had to be performed repeatedly for civilization to survive—in other words, a kind of ritual on a culture-wide level. Sometimes individual objects are said to have their own me, in which case the me should probably be thought of as the destiny or cosmic role of that object. As the philologist Gertrude Farber concludes in her study of the me: “All spheres of civilization and culture—be it the institutions of state or religion, spiritual or emotional values, social conditions, professions, offices, or any object or tool—are permeated by the ‘divine powers’ [the me], which are designed and executed by the gods.”14
Inana and Enki tells of how Inana stole a trove of me from the trickster god Enki by drinking him into a stupor and loading his me onto her boat.15 The me that Inana absconds with include, among many others, joy and justice, honesty and lies, rebellion, kindness, awe and reverent silence, wisdom, the scribal arts, shepherdship, leadership, leathercraft and metalwork, the kindling and dousing of fire, the making of families, strife and triumph, old age, weapons, various priestly offices, sex, singing and musical instruments. All these were me—that is, practices which formed the fabric of the human world. Note especially how the me are treated in the story: as physical objects that Inana can load onto her boat while Enki sleeps, almost like shipping crates. The me themselves seem to be silent and inert, but owning them bestows cosmic power.16 That is what makes them so odd. They are both objects and rituals, powers and practices, elements and destinies.

In Inana and Enki, Inana does not necessarily get away with all the me that exist. Notably absent from the list are aspects of life such as medicine and disease, which were controlled by other gods. The list we find in this text is probably not a comprehensive enumeration of all the me, but only a catalogue of those that Inana stole from Enki. This is what makes the claim we find in the Exaltation, that Inana controls every me—that she is nin me šara, “queen of all the me”—so startling. It amounts to saying that every aspect of existence, every part and province of the human world, belongs to Inana, and that all the other gods had their domains delegated to them by Inana. In the Introduction, I noted that Enheduana does not merely assume Inana’s cosmic supremacy; she seeks to bring it about through the poem. She explicitly states that Inana was born as a “second-rate ruler” (l. 114), and that the goddess can now claim universal rulership by stepping into the power vacuum left by Nanna’s silence. The idea that Inana was in need of empowerment does not reflect historical fact: it should be seen as a poetic device in which Enheduana claims that Inana was not held in high enough regard, and therefore she could take it upon herself to do the exalting.17 The narrative does not just praise Inana’s power; it actively seeks to make her the “queen of all the me.”

Charlatan Eschaton posted:

sounds sorta like the mes, activities that are aspects of the gods also have representations as physical objects

H.P. Hovercraft posted:

Charlatan Eschaton posted:

sounds sorta like the mes, activities that are aspects of the gods also have representations as physical objects

Sherbert Hoover posted:

https://twitter.com/cynicalzoomer/status/1742367620924334185

Sherbert Hoover posted:

https://twitter.com/cynicalzoomer/status/1742367620924334185