Absolutely agree.

You know I've been thinking about this a lot lately and it seems that being innately adept at witchcraft simply isn't allowed. You have to be more than that. Or if you are just a "from the gut" witch, then you are disbelieved or questioned constantly because you dont have a "tradition"

Bizzarre

But I have also noticed that it just isn't good enough to be a good old Bogstandard Pagan. Where is the shame in that I wonder??

So because "witchcraft" has become more widely available, through books or covens or whatever, people no longer have to be "just" Pagan, they can now BE witches, whether they are or not.

I dont care if I'm called a witch or not personally, but as I've said I cant find another simple word which adequately "labels" me and so for expediency Witch is easiest.

At one time everyone wanted to be Wiccan, then the Heathens had to put up with a resurge, now it seems "trad craft" is the new trendy witch to be..

What next I wonder?

But all through these trendy and fashionable things to "be", there are some of us who have just been doing what we do and will continue doing what we do, without any need for validation.

It used to worry me a lot. These days I simply cant be asked to justify who or what I am. I'm a Comfrey and I am definitely Pagan and I may possibley be a witch, all depending on an individuals definition.

Good, so for you reading his work made a huge difference and this sort of study is of course important when we are starting on our path

But my argument still remains the same. It is someone elses thoughts and although I agree he was a natural teacher, his teaching came from somewhere. Did he gain his "thoughts" from another person, or did they come from somewhere deep within himself?

What about those who have done all you say you have done, without the need to read people like Cochcrane.

Peoples relationship with Deity (if they acknowledge such) is extremely personal and far too often the"seekers" get tied up in other peoples words and work, instead of listening to their own hearts.

I believe that everyone has the innate ability, so you could say that I think that witches are born

Hence we are all born witches, some choose to listen to their inner voices, some don't, for some its a whisper, for some a shout.

BB
TR

/* Rubs hands together in glee*/

Oh goody the witchblood debate, I have always maintained that it should be possible to debate this subject in an adult and cogent manner, although past experience has proved temporarily otherwise; but the general level of mature posting here may finally facilitate what is to me a fascinating subject.



The concept of born a witch, can of course be taken literally or abstractly. And I have seen the literal sense used to bash people over the head and belittle them, something I take a very dim view on. My understanding of Cochranes meaning behind the word "born", was not that he meant it in the literal, of the womb, genetic line, sense. Although I did spend sometime studying the "daughters of eve" theory and the 17 (I believe it is now) base mitochondrial DNA strands, and it is "possible" if generally implausible that there is a connection.

Now that isn't to say that some witches are innately "born" in the mundane infantile sense of the word, pretty much fully functioning, but I reckon those are pretty much few and far between. Most that have the innate ability activated in them at a later date. As a curious side line, I have noticed that most of the solitary witches (in the "trad craft" sense, myself included) who I rate, that I have come across all have one or two interesting facets in common, firstly many have had a traumatic or NDE experience during their life and/or didn't come into their full faculties until after their Saturn return, both events can be considered a death/rebirth event, thus allowing them the ability to stand with one foot in each world; and is not dissimilar to the Shamanic initiations of the people of the steppes.

My understanding of the "birth" situation is that it can be activated, within a "group structure" through magic and ritual, more quickly, more cleanly and sooner, without all the messy age and life/death stuff, but it is not necessary, although it may take longer and perhaps may not be as complete.

xXx

Interesting. So you're saying that someone who is very adept but has no 'witchblood' can never be of the same value as someone who has 'witchblood' and is equally as adept (or even less)? Surely the proof of the pudding is in the eating, not in the recipe?



Try. It's beginning to sound - to me - rather like muggles, purebloods and mudbloods, and I'd be rather happy if you disabused me of that impression

Also, just out of interest, is this an argument ("born, not made") central to Cochrane's work?

Caerthan

Hmm I suppose that depends on who you speak to, he most certainly made a distinct differentiation between the "witch" and the "pagan", I believe the other term he used was "between the quick and the dead" (sorry haven't got the books in front of me at the minute and I am to lazy to get off my fat arse and go upstairs to the temple and get them). There was a distinct level of elitism and arrogance that under pinned some of his writings. Something which I think has been twisted and abused to the Nth by some that now profess to practise Trad Craft today.

I would say that it appears to be completely dissimilar to shamanic initiation. The messy life/death stuff is the defining event in becoming a shaman - it's afterwards that the social "group structure" work kicks in. From what you say, it appears to be the other way around in becoming a witch, and the crisis can even be avoided - even should be avoided, as it may not be complete.

Caerthan

edited for clarity

A girl after my own heart!



Thanks for that, Naimh

Caerthan

Ah okay I see what your getting at, and I hadn't explained myself well. I most certainly wasn't saying it "should" be avoided. Far from it. Hmm how do I explain this. Okay Cochrane very specifically stated that when we die we each go to a place of our own making (not quoting verbatim here).

My understanding of magickal/witchcraft currents is very similar to that of the light spectrum, some wavelengths are accessible by everybody and are there to be used, we could liken this to the visible spectrum of light. But further, with careful training and appropriate "filters" put in place it might be possbile to access the invisible spectrums, ultraviolet, infrared, microwave etc. Different groups will tap different parts of these unseen spectrums and this is thier current and "transmission" of the way to access these spectrums are formalised and focussed in the initiation ritual.

Now it is perfectly possible as a solitaire to also access these currents; in fact there is some basis for the argument that by being a solitaire this allows a freedom not enjoyed by others who maybe either through ignorance or deliberate choice be limited to a singular current and nothing else, but what it means, IMO is that the solitaire that does it through the messy life/death stuff rather than a formalised process, will not be accessing the same frequencies as those who have been activated through formal procedures.

So my activation whilst "complete" for me, will not access the same frequencies as I dunno say CoTC, Roebuck, 1734 or any of the other Cochrane influenced groups. So I will go to place of my own making, and whilst I may have somethings in common with the afore mentioned, and I may have access to certain of their frequencies, I "may" (and I specifically use "may" as not being in any of these groups I wouldn't know) not have complete activation, does that make more sense?

Absolutely! Thanks for the supplementary explanation, Naimh.

"Born to" witchcraft, in the sense of an initiatory rite of transmission or crisis event makes much more sense to me than being "born a" witch in its natal sense. In which case, I could probably see the validity of Cochrane's views (even if I may not necessarily agree with them ) in their context. The charge of 'elitism' could be levelled at any of the initiatory cults in the world, however the charge can only really stick if the initiation itself is limited by something other than ability (in its widest sense) and possibly potential.

Caerthan

Ahh and there in lies the rub, I suspect for many groups, it is exactly that, limited by outside influences, socio-political mostly. That being said, I have noted over the years that those that cry elitism the loudest as an accusation are nearly always on the outside scrabbling to get in, but as somebody wiser than me once said, (which initially I didn't understand, but now I see the wisdom of). "I wouldn't want to be a member of any group that would have me". Lol so I suppose I have my own, twisted form of elitism too

I agree, although I dont necessarily adhere to the saturn return rule.

I doubt many witches come out of the womb fully formed any more than we come out of the womb complete with wisdom, this take experience and lifes lessons to fulfill and some never achieve that.

What I do believe about the born as opposed to made argument is that some have an inherent witchiness which they have perhaps tapped into since chiuldhood, even if they didn't know exactly what is was they were doing.

That despite society and maybe family attempting to knock it out them, get to a stage where they can no longer ignore that which is themselves. Many have tried to ignore it. Many dont actually like what is within them, but in the end it is as much a part of their being as lifeblood and it cannot be ignored any more than can the need to breath.

So in that respect a witch is born, in my opinion. Or perhaps we should say SOME witches are born this way.

I think it's down again to interpretation of what is and what is not a witch.

I go with the 'Awakened' idea as opposed to literally being born a Witch. There have always been and will always be people that live in the 11th percentile, that is to say are capable of using more than the scientifically/medically accepted 10% of the working part of our brains.

Some people are born with this open to them from the get go, this leads to all sorts of interesting concepts, past life knowledge, innate abilities such as musical talents etc.
However this can be accessed by everyone if the right 'keys or triggers' are found to access it. This is often the NDE (Near Death Experience) or traumatic life event. The brain forced out of its usual 'mode' by shock/trauma functions in the areas not usually used on a daily basis. This can be induced in a more controlled way by training as has been said. Either way once that part has been accessed it remains available whether its utilised/recognised or not.

I've been thinking about this over the last couple of hours and I've come to the conclusion that this is a really valid point.

You also hear this argument when it comes to spiritualism, even the more mainstream Christian variety.

I find it interesting also that many people who are Pagan have tales to tell as far as this type of phenomena is concerned. Be that a traumatic childhood, or an abusive marriage or even a true NDE.

Interesting. I'll certainly be giving this more thought

I dont know that I can disabuse you of the impression

I will however try and clarify as best I can.

People are born witches IMO and I think the best way I can explain it is this. (Im going to use an example Pratchett uses) You are not a dwarf. You are a human. You may be raised by dwarves, you may know how to sing all the songs about gold, you may be able to mine like a demon! It doesnt change the fact that you are not a dwarf. Its like anything. You can move to... Spain, you can learn the languge, you can marry a spanish man or woman, you can adopt the culture. It doesnt change the fact that you are not actually Spanish.

Now one thing I am not saying is that being a witch is better. Im not. I want to make that REALLY clear. I am saying it is differnt. I cant help that. I dont think I should have to apologise for it either. Its just how it is.

Absolutely. Neither am I. But I'm also sick of apologising. There is always the assumption that because you have this opinion that you're either trying to be elitist OR you are ignorant. Sometimes both FFS

I am neither, but I have been doing my "stuff" for a bloody long time and I am as entitled to an opinion as anyone else having this discussion.

But yours (and Pratchetts) analogy is a very good one. Just wish I'd thought of it

I'm drawing some strands together speculatively, here.

Can any witches here tell me (trad. secrets exempted, of course ) how often the initiatory rite/ritual - whether self-ordained or within a group - results in an initiatory crisis in the way that an NDE or other shock/trauma situation can trigger a spiritual crisis (e.g. the shaman's crisis)?

Apologies for the convoluted sentence... ouch.

I'm not a witch, but the subject of the 'spiritual crisis' triggered by NDEs or other trauma is one close to my heart. I've had two of them (NDEs), both involving near drownings. The 'initiatory' aspects of these events (in general) interest me, what they trigger, what one 'becomes' after having them, etc. I've never heard it discussed from the perspective of being 'born into' witchcraft or other pagan initiatory traditions before, so hopefully you can indulge me. Hearing folk talking about Cochrane's perspective has certainly intrigued me enough to find out more - thanks guys



Yeah, it's prompted some thinking in me, too. Hurts, doesn't it?

Caerthan

Honestly I havent a clue!

I've never had a NDE. I've never been initiated group or solitary, I dont do ritual. It doesnt mean anything to me.

Sorry!

I haven't been initiated into any trad either, but I have suffered, or should I say lived through, trauma and I DO think it has a effect on the way a person views the world. I also think it CAN make you more open to the possibility of things "otherwordly".

Certainly I tapped into something when this was happening to me and it was that which gave me focus. But also after the event I certainly looked for reasons and that in turn led me to look at many different beliefs, not just Paganism.

In fact my Paganism is very much based on the fact I simply dont fit into any other category LOL

I cannot think that initiation alone could cause the same reaction as such a traumatic event as an NDE would create, but I simply dont know. Sorry


Cant answer that my heads just exploded

I think you probably have



Ok, I accept that. However:



You haven't explained what that 'thing' is. I understand that you believe there to be a key difference, that it's not better than non-born witches.... but what is 'it'?

At the end of the day, I'm suffering a slight amount of incomprehension here because what constitutes a witch is different from one to another. Some witches say that it's a way of envisioning the world and experience; some say it's about 'spelling' and effecting material change; some say it's about having better occult tat than others What sort of witch are we talking about, and which (!) traits precisely are in-born?

I realise that there can never be a conclusive resolution to the argument - hells, the gay community have been struggling with nature/nuture for decades and have reached no conclusion. I think it's a subject that can only be explored, and not definitively pronounced upon.

Caerthan

The closest I can get to an explanation is : Take a real musician they hear a piece of music they experience it fully, they dont just hear it they LISTEN to it, Feel it, then they can play it. Having only heard it once. Anyone can learn to play the song but only a musician will experience the thing in its entirety.

Witches are like that. If its there from day one you live fully in the moment always, aware of yourself, others, energy, patterns, interactions, inconsistencies in the "flow" of all around you etc. People can be trained to do this also, but its never the same as just being able to do it, because the brain works within the lesson and you can never fully experience something that you are conciously trying to achieve.

Edited for dire spelling...

Oooh thats actually pretty good!

Its definately something about the way things are perceived, definately about the "flow". *nods emphaticly*

I thought it was pretty good too, especially as I can relate to my own inability to learn music. Oh I can actually sit down at a piano and copy what someone has just shown me (within reason - lol) but I have no idea what it is I am actually doing, in terms of notes, rhythm etc.

But also - i think its VERY difficult to explain something that you have grown up with and that you know innately. its like the finer points of English grammar. Most people know it, they use it when reading, (hopefully) when writing, even when listening. But - could you sit down and explain to someone exactly how it all fits together and more importantly WHY it is that way ?

I doubt most people could.

And before anyone accuses me of that being a cop out - just think about it. Could you explain something so innate in a way that other people will REALLY understand ?

That's a combination of extremely good training, natural talent, and creative mastery.



On a usual-to-good day, that's how my experiencing of the world pans out (other than the 'energy' bit, which is a word I despise in this context ) However, I'm most certainly not a witch. Well, not in any definition I've come across, anyway. Indeed, any Buddhist would probably broadly sympathise with your description (i.e. mindfulness).



Again, that's merely the path through training. One moves from incompetence to proficiency, and on to mastery. Proficiency in any skill relies on a modicum of natural ability, and an amount of training. Once proficiency is achieved, the brain is no longer in the lesson. Mastery relies on an extraordinary amount of training, a large amount of creativity, and, again, natural ability.

Rather than dressing up natal 'witchiness' as something rather grand and flouncy, that they're a species apart, why not just say that someone has a talent for it? Or just do what Cochrane and many others do and say that it's endemically latent, but can be awoken.

Caerthan

Totally get where your coming from Moon, its like trying to describe colour to someone thats been blind from birth.... Just where do you even begin?

With the greatest respect, I really do feel that that's a cop-out. I once heard/saw someone explaining to a profoundly deaf child what it was like to hear sounds. She managed to convey it extraordinarily well, in a way that the child could readily understand.

When I was a confirmed atheist, someone described their experience of god to me. I understood it, even though I had no real conception of what that experience felt like.

It's not necessary to be able to experience something to have an understanding of it. Otherwise we'd never have got to the point of constructing string theory, let alone quantum mechanics. Can you experience the strong interaction that holds quarks and gluons together? No, but I bet someone could explain it to you in a way that you'd understand.

Empathy, imagination, and clear explanations are all that're required.

Caerthan

I dont think ANYONE here has tried to dress it up as something rather grand and flouncy. Blimey - that sounds like someone with a touch of ..........I dont know what.

I have often used the word talent.

But you know - I dont think it even needs to be 'awoken' in some people. I think that if its there it will come out one way or another. And I know of one person who immediately springs to mind who is scared to death of all things 'esoteric' yet is scary themselves in how much innate 'talent' they have - they are a total loose cannon where magic is concerned because they dont even know they are doing it. And I wish she's get herself some flippin training!!!

And no-one said that witches who are born are another 'species'. Thats kind of like saying that someone wih a skill for maths that is just the way they are is another species - its crap.

You will find, if you look closely enough that those witches who admit to having been aware of this 'talent' for most of their lives are alot more down to earth than many others who abound online.

And now I am flouncing off Miss Piggy style - LOL

I was probably over-egging the cake there



That's great, Moongazer - that's what I was trying to establish.



Again, over-egging perhaps, but the concept of 'witchblood' implies just that: a genetic difference held in a family line that enables them to do things that ordinary humans can't.



I think you're right. As in many areas of 'talent' - mundane and esoteric - the ones with real talent are generally more down-to-earth and humble about their gifts.


I think Miss Piggy would make a great witch!

Caerthan

which is precisely what I meant when I said "Many have tried to ignore it. Many dont actually like what is within them, but in the end it is as much a part of their being as lifeblood and it cannot be ignored any more than can the need to breath."

Sometimes it just cannot be ignored.

But as for flouncing, well in my experience its those who just get on with it and who have always just got on with it, who flounce the least.

But do you know I actually dont know why I bother with this argument. I've been having it for the ten years I've been on line and neither side seems able to see the others point of view and over the years I've seen perfectly adequate witches transformed into fantastic ones with the right kind of help.

But equally I've seen really talented ones ruined by their own ego because simply being a damn good witch isnt good enough for them.

As I said before, perhaps its all down to interpretation again and the argument will run and run, no doubt, over what is and what is not a witch.

I said on another thread that its a shame we cant celebrate our similarities instead of arguing over our differences and maybe this is one such case.

I dunno

Ok been trying to think about how to put this into words for you Caer.

Innate ability cannot be trained. It cannot be taught or learned, it is either present or it isnt. Back to the Musician... You train and learn with a grandmaster in your chosen instrument, they teach you all they know of music, composition, rhythm etc. You play in concert with them and you are 'technically' (with the exception of experience) on their level. However what you play and what they play will be completely different songs made up of the same notes. You will just never have the certain spark that they do.

Does that go some way atleast to getting it across?

I don't see an argument here, Comfrey. If you're referring to a 'Caerthan vs. UKP Witches' situation on this thread, that is very far away from the actuality. I'm not disagreeing with anyone on this thread about there being an in-born 'witchiness' - whether natal or intiated by other means. I'm just trying to establish what folk mean by that: how witches themselves experience it.

I'm certainly not trying put across my point of view, as I don't yet actually have none. I am, however, eager to hear and understand others' points of view. I've been part of the 'spiritual' community for decades, mostly within the pagan community, but I have no experience whatsoever of either Wicca or witches. I've a nodding acquaintance with some of the Wiccan 'stuff', but none at all of Cochrane's work. Almost every posting on this thread has been of use to me. I appreciate that you may have heard much of this discussion before, but I'm sure that many (including myself) either haven't heard it or haven't participated in it. If there's a "Witchiness for Dummies" page, please point me at it

Caerthan

No not at all love. Just the "argument" in general. Its been done to death and I sometimes feel like my head is going to explode

I'm well aware of what the definition of 'natural talent' is. No-one other than Moongazer has simply stated "It's just natural talent". Hence, the circles. However, no-one has yet stated what 'it' is. Are you able to do that?

And it's 'Caerthan', Ethe. See below

Caerthan

Sorry! Want a sweetie?

Caerthan

Lol apologies for the abbreviation its bad habit of mine.

You are asking for a definition of "it". The talent you mean? Not trying to be obtuse just want to make sure I'm taxing the brain cells over the right subject

Ta



Spot on.

Caerthan

Actually Xalle, you bring up an interesting point; I do not think it is the initiation or NDE or what ever that actually facilitates the birth of the witch; I have for a long time suspected that the process of "being born" as a witch has little to do with the understanding of magic (as understood in the general populace) and more to do with psychology.

I see the "initiations" (however you want to define them) as tools for those with the talent, to transcend from what Maslow (very old and outdated psychologist) called deficency needs into self actualisation. If you are lucky enough to already have that (last I read they reckon less than 18% of population truly achieve this) then the "triggers" would not be neccessary; hehe but for the rest of us mortals they give us a mighty fine helping hand

Cochrane alluded to this a number of times in his letters, the one I recall is the question "what two words are never spoken from the cauldron?" The answer of course being, "Be Still". A witch without growth is no witch at all just a very proficent magic user, but of course that is just my opinion

The ability to experience the natural order of events on many levels of being. To see how things branch off from this moment NOW. Not only to see but to comprehend the effects this moment may lead to, where it joins other things, what effects this or that action will have upon the whole.

The solid and complete knowledge of Who and Where you are, with understanding of how your placement affects all around you but more importantly the Why.

May I just say LOVING this discussion!

Ok... Caerthan. I understnd what you are saying here, especially as an athiest myself. However. I think you actually make the point yourself.



The reason you could not conceive what the emotional, deeper connection was is because it cant be explained. Its like trying to express what love IS. you can explain around it, you can say it is an overwheleming feeling... but what IS that feeling, what IS love? It is the exact same for being a witch or having a relationship with a god, we may understand it on a purely cerebral level, but we dont and never will actually understand it.

Your deaf kid may comprehend sound, a blind kid may comprehend colour, but they dont ever really, because experience sometimes can not be related. Some things we just dont have the words for. I can not make you feel what I feel as a Witch. Same as someone with gods can never express what it is that is the essense of their relationship with their god.

Going away now to think of decent coherant responses to the other comments!

Hmmmmm. I dont know. I've heard this phrase "awakening" and it makes me really uncomfortable. Like something needs to be done to bring the witch forth. Im with Moongazer when she says its already there and most witches already know its there even if they cant put a lable on it. It also implies that anyone can have their "inner witch" brought out. And... that just doesnt feel right to me somehow. Its like ooh!!! I know.... you know those dogs that can smell cancer or illness? Well not all dogs can do that, and while you can train (most) other dogs to detect something by smell... explosives, dead bodies, not all dogs can and some stuff is just... there. Actually Im not sure now that explains it at all

Hopefully you get my meaning tho!

Apologies for coming in late to this twist in the thread, but I've been working late today.

While I do agree that in those of us destined to become witches there must first be some degree of innate 'talent', the ability may go ignored or unrecognised (to the detriment of the person's psychological wellbeing, I believe) until something acts as a trigger. Sometimes this is a traumatic experience or NDE, and sometimes the result of initiation. Initiation is not just joining a group but a profound ritual which resonates at a deeper level of the soul and kick-starts the process of becoming. The initiate is taken through the enactment of the ritual on a kind of journey that they would struggle to access alone. I'm not saying its the only way to do it, just my take on how I believe it works.

Coming to the second point, both a traumatic event/NDE and an initiation have the same result in precipitating a spiritual crisis. This is necessary, as both are only the triggers for the actual process of growth and learning. The crisis which follows is when everything you think you know is challenged and seen from a different perspective as the witch is assailed by the rapid expansion of knowledge and understanding, a bit like the tumbles which a toddler has to put up with in order to learn to walk. Only instead of 'walking' you are learning to interact with other realms.

I think I get what you are saying and in part agree with it, some of the problem however lies in personal perspective on witchcraft. I do not believe that an "inner witch" can be brought out or "awakened" in anybody if it isn't there in the first place no matter how hard a person might dearly wish it otherwise, however, if we go back to my light spectrum analogy from earlier; all the "visible" frequencies are open for just about every Tom, Dick and Harry to use, and possibly become very adept magic users, this is very much the basis of daily folk magic seen practiced even today and back in the day most genuine old fashioned folk magicians would have been horrified at being called a witch. But some of these magic users have got hold of the title witch and with dogged determination have hung on to it with tooth and nail, thus clouding the whole concept of what it means to actually "be" a witch.

To those that genuinely "are" witches, whilst they may "know" from a very early age that there is something there, it may take "something" to facilitate accessing this something, these unseen frequencies, so these psychological and physiological or Magical events "can" be the trigger.

As this thread is related to Cochrane, I finally succumbed and went upstairs and dusted off the books, I think this just about sums up what I was trying to say:

Interesting discussion. It does tend to bring up more questions than answers though as such questions do

(oh, just a niggle but Ethereal mentioned the old myth of using only 10% of our brains. Not true, we use all of it ).


Ethereal described the 'talent' of being a 'witch' thusly:

""The ability to experience the natural order of events on many levels of being. To see how things branch off from this moment NOW. Not only to see but to comprehend the effects this moment may lead to, where it joins other things, what effects this or that action will have upon the whole.

The solid and complete knowledge of Who and Where you are, with understanding of how your placement affects all around you but more importantly the Why.""

Millions of people can do/experience this. Does this mean they are 'witches'?

What about NDEs? I would contend that what happens there is an awareness of one's mortality which could lead some people to examine or re-examine their priorities in life - after all, traumatic events frequently almost always produce a change in a person. But lets take the 'arcane' view. One must apply this across the board I should think. If this experience can open the door for one person, it must perforce have the ability to do this for all. I'm assuming there are no 'preconditions' attached. If this is the case, then every soldier who has been in battle, every person who has had surgery, every person who has been in some kind of event where their life hung in the balance then has that door opened for them. After all, just because a NDE isn't viewed as one doesn't mean it didn't happen. Many people who drown but are revived or who are in battle and have a bullet miss them by a fraction have had a NDE whether they know it or not. This leads me to believe that in those who were aware of it, it will depend on the interpretation they put on it unless this process is being presented as a sure thing for turning work-a-day people into 'witches'.

What about this 'talent' idea? I have perfect pitch and can instantly memorize and 'feel' music. Indeed, the feeling is intense. I am not a musician. I can draw. I am not an artist. These same things can be said of many, many people. However, if one has the 'ability' ( which genetically would involve hand-eye coordination, the processing of auditory formation and sequencing ability) and one takes years to develop it, I defy anyone listening to them to say whether they were 'born' with it or not. MRI scan results are interesting in that some differences are noted ('scuse the pun):

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/537352/

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m151...v15/ai_15186904

[improv here]

I'm sure they will find similar differences and/or similarities in people engaged in other pursuits. The only stand-out finding is a thickened corpus callosum. This is found in other situations though that have nothing to do with artistic ability.

What is found though, is that it is a combination of variables which go into it. If a person practices ANYTHING, it will change the configuration of the brain - certain transmitters will increase in density and activity . The brain is very plastic and adaptable and will adapt to the environment in which it has to operate. We can ourselves alter our brain function to some degree. However, I'm hesitant to accept that 'witches' have altered their brain function to such a degree that they are 'different' to other people except in so far as everyone is unique and different from the next person.

Are people saying then that a 'witch' brain is different and if so, where would they expect to find those differences? Serious question. It's serious because one cannot posit something as a 'fact' unless they can show the different aspects and facets of this 'fact'. Just saying " When a person feels it, they will know" is , I feel, a fairly weak response to a concept so important, so fundamental to those that hold it that they feel that 'witches' are biologically different from other people.

My first post on this subject mentioned the pitfalls of assigning 'qualities' and talents or a lack of them based on genetics. History is replete with the abuses done in the name of these supposed 'differences' . This is why I think one should be VERY clear on what they are saying.

If I am born in Spain, I am a Spaniard even if my father is Ethiopian and my mother is Chilean. If one doubts that that is the only definition which can realistically pertain, I invite them to read the many interesting articles on the demographic distribution of MDNA distribution.

If one is suggesting not a difference in physiology but one of 'awareness' as brought about by certain processes, then this isn't really saying anything...at all. We are back into subjective interpretation and self-identification again. Indeed, the very word 'awareness' can take many interpretations and there is no 'right' one as far as I can see. I could be wrong and would be happy to be shown the definition of 'awareness' that has a general application readily accessible to all.

In terms of this subject of witches being 'born to it' or somehow having it 'in the blood' , I fear I see a desperate attempt to legitimize a self-identification by using concrete examples which cannot be so far proven.

However, it's fun to learn and I am open to doing so. After all, learning makes changes in the brain

Marto

Greeting Marto,



Exactly which is why witchcraft in the purely magickal sense of the vernacular is considered by many to be a craft NOT a religion, you practise it, you get better. And I agree with you, I doubt very many witches have actually altered their brain function to any appreciable level, but then as I have stated, many that call themselves witches are most likely nothing of the sort, just very capable magic users. But then from what I have read here, nobody is claiming any kind of biological difference, spiritual possibly, psychological, definitely but physically nope definitely not seen it.



Umm I haven't heard anybody doubting the ridiculous claim that being "born a witch" is purely genetic. Without re-reading all the thread again, I am pretty convinced that Xalle and Herne disabused the idea, and I definitely stated that whilst it might have a theoretical possiblity (after all in an infinite universe anything is infinitely possible ~ "Please do not be alarmed," it said, "by anything you see or hear around you. You are bound to feel some initial ill effects as you have been rescued from certain death at an improbability level of two to the power two hundred and seventy-six thousand to against--possibly much higher. We are now cruising at a level of two to the power of twenty-five thousand to one against and falling, and we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure of what is normal anyway.") it was highly implausible, so I am confused why you are persuing this?



I think you will find that is exactly what most people are saying, belief (even just self belief for those who operate outside any religious dogma) is a very subjective and empirically unprovable thing, it is our own gnosis, at best all we could possibly do it practically share it under certain circumstances with others, but even that is hit and miss.

If you are looking for concrete evidence of what a "witch" actually is from a logical, cold hard scientific, provable and rational manner, then I suspect it will be a cold day in that very subjective concept of hell before it comes

xXx

*Is confused* ( so, no change there, then ).

Was not the question asked ""To add an open question to the debate, Roy stated that he believed that Witches were born and not made (inferring the old arguement of "Witchblood").""

What's NOT biological about being born with a congenital predisposition ( and passed on from one's fore bearers hence genetics) and blood?

So, is the general consensus that one is NOT born a witch and that such a things as 'witchblood' is a flawed idea? Then that answers the question.

I wasn't looking for such 'proof' as I don't think it exists ( though as you say, all things are possible ).

So then we are back to someone's subjective interpretation of their self as being best described as a 'witch' - whatever that may mean to the person calling themselves that. No special attributes, no difference in capacity or biology, just a belief some people hold about themselves.

I'd agree with that. I just don't think one can take it beyond that. Further, I don't see a need to TAKE it beyond that .

Marto

Aye, it's enlightening



Actually, I was an atheist, I'm not now.



Even a cerebral understanding is enough, if it aids comprehension. To say "Even if I try to explain this, you won't understand" and then stay silent, is to underestimate the other's ability to imagine and empathise.

That person who I mentioned before, who explained his experience of god to me - what it truly felt like to experience his god and his relationship with it - took a chance with me and trusted my ability to imagine. It was a chance - I'd always been very scornful of theists. His explanation was enough not only to get me a glimpse into his experience, but set me on the path to my own experience of deity. His explanation indicated a door that I subsequently opened and walked through. Now, I agree that his explanation in no way gave me the experience, I had no felt conception of the experience until I had it. I didn't truly understand via explanation, but I got an idea and that idea eventually got me to the experience.

A 'cerebral', intellectual understanding is enough. The attempt at explanation is worthwhile. What if the Buddha had stayed silent? "Shit, how the hell am I gonna explain THIS to people...?"

Caerthan

A common problem amongst those that try to over intellectualise these things, hehe don't worry you will get over it, I did



It was and it was debated and generally refused in the "natal" sense of the term over the space of about a pages worth of posts, which was why I queried you bringing it back up again.



Depends what you mean by born, we could for arguments sake now introduce the concept of "soul" and "reincarnation" where assuming you adhere to those doctrines it could be eminently possible that you were born a witch and biology would have bugger all to do with it.



Not at all, the concept is not flawed and it is eminently probable that witches are born, the general consensus seems to be as much if you read all the posts, different people are mostly saying the same thing just in different ways, but you have to do away with the Mechanics of the concept of procreation and genetic markers to get down to the nub of the issue. I suspect again this whole "born not made" was another of Old Roys acts of grey magic, look at all the energy that has been expended discussing the topic, that has got to be feeding an egregore somewhere.




I wouldn't say that there was NO difference in capacity, your suggested measurements have all been purely physiological and that would never cut the mustard, being a witch imo transcends physiology. However you do have a point for many being a witch is just a belief that some people hold about themselves.



Agreed, there is no real need at all, although if we all sat in our white towers and didn't at least once in a while stick our necks out and debate our gnosis, what a boring life we would all lead. Challenge = Growth so that in its own right is a valid reason for at least ruminating on the idea of taking it further, don't you think?

So then, a 'born witch' is simply some-one who declares themselves to be so, explains that they simply 'know' it even though they cannot explain it except to others who 'just know' it as well, and needs no other 'outside' or 'learned' indications to support this self-perception?



I think, from reading this thread, that if I had reason to seek the help of a witch, I would avoid the 'born' witches and just head straight for the nearest 'very capable magic user'.

In fact, I think I'll change my profile to say 'magic user' instead of 'witch', since I'm pretty sure i had to learn everything i know.

unsung

An eminently sensible suggestion and one I would advocate any day of the week, good magic users normally have way less baggage and much smaller egos Ergo they will most likely get the job done more quickly and more efficiently imo

Swings and round abouts. When you say it is highly probably that people ARE 'born' witches, we are back where we started. You did mention the idea of 'souls' and 'reincarnation' in order to get around any biological implications. Fair enough. But there are many interpretations of 'souls' and 'reincarnation'. Karma is a complex and not universally agreed upon concept. So it's kind of a non-answer answer from where I sit, or it's answering with another abstract supposition to get around the little problem of what 'being born' with something means.

I'm all for investigating phenomenon and attempting to take understanding further, I just like the flow of logic to at least have some consistency. Not much to ask, I should think? As for sitting about in Ivory Towers, chance would be a fine thing . I'm working myself and just take breaks so I don't suffer cognitive meltdown!

So I think I'm with unsung on this one.

Marto