The Social Network for the Occult Community

Hi, this may be a really strange question, but does anyone else have a hang-up about letting remnants of ritual candles mingle with their hair that's fallen out or with their nail clippings? I don't let used candles anywhere near mine, but I don't have the same reservations with incense. I consider myself a Germanic pagan and I'm not into Voodoo so I don't know where this comes from. Does anyone else experience this?

I even do this with candles that are burned purely for atmosphere like black and orange candles around Halloween. They're not part of a ritual, so I unceremoniously toss them in the trash, but I can't bear to have them touch any hair and nail clippings that may be in the bag. If they go in the same bag, I wrap up what's left of the candle in a paper towel or tin foil before tossing it.

Views: 247

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

   I dispose of my hair and nail clippings down the toilet..

That's not good. It could clog the toilet.

Would take an awful lot of hair and nails to clog a toilet

Just Sayin'


It looks like the trick to long beautiful luscious hair is toilet water mixed with nail clippings lol.

I couldn't help posting it when I saw !

The precaution is sensible! Modern Radionic practitioners (who are also not into Voodoo) have definitively proved a link between body substances (called in radionics the witness) and the person to whom they belonged. This methodology is the basis of Radionic healing! Of course because the link exists it can also be used for other purposes...!!!

Cluthin , here we go again...

I am very familiar with radionics...

And I am not saying I do not believe in some claims of it...;)

However you cannot say it has been definitively proven , unless

you have the empirical evidence...I learned this , years ago , from

others online , here and elsewhere who called me on some ways I

phrased things...

So...empirical evidence , with links to published papers , recognized

by established authorities , please ?

( or you might choose to rephrase the statement )

We have a responsibility , as elders , to inform and advise those who

are younger and shall follow the stones we lay on the path...

Claiming something is *proven* , needs backup...

Stating some have found it seems possible , or likely...

That is a different matter...hope you understand...:)

The proof that I am referingto was as far as I can remember carried out by the Anthrosophical Society In Donarch in Switserland, It is Mentioned by Tomkins and bird In Secrets of the soil where the reproduce some of the evidence. I consider the identity of the cdiamolis pictures between the radionic and non radionic pictures as decicive. Although I do not have the mathematical tools to quantify the data from an epistamelogical viewpoint I do not  consider Quantification nessary as Leibnitz  Law of Identity is satisfied in this case. Besides that the experiment falls within Popper's definition of science as the experiment was falsifiable and falsifiability not quantification is what makes an experiment scientific acording to Poper and most contempory philosophers of science!

Not good enough by empirical science's standards to claim

it has been proven , it is not acceptable by those

standards to make the claim...

I hope anyone just getting into paganism , magic , and any

form of alternative medicine pays attention here and does

not repeat and further this false claim...

This is why many scientists look at "new age" , and / or

"magical" traditions , and become frustrated , angry , or


If any of us state "in my tradition" , or "we believe" that

is much more acceptable , though lacking in scientific *proof*...

Secrets Of The Soil , by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird ,

has been disputed as far as their findings , yet I do not totally

disagree with it , as I myself , lean in the direction of many claims

made in the book...yet it is not considered *valid* scientific data...

As far as experiments carried out regarding the Anthroposophical

Society , now we are speaking of Rudolph Steiner , and Biodynamic

Farming , which I do respect highly...yet much of the Anthroposophical

Society's beliefs , and published works , are not considered in any way

to be scientifically accepted , and Steiner himself , who I do have respect

for , made some absolutely ridiculous claims in some of his books , though

his methods of biodynamic farming , and eurythmy , came from the code

I teach , which he was initiated well many of his other methods...

Yet , they have not been subjected to rigorous scientific testing , whether

they work / seem to work , or not...therefore they can not be considered


I am not saying I favor the approach of empirical science...

I am stating , however , making spurious claims , then attempting to back

them up with further unproven information , is only doing the entire pagan

community as a whole , a great disservice , and misleads those who shall

follow in our footsteps...

Again , it is phraseology , which is important , and the way we state unproven

beliefs , and traditions...we may speak of our personal experiences , experiments ,

traditions , or methods , or our interpretation of such , in a way which does not

trample on the established strict demands of proof , by scientific method...

We do not *need* science to agree with us , if we see something works , in the

magical / alternative the same token , we should not claim what is

not ours to claim , as we do not have the evidence required...

However , perhaps some day , these things may be proven by science , as we

call it , within the parameters set by that community , and discipline...

Masura Emoto's work fits this category of something claimed , yet is not in any

way considered to be truly scientific , under the standards required...

These claims in the article below on hair , are not *scientific* , yet believed...

As is :

Again , I am not stating they are wrong , or right , just not *proven*...

Thus we cannot say that and be truthful...

The Norse believed the Ship of the Dead , was made of hair and nails...

It is a belief , and a folk tale , not proven...

Nor , for that matter do I have evidence it has been scientifically unproven...

So , you may continue to make spurious claims , which I believe are

detrimental to the pagan community , or , you may take it upon your

self , or encourage others , to conduct the tests , and get the papers

published , which would fulfill the needs to be truly considered scientific...

Anything else , is sloppy thinking , and execution , and misleading to our

future pagan progeny...

I ask you to consider these things , when you make future claims...;)

By the way , Blackfire , there is a *belief* in the Old Craft , when a

witch / wietch , combs her hair , while chanting a certain spell , she

can create a storm...or , that a comb and mirror ( hand held ) were

a way of accessing the astral realm ( see comb and mirrors found in

old burials , and graves )...

Beliefs are wonderful , magical , inspiring , and can spur us on to new discoveries...

Scientific proof...that is a whole 'nuther thing , so to say...;)

As I have pointed out several times I am an academicaly trained Philosopher, not a scientist! When I use terms like Definitive proof I am referring to epistemology, not scientific empiricism!

While some philosophers(mainly in the English speaking world) are empiricists I am not one of them! Most Non-English speaking philosophers are not empiricists. I consider myself a Goethian phenomolist and within that tradition my epistemological claims are justified. I have just completed a thesis on alternative epistemologies so I know where of I speak!

I reiterate that my claims are completely justified from a philosophical epistemological viewpoint which was how they were intended!

I understand that is how you justify them...

But that is not how mainstream science defines things...

I have stated I am not a fan of , nor do I agree , with many

of the methodologies , or conclusions , or fixed standpoints

of the modern scientific community...

Yet that is the standard considered most acceptable...

When any of us say something has been *proven* in science

we *are* most definitely subject to those standards...

Philosophy is not an *exact* science...

Stating something which relates to physical manifestations ,

and physical laws has been *proven* , falls under the domain

of the exacting nature of empirical science...

I am not trying , nor do I have the intent , to insult or demean

you , your knowledge , or your conclusions...( though I may ,

and sometimes will , disagree with them )

However , this is not something which can be disputed...

If we are speaking of proof as far as physical laws , we are

dealing with empirical science , and where knowledge is the

truth bearer rather than belief...

One can not invalidate the demands of empirical science as

the standard for proof , by using an epistemological argument...;)

And congratulations on completing your thesis !

A poem for you I wrote many years ago...;)

In The Name Of All Science , In The Name Of Religion ,

Deliver The Evidence For The Count Of All Angels

Who Do Quantum Dance On The Head Of A Pigeon ;

The Burden Of Proof Is Yours For A Claim ,

Though Your And My Evidence Is Never The Same ,

Some Demand Fact , Some Faith , Some Free Violition ,

Some Know The Speed Of Their Brain ,

Should I Then Doubt It's Position ,

Some Get Particular While I Stand There And Wave ,

Some Find God's Proof In The Depths Of A Cave ,

Some Say I Just Sense It , Some Say Empirical ,

Then Those Who Find Mathematics To Be Quite Lyrical ,

I Do Not Need Proof , For I Just Believe ,

And That Just Shows A Mind Like A Sieve ,

The Gods Do Exist ! In Who's Universe ?

Religion And Science , I Think We Are Cursed !

I completly dissagree! I have already cited Popper and could cite other recognised authorities in the philosophy of science and philosophers such as Quine to suportmy position. Let me cite as an example Rudolf Stiner's Phd(in Philosophy) dissertation as a case in point! If Stiner was only a philosopher turned occultist his opinions might be dismissed out of hand, but his methodolodogy has produced many results in the material world! Biodynmic Agriculture being a case in point.

There is evidence that some clairvoyants such as Leadbeater were able to View Quarks and superstrings and that Amazonian and other shamanswere able to clairvoyantly see DNA and other biological processes al with out empirical science to suport their methodologies. In fact in several cases the clairvoyant observers published physicaly verifyable data such as the existence of Isotopes some years in advance of their "discovery"by modern science! See in this respect Clarvoyant observation of Quarks" by Dr Stephen M Philips (a Qualified Quantum Physicist with papers in refereed journals) and several other books by the same author on this subject. In reguard to clairvoyant observation of DNA See the Book "The Cosmic Serpent" By Dr Jarques Narby an anthropoligistin the European Tradition also with papers in refereed journals!


© 2018       Powered by

Badges | Privacy Policy  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service