Re: nature of mysticism

From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_...>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:22:48 +1300


On 2/24/2013 9:38 PM, jorganos wrote:

> The most detailed description of a mystical journey is that of the successful path to dragonhood by Obduran the Flyer and the failure of Ingolf Dragonfriend to go all the way of that same path due to his entanglement with the world.
>
> What I gathered from that path is that the mystic does indeed aquire access to vast magical powers of various background - powers that he usually keeps away from himself (eastern mystics' zone of magic suppression), but which he may also channel. If the mystic does the channelling to further his penetration of the mystical path, apparently that's ok, and if conincidentally this affects a whole nation of hostiles, there is nothing wrong with that. There seems to be a difference in the intent, or in the lack of spiritual preparation when applying that access to magic, that leads to the failure of the mystic.

Except that arguing from Ingolf as an example of a mystical failure is flawed because you have the examples of Great Lord Burin and others of the EWF making dramatic displays of draconic power without any ill-effect. The nature of Ingolf's flaw was not that he used vast magical powers but he used vast draconic powers at the expense of his draconic self.

I'm also dubious about the thinking that a mystic acquires vast amounts of magical power but does not use it for fear of failure. Human nature being what it is, I would expect about 5% of mystics to crash and burn dramatically. If they had vast magical powers I think the east would be producing a hundred Sheng Selerises in an age rather than just one in 1600 years.

--Peter Metcalfe            

Powered by hypermail