I started reading Thee Psychick Bible this morning. …

I started reading Thee Psychick Bible this morning. It is a strange beast.

The book gathers the writings of Genesis Breyer P-Orridge and Thee Temple ov Psychick Youth, the experimental network known as TOPY. It moves between occult manual, countercultural manifesto, memoir and the paper trail left by a community trying to find out whether a human being can take conscious command of their own construction.

Underneath the sigils, cut-ups, ritual language and deliberate provocation, I keep hearing two questions. How much of what I call “me” was handed to me by parents, school, class, religion, advertising, language, sexuality, work and habit? And if identity has been constructed, can I take part in reconstructing it?

P-Orridge writes that instead of allowing others to build our identity, “we can build our own, and own it.” The self becomes raw material: something to dismantle, rearrange and try again. Magick, in this frame, is a practical technology for interrupting the automatic programme. Ritual, meditation, altered states, music, performance and sigilisation all make the familiar strange enough to be seen.

The sigil work interests me because the ritual’s outward result isn’t the whole point. You name a desire, give it a form, involve the body, and pay attention to what the process does to you. By the time you reach the thing you thought you wanted, the wanting may have changed because you have changed.

TOPY had a slogan for this: THEE PROCESS IS THEE PRODUCT.

That line brought me back to The Dice Man and the six-sided die I once carried as a small instrument of disruption. The roll never contained any wisdom. Its value was that it interrupted the little boss behind my eyes who already knew what I would do next. Chance exposed the groove. TOPY seems to be working the same seam with a far more volatile set of tools: disturb the pattern, watch what resists, and discover how much of a stable personality is repetition and habit.

I’m only at the beginning of the book, and I don’t know yet how much of its occult machinery I will want to use or believe. But the proposition has already lodged itself in me: identity may be less like a hidden object waiting to be found and more like a practice repeated until it feels inevitable.

The book is still open beside me. So is the question of what, exactly, I keep rehearsing when I say “this is just who I am.”

habits

I have in mind to evolve, to break out of habits that bind me, that confine me, that leave my soul a stagnate pool of green slime. My habits are vicious little gnomes that enslave my behaviors, perceptions, emotions, and thoughts and limit my range of possibilities in a limitless world. I think it is time to fight and win back some of the freedom I’ve given up, whatever the cost.

To what degree do you believe that your past experiences determine who you are, and what is possible for you now?

How this plays itself out for me is that most of us are unaware of the past experiences that control or influence our present behavior. Our innate tendency is to act habitually. This is a useful trait to make our lives more efficient, but it can have negative effects if the particular habit we have formed limits us. Some habits we develop all on our own. Others habits we pick up from our parents, teachers, priests, or other persons or sources of influence. Habits can become so ingrained that we no longer question their origin, we just accept the act as being who we are, as our nature, much in the same way we don’t question our breathing. We just do it. Or walking, we had to learn how to walk, now we just do it. So to that extent, I do believe our past experiences determine who we are and what is possible for us now.

For example, for some of us who claim not to be good at maths, we perhaps got a few bad marks on our maths tests back in the early days of our education. Based on these few bad marks, we start telling ourselves that we are no good at maths. We habitually tell ourselves this until the statement becomes fact and that fact becomes a belief. Then we go into our next encounter with maths believing we are no good at maths, do poorly on at it, and take that as evidence to confirm that we are not good at maths.

If I adopt this belief that I am not good at maths early on in my life, then chances are I will make decisions about my future based on the “fact” that I am no good at maths and steer away from careers or projects that involve maths. From my past experiences I now say, “I am no good at maths.” How that limits what is possible for me now is I stay away from opportunities that would require lots of math. To the extent that I am unaware of this limiting belief born of past experiences, the more control it exerts over me.

Make a list of all the things you find yourself habitually saying, I am no good at that. Or I could never do that because…

Now think back to what experiences you’ve had in the past that has led you to adopt that belief. No examine how that belief defines who you are and limits the possibilities available to you.

When our experiences become restricting “truths” they are, as Jack Elias, the noted hypnotherapist states, “no longer models over which we have power as creators; rather they have power over us as our ‘definers’.”