etheric travel (partial DRAFT)

As with astral travel, this is the release of the etheric body from the physical body. The difference between this and astral travel is more awareness of physical reality when doing etheric travel – astral travel may involve going to levels of reality which are fundamentally different to the physical (e.g., responding profoundly to thought and emotion), whereas that is not as easy in the etheric. Things like passing through physical solids and flight still apply. Astral travel is more like a fluid dream, whereas etheric travel is more akin to what people – in my experience – expect when they say ‘astral travel’, things like seeing one’s physical body, being able to see events and people in the physical, etc.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No. TBC

etheric (partial DRAFT)

The world is not just a physical reality: there are also a whole set of nonphysical realities as well. These are typically described as being at different frequencies – and that is a convenient way of thinking about it, although I rather suspect the differences are more akin to the differences between Am and FM radio, or analogue and digital transmissions.

Be that as it may, the first nonphysical world “up” from the physical is the etheric.

This is the level that is partially picked up by Kirlian photography, and is considered by some to be the level upon which a template of our physical body exist – and is therefore where things such as ‘phantom pain’ after an amputation originate, as well as the regeneration of some lizards’ tails. Some ‘ghosts’ are simply the etheric before it disperses at death – the etheric body is linked to the physical body, not the eternally enduring parts of us, which are from the astral ‘up’.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No.TBC

inappropriateness

Fairly obviously, this is an ordinary, everyday, mundane word that anyone can look up in a dictionary - for instance, here. I have, however, a particular example or two of matters that are inappropriate that I wish to particularly illustrate.

The first, is inappropriate responses to agape type love. This is something I've written about here.

The next, which is more important, in my view is that of behaving as if everyone was already spiritually evolved, or acting as if the world was as peaceful as it should be, or as if everyone was able to operate effectively from the basis of the truth that, at a much higher level of reality, we are all one. To me, this, which I've written about here and here, is a little like a child at primary school quibbling about using cuisenaire, on the grounds that ultimately, a dozen or so years later, the child will have to work with calculators and advanced mathematical skills such as calculus, and Fourier and Laplace Transformations.

In the second link I gave in the previous paragraph, I write about the struggles to develop some universality of love/goodwill (or at least a genuine neutrality), which may be exacerbated by:

• inappropriate/wrong views on the Universe / Deity/the nature of our interconnectedness / the "basic reasons" (aka “rewards”) for attempting to achieve this; 
• inappropriate/wrong views regarding situations where other people are “not nice”; and 
• a fear that such a more universal love may lessen one’s earlier loves - e.g., of family, friends, etc.

I've written about this concept elsewhere as well:

• Post No. 546 - where I write about the saying "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater"
• Post No. 479 - where I about inappropriate advice - which is often based on a superficial or shallow assessment of situation or matter
• Post No. 465 - which includes a comment about inappropriate expectations of others
• Post No. 402 - inappropriate responses to a child who has been bullied; on that, note also Post No. 330
• Post No. 392 - inappropriate emphasis 
• Post No. 307 - contains a few references
• Post No. 196 - inappropriate survival mechanisms
• Post No. 178 - inappropriate fear
• Post No. 058 - inappropriate responses of people being healed 
• Post No. 040 - inappropriate energies 
• Post No. 028 - scientific methods can be inappropriate 
• Post No. 025 - inappropriate tolerance of nonBPLF behaviour 
• Post No. 024 - them and us - inappropriate conditioning 
• Post No. 020 secret science of hugs - inappropriate energies/flows 

psychic attack

Psychic attack is the directing of negative ('harmful') energies or other units towards a person, place, thing or event. I don't care whether it is conscious or unconscious, direct or indirect, done with skill or without: it is all psychic attack.

If you are jealous of someone and do not contain that energy totally (which is almost impossible, incidentally), you are guilty of psychic attack. Want someone to do something or to like or love you and wish hard for it? Psychic attack combined with the evil of control.

It is incredibly easy to wind up doing psychic attack - which means virtually every person on the planet has done this, is doing it, or could do it at a future date - no matter how evolved you may think you are.

So ... what's the solution? Know thyself, and know how to clear negative units.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:
     Post No. 007. Psychic attack, energy, protection and physical and non-physical responsibility;
     Post No. 039. Know Thyself, Be Thyself and Occlumency: A Mediumship Primer;

     Post No. 060. The Middle Ages and Today's Psychic Sewers;
     Post No. 090. Logic Flaws;
     Post No. 319. Psychic attack;

     Post No. 323. Asking for protection;

     Post No. 532. Phagic Attack;


I’ve also made reference to this idea in the following posts:
     Post No. 029. Protection;
     Post No. 042. Psychic Attack: Being Caught Out;
     Post No.171. Convenience vs. Responsibility;
     Post No. 434.  Retribution - aka, "counter-attacks";
     Post No. 483.  Psychic Attack, grounding out energy and using Harry Potter;
     Post No. 552 - Some Sunnudagr Speculations - including some thoughts for tonight's meditation;  

Some links to writings by others:

• http://www.patheos.com/blogs/johnbeckett/2012/03/psychic-attacks.html;

A couple of decades ago, while working on a book on rescue which I never finished, I did a few - lighthearted - sketches to help illustrate what I was writing about. The following sketches show - and I was using animals in an anthropomorphic way as a cartoon device - some examples of psychic attack (incidentally, I had intended to redraw these to be a bit more distinct, but as I haven't had time to do so over the last few decades, I've decided to post them now, as they are  with a hope they may be of some use or lead to someone doing something better):

Temple (partial DRAFT)

When a Coven is part of an established Tradition, it is referred to as a 'Temple'. For instance, the Correllian Tradition has a number of Temples, including, as a specific example that I know nothing of, the Holy City Temple.

Joining a Coven or Temple may require an initiation, or series of initiations (see here for something generic I've written on this concept).



Now, as an addition to the strict definition, I urge you to keep in mind that all Covens, Temples and other groups are just that: groups of humans coming together for a specific purpose, or purposes. As such, they may be flawed, hopefully becoming less flawed as they gain experience (although becoming rigid with age is a possibility, as well), and they are composed of humans who are always flawed, and have varying degrees of skill when it comes to dealing with personal and group flaws, group dynamics and problems, and the attainment of the group's goals.

Furthermore, in much the same way as we can be in harmony or disharmony with a particular piece or style of music, a smell or a colour, or other individuals or groups, so too can we be in harmony or disharmony with a Coven or Temple OR IT'S AIMS. Being in disharmony does NOT necessarily mean that group or aim is wrong or evil, any more than it means the person is defective in some way: it ONLY means that you need to move on, graciously, and find a group that IS in harmony with you.

Next, you should NEVER agree to sex - or it's simulation (aka 'The Great Rite') - under duress. Any Coven or Temple that claims sex is an essential part of its conduct is wrong, and is actually abusive. Leave, and consider reporting them if they have breached the law.

I also personally have no time for any group that insists on nudity (often termed being 'skyclad'). If people are genuinely naturists, or are comfortable with nudity, that is fine ... BUT any attempt to force this sort of behaviour on the grounds that it is a way of ensuring trust is utterly backwards: trust comes with time and experience and people PROVING that they can be trusted - and then, AFTER you have established trust, you can have a discussion about consensual, duress-free skyclad work.

Of course, if you are joining a group where they have already established practices of working skyclad, you cannot expect them to change to suit you - you may have to decide whether that group is something you can be comfortable with, or whether you need to continue your search.

I've not had to make the choice to join or not join a group on the basis of working skyclad, but I have chosen to leave groups on the basis of ethics or other conditions - for example, expectations around tithing, availability at expense of family, etc. I have, in some such instances, genuinely lost access to some knowledge that I haven't been able to access elsewhere - but I remain comfortable with my conscience.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No. TBC

Coven (partial DRAFT)

A Coven is a group of witches, Wiccans, Practitioners of 'the Old Ways', or similar, who come together on a sustained basis for a specific purpose associated with their beliefs.

A group of Witches/Wiccans/etc coming together to celebrate Esbats (I interpret that term as Full Moons and Dark or New Moons) or Sabbats (I am familiar with the eight Festivals that man people consider the Sabbats, but have also tried to develop a system that better suits where I live) or other rituals (see here for a list of rituals I've written and shared on this blog) occasionally does not, in my opinion, make them a coven, as they lack the more intense sense of intentional purpose that a Coven has. Also, a Coven may, over time, develop a Group Mind, which joining others on a basically ad hoc way from time to time, does not.

Commonly, in my experience, the purposes covens may exist for are to teach their beliefs or otherwise share their knowledge, to plan and perform rituals (e.g. the aforementioned rituals for Esbats or Sabbats), or perhaps to accomplish some other purpose (Diana L. Paxson talks of what can be described as mediumship, for instance - see here and here).

When a Coven is part of an established Tradition, it is referred to as a 'Temple'. For instance, the Correllian Tradition has a number of Temples, including, as a specific example that I know nothing of, the Holy City Temple.

Joining a Coven or Temple may require an initiation, or series of initiations (see here for something generic I've written on this concept).



Now, as an addition to the strict definition, I urge you to keep in mind that all Covens, Temples and other groups are just that: groups of humans coming together for a specific purpose, or purposes. As such, they may be flawed, hopefully becoming less flawed as they gain experience (although becoming rigid with age is a possibility, as well), and they are composed of humans who are always flawed, and have varying degrees of skill when it comes to dealing with personal and group flaws, group dynamics and problems, and the attainment of the group's goals.

Furthermore, in much the same way as we can be in harmony or disharmony with a particular piece or style of music, a smell or a colour, or other individuals or groups, so too can we be in harmony or disharmony with a Coven or Temple OR IT'S AIMS. Being in disharmony does NOT necessarily mean that group or aim is wrong or evil, any more than it means the person is defective in some way: it ONLY means that you need to move on, graciously, and find a group that IS in harmony with you.

Next, you should NEVER agree to sex - or it's simulation (aka 'The Great Rite') - under duress. Any Coven or Temple that claims sex is an essential part of its conduct is wrong, and is actually abusive. Leave, and consider reporting them if they have breached the law.

I also personally have no time for any group that insists on nudity (often termed being 'skyclad'). If people are genuinely naturists, or are comfortable with nudity, that is fine ... BUT any attempt to force this sort of behaviour on the grounds that it is a way of ensuring trust is utterly backwards: trust comes with time and experience and people PROVING that they can be trusted - and then, AFTER you have established trust, you can have a discussion about consensual, duress-free skyclad work.

Of course, if you are joining a group where they have already established practices of working skyclad, you cannot expect them to change to suit you - you may have to decide whether that group is something you can be comfortable with, or whether you need to continue your search.

I've not had to make the choice to join or not join a group on the basis of working skyclad, but I have chosen to leave groups on the basis of ethics or other conditions - for example, expectations around tithing, availability at expense of family, etc. I have, in some such instances, genuinely lost access to some knowledge that I haven't been able to access elsewhere - but I remain comfortable with my conscience.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No. TBC

circle (partial DRAFT)

This word is one that, as far as I know, seems to have started with, or has become associated with, Spiritualism and, to lesser extent, New Age practice. As I understand the word, in the context of magick/psychism/religion/metaphysics, it means "a group of people meeting for a psychic or spiritual purpose – probably most commonly to develop psychic abilities, for healing, or for discussion of spiritual matters."

Note that Spiritualist religious 'dogma' (some branches of Spiritualism are 'registered as churches - e.g., in Australia, which, as I understand it, requires seven 'congregations' following a prescribed set of rules) or practice is based around mediumship and/or psychism to contact nonphysical realms - or, more specifically, the wiser or more skilled entities currently living there.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No. TBC

discarnate (partial DRAFT)

A spirit or soul or astral or whatever term you prefer that is not connected to, or inhabiting, a specific physical body. This does not mean that they cannot come to the frequency of the physical, or temporarily overshadow or possess a body, but they are not the assigned or official ‘owner’ of that body.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No. TBC

obsession (partial DRAFT)

As I’ve generally used the term, obsession is basically down a notch or two from full blown possession.

With possession, the mannerisms, personality and, in some cases, consciousness of the original and proper inhabitant of a (living!) body is completely overborne by an entity - which is OK if that entity is an invited in (by the original and proper inhabitant) BPLF Guide, for instance (which is termed mediumship, not obsession or possession!), or this is part of a planned and prepared rescue session for which proper informed consent has been given, but if none of that applies, it is not good.

Obsession is similar, except that the term is only used for those situations where proper informed consent has not been freely given (in the case of BPLF Guides, the lower level of occupancy is referred to as ‘overshadowing’). 

One of the most common examples of this being a problem is people who abuse alcohol or other drugs: the drug (and alcohol is a potentially addictive drug) weakens the person's aura, which allows any earthbound entities who had that addiction (i.e., alcoholism, in this instance) while they were alive can get in to the aura enough to share the sensation of drinking, and also increase the person's apparent craving to drink more. Thus we may have the situation where someone who doesn't normally drink to excess has an initial issue (perhaps they fail to constructively handle an emotional problem, or they are over-worked / tired) and starts drinking, but "strangely" finds it difficult to limit their drinking and they wind up roaring drunk and creating massive ongoing problem for themself (and maybe others).

Action should - ideally - be taken by the original and proper inhabitant to address this situation, which may involve acceptance of greater personal responsibility for psychic protection, resolving issues leading to vulnerability to psychic influences, etc. 

Help may be needed from others.

As of the time this definition was written, I’ve touched on this idea in the following posts:

     Post No. TBC

Some other links that may be of interest:

• The Thompson-Gifford Case (A Documentary by Dr Keith Parsons) - an example of powerful obsession that, poorly handled, ultimately becomes destructive; 
• The Watseka Wonder - (A Documentary by Dr Keith Parsons) - a well known case of possession (that I have referred to elsewhere on this blog); 
• Spirit Possession, Spirit Release - (A Documentary by Dr. Keith Parsons) - largely on Carl Wickland's work, which was, in my opinion, influenced by some of the biases of his time.