Wednesday, 25 August 2010

Post No. 149 - Updates: healing, world peace, vegan witches, crop circles and memory

This is just a short post so I can get a few updates, possibly interesting links and thoughts out into the blogosphere.

Firstly, healing - which I have written about a few times (see here, here and here).

One of the aspects of healing that I have occasionally wondered about is the apparent heat that comes out of my hands. Specifically, could that simply be a byproduct of something like more blood flow, as I have noticed veins standing out at times? Well, I recently have had to go to hospital a few times as part of managing my diabetes. Sitting in the waiting room with literally dozens of other people, some quite ill compared to me, some about the same, I felt the healing energy start to flow - and I decided to let it, although I considered trying to close down to protect my energy levels.

Anyway, when I got in to have a blood sample taken, the nurse commented on how warm my hands were - even saying "we'll have no problems getting blood from you".

But she did.

She had to try a few locations, and do a lot of squeezing to get a few tiny drops of blood out.

I'll take that as a reasonable answer to my question, with the answer being "no, the warmth is not necessarily due to extra blood flow".

(One of my sisters has been in hospital for some major surgery recently: I'm currently giving her healing every day, and her doctors have told her she is healing faster than expected. Could be due to other factors, of course, but I could also be contributing to that ... )

I've done a sketch on healing which I will use as part of future teaching, and have decided to give it a preliminary run, so ... here 'tis:

Next: world peace, which I have also written about - see here, here, here, here and here.

Wikipedia had an interesting article on "Nonviolent resistance" (see here), and I recently found an online edition of Tolstoy's "The Kingdom of God is Within You". This book apparently influenced Gandhi; I've only skimmed Chapter One so far, and can't say I've particularly found it appealing or inspiring, but then I come from a different era when these concepts are no longer as revolutionary as they were. I also must say that I think it is dangerous to say evil should not be resisted at all, and I don't think that was Gandhi's take on this matter: my impression was that Gandhi sought to actively oppose evil, but he was as firm that such resistance be nonviolent as he was that it should be resisted. Anyway, if I manage to wade through it all, I may post a few further thoughts ...

Don't hold your breath.

As an aside to this, I came across a debate on religion and violence which was started by a speech or article by a William Cavanaugh, Research Professor at the Center for World Catholicism and Intercultural Theology at DePaul University, Chicago (apparently the author of, most recently, The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology and the Roots of Modern Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2010)), on the ABC's Religion and Ethics dated 24th August, 2010:
"Christopher Hitchens and the Myth of Religious Violence".

The blurb on the website has this:
"When I recently gave a lecture entitled "Does Religion Cause Violence?" at a college, someone scrawled across a poster advertising the lecture a single word - "Duh!" The idea that religion has a peculiar tendency to promote violence has achieved the status of truism in Western so ... " More

The debates after the article itself are, to me, more interesting that the article itself. Have a read and a think ...

Now, third - speaking of having a think: wisdom.

ABC Radio National's Life Matters programme had a session where a University Vice Chancellor said he thought institutes of higher learning should be teaching wisdom, not just knowledge for jobs ...

The blurb on their website is:

Learning wisdom Universities are well known as institutes of learning. But perhaps it's best known for teaching things like history, molecular biology, economics, botany, engineering,and medicine. These days much of the knowledge imparted at universities is about making graduates job-ready. But Steven Schwartz, vice-chancellor of Macquarie University, says knowledge is not enough. Universities, he believes, ought to be in the wisdom business too. He'll be giving his annual lecture on just this topic tonight. Guests Steven Schwartz Vice-Chancellor, Macquarie University Further Information Wise Up: Restoring Wisdom to Universities, Vice Chancellor's annual lecture

: a blog which might be interesting: Vegan Hippie Witch

Now, fifthly, we come to a topic that I've had, at times, mixed feelings about: crop circles. There were a couple of blokes who claimed to have created all the crop circles. They may have, I agreed at the time, but is the occurrence of crop circles limited to what two people at night can create within the confines of working at night, etc? Well, the answer it would seem, is no - see here.

(If the link has disappeared when you look at it, go over to my website and email me for a copy of the article.)

I'm still not so certain about the interpretations that are placed on these ...

For my sixth comment, I'm now going to go back to the ABC's Radio National's - and my favourite programme there, Life Matters, and a topic that is of great importance to psychic work: perception. Being objective and, at times, dispassionate is actually crucial to developing advanced psychic abilities. Hence, I post links about perceptions from time to time. Well, this article was about something that is somewhat similar: memory ... (see also here)
From here:
Memory and witness discussions
New forensic psychology research from the University of Sydney indicates that crime witnesses tend to contaminate each other's memories by discussing the event. Study participants were convinced they were describing a scene from memory, when they were often describing a similar scene someone else had seen, and then told them about.

Seventh, one of my environmental passions: the need for a change of lifestyle, which is included in an article titled "Fiddling while the Earth burns", published in The Age on 27th August, 2010.
To view the entire article, click on:

Eighth: a cautionary note about the travails of being a psychic detective. Now, apart from the limitations of accuracy and communication, and the fact that such work will only be useful if it leads to evidence which is admissible in a court of law (which it can and has done), there is the sceptical attitude of the police and media, which conceivably could potentially lead to suspicion of having committed the crime being laid against the psychic.

Doubt that? Have a read of the following ...

"Psychic searching for Kiesha discovers woman's torso", August 12, 2010 - 1:05PM
To view the entire article, click on: Later articles described the psychic as an aboriginal elder. (There is another article about a psychic on this case here.)

Ninth: guides. This is also a topic I have posted on previously (for instance, see here, here and here), and now I've been working on a sketch to help illustrate some of the concepts (namely, that either your direct guides, or the indirect guides helping someone who is guiding you because you trust them, will have more spiritual experience than you, but will NOT necessarily be "wise".

Keep in mind, too, that any time you ask for guidance, you should specify that it is from constructive sources, and check to make sure it is not someone trying to dupe or mislead you, possibly to gain power over you (as some earthbound entities and other lifeforms may do).

Tenth: a cautionary article from Witch's Voice. I actually consider the author to have been a little naive, but it may well be that others have not come across such behaviour previously either. So ...
"Dealing with Antagonists in Pagan Groups (Part One)", by Iris Firemoon

I'll have to see what the next part is like.

And finally, a lighter comment: a name for a band, if any happen to be looking and read here (not likely!), from a sign with an obscured "s": Tone Masons ...

Love, light, hugs and blessings


This post's photo is from the Queenscliff to Sorrento ferry between the heads of Port Phillip.

Tags: energy work, healing, education, learning styles, wisdom, crop circles, vegan, perceptions, memory,

First published: Tuesday 31st August, 2010

Last edited: Tuesday 31st August, 2010

Saturday, 21 August 2010

Post No. 148 - Parenting and personal flaws

I have a personal policy of avoiding, if I can, commenting on other people's character flaws. The reason is that, because I have so many flaws myself, I don't consider I have any right to do something which feels like it is passing judgement on others. That policy has a major impact on how I teach/guide/nurture people, but I have to admit there are times when commenting on a more pressing need may be appropriate (e.g. "My friend, you seem to have a habit of choosing destructive relationships - the last 385,214 relationships haven't been very good for you, and my shoulder is getting tinea from your tears. Perhaps you could look within yourself to see if there is an internal reason you repeat this pattern? No, I don't think you should set out to try not to get into bad relationships - that's just the outcome of the internal issue").

I feel more comfortable talking to people if the matter is something I have personal experience with - and, apart from all the personal growth I have done, having been a rescue medium means I have had intimate experience of quite a few other people's problems (see here, here and here).

One of the matters I've generally avoided commenting on is parenting. However, I've had more experience at this than I generally give myself credit for, as so many of my partners have had kids (as someone I was close to who didn't have kids pointed out), and, between them, step-kids and step-grandkids, I've actually been through most of the various stages of parenting. The interesting thing about that for me, the aspect that inspired me to write the blog, is that these kids all turned out as unique individuals, in some cases despite the best of parenting.

Just talking about past relationships, and using a code letter (not any initials) for various people:
  • W admitted she wasn't the best of parents when she was younger, but she did do the best she could. She had fairly intolerant views, and these were reflected to some extent in her kids, but two of her kids wound up in de facto (heterosexual) relationships with kids and a home (one with a mortgage), and not too dissimilar to many people in their lives. Her son, C, followed in the footsteps of his mum, and took up many of her habits (aggression, drinking and smoking). One her daughters, Q, took up these for a while, but has been trying to cut down since she became a parent. As a parent, W's approach tended towards a hard-line discipline (especially around manners towards other people), but she was supportive of her kids when they genuinely needed it - unless they were repeating mistakes.
  • L had three kids. Her eldest, a boy, B, was incredibly affectionate; her younger son, the middle child, K, was always into trouble; her youngest, her daughter, S, was incredibly independent and stubborn ("No, don't help me get up onto the bench! I'll do it myself!" ... <30> ... "Help me up!"). They had all had the same loving parenting, with what I would consider fairly standard boundaries/discipline management, yet one turned out (at that stage) sensitive and loving, one craved more love and attention, and one didn't want interactions at all. All three had been through a recent separation of parents a couple of years before I became part of their lives.
  • E had two kids, the oldest was a boy, K, and a younger daughter, also K by this code, but I'll refer to her as L. L was absorbed in upset at a recent separation of her parents, and saw me as a threat. K was quite taken by me, but that was a relationship where E's personal problems were an all-consuming issue, and both kids were worried about her. She did eventually find someone who was able to give her the sort of support she needed, and she started to do well. The last time I met her, she was well, and K had grown up to be a goth (can't remember now what she said about L.
The same parenting, in some of these cases, came up with radically different results. Separation/divorce also came up with different results for different kids. [1] All that one can do is one's best, and if you find out later that perhaps you should have done things differently, well, that's life. You will never get through it without making any mistakes - in fact, one of my former bosses used to have a saying "show me someone who has never made a mistake, and I'll show you someone who has never done anything".

Its a little like some of the media reports on medical advice: one study seems to say one thing, and then there may be another which seems to say another. [2] You do the best with what you have at the time. This, incidentally, is something I struggle with, as I am very hard on and judgemental of myself, in part as a reaction to the excesses of the "there there now - it wasn't your fault" approach, because I KNOW from personal experience what goals can be achieved, what can be accomplished, with sufficient self discipline, determination and persistent effort. [3]

The "best that you can do" with regard to parenting is, in my opinion, better now (in Australia) than it was when I was growing up (in the "be seen but not heard" type era). The existence of a range of parenting styles is known by many people (not all!), communication between people in society is generally better (I didn't say "is universally perfect" - just "better") than it used to be, and more is known about the problems such as violence and bullying (whether at home or at schools) and (to some extent) about the importance of things like good nutrition, good boundaries and social connectedness.

There is still room for improvement - for instance, there are still people with massive disadvantage in society (i.e., people who are poor or discriminated against - particularly indigenous Australians), and that impacts on their families. Most of all, I consider there is a need to acknowledge that techniques need to be selected or adapted to suit the character of each child: one size does NOT fit all when it comes to parenting (just look at the range of characteristics of L's kids, for instance). As an example, perhaps you have a dislike of "alternative" religions, or competitive sport: you may prefer your child did not participate in such activities. Yet that may be exactly what they need.

As one of my ex's once said: children are basically little people. They're not all innocent angels, nor all demons; the truth is a complex somewhere in-between, where each has a bit of both and a lot of the in-between. (I use her comment when people ask me if I like kids: some I do, some I don't, just like big people.)

Furthermore, each parent is at a different stage of their evolution, and will have different understanding and reactions to various bits of advice. For instance, if I say, "think of the colour green", there is a fair chance that every person reading that will think of a different shade of green. Communicating a message needs to be adapted to the audience, unfortunately (unfortunately, as that means it potentially involves a lot more work - see here for a previous post of mine on this topic).

We also need, in my opinion, as a society to give more attention to the issue of managing what happens when kids leave home. [4] It can be quite traumatic for parents, in part because of kids tending to be focused on establishing themselves as independent adults (they can actually be quite selfish during this period, but they generally "come back" in a sense).

However, even more so than that, we - as a society - need to focus on the view that, as Kahlil Gibran put it (this is not an exact quote), our children are not our own: they are borrowed from the future. You should NOT try to turn your kids into little carbon copies of you so you can feel immortal: you have a task to deliver them to adulthood as capable, independent beings - not carbon copies. This is something that my current partner excels at - and it can be hard when they have different views or behaviours to what you would like, but it is more important that they are capable of thinking and making informed decisions than that they be carbon copies of you.

Above all else, remember that, if there is something you are measured for, it is your effort and care, not the result :)

Love, light, hugs and blessings


  1. I've seen different approaches to divorce, and, if I wanted to make a generalisation, it is that it is wrong for the non-custodial parent (if the divorce winds up with one parent predominantly having custody) to assume there is no point trying to make an effort to have contact with their kids. If you try later, the damage caused by you not making an effort may be insurmountable - which is something I have seen (and, to be quite clear about this, the custodial parent was trying to encourage contact).

    I've also read reports which suggest that the difference in how kids handle the divorce or separation seems to be related to whether or not they knew there were problems: the ones who knew there were problems seemed to cope better. All of that is, of course, a generalisation.
  2. I never bother to save any examples of this, because the truth of the matter is usually that there are details which are different. For example, one study may be reported by a sensationalist heading "doctors say to drink more alcohol", about a study saying that certain people find they are more relaxed if they have ONE OR TWO drinks on a regular basis, and a subsequent study may be reported by the sensationalist heading "doctors say to cut back on alcohol!" about recent evidence saying pregnant women should not drink while pregnant.

    On this, I had an interesting read on the topic "confirmation bias" at Wikipedia recently - see here.
  3. In the sporting field, achieving reasonable success at the Sydney Gay Games in 2002 in the sailing is one example. As a teenager, I remember reading a comment by an Olympic gold medallist to the effect that, the harder he worked, the luckier he got. In other words, people who didn't practice hard enough to understand the skill he had developed thought he was being successful because he was lucky. The truth was more likely that he and his crew had developed their "in-boat" skills to the extent that they were automatic, so they could focus on keeping their eyes outside of the boat, looking for evidence of windshifts (which gets easier when you PRACTICE it more), whereas the "you're lucky" grumblers were probably fumbling with basic boat handling skills, keeping their attention within the boat, and wouldn't recognise a sign of a windshift if it had neon lights. I was not a naturally successful competitive sailor (although the basics of sailing came fairly easily): I had to practice hard, study, test and learn. I pestered all the other, older sailors in the fleet for their views of how they did things ("How much rake do you put on your mast? Why? What do you change as the wind increase?" - I would also record this advice, and had one sailor commenting to another "Watch out, everything you say will be taken down and used in evidence against you" - intended lightheartedly, but I thought I should make the writing less obvious after that :) ) All this worked, with me having dominating success after initially always being last.

    At work, turning a group of junior engineers into a skilled team of proficient and capable professionals - which I have done several times, and am currently working on again - is another example. I've raised the issue of getting more experienced people to help, which hasn't happened for a wide range of reasons, so I've turned what I had into what was needed.

    In the psychic field, people like Charmaine Wilson, who I wrote about here, impressed me because she showed how much practice and effort is required to be good at being psychic - despite already having an impressive natural talent.

    I spent over a year working up to 15 hours a day, 7 days a week at developing my skills and knowledge when I started. I'm still learning, and life means I cannot devote the same sort of hours to practise that I used to (I'm too old and don't have the energy, even if I did have the time :) ), but I still have the benefit of all that hard work.

    I have frequently told people "there is always a price, even if you don't pay money": that price may be time, energy and effort, and in the case of "time, energy and effort", you still get what you pay.
  4. It's worth keeping in mind that you are preparing your children for a world where they are inherently NOT going to be the centre of the universe, so to speak. NO-ONE else is going to be as focused on them as you are: your children need to be prepared for that - apart from anything else, it's part of teaching them to get along with others, rather than being self-centred.

    They are NOT always going to have criticism delivered to them gently - apart from anything else, the people they will work will occasionally at least be under pressure with deadlines or financial constraints, and not have the luxury if investing that much time, energy and effort into delivering a gentle, uplifting, encouraging form of criticism. Tough - that's life. Sure, it shouldn't be delivered in a way that is abusive, but be wary of mollycoddling your kids - of over-protecting them. DON'T always do their homework for them, don't help them with a short term sense of accomplishment at the expense of their capacity to be an adult.

    As a variation to this, don't lose perspective because of your love for your kids: don't expect the world to adapt itself to you and your needs - for instance, if you visit the home of people without kids, DON'T expect them to have a house that is set up to be kid-safe. They have their own lives, and a right to live it as they wish. You DON'T have a right to tell them how to live it - and you especially DON'T have a right to tell them to arrange their home to suit YOUR convenience. Their your kids: you manage them in someone else's space.

    As a final venting point, I also consider that if you EXPECT your kids to take care of you in your old age, then your love for them can be questioned. I take a fairly hard view on this, that I expect such love to be unconditional. EXPECTING kids to look after you is imposing a condition on that love - as well as being personally irresponsible. It is something that isn't needed in this day and age in most of Australia.

    The views in this note are views I formed before I had any partners with kids; they remained unchanged now, after several decades of supporting partners with their kids, and supporting partners as their kids move out of home and get on with having a life.

    In many cases, the kids will voluntarily want to look after elderly parents: that is wonderful, and it could be said to be a bit sad when they don't want to do that. Just don't do the crime of expecting it, and planning on it. It's not honourable - in a spiritual sense of "honour".
  5. As a final point, tongue in cheek and unrelated to anything in particular in this post, I was talking with someone close recently about teenagers, someone who needed cheering up about her daughter. Teenagers are the age where, to many of them (particularly females), being close to others and having friends is important. Almost everything they do is around demonstrating trust, and therefore demonstrating closeness. They will help each other, test each other by imposing on each (oh I forgot such and such - can I borrow yours? - which can also be about status, manipulation and a few other concepts they may not be aware of yet!) Hence, when a teenager behaves in a way that seems irresponsible to an adult, and is imposing on an adult, they may - in the teenager's mind - be saying "See, I trust you - we're friends, and, of course, that means I'm an adult too. Isn't that wonderful?" As an example:
    - teenager forgets key
    - teenager rings parent and asks if they will drop out key or rearrange home so teenager can get in
    - parent thinks teenager is irresponsible and can't be trusted to be an adult, but decides can't accept the risk of kid not being home so cancels a work function (thereby putting job security at risk and increasing stress) and agrees
    - teenager assumes they have just been treated as an adult because an adult demonstrated what the teenager considers is closeness
    - when teenager gets home, parent snaps and talks about irresponsibility and teenager is amazed and complains about lack of trust

    Don't worry, both my friend and I have agreed that I won't give up my day job for a career in humour ...

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: family, parenting, learning from mistakes, about me, challenge, emotions, indigenous, interpersonal interactions, morality, personal responsibility, perspective, relationships,

First published: Monday 23rd August, 2010

Last edited: Monday 23rd August, 2010

Friday, 20 August 2010

Post No. 147 - A book of mixed "blessings": Baldwin's "Spirit Releasement Therapy"

I referred recently to the book "Spirit Releasement Therapy", by William Baldwin. Well, I have tracked down and obtained a copy, and my first scan of it is extremely disappointing.

The practical ideas on spirit rescue and past life regression seem OK, but the book claims to have "cured" two people of being (M2F) transsexual by rescuing female spirits from these people.

That may have happened (I think, incidentally, that there is good reason for thorough psychological evaluation prior to surgery, although current assessments should be improved, and the view of gender diversity needs to be broadened), but ALL first responses to any divergence from normal along the lines of "I can 'cure' that" are, in my experience, basically bigotry and prejudice (see here for a better view on trans matters, here for a better view on same sex attraction, and here for a better view on bisexuality). They remind me of the story about a famous psychologist (Freud) who was asked by a woman if he could cure her son's homosexuality: the reply was along the lines of "Madam, there is nothing to cure."

Transsexualism (and being transgender or bigender) is NOT a disease that needs a cure! To imply that it is, as Baldwin does, is irresponsible and unprofessional in the extreme.

Goddess how many people have I LITERALLY buried because of idiotic implications like that ... !

The attitude brings to mind another book I read years ago which claimed a similar "cure" for being gay or lesbian. I can't even recall the title of it now - needless to say, I stopped recommending it very quickly!

I wonder how those idiots feel as evidence of physical causation starts to be found (see here and here, for instance)?

I'm wary of finding physical causation for sex and gender diversity: it raises the possibility of bigots having abortions because they don't want to have an LGBTIQ kid. The problem is not natural, normal diversity (now acknowledged to happen in other animals): it is the attitude of stamping on divergence.

So ... Dr Baldwin is not off to a good start with me. I'll see how his book holds up when read more thoroughly.

Oh, by the way: I've decided to try writing my reviews of books in chunks: I still have several book reviews that I haven't completed yet because I am trying to assemble all my notes and review the whole thing. Doesn't work with my busy lifestyle ...

Love, light, hugs and blessings


This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: rescue, past life regression, hypnosis, discrimination, transgender/transsexual/bigender, lesbian/bisexual/gay, psychology, death, demons, gender,

First published: Friday 20th August, 2010

Last edited: Friday 20th August, 2010

Monday, 16 August 2010

Post No. 146 - New website

I have finally bitten the bullet, and am - with the help of a talented friend - getting a website up for myself (based on the services I can provide, mostly locally). The content is, at the moment, a rough draft: we will polish it over the next few weeks. Please have a look, it's at

Sunday, 15 August 2010

Post No. 145 - Others' feelings

There is a saying that we are not responsible for the feelings of others. That is true enough, and the saying is often used to promote a dispassionate view of circumstances when making decisions.

So, as I wrote, this saying has a valid place - for instance, leaving an unhealthy relationship with someone who is possessive through insecurity. You are not responsible for managing the other person's flaws, nor what they say is pain when you leave (and it may seem like pain, with lots of tears etc, although that can be simply an adult's version of a toddler's tantrum) - that is their role, something they have to sort out through their own life. In fact, you cannot, ultimately, cure that flaw or fix the pain for them: you can guide them, help them, support them ... but THEY have to fix it themselves. Thinking you can fix their pain is a bit like someone saying "I can reach into your innermost being, your heart and mind and soul, and push this over there, and take that out, and then you'll feel completely better, OK?" It's rubbish. And you staying in an unhealthy relationship (which is a mistake I made before this relationship) for the sake of avoiding causing others' pain is not healthy for either of you - although it can seem like the path of least resistance, which some may interpret as "going with the flow". But that's a topic for another post. [1]

All this doesn't mean others who are close to us being in pain is easy for those who love them.

I've been thinking about this quite a bit lately, as we've had so many major events in our lives in my family, including a death, a diagnosis of major and aggressive cancer, and a child moving both out of home and overseas. The strict definition of the saying "I am not responsible for others' feelings" seems to suggest that I should be as dispassionate as I can be while being compassionate, empathic and supportive. Loving and, in one case, being in love with (i.e. my partner), the people in these events makes that hard.

I didn't let that saying interfere with how I was living my life (it was one of those sayings that I classify as "useful in some circumstances", and then only bother with when those circumstances occur), but as I was in what we call my "Littlest Home Office" (apologies for an "in joke"), the thought occurred to me that there is a difference between "responsible for" and "loving".

Taking on a role of "being responsible for" is a little like being an overprotective parent - doing your child's homework for them (which may lead to them getting praise in the short term, but hinders them from maturing in the long run): you are interfering with that person's capacity to be the best that they can be.

"Loving" means you will seek to help that person deal with their pain in what is GENUINELY the best possible way for them (including letting them know they are loved and that others know they are in pain, and desire them not to be) - you're not taking "responsibility" for the other person's feelings: you are taking responsibility for your love of them, and making sure that your love leads to what is best for the other person. Loving (in the agape sense) all others in creation (indeed, all of creation) has been conveyed to me as the ultimate goal of reality - when you can do that, you will also have reached the state of "being all that you can be", which, in part, requires consideration of the issue of your impact on others - beyond the crude level of "not deliberately harming others" that too many people on this planet are still fumbling with. You can help and inspire others, but, a bit like a parent having to let go as they push their child out of the nest into the world (or, to use a better analogy, as the child graduates from their apprenticeship with their parents/carers), but there comes a time when changes or (temporary) partings (such as a death) may be necessary: you are not responsible for the other person having to feel happy, but you do have a responsibility to facilitate them getting the most (in a constructive sense) of the experience. If someone is grieving, you do not have a responsibility to stop them feeling pain, but you do have the obligations of agape love to facilitate them moving through the stages of grief in a way that is ultimately healing.

So ... it seems to me, the saying "you are not responsible for others' feelings" may have a sutler level of interpretation, when looked at in the light of love.

This is extremely clumsily worded compared to the sense I have of it. Sigh. Oh well, at any rate, I may to reclassify that saying on the basis of my new understanding.

One thing I won't reclassify, though, is that of this applies in your attitudes towards yourself - particularly the bits about love, and being all that you can be.

Love, light, hugs and blessings


  1. Another topic for another post is the rubbish statement "you make me angry". Did the person being spoken of put a gun to their head and say "if you don't become angry, I will kill you?" No - it's just ducking responsibility. Mind you, sometimes people expect others to show certain emotions as part of bonding - anger at someone who has hurt a loved one is often interpreted by the loved one as a sign of love - it would indeed be hard for them to interpret the other as showing signs of love if they seemed perfectly happy and content despite pain having been caused (although that is a view some argue for ... I definitely have to start working out a post of that one :) )

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: emotions, love, attitudes, responsibility,

First published: Sunday 15th August, 2010

Last edited: Sunday 15th August, 2010

Monday, 9 August 2010

Post No. 144 - Not devoking

Had a reminder of an interesting concept last night: not devoking.

This is something I occasionally do if I want to build up the energies in something that is not used by a lot of people - e.g., a personal sacred space. I wouldn't do it in a public area, one where people are coming and going, for instance, or anywhere else I couldn't be absolutely certain I wasn't going to create a risk for others, but, in some cases, it has a use.

Last night, there was this aspect, but also, there was the idea that, if, say, one had invoked something that was vital, perhaps ... say ... rain, you didn't want to "send rain away", so you wouldn't "devoke rain".

Interesting viewpoint ...

Love, light, hugs and blessings


This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: rituals, potential mistakes,

First published: Monday 8th August, 2010

Last edited: Monday 8th August, 2010

Friday, 6 August 2010

Post No. 143 - Wisdom from the world of science

I recently received the following interesting link from a close friend:

Research shows what you say about others says a lot about you
They discovered particularly strong associations between positively judging others and how enthusiastic, happy, kind-hearted, courteous, emotionally stable and capable the person describes oneself and is described by others. . . . In contrast, negative perceptions of others are linked to higher levels of narcissism and antisocial behavior.

There is much in that which I agree with.

On the other hand, however, being excessively positive can be a problem. Trish Bolton wrote an article titled "Always being positive can become a negative" in the 29th January, 2010 edition of "The Age". (The URL was, but the article is no longer there - you may have to buy it from The Age; I saved a copy at I Cyte, but that is for my use ... )
I also recall the alien intelligences ("the Nine") with which contact is described in Stuart Holroyd's brilliant "Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth" (see here for my thoughts on this) mention intervening when the planet was becoming "too positive".

Balance has a place in all this: the problem is that the planet is currently so slewed towards being negative that being balanced can potentially seem unduly positive ...

Anyway, maybe have a read and a think :)

Love, light, hugs and blessings


This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: attitudes, emotions, personal responsibility, interpersonal interactions, life lessons, aliens, Stuart Holroyd, The Nine, balance,

First published: Friday 6th August, 2010

Last edited: Friday 6th August, 2010

Post No. 142 - Grief

I've just come back from a funeral for a young friend of the family, a kid who was not perfect, but touched many people with love. His death was accidental; the grief and other effects (I've seen some maturing in young people as a result of this loss, for instance, and there have been some other benefits out of the pain) were a natural consequence of who he was.

That's not what I want to write about here, though. I want to cover two points:
1. the blockage that grief can cause; and
2. the psychic effects of the grief at the funeral.

That first point. Well, the energy that is grief is capable of blocking (psychic) contact with loved ones who have passed over. This energy can become, for the person who is grieving, a black cloud within which they wrap themselves - literally: that is the psychic impression seen under some circumstances. [1] The person concerned may then wail about not having contact from the loved one, not realising that it is the still living person themselves who is blocking the contact - and, in the process, ironically possibly causing some pain to the person who died. [2]

I'm currently writing a post on the topic of "Self Indulgence", from the shamanistic perspective written about by Castenada, and I'm going to steal the thunder from that post by stating here that, in general, I consider the philosophy expressed in the saying "feel the fear and do it anyway" applies to most emotions: acknowledge the emotion, feel it, and get on with (constructive) life anyway ... It is a philosophy which, in my opinion, applies to grief: acknowledge the various stages of grieving [3], work with them constructively (i.e., grow), adjust and then continue living.

OK, the second point. Well, basically, quite a few earthbound spirits who were themselves earthbound because of their grief (not always over the death of a loved one: losing relationships or opportunities can also lead to this) were drawn in to the outpouring of grief at the funeral. So, while I was sitting there, as well as dealing with my own reactions and supporting those around me, I also was performing spirit rescues [4] - quite a few, in fact [5], of people who had become trapped by their grief (including some who had died of it).

That's OK, but there were also a few entities there who could probably be technically classified as vampires: they were enjoying the grief - feeding on it, in a sense. The influence of these entities (all human, by the way) was to exacerbate and prolong the grief that incarnate ("living") people felt. Those entities were isolated from the incarnates they were feeding off, and will be given rather intensive clearing of energy (this is also used to free those who these entities had been controlling - including other earthbound entities [6]) and healing, and will be given (by the Guides) a choice of passing over or being left in a place where they cannot feed on others.

Sounds bit tough, doesn't it? Well, they've been actively harming other people for long enough, and now they are going to be stopped from doing that any more. They're free to pass over any time they want, but they will not be allowed to harm others.

This action is a last resort, approved by the entity's own Higher Self.

These sorts of entities are the sort of reasons usually quoted when talking of the need for protection, grounding, clearing & releasing, etc: the truth is, they're rare - most times people need protection it is simply because of incompatible energy.

There is an interesting article on (the history of) possession here: it might be worth a read before judging this last action too much one way or another.

And now, I will resume my own grieving process - not just for this death, but for other sad news I have had recently [7]. May the Goddess bless, nurture, heal and protect you and all who are near and dear to you.

Love, light, hugs and blessings


  1. Not always, though: some grief is the normal, painful but healthy adjustment to loss, and it doesn't necessarily form a blanket around the grieving person. It is useful to refer to the work of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross on this topic.
  2. Usually the grief is like a constant drag on the person who has passed over, interfering with them settling in to the afterlife. This, incidentally, is part of the reason some indigenous people do not mention the name of people who have passed over.
  3. It can be useful to be familiar with the work on stages of grieving: I know this through the work of Elisabeth Kübler-Ross on grieving (the "Kubler-Ross model, or "the five stages of grieving"), but there have no doubt been others since, and may well have been others before her. She also contributed to the hospice care movement, including care for people with AIDS (which may have led to an arson attack on her home).
  4. You can find some of my previous posts on this topic here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
  5. I have a habit of asking my Guides how many entities have been rescued, as often, for every one entity rescued by "work" (talking with them, healing them, clearing energy, opening portals, etc), there will be a few others around who will see what is going on, who also pass over. In this case, my Guides (who have a sense of humour) responded to my questions "how many" with "42". "Yeah, right - the meaning of life" (an allusion to "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy") "I get it, doing rescue is my life purpose ... How many?" The answer was a smaller number, but still quite surprising enough.
  6. Apparently this was dealt with in the episodes of "Ghost Whisperer" featuring the character "Romano", in Season Two. I regret that I have missed seeing all the episodes of this series ... I'll have to grit my teeth over the technical technique problems, and enjoy the entertainment (and the fact that, effectively, spirit rescue is on a mainstream TV series - two, if you add in the British "Afterlife").
  7. I've written previously about "living in chakras" (see here [8]), which is basically a concept based on "how much do you focus on the different levels of life/existence". I'm aware that I'm being affected by a negative frame of mind, caused by exhaustion as much as anything else, but it seems to me that people in this world are overly living in the Solar Plexus chakra, which is the third to most people, fourth to me, as there is too much focus on emotions, and not enough on other things like caring for the planet, spiritual life and honour. I think that is a key feature of this level of reality, but, in the interests of evolution, there is a need for balance with other aspects of life as well.
  8. And see here, here, here, here and here

This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: control, earthbound, emotions, grief, death, Castenada, shamanism, rescue, purpose, Vampires, possession, honour, chakras

First published: Friday 6th August, 2010

Last edited: Friday 6th August, 2010

Thursday, 5 August 2010

Post No. 141 - Peace conversion: a follow up

As I was driving to work today, I happened to hear a programme on the ABC Radio National programme "Lifematters" about a former skinhead, and his "conversion" away from that violent lifestyle, largely in response to becoming a parent (not, by his own admission, initially a very good one). The programme's details are:

Autobiography of a Recovering Skinhead
Frank Meeink was once one of the most notorious skinheads in America. But a lot has changed for Frank since the days he proudly wore a five inch Swastika tattoo on his neck. He tells his story in Autobiography of a Recovering Skinhead.

See here. for the programme link, here and here for a couple of my previous posts which are relevant, and here for Frank Meeink's website, including details of his book.

Love, light, hugs and blessings


This post's photo is yet to be posted

Tags: attitudes, maturity, violence, society, discrimination, forgiveness, evil, growth, leadership, life lessons, love, parenting, family, children, priorities, training,

First published: Thursday 5th August, 2010

Last edited: Thursday 5th August, 2010

Post No. 140 - Rapping (not the music)

A few nights ago, my partner had gone outside for a last smoke (she uses clove cigarettes for pain management - they're better than any arthritis drug or pain relief she's used) late at night, after I'd gone to bed. Nothing too unusual about that, except she fell asleep out there (AFTER the smoke). Now, our winter's don't involve snow here (although we do get snow in the hills and mountains), but they're still pretty chilly, and it's not too good to have to sleep out there (hence the annual fundraiser for homeless called "Winter Sleepout"). In short, I'm asleep inside, my partner is asleep outside and at some risk.

Solution? Guides - or spirits - create a rhythmic tapping sound which wakes me, I then notice "no partner" despite it being late, go outside and wake her before any harm is done.

Nice little story, and has the advantage of giving me a chance to let people know that "spirit rappings", beginning with the controversial Fox sisters, were one of the early features of the spiritism movement which led to spiritualism, Spiritualist Churches, Theosophy, Christian Science, etc - and, ultimately, contributed to the New Age movement.

The phenomenon itself is probably part of what is generally termed "physical mediumship", along with psychokinesis, direct voice, materialisation, levitation (as allegedly demonstrated by D. D. Home, for instance), etc. Other such manifestations I've encountered are lights and TVs themselves on or off (although that can possibly be explained by electrical effects) and balls of light.

All very interesting. More importantly, my partner is well :)

Love, light, hugs and blessings


This post's photo is yet to be posted.

Tags: about me, activism, homelessness, phenomena, rapping, mediumship, spiritualism, theosophy, New Age, history,

First published: Thursday 5th August, 2010

Last edited: Thursday 5th August, 2010