Monday, 30 April 2012

Post No. 381 - I am ... a psychic artificer

In my psychic work, one of the things I most enjoy is inventing new things - things like Talismanic Tetrahedrons. I'm currently working on several designs for those, and a device for clearing negative energy away from people as they pass through a doorway.

I quite enjoy doing this sort of work, although it is a bit difficult when I don't have an area I can work in (waiting for last child to move out soon :) ). Anyway, the point is, I've realised I can use the term "psychic artificer" - although I probably have to have some care, as one definition of that is trickster (in the sense of con artist), and that is something I am not, and have no interest in being.

Love, light, hugs and blessings

(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear") 
May the world of commerce & business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.

Tags: about me, artificer, energy work,

First published: Manadagr, 30th April, 2012

Last edited: Monday, 30th April, 2012

Saturday, 28 April 2012

Post No. 380 - Naivete (inappropriateness)

One of the most dangerous things in the world now is, in my opinion, that of naiveté - specifically, people who think everything is fundamentally alright, so that they should behave as if everyone was already spiritually evolved. People aren't, and there are times and circumstances when that is no more appropriate than discussing University calculus with a kindergarten "student" (and hence the bracketted title - inappropriateness).

The trigger for me in writing this is the desire of some, in an open, public discussion (non-Wiccan/pagan) group I am associated with, to ensure that EVERYONE is able to come along safely - which is a matter of considerable, intense debate (including around the wording of an anti-violence policy, much of which came down to personal responsibility vs. collective responsibility) as a result of some incidents of ... "inappropriate" behaviour outside of group meetings (yes, you read that correctly: OUTSIDE of group meetings and activities).

I've come across this sort of problem (and other disruptive problems) in some groups, and the best analogy of the problem that I can give is to consider a person with a gun shooting other people (like the mass murdering criminal in Norway who is currently on trial).  When that is sort of behaviour is happening, unless you are someone with an INCREDIBLY powerful aura (and having read of some of the actions of people like Bishop DesmondTutu, or, even more notably, Mohandas K Gandhi, I know that such people do exist - and I'm NOT one of them :) [1] ), you need to take the gun off them, or stop them. (This happened literally in the case of a group promoting peace and communal living in northern New South Wales recently. They were threatened by a violent person, who wound up being shot by the police after an attempt to Taser the violent person failed. I think that group in NSW still needs to exist and continue working as it was - it's work obviously provoked the person [or any negative entities that were controlling him], which probably means that they are on the right track, but, by the same token, the police still need to exist in this world as it is now, although with appropriate reviews of training etc. The news report I read on this is here.)

The same sort of damage can happen on a psychic level - which is, in a sense, even worse, given that so few can see or accept the existence of non-physical energies. When you get to the desperate stages of dealing with a sociopath or psychopath (or two or three, and I have come across situations where groups have been disrupted by multiple such people - by the way, read the links: I'm not using these terms pejoratively, these are particular disorders), the problems at least become somewhat more clearly manifested. (I have heard advice that it is up to the group to confront such people: if the sociopath(s)/psychopath(s) do not have too much power, that MIGHT work ... IF the sociopath(s)/psychopath(s) do NOT have too much power ... ) Personally, this is where I think people with some psychic awareness and skill at dissolving negative psychic energy (in a hurry - which is exactly the sort of pressure-cooker skill one needs for rescueing uncooperatives) have a DUTY to get involved and do what they can. That's why I'm still there, but I will probably tootle off when the war is over ...(incidentally, I can count the number of people who know the energy work I am doing - which includes making a tetrahedron to protect the group - on less than the fingers of a hand: this sort of work is something you don't brag about, you just do it.)

Even more so, however, I think it is important for an element of realism (pragmatism?), and for ALL to acknowledge that not everyone can necessarily be part of a group. In the same way that some people, for the safety of themselves AND OTHERS are placed in mental health care institutions (well, they SHOULD be about mental health care, and not just managing awkward or inconvenient people - see the film "Nuts" with Barbra Streisand and Richard Dreyfuss for more on that), not everyone can be part of a group. I therefore disagree with the view that, if a group cannot ensure all who wish to be part of it cannot be safely part of it, the group as a whole is lesser. Some people (namely, the aforementioned psychopath(s)/sociopath(s) ) cannot be part of a group: they need to be isolated for the benefit of themselves (karmically) and others (health, wellbeing and safety - and human rights) UNTIL THEY REALLY CHANGE (which WILL eventually happen, but that might take several lifetimes of being isolated first).

Incidentally, when such people have been isolated, don't forget them: send them healing and, if you can, clear the negativity around them (not to do so gets into the head-in-the-sand problem I have written about elsewhere), but don't try to make the group function as if the world was an ideal place. It isn't; we are in the Kali Yuga, not the Golden Yuga, and there is a difference between noble idealism or a self-sacrificing example (e.g. Gandhi's hunger strikes) and foolishness or even stupidity (if I think of a good example, I'll add it).

I also have to point out that I have been a beneficiary from an attitude of inclusion. I actually left one of the groups I have concerns about a few years ago, and that led to a discussion which led to a few elders of the group talking to the person who had been discriminating against me and, ultimately, that person, despite their considerably greater public popularity than me, being told to leave (not just because of his behaviour towards me, but also his offensive behaviour towards others).

I also want to acknowledge the growth that I have seen in some people who are advocating the "include at all costs" approach. In the case of the example that led to me thinking of writing this post, at least one of the people concerned (who I am aware took the Bodhisattva Vow in a previous life, which is about making sure all humans attain enlightenment, so this person is being very true to their commitments) has made very considerable growth, and looks well able to handle the stresses and strains of running a meeting to resolve the internal split.

There's a point of balance between opposing views, and the balance point moves in response to the dynamics of the situation. In assessing that moving balance point, one of the things I definitely wish to avoid being is one of morons who, because they were lazy manipulators in a previous life and are overcompensating now, think they have to be hard, rather than realising that there is a win-win possibility :) One meets all types of people in a wide range of situations, and my training as a Priestess covered many problem people, but my training in the School of Life covered many more :)

As a final, more pragmatic note, this set of experiences is also possibly an argument in favour of closed groups, or defining/separating functions very clearly: part of these problems came about through mixing discussion groups and social events. 

As a final. final note, I can view all this from my favourite lens of maturity, and say that naiveté and other forms of inappropriate idealism are forms of immaturity. I find myself moving more and more towards pragmatism ... provided it IS genuinely pragmatism with teeth, as it were, and not a cop out to what is easiest in a situation! It is possible to be TOO pragmatic, and thereby sacrifice the moral idealism one SHOULD have - after all, the motivation of many of the people I have concerns about is a desire for GENUINE peace, and they have some advanced, brilliant teachings on this - and communication. So ... pragmatism vs. idealism ... ah that old thing of balance, and dynamic balance at that, eh? :)

And now, a few links. Enjoy, and THINK

Love, light, hugs and blessings

(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear") 
May the world of commerce and business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.

  1. In Marco Pallis' book "Peaks and Lamas", first published in 1939, republished in 2004 by Shoemaker & Hoard, ISBN 978-1593760588 (my copy is older, from a lovely, packed-to-the-rafters-with-books second-hand bookshop) there is a discussion about the Tibetan view that, if one is biten by a dog or attacked by a wild beast, it is because one did not have - and I'm simplifying and using my words here - a strong aura (or, you could say, you lacked in what they would describe as "authentic presence").

Tags: attitudes, group dynamics, immaturity, maturity, peace, self defence, society, violence,

First published: Laugadagr, 28th April, 2012

Last edited: Saturday, 28th April, 2012

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Post No. 379 - Flexibility and strategy, and reading

I did a house clearing yesterday: nothing unusual about that, except that it was the first time my partner came along. She did very well, too: at one stage, when one of the entities being cleared started to block one technique my partner was using to generate positive energy, she "invented" a new technique on the spot. That sort of flexibility and adaptation is the hallmark of a great Spirit Rescuer in the making :)

On that, there are a few strategic approaches to doing this sort of work. As I see it, the options are:
  • clear negative energy and then generate positive energy (how I used to mostly work when I started)
  • generate positive energy and then clear the negative (which I consider better);
  • alternate between the two (which is what we did for the clearing yesterday); or
  • do both at the same time (which takes a fair bit of experience and practice).
One thing I never do is just clear negative energy: that can leave a vacuum, and doesn't do enough to prevent entities coming back in.

It can also be absolutely invaluable when clearing an uncooperative (which is what we were doing) to be able to identity the specifics of negativity - for instance, is the opposition coming from entities behind the uncooperative, a negative link or a thought form (it is rarely due solely to personality, and even then, there will frequently be some form of externalisation of the negativity in the person's aura which can be cleared if identified)? Whatever it is, use a technique for clearing that is relevant to the specific item (refer to my initial workshop notes in the very first posts (here and here) when I launched this blog for more).
And now, some reading links.
and from "The Age"

Enjoy :) ... and think :D

Love, light, hugs and blessings

(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear")
May the world of commerce & business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.

Tags: about me, deities, discrimination, environment, negative energy, rescue, society

First published: Thorsdagr, 26th April, 2012

Last edited: Thursday, 26th April, 2012

Friday, 20 April 2012

Post No. 378 - Checking

One of the aspects of psychic work that I consider an absolute, utter BASIC, is that of checking (along with grounding, shielding, flaming, etc). This crops up at such basic levels as ... checking that you are actually protected when you ask for it ... checking that you are actually communicating with BPF Guides ... and making sure you are finished.

Making sure one has finished, you ask? (Well, I hope you do - I'll run with it anyway.) Yes, finished.

This most commonly crops up in my life when I am checking with my BPF Guides (after checking that they are who they claim to be!) under a protected environment (which I have checked) whether or not I have finished giving someone the healing they are meant to have. This usually crops up at the spiritualist place I go to, and I am always finishing later than others, I suspect partly because I don't operate to a clock, I operate to the needs of whoever I am working on.

It also crops up in the context of doing things like charging (consecrating) a tetrahedron. My preference is to do that work with someone independently checking that I have actually done all that I should.

It is fairly easy to do. I ask someone, usually my partner, to ask their BPF Guides for an impression of a milk bottle (a glass bottle, for you young 'uns who don't know what that is) and give an impression of how much of the work to be done has actually been done by showing how full the bottle is: if it is half full, I have done half the work; if it is three-quarters full, I have done three-quarters of the work. If we all agree it is full, then - and only then - we have finished.

This is a technique I learned when doing rescue of uncooperatives [1]. If you're doing that sort of work, the last thing you can afford to EVER do is allow an entity to defeat you, and that sends out signal that if an entity shows strength "X" or persistence "Y", you will be beaten.

Hence, we had some extraordinarily long nights, but we did our work. These days, I tend to check before I start how much pre-weakening and other measures I can do to shorten the time (I have family and other commitments). "Hey BPF Guide, if I do 4 hours of clearing on Target Z tomorrow, how much will the 2 hours and 30 minutes required the day after to actually rescue Target Z be reduced by? ... 2 hours and 5 minutes? Great!" Sound militaristic? It is, and it needs to be, when you're working on dangerous and strong entities who are actively seeking to psychically enslave and torment others.

You, Dear Reader, don't have to do anything so demanding to get value from checking, however.

So, please do actually CHECK.

PS - I forgot to mention one aspect of checking which came up in a rune reading I gave last night: other forms of checking, specifically, around yes/no questions. The context was whether or not I should pass on one particular aspect of an interpretation which could be upsetting for my client (I don't just pass on everything I receive without question: I feel perfectly free to challenge my BPF Guides to clarify/explain things further). So, I asked my client and, in the end, two other people to get from their BPF Guides (I set up the protection for them) an impression of either a purple giraffe or a blue pumpkin: one symbol meant yes, I should pass that aspect of the interpretation on, the other meant I shouldn't. By avoiding "yes" or "no", I avoid the bias that many people have towards "yes" (particularly if people are interested in spirituality, they often have a tendency to want to be "nice", and that often biases them towards saying "yes"; I also avoid using green and red for people in developed countries, as traffic lights have green for go and red for stop, and the same sort of bias can come through). Naturally, I didn't tell an of these people what the question was until they had answered, and I also specified for the two who in one room together that, when they had an answer, they stated that they had an answer, but they didn't say what it was until both had received an answer - which prevents those who get ansers faster from influencing those who are slower psychically, possibly owing to less experience.

There are some possibly useful flow charts on this at my regression-rescue manual site: see the asking yes/no questions and making decisions charts towards the end of this post.

Love, light, hugs and blessings

(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear")
May the world of commerce & business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.

  1. See, also here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and other posts

Tags: checking, energy work, healing, rescue

First published: Frysdagr, 20th April, 2012

Last edited: Saturday, 21st April, 2012 (added the PS)

Post No. 377 - A new spiritual ambition

Well, we've got another darn high sitting around, giving the sort of weather most people love and I hate, and more high pressure (I wonder if that is part of why I hate summery weather?). As I'm stewing away, I happened to cogitate upon Maitreya, the future Buddha also known - in some sources I've read - as the Laughing Buddha. Hmmm. If there can be a laughing Buddha in a million years or so, when I might be ready to try dipping my toes back into Buddhism (I'll get a leave of absence from my Patron Deities - should have just about earned one by then :) ), so I think I will have a go at being ... the future Buddha of Grumpiness. Ta daaaaa.

More seriously, why is it "we" expect spiritually caring people to always be pleasant, warm and effusive? I do quite genuinely consider myself to be bad-tempered: it's just that I've been aware of it and working at managing that since I was 10. A couple of years later I started on an affirmation ("I will be kind, gentle and generous") that is a lifelong tool (I work, incidentally, at keeping whatever I consider my strengths to be as well as working on [reducing!] my faults and weaknesses: I'm not so foolish as to presume that my good points will always be with me from incarnation to incarnation ... especially if I take them for granted). The affirmation may well be working, as I had a reading last weekend while at our local spiritualist mob which started by commenting on me having a lot of compassion. Well, yeeees, perhaps, but ... when I'm driving, I have established a habit of being courteous - letting other drivers in etc. I might, however, grumble about it - e.g. "go on, get in before someone runs into you". It's not an active piece of negativity, but it's still grumbling, whether as a cover or what I don't know (and don't care, should anyone try to presume to tell me why).

It all did, however, combine to get me thinking about pleasantness vs. genuine caring. I have known too many people who put on a facade of niceness, and then stab you in the back. On the other hand, some of the gurus in Tibet have behaved appallingly towards their students - look up Mila Repa and what he endured under his guru Marpa, for instance. At one point, when building a house for Marpa (which Mila Repa built, then had to pull down bit by bit, then re-build), Mila Repa was getting sores on his back from carrying stones: Marpa told him to put a felt cloth on his back which had holes cut in it for the sores so he could keep on carrying stones.

There are other stories I have encountered about gurus in "the East". One more: a man went to a guru and begged to become a student of the guru, claiming that life had no meaning and he would jump off a cliff if he couldn't be the guru's student. The guru shrugged indifferently, and said "jump, then". The man jumped, died, and was brought back to life by the guru, who - according to the story (I think I read it in Paramhansa Yogananda's book "Autobiography of a Yogi"), was testing whether the man meant what he said, or was being a flippant manipulator (my words).

Maybe some of what seems to be unpleasantness is actually just testing us, or drawing out our potential. Certainly being at school was tough at time, and I was in absolute terror at the thought of some of the exams, for instance, a feeling which I have had at other times in this life.

Hmmmmm ....

Well, I think I'll end now with ... Christmas? Bah! Humbug!

Love, light, hugs and blessings

The Future Buddha of Grumpiness

May the world of commerce & business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.

Tags: attitudes, Buddhism, Hindiusm, presumption, society

First published: Frysdagr, 20th April, 2012

Last edited: Friday, 20th April, 2012

Saturday, 14 April 2012

Post No. 376 - Four Million Leaky Auras and other Stuff

I recently started writing a series of short stories under the general heading "Four Million Leaky Auras", which is a term I have used about living in Melbourne to show the problems for psychics and other sensitives that go with living in cities (based partly on my experiences recently, but also when I moved 1,000 km away from the parental home to Brisbane to attend uni in my late teens). Well, in a reply to a recent "Question of the Week" on the Spirit Rescuers website about empaths, I got to launch the expression publicly. That's not why I am writing about that now: what I DO want to direct people's attention to, is a later reply, by someone else from Victoria, someone who writes a lot of common sense. The later reply expanded on what I had touched upon, and outlined the problems beautifully. Have a look:
(The reply I am referring to is the one by Ama - my apologies: I though the link was for that particular answer only. I've found this woman has a website; it's not bad, although too Christian-flavoured for me [although she is aware of some pagan stuff, and seems respectful], and she is wrong in her interpretation of nirvana - which is, I think, the only error I'm aware of in her website [] and her many excellent answers and comments on Spirit Rescuers. Definitely someone worth contacting if you need help, and are OK with archangels :) , but also, have a look at her website - there's some excellent stuff on it, including a simple way of doing rescue. Some of her stories remind me of events from my life, actually ... such as the time I did a rescue of a spirit in a house I lived in, and had the spirit come back as an occasional visitor after some time. All the stories, such as the angry indigenous man, are worth reading [I haven't got through all of them myself yet, mind,] )

As with this person, we would like to move out of the city. Sigh ... Incidentally, I've had another melt down after a week of atmospheric pressure over 1,030 hPa: that really affects me, but there isn't much I can do to avoid living under those circumstances so I will just have to work out to cope. (I thought I had posted on that before, but I cannot find anything, so I will state here that my theory is that I - not necessarily anyone else - seem to be more prone to stress when the atmospheric pressure exceeds around 1,020 to 1,025 hPa.) One thing that has helped me is an email I get regularly about UFOs: a lot of times this is unimpressive, particularly when it contains conspiracy theory rubbish, but the last week had some good, probably genuine (unexciting) sightings (along with some of the more dubious), but it gave me hope that someone "out there", someone like "The Nine" written of in "Briefing for the Landing on Planet Earth" by Stuart Holroyd, is looking out for this planet - to an extent. The planet is, after all, a school, so it us lot who are meant to make it a better place, although we can get the help from Higher Selves, Goddess, etc.

Now, I'd now like to write about two things I noticed/experienced recently, which appear to be unconnected, but actually are:
(1) a comment I came across that reading about negative matters affects us, and
(2) a recent workshop about safety and an anti-violence policy.

Effectively, the debate in the workshop boiled down (in my words) to laissez-faire vs. interventionism. The workshop had been convened as I, and others, had left the committee because of health problems (and for other reasons) brought about by the stress of dealing with situations which had led to the formulation of the anti-violence policy. Now, there is quite probably a need for greater individual responsibility, as argued by the laissez-faire mob, but this view is limited as it sees violence only when it is direct and obvious, and misses the effect of violence from other arenas (I can't say too much more than that). It also misses the very important point that, even if one isn't directly affected, one is affected by violence elsewhere - we are all connected, and, just as the stress of city life drags down every living being on the planet, so too does the experience of all those who lack adequate food, water, shelter, and other basics of civilised life.

Furthermore, if one has one's head in the sand over such matters, that wilful blindness will adversely affect oneself, including by creating negative karma arising from acts of omission - it's a little like turning the other way when walking past someone who is drowning.

All of that argues in favour of interventionism .. so, which is correct?

Answer: both.

In much the same way that some politicians have started combining social inclusion/progressiveness with "responsible" economic policies (rather than the old "you can manage the economy or you be socially progressive but not both" attitude), so too is it possible to combine almost any set of opposing polarities. In many cases, it is contextual - hence, for instance, the person who lacks a sense of personal responsibility needs to have that encouraged, whereas the harder-nosed person arguing for personal responsibility needs to learn a softer, gentler, more encouraging and inclusive approach. So ... to be a little tongue-in-cheek, if you've annoyed everyone on both sides of spectrum, maybe you're doing it right! :)

That is a simplification: there are, in my experience, points of dynamic balance in all such cases. Another way to look at it is, perhaps we can the equivalent of bisexual/polyamorous in other areas of life, and not have to choose between one thing or another.

Now, moving on from that little "rave", I was part of a discussion recently about life after teenagers. Having been there, done that, and survived getting young people to the stage where they move out (and being currently involved in supporting my partner as she does the same), I can say that, yes, there is life after teenagers.

In all seriousness, it may well take a couple of years for parents to heal from the trauma that can go with trying to guide teenagers into adulthood, part of which could be - if you have not been careful to watch your ethics as you raise your (or others) children - coming to terms with any breaches of ethical behaviour you may have "allowed yourself" to be provoked into (sounds clear cut written like that, doesn't it? Shame that doesn't reveal the wearing grind of life, day in, day out, with an angsty young apprentice adult ... ). No-one else can help you there (especially not any remorse from the ex-teenager concerned: too little, too late, and completely irrelevant), and it has to be viewed as a growth exercise.

Also, learning to let go and adjust to can be an issue for some parents. As my partner says, parents are taught to hold on and love and nurture and cherish from the start of life ... but they aren't taught how to let go and adapt to the new circumstances of adult offspring ...

Talking about failing to let go, I have had a reluctance to join in the rush to be connected that extends back through all my adult life. When I first graduated from University and move back to Mackay, I initially refused to have a television or phone (although I did have something to play music on - cassettes). Now, I have mobile phone that is an old clunker: it can take photos, but I only want it for texting and - radical idea - making phone calls. I also choose very deliberately not to be on social media for a range of reasons, including concerns about privacy issues, but above all, concerns about human beings:
(a) mistaking the sorts of interactions that can happen for friendship when they aren't (although I am very aware that some connections are deep and meaningful, and some people with limited mobility find being online invaluable); and
(b) becoming addicted to updating status and sharing trivial details to an extent that consumes an inordinate amount of time, which I consider a MAJOR problem with these things.

However, a large part of the reduced physical contact for me is allowing myself to be open to communication from the world of spirit.

Finally, more reading. I would like to include another excellent article from Margot Cairnes (see here for more about this author, who I hold in high regard) in this list, but there's no way for people to get it unless you can get my engineering magazine, Engineers Australia (my version is from the civil engineering college). So, I'll content myself with re-posting a link to a post of mine on competitiveness vs. competition, and suggesting you research the "Occupy" movement.

Enjoy - and think, and may the world of commerce & business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.

Love, light, hugs and blessings

(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear")

Tags: about me, attitudes, empathy, family, negativity, sensitivity, society,

First published: Laugadagr, 14th April, 2012

Last edited: Wednesday, 18th April, 2012 - added explanation as to which post on Spirit Rescuers I was referring to