A Short Q&A About Conjuring Terms

What are the definitions for the following – Conjuring, Binding, Attachments? 

Well, first off, obviously, conjuring and binding are two totally different things – although you cannot really have a binding that isn’t conjured, if you’re talking entities or spirits.

Conjuring, essentially, is a ritual of sorts where the conjurer positions themselves somehow at an in-between space and CALLS… and spirits or entities of their desired type come to them (hopefully – they might not come, or the conjurer might get the wrong species or be tricked – this is where training and sharp wits come in), and then the conjurer pulls them through in some manner to this realm, to a specific location, for a specific purpose. Whether a conjurer negotiates with an entity or spirit prior to bringing them here, or once they are here, depends on their process (their ritual) and what kind of work they have planned for the entity or spirit. I generally like to settle contract details before I pull them through, but there are other styles of conjuration where you pull them through and then settle the details, and if you can’t settle on anything, then you dismiss them and try again.

Binding, on the other hand, is where you actually magickally suck an image/feeling/taste/whatever of the essence of a spell or spirit into a vessel, thus creating a bond between the object or person, and the entity, spirit, or spell. This object then begins to radiate the energy of that essence, which allows the keeper of the object to more easily tune into the spirit, entity, or spell, and allows for auric adaptation to that energy. In other words, the binding draws energy to itself, alters the energy to mimic that which it represents, and pours it back into the keeper.

So, ok, what’s an attachment, then? 

Attachment is where the entity or spirit is the one who creates the bond… the bond is not as sound, it’s not as strong, and the flow of communication isn’t as vibrant. An attachment can be broken, whereas a binding is often based, at least with spirits and entities, on contracts that cannot be broken except when specific conditions are met… Binding is like creating two phones that can only call each other. Everyone can have lots of phones, if they like, but each “line” is to only one pairing. Attachment, on the other hand, happens all the time… everytime you touch something, you exchange a bit of your energy with that object, but you don’t ever have to think about it ever again… essentially, the energy exchange is much less meaningful than a binding exchange – anyone can attach to anything, and just as easily detach from anything, at any time. Binding, because of contracts and because of purposeful essence mimicry and exchange, is far more deeply wedded, and thus more permanent and well.. binding. ;)

Does conjuring require a specific portal for each spirit or entity? 

Yes and no – when I conjure anything but the cecaelia, I often get multiples showing up and need to wade through them all and decide which I keep and which I don’t… but it’s like a portal for one because my portal to conjure through is specific at the time of conjure to that KIND of entity – however, I do not have to open a new portal for every single entity of that type. I DO have to close a portal and open a new one to get a different kind of entity.

So what’s the deal with unbound spirits and entities? 

Unbounds are, in a sense, just visiting. They randomly float through on various planes, sometimes using portals, sometimes staying on their own layer – but as a person adapts to sensing the unseen worlds around them, they become more and more aware of those other layers and the amount of travel going on.

Can an unbound be bound without being conjured? 

Conjuration actually pulls an entity or spirit through to this layer temporarily, specifically for a purpose… in this case, to create a contract spell that allows the spirit or entity a stronger connection to this plane through two possible mediums… a relationship with a human, and/or a vessel that they can draw energy from to maintain that presence. Because binding uses essences imprinted onto a vessel, and that process is a form of conjuration, it isn’t possible to bind without there being a kind of conjuration going on.

Does that mean that when I use a spelled tool that binds for me, I’m conjuring? 

Well, yes and no. Technically speaking, conjuration is occurring, but also technically speaking, you’re not the conjurer, because you aren’t the one who’s actually in charge of the process – you’re using a tool because you don’t know how to do it properly on your own. That means that while you are conjuring, you are not, per se, a conjurer.

Why use vessels? I mean, even using people as vessels – if the energy is always there, why bother? 

Honestly? It’s purely convenience and psychological assistance.

It’s quite true that a vessel with a binding on it is not the spell or spirit or entity, nor is it the home of the spirit, spell, or entity… but it IS a marker – a useful place for energy to collect in a certain manner and then be forwarded to both ends of the bonded – spirit/spell/entity, and keeper. In other words, vessels are also an easy method of holding, in order to empower, either the effects of a spell, or an image of a contract and the essence of the being under contract, and thus they are the “phone.” With spirits or entities specifically, the contract exists, the vessel is a representation of the existing contract… however, a vessel is not necessary for the contract to exist – it’s merely a convenient place for energy to collect and be channeled to both the spirit/entity/spell and the keeper. Vessels are also a constant reminder of those energy patterns – they are a physical representation of a keeper’s relationship with the spirit, entity, or spell.

Why do I keep having to recharge my vessels if the spirits or entities aren’t in them? Why are there charging spells? 

The reason you keep having to recharge your bindings is because you’re actually charging the contract spell that allows the spirit or entity to draw on enough energy to be more… “here” than “there.” The more a spell’s energy is drawn on, and the more powerful the pull on those energies, the more frequently an item must be charged. A charging spell, bound to the spells on a vessel, charges itself and any other spells, which means you no longer have to charge it – it instead charges itself.

So, can a binding ever get low enough on energy that the contract is void? 

No, a binding cannot ever get low enough on energy for the contract to become void. The contract is based on a timeframe, or other specific terms of agreement between conjurer and spirit/entity, such as a task being completed… The symbol of that contract, and the spell of it, fading, does not negate the contract itself. The spell might fade from your awareness and experiences may dry up, but once a spell is laid into an object, no matter how fizzled out the spell becomes, it’s still there. Until it breaks according to the rules of the contract, the spell will remain. Once the spell breaks, that’s a different story… Charging helps refresh the spell to give the spirit or entity more vital force to be present with… it doesn’t have any actual effect or lack of effect on the contract.

What are the usual terms of a contract?

Contracts are usually until the ending of a task, or if a conjured entity or spirit is agreeing to enter into a Keeping relationship, either the death of the Keeper, or until the spirit/entity and Keeper BOTH agree to an alteration of the contract.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.