This article is a collection of (slightly cheeky) responses to common criticisms of soulbonding from other occultists, spiritworkers and magicians. In fact, if you’re not already part of occult and magical communities, parts of it might make no sense to you.
Some of this isn’t meant to be taken too seriously, either way. I’m not arguing against the traditions mentioned, per se. I’ve got few actual objections against things like Enochian magic, Wicca, Goetia, etc, as long as they’re understood within their own context. Some are much more “useful” than soulbonding if your goal is to achieve practical magical results.
Regardless, I just find it amusing that people who talk to angels, demons, goddesses, and elves regularly look down their nose at folks for daring to bring modern media into the equation.
Orobas, Prince of Hell? Certainly, plenty of magicians form a partnership with him. A fictional character, though? Don’t be silly! What a ridiculous idea.
Over the years, I’ve come to conclude that the major objection occultists have to pop culture magic in general (including soulbonding) is the matter of optics. They just think it looks bad in front of the “mundanes.” It’s less ancient. There’s fewer impressive tomes. It comes across chaotic and disjointed, and can be difficult to understand. It makes mage-types look a bit unhinged.
It’s hard to care, though. I know that I’m being judged for merely believing in magic and spirits. I feel like I’m more aware of that than most magical practitioners. I’m not worried about appearing (more) unhinged because my particular flavor of magic is less fancy, less posh, and less historical.
I've seen mages argue that of course Frodo Baggins couldn't be seen as a spiritual entity; he's a fictional character. Powerless. Nevertheless, King Such-and-Such ruling over whatever number of demon spirits (who rule over smaller legions on their own!) is in fact real (because he shows up in the Goetia, which is several centuries older than Lord of the Rings).
Those several centuries, in the grand scheme of human history, are incredibly important, apparently. And don’t forget the mishmash of rewrites and bad Hebrew over the years by random wizardly sorts. There, we’ve got the dividing line between real and unreal, right? In some respects, it really does seem like some occultists believe that spirits described in lore, grimoires, etc, are the only spirits that exist.
Yeah, no. I’m not buying that. What it really comes down to? Some magicians are salty because their unseen friends are more posh than mine. That’s it. Angels? Demons? The Fair Folk? Why, sure, sounds perfectly real! Safe, too, despite all lore to the contrary.
If you bring the main character of a comic book into your workings, or connect with the forces inherent in a science fiction fandom, the pearl-clutching begins. Clearly, you’ve lost your mind! Didn’t you know fictional characters aren’t real? Good heavens, how can you believe such things? Didn't you know all spirits must be tested (by seeing if they're mentioned by various old white dudes?
It doesn’t really make much sense, does it? The best explanation I got for this was from a channer mage I knew for a while. He said something to the effect of “If you say you talk to archangels, people will want to hear more, but if you babble about how waifus are real, they’re going to avoid you.”
Sure, he thought he was making a point, but actually, he said the quiet part out loud. It’s all about optics. Occultists know our beliefs are already fringe and desperately scared of looking even more cringe. Many take themselves far too seriously.
Do you really think the first human beings to develop mythology didn’t feel similarly about the stories they were telling? It’s possible they witnessed the awe-inspiring events of (for example) the Genesis and the Greek myths first hand in some strange fashion, but that seems terribly unlikely.
That doesn’t mean they were “making them up” necessarily or that they were “channeling higher (or lower) forces.” In my opinion, humans just have the capacity to tap into something (the spirit world) and shape what flows out in the image of our own imagination at times.
You might have a different perspective on how this all works, and that’s perfectly fine. None of us can be absolutely certain, insofar as we’re messy incarnate beings ourselves, limited by our senses.
It really does seem to me that human folklore and legend appears, devotion follows, as does the sheer personality and power of the entities involved. We see this in spades with many mainstream religions. Some, of course, follow a rough historical record, but most include rich folklore bordering on fiction.
Let’s not forget neopaganism and Wicca too, of course. Hundreds of thousands of people probably would consider themselves some sort of “Wiccan witch.” This is independent of the fact that Gardner invented said religion almost out of whole cloth in the mid-20th century, complete with an elaborate mythology mostly of his own making.
Many, many Wiccans are quite aware of this fact, and understand Wicca on a different level than the literal, but it doesn’t change Gardner’s initial talespinning.
More people know and care about Luke Skywalker than King Asmodeus and his legions of whoever, or Madimi, I promise you that.
Modern media has produced situations of near-religious devotion on the part of fans at times, and we’ve all seen it. Sometimes, when I mention this (undeniable) truth, magicians will argue that only belief rather than simple devotion empowers a spirit. I find this doubtful - things tend to exist without one believing in them. They may need sustenance but that usually needn’t take the form of raw, simple belief.
Devotion doesn’t always require belief, right? On some levels, that’s true, yes. It depends on how one defines devotion, but I definitely see some sort of devotion towards fictional characters in mass media, in a way that has supplanted existing folkloric traditions almost completely.
It’s also important to remember that belief can take different forms. To internalize the message of a character, of a work of art, may in fact be to submit to its reality on some level.
You might disagree. Either way, I believe spirits can and do exist independent of human belief, and can be fed by mere devotion in various forms. I’ve said before I consider spirits (including soulbonds) to be living, and I do. They may be in some way our initial creations, but this doesn’t make them less autonomous beings. If our belief were their sustenance, this wouldn’t be possible. Apologies, but this is just how I see it.
All spiritual paths have this potential. Soulbonding isn’t even a spiritual path. It’s a practice. Any cult or group could, in theory, take advantage of spiritwork or a belief in it. Soulbonding is neither unique nor immune, but this doesn’t invalidate spiritwork as such, nor soulbonding as a paradigm for it.
A cause and effect relationship doesn’t really exist. If anything, a relationship exists between soulbonding and a couple notorious people who have received publicity over the past twenty-five years. Their actions cannot be condoned.
Once again, soulbonding is a practice, though. It is not a belief system, and different soulbonders incorporate their soulbonding into their existing beliefs in different ways. If those beliefs lend themselves towards cult-like behaviors, that’s what will happen.
Throughout history, plenty of channelers and spiritworkers (or those claiming to be such) have created cults. It’s not something unique to soulbonding as a phenomena or type of spiritwork. If anything, the decentralized nature of soulbonding as a practice tends to lend itself away from cult formation.
No one’s in charge of your soulbonding, nor should they be. You’ve more options to exit situations involving dangerous individuals. In situations like secret societies, covens, and magical orders where occult techniques are “taught” in a strict, regimented way, abuse is much easier to inflict.
More so than John Dee and Edward Kelley deciding Madimi desperately wanted them to swap wives? Seriously?
For you newcomers to the occult, yes, that was a real thing that happened during the formation of “Enochian magic.” You can read more about it via the link above (to Wikipedia, but it’s a good summary).
Enochian magic is still practiced and taken quite seriously today, though. Yes, many occultists still spend time garbling about how the wife-swapping makes perfect sense and wasn’t just Kelley trying to score a threesome and put an end to his torturous chapel perilous experiences under Dee’s control.
In all honesty, though, even outside of egregious situations like that, spiritwork was often actually performed for what we’d call “trivial” reasons. These could include something as simple as seeking luck in gambling. They, admittedly, rarely included befriending the spirit, at least in a “ritual” context.
It did happen, however, and often outside the auspices of ritual. Spiritwork historically wasn’t a solemn affair trapped in carefully-crafted circles. People drank and ate with spirits and honored them in casual ways. People did befriend them. Relationships were more than just transactional exchanges where a demon or other spirit is treated like a contractor.
We see this in folklore throughout the world, where offerings are left (often rather unceremoniously) for spirits, spirits are addressed informally, and even build strong bonds with practitioners as familiars and other helpers.
It’s unfortunate, but I’ve seen this argument made against all spiritwork - not just soulbonding, and not just channeling.
It’s ridiculous and reeks of performative sensitivity. I literally heard this, or something similar, several times, though. At least sometimes people saying this tack on an “unless you come from a closed culture that practices it!” nonsensical qualifier. It’s not a wash either way.
Traditions of “positive possession” (also known in the modern era as channeling) are rather common throughout the whole of human history in most cultures. They’re seen in closed and open cultures, oathbound lineages, folklore, and oral traditions. They are not limited to the New Age movement nor us (rather postmodern) soulbonders.
Trying to simply say “well it’s a bad thing in the (Christianized) West, so only non-Westerners can do it!“ plays directly into orientalist “mystical” stereotypes. It’s really not that far from saying something like “oh, those noble savages have powers we don’t understand!”
The truth is, even in the “Christianized West,” traditions of channeling, intense communion with, and invoking spirits aren’t at all uncommon. These can be hard to recognize, because they’re often vaguely Christianized themselves, but from my perspective are undeniably spiritwork. You see this in many forms, from folk venerations of saints to consorting with faerie lovers.
Stories of stereotypical Catholic-coded “exorcisms” (and equally-brutal Protestant equivalents) are sometimes true, but that’s hardly the end of the story when it comes to spirit interaction in the West.
Define “enlightenment” in your own terms, and explain to me why I ought to be seeking it. Explain to me why joy alone can’t be a goal within the occult.
Magic is used to meet other needs - the experience of beauty in various forms is no different. And soulbonding is a beautiful thing sometimes. A lot of people just find the idea of recreation as a goal within the occult untenable because it makes them sound less-serious, less-spiritual.
They fear being seen as less spiritual, because they believe the spiritual aspect of their belief (in magic in particular) gives it legitimacy. This is, of course, disingenuous. If you really believe in magic, you needn’t be on a constant spiritual quest to convince yourself of it, and should, rather, be practicing magic.
It also depends on how one defines spirituality, and, of course, “enlightenment,” as I said. If you want to meet your own needs, seeking enjoyment is part of that, and can be part of any spiritual journey. It doesn’t have to be, though. I’ve thrown away all notions of spiritual hierarchy and concluded we’re all here to enjoy ourselves, not “attain” a distant goal.
You might feel differently about yourself, but I doubt that invalidates my perspective. It doesn’t, contrary to what you think, make magic, occultism or alternative spirituality “look bad” (trust me, we already look terribly cringe). It doesn’t affect you in any way.