Wednesday, January 31, 2007

On Using The Term "Fluffy"

י"ג בשבט תשס"ז

I think most occult and spiritual-religious traditions recognize that a certain amount of harsh testing [1] precedes true initiation into the occult mysteries, so to speak. Consequently, "fluffy" is typically a derogatory [2] term applied to a witch whose "constitution" has not been tested and "refined" in a manner consistent with whatever path she or he follows.

I personally do not believe that the level of "head knowledge" is always an accurate indicator of "fluffiness", as many very knowledgeable people can be "fluffy" and many rather unknowledgeable people can be rather "occult intense".

I also do not advocate calling other witches fluffy, even if a particular witch may be what I might consider fluffy. We all are charged to develop upon our chosen path and if we aren't fluffy in this lifetime, certainly (in my opinion) we were fluffy in a previous one.

Name-calling another witch fluffy is really more reflective of the witch who uses this term as opposed to the one the descriptor may be aimed against.


[1] I am referring to testing much like classic shamanic initiation, where one is "chosen" by the Divine and/or spirits for progression upon the occult or shamanic path. With respect to human-initiated persecution in the name of "testing", while persecution may be a tool of Divine-spiritual testing, the human persecutors are not excused of any wrong action they may initiate against a victim of their persecution. In other words, it is incorrect to think oneself above spiritual law and authorized to willfully persecute another in the name of occult testing.

[2] Sometimes the term may be generally and non-derogatorily applied to novice witches, but more often than not, it is meant in a derogatory manner. As with many terms of human language, context and intent count.

Technorati tags:

No comments:

Dare to be true to yourself.