You found my old blog. Thanks for visiting! For my new writing, visit mikesententia.com.
This is a chapter from Part 1 of my book, where I explain my terms by describing common styles of magick. Feedback and questions are always welcome.
If you’re psychic, you know that your intuitions come from somewhere outside of yourself — from some external force that reads your thoughts and actions, and gives you intuitions and visions to help you. Most psychics I know don’t name that force. Some call it an impressive-sounding name like “The Universe.” I call it “ethereal software,” because using a pedestrian name makes it easier to explore how it works.
Psychic ethereal software (which I usually call “psychic software”) works pretty much like other ethereal software: It connects to your mind, listens for questions, and puts intuitions into your thoughts. While some ethereal software only connects to you when you do a specific ritual, psychic software stays connected to you 24/7. That’s how it can provide the continuous stream of intuitions.
From working with a bunch of psychics, I know that different psychics channel different ethereal software. And many psychics use multiple pieces of ethereal software, each one for different types of queries. That’s because most psychic software specializes in one field, and is often not programmed for others. One might be great with imminent physical danger, but doesn’t understand what money is, while another could guide you to romantic success, but has no concept of traffic accidents. If you’ve ever had trouble asking certain types of questions, this may be why.
I’ve helped several psychics get better intuitions by replacing their ethereal software with software better suited to their needs. We’ll cover that in Part 2, along with techniques to get clearer messages from any ethereal software.If you liked this post, consider visiting my current blog at mikesententia.com.
There is no “like” button so…..
I’ve been meaning to add one of those. Thanks :)
Edit: Wow, that was easy. Wish I’d done that a while ago.
I stumbled on an interesting idea about this. I’d been discussing with several friends with rather diverse viewpoints why it is that some people’s spells, prayers (etc. use your word here) are more effective than others. At least, they seem to be.
One response, from a Tibetan lama, was that the more “realized” a person is, the more their intention is pure (free of the distractions of grasping, aversion, lust for results, etc.). The more pure their intention, the more powerful their prayer or spell. Moreover, the more realized a person is, the more they can sense things through all time, so they are more likely to “just know” what to ask for. That is, if someone goes to a lama and asks them to do a ritual to help them get the love of a certain person, the enlightened lama will often be able to simply know whether that coupling is in line with (future) reality. They may, if less intuitively sharp, use divination tools to know. Then they can say “yes, you should be with that person, and I’ll do the ritual” or “No, that won’t work out well, but I’ll do a ritual to bring you the right person.”
From another perspective I stumbled on a Catholic Q&A where someone asked “why do some people’s prayers always seem to be answered, and others not?” The answer was that the more holy a person is (more in union with Divine Will), the more likely they will be inspired to pray by the Holy Spirit, which will guide them to pray for things that are meant to be, and then come to pass. Where a person who is still very entangled in the ego will tend to pray for things they think they want but aren’t necessarily part of God’s plan, so to speak, and thus won’t happen.
I thought it interesting that there are some similarities in the two explanations, and I personally think there seems to be some basic truth in them. But I post them here mostly just because it’s kind of anthropologically interesting to compare the explanations of various traditions.
Very cool idea. I don’t think those models are entirely accurate, (and it doesn’t sound like you do, either), but it’s a neat point to start from. Here’s what it reminded me of:
In my own practice, I’d say that this is the reason to ask for broad goals. Asking “guide me to find a good apartment” is probably a request the software can fulfill. Asking for a specific apartment (“I want the apartment at 123 main st”) is probably not something the software can fulfill, especially if you wouldn’t have a decent shot at that apartment without magick. And when you ask the software to do something it can’t handle, it will send you an error message (which most people will miss, unless they’re really tuned into the software.)
I think the insight from your stories is: First manifest for something very broad, like “what should I aim for to bring me happiness,” then do manifesting within that plan. This should keep you within the realm of what’s realistic and manifest-able, which I’ll call the operational definition of “keeping your manifesting within God’s plans.”
Mike, you say: “Asking for a specific apartment (“I want the apartment at 123 main st”) is probably not something the software can fulfill…”
I have heard numerous times in Tibetan Buddhist circles of someone in an instance like this to be recommended to pray for the current resident of 123 Main St. to get a better apartment more suited to their needs and wants and it working for the person whose heart was set on the specific apartment to then get the apartment. It even sort of worked for me once although I guess that could have been just chance as I did not do any large practice or ritual. I just asked a couple of times that if it were reasonable, I wanted that one particular office so could the person then occupying it be blessed with a better position. It felt more and different than chance and the person who had been occupying the office did indeed go on to a better position more in keeping with their needs and wants (they got an offer to join a new brand new prestigious hotel spa in Guam of all oddball unexpected (Gordon would say Black Swan) things!)
That’s fair. I was thinking of my apartment hunt, where I arrived in town and had 2 weeks to find a place. But you’re right: If you can loosen the time constraints, you can become much more precise about everything else.
I can no longer be sure of my timing, it was quite a while ago… but I think it was surprisingly fast… 2 weeks maybe? And once again, In all fairness, I cannot be sure it was my request, but it felt like it was.
Ona and some of your other readers might find this interesting:
Researchers who conducted a double blind randomized control trial on the effectiveness of prayer on wound healing using African bush babies as test subjects found that a prayer intervention had statistically significant effects on wound healing. Wounds in the primate group that received the prayer intervention were significantly reduced in size and wound healing factors were increased over the control group. The study reference is:The effect of intercessory prayer on wound healing in nonhuman primates. Altern Ther Health Med. 2006 Nov-Dec;12(6):42-8.
The use of nonhuman subjects eliminates the placebo effect.
Very cool. For anyone interested, the abstract is here:
And this is a “bush baby”:
I’m familiar with the US studies showing that prayer based on a person’s name is ineffective. I’m guessing this differs in a few ways:
-The person praying saw the prayee at some point (presumably before they knew if they would pray for the primate or not), where in the US version, they were only given the person’s first name and last initial. And any mage would tell you, seeing the person will make a much better means for targeting the healing.
-The people doing the praying probably grew up with capable mages in most communities. (I’m thinking of the prevalence of voodoo and witch doctors, though I’m getting nervous making assumptions like that, since I’m realizing my readers know far more about these things than I do. And that nervousness is probably a good thing, as it will keep me humble in what I assume.) Growing up around mages is pretty significant: It will connect most people to capable ethereal software, even if they don’t realize it or practice consciously themselves. And being connected to that ethereal software means there’s something to drive the actual magick when they start praying.
Anyone else see a potentially significant difference between the US study and this one? I’m really curious.
Lisa: Thanks for posting this.