This may or may not be a familiar term for you. It is certainly not a topic that is talked about much, and is written about even less. I can count on one hand the number of authors I have found that mention it, and their definition of which is something that may vary depending on the author. This topic ties in with animism as well as totem animals and animal guides, all of which I have covered in a previous post. Many cultures have spiritual practices that involve animals that guide followers in life or refer to key parts of the persons personality. Even non-spiritual people use animal references to describe people, their personalities and habits, or physical features. Many cultures see the connection between modern humans and our more primal animalistic ancestors. A time when where we were not so disconnected from nature, and we knew our place within the natural cycles.
My first purchase on this topic was a traditional tarot by Siolo Thompson called The Otherkin Tarot. Siolo basically defined otherkin as those creatures that were part human part animal or animals that acted like humans/had human characteristics. So, the first part of the definition would include creatures of myth and legend like mermaids, centaurs, and satyrs. These creatures, described in many myths, also fall into the more commonly used category of cryptid. The second category in that definition would include some our beloved childhood characters like Peter Rabbit, or Winnie the Pooh and friends, or the lovable characters from movies such as Zootopia. That particular tarot deck comes with a large companion book that covers the basics of otherkin from this perspective. It has some nice artwork as well.
The second definition for otherkin has a more magical purpose. It has been used to define those that feel they have a special connection to the animal kingdom, or a certain animal in particular. Under this definition, the connection made with the animal counterpart is done through trance work. This is a shamanistic-type magical working. The practitioner connects with the spirit or essence of the animal in question on the spiritual plane or by channeling them so as to make a personal connection with them. They may do this for a number of reasons. They may be trying to channel certain prominent characteristics they feel they lack that they would like to apply to their own lives, enhance personal qualities they already have, channel that energy/essence for healing, ask for guidance, or even just connect better with nature or the spiritual plane. The practitioner could have a specific animal they connect with, or the animal could vary depending on the needs of the practitioner. I have read of some practitioners using bones, skins, or other animal parts in their ceremonies, some use certain herbs or other tools, and others use no tools at all. The way the animal spirit/essence is invoked/evoked is personal to the practitioner. I have had this definition of otherkin described under another term; therianthropy. This term was used more acutely as the person believing they are, in spirit/essence, that animal. It was described in conjunction with shapeshifting, but both of these terms used in this magical context, share many similarities. Regardless of the term used, both describe workings that use trance work, connection with spirit animal/essence, and a deep connection with our own animal nature.
One difference I have only found one author write about, puts vampires in the same category as otherkin. In this case they are referring to the vampire as something non-human with human characteristics. Which, I guess, could technically be true, but I don’t agree with this categorization myself. I will not go into vampires in this post, though I will likely make one in the future.
Have you ever heard the term otherkin before? How would you define it? Have you channeled or reached out to animal spirit for guidance? Would you?
 
 
*If you would like to read more on this topic, I would highly recommend anything written by Lupa, and if you want to know more about the specific magical workings of otherkin practitioners, I would recommend the book called The Book of Satyr Magick by LotusWulf Satryrhorn.

​Over the centuries there are certain truths that witches and other spiritually oriented people have sort of taken for granted. Knowledge that has been handed down; taught to future generations. Wisdom gained through the connection and communication with nature and the universe. Things that could not, until recently, been proven by science. As a society people tend to put more weight behind what can be proven in a lab than the knowledge that was passed down. Historically, before something is “proven” by whatever the current scientific methods are available, that “knowledge” is discredited, and called into doubt, even when positive results are obtained by practitioners time and time again.
One of the biggest areas that “science” has cast doubt on is herbal medicine. People all over the world have been using plants to heal themselves and others dating back at least 60,000 years. A good example of this is white willow bark. This can be used as a natural pain medicine, and was the basis for our modern aspirin. The salicin in the bark was synthesized into acetylsalicylic acid in 1853 by Charles Gerhardt. While this new lab made drug is more fast acting than its natural counterpart, it can cause stomach irritation (on the list of side effects). This particular side effect does not usually occur when using the willow bark, because the bark does not damage the gastrointestinal mucosa. So while the “modern” pharmaceutical approach has extracted the main healing component and created a faster acting version (something greatly appreciated in our instant gratification society), it failed to include the rest of the natural healing components that prevented the negative side effects.  This is not new information. However, if you were to ask your allopathic doctor for a natural alternative, they would cast doubt on any claims anything natural could help you, and then prescribe you some lab made pharmaceutical. Thankfully we have alternatives, like naturopathic doctors, we can see, though they are not covered (at least not fully) by our current medical system.
That said, there are books out there like Herbs Demystified by Holly Phaneuf, PhD ( a biochemist and drug researcher) that show the research that has been done on plant medicine to give a better view of what has been proven to show results. I am greatly appreciative of books like this because I actually make herbal wellness products, so when nay-sayers do question or comment, I have something they cannot refute to show them.
What gets me about all of this, is that these natural medicinal practices are called “alternative medicine”. I find that interesting, because all of these techniques existed long before allopathic medicine was created. Wouldn’t that make allopathic medicine the “alternative” to the pre-existing natural medicine? If you have not heard the term, allopathic medicine is the “modern” approach that focuses on the symptoms of the dis-ease, rather than finding and treating the root cause. It is rooted in the current scientific methods of testing to diagnose and then treat current symptoms. This approach has allowed for great strides in health and medicine to be made, but I do find it interesting that it completely discounts its own roots, and even actively works to discredit its predecessor. Even long-standing practices like acupuncture, chiropracting, and reflexology are still looked down upon by many allopathic doctors today. I am sure you can guess how I feel about that by now. I am, of course, thankful for the knowledge gained by that allopathic system, I am certain it has saved many lives. However, I do believe these two systems could, and should, coexist together. I do not believe they should be in competition with each other at all. I know of many practitioners of natural medicine, energy works, and other such wonderful healers that would never tell a person to not seek out the opinion of an allopathic doctor, but I have yet to meet a doctor (or even pharmacist) who would recommend a naturopath, or other natural/energy healer for treatment.
What do you think? DO you feel these are both mutually exclusive practices? Or do you feel, as I do, that they should coexist in a mutually respective and cooperative manner for the health and well-being of all? 

​Last week I was reading a book about something called Vortex Theory. It mainly covered a lot of quantum physics theories and theorists, but there was a paragraph that made me think more abut metaphysics than quantum physics. It read:
“Thoughts are many but the mind is one. Particles are many but the universe is one. If the consciousness on each of us, seeing through our eye, hearing through our ears, and feeling through our senses in one then it would be the same consciousness in all the different bodies of humanity. We may all be living separate lives but the one thing we have in common is being human. The unity of consciousness we share suggests we are one being in many bodies. We may think different thoughts perform different actions and have different experiences but the conscious awareness underlying every thought we think and action we perform is one and the same and that indeed is the brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity.” – Vortex Theory by David A. Ash (P. 133)*
It made me think about how we are all connected. Generally when that is said I think about how we are all made of the same star stuff; how we are all connected to the universal consciousness. This statement says to me that although we are all separate souls in this human experience, learning our lessons, trying to find our purpose, we are still connected to everyone and everything.
However, that paragraph made me think about that theory a little differently. It suggests that we really are all one, in a more literal sense. That we are one mind, one consciousness experiencing life from many different perspectives. Not just experiencing through each soul, but every living thing within the universe, and every non-living thing as well. Every cell, every atom, every seemingly empty space. The universe as a single entity experiencing itself from every conceivable point of view.
While I don’t ascribe to this particular theory, it is definitely something to think about. In some ways, current quantum physic theories support this statement in their own way, though this is not their purpose or their focus.
Another theory, that falls somewhere in between, says that we have a higher self and that self stays connected to the universal consciousness, but also manifests as a soul to experience our current life. Sometimes this theory suggests that our higher self is fragmented, yet still connected. This is possibly how we receive messages through divination techniques, where we receive prophetic dreams/messages from, and even perhaps know about our past lives. This theory brings up some interesting theories about ghosts/spirits and fractured soul pieces for me, but that is a topic for another post, perhaps.
What do you think? Which of these theories makes more sense to you? Do these theories bring up questions for you? Maybe more questions than answers? Let me know what you think. I would love to hear your thoughts, and other theories, if you have them.
                                                                                                            
*Disclaimer: I am aware that there may be grammar and punctuation mistakes in the quote. I copied it verbatim so that is exactly how it appears in the book. If that made your eye twitch I do feel your pain, but it was a direct quote. Sorry. 

​I read a book the other day about an energy healing modality I had not previously heard about. I have read about many energy healing systems, and for most such systems, one of the common tenets is humility. We are told to let go of ego; the idea that we are doing the healing rather than being its facilitator. In this book, this was not the case. The author of this book proposed that it was the only energy healing modality that connects directly to divine energy, and that all the others (of which they did specifically mention Reiki) only connected with vital energy. Now, vital energy is also known as life force energy like prana, chi, or Qi, meaning that they propose that the energy worker is using their own energy to heal rather than connecting to universal or divine energy. As a Reiki Master myself, I have to whole heartedly disagree with this statement. Reading this kind of misinformation tells me that either the author knows very little, if anything, about energy healing modalities outside their own, or that they have let their ego get in the way. While I cannot speak to the efficacy of this particular system since I have never studied it or seen it practiced, I do believe that this way of thinking can be a hinderance to the growth, evolution, and possibly the productiveness of both the practitioner and the system. While it is important to have confidence and faith in the energies and systems we are drawn to learn/practice, as well as our ability to implement them, no one system is better than another. Personal preferences are expected. We are attracted to certain things due to our own knowledge and experiences, but that is not the same as definitively stating one system is better or more successful. This kind of talk could dissuade someone from receiving a treatment that would most suit their needs. As healers (of any kind) our job is to help, and I do not believe this helps. If we set ego aside, we may not get every client, but we can help all those that come to us by helping them find the help they need, whether it is from us or someone else. This not only fosters a trusting and respectful relationship with the people we meet, but also within the healer community.
I write this post not just for the healers, but for those who seek us out as well. Our choices (and our words) can make all the difference.
Have you ever read about any healing modalities that claimed they were better? Have you experienced an encounter with a healer with such claims? Did it affect your feelings about/response to that system/person? What would you do if you did?