Spirit Binding: What do you think about it?

I came across these articles and I thought it would spur constructive dialog. So here they are:

and the second article

1 Like

What does everyone think?

I dunno. No disrespect to the writer, but she contradicted herself a little bit.
She drew the difference between binding and anchoring, so she knows that to bind means a ton of different things. She also scolded us on moral grounds. That doesn’t bother me, but lots of BALG members stopped reading right then.

Otherwise I agree with the main intent of the piece. Don’t try to subjugate a natural free-willed observer to do your bidding. It’s going to hate your guts and on a long enough time line it will find a way to get you back. It would also take more effort than it would probably be worth.

I would have a lot of doubt that anything someone sold me was inhabited by a real living prisoner.


Personaly it depends on the spirit and situation.

Is this gaurdian being attached to an object?

A spirit you work with in anyway being attached to an object to keep a close and intimate blah blah?


There’s a difference between forcing a spirit to obey you like a slave and housing it in an object it willingly enters of it’s volition. That’s my opinion.


What is the difference between binding and anchoring a spirit?

1 Like

From the way the writer used the term, it means the same thing as binding except the spirit finds it useful and isn’t pissed.
That’s fair if she sees it that way. Wiccans will often say they’re “binding” someone when they’re clearly attacking them. I guess they’re trying to be positive, but that gives ‘bind’ a bad connotation in her eyes.

It’s a fine bit of reading. That was just my counterpoint for the sake of conversation.

No point. Anything that can be done by binding a spirit can be done by evoking and working with it without binding. If you need to bind then you are little more than a one hit wonder, or you are an uncreative shyte that resorts to coersion. In most cases, anyways…

If you are working with the psychological model then binding still implies that you are naught but a one trick pony.


only spirits i bind are the ones that hurt other people others can go about with their buisness but if a shadow person or a parasite latches onto someone ill trap it and probably bind it to my will i dont play well with things that hurt others


Thanks everyone for answering my question.

I don’t know about ethics, but traditionally, the most powerful blade smiths in Japan would bind spirits to swords, even though spirit veneration was a big part of their religious life. A spirit possessed blade was said to move the swordsman as much as the swordsman moved the sword, and were very sought after. There are many stories of such blades, and as long as the blade was cared for properly, it seems to have been a positive thing, and handed down through family lineages.

In Path Notes of an American Ninja Master, the author, Glen Morris, talks about finding such a blade and how it would cut him every time he drew it, until he cleaned it and put it in a place of honour in his home. Watching a demonstration with the sword, Ninja Grandmaster Hatsumi noted, " Does Morris wield the blade, or does the blade wield Morris?"

I think it all depends on intention, and it is ridiculous to paint the binding of all spirits as unethical. Spirits have been bound to rings and jewelry by all manner of different shamans and sorcerers, for all sorts of reasons, throughout time.

1 Like

There’s a difference between binding a spirit to an object such as a talisman or other object for constructive purpose and just binding for punishment. For example you can bind a part of a spirit to a ring, however it’s not the WHOLE thing, more like their essence and many will do this for you willingly. That I’m ok with. Trapping for trap, no.


Do other powerful entities teach the sorcerer to bind other entities too? I have no doubt on that but what do you guys think?