Honey jar

You can dispose of the messed up jar by burying it at a crossroads, in the backyard, or tossing it in a stream.

@prsona

A jar's ingredients are important and the ingredients have their own energy that they add. To say otherwise is discrediting the very system from which this practice stems, Conjure/Hoodoo. Hoodoo pulls from multiple practices, the majority of which were animistic in nature, which is to say it believed in the spirits in the world around them.

You can discredit the use and importance of ingredients or 'props' in your own practice, but this is not 'your practice' and when speaking on it, you should respect the basic tennants of the practice.

So for people who do not know that a honey jar spall stems from Hoodoo, and for those who do not know its origins with animist beliefs, you would still insist it is the ingredients themselves?

I do not study Hoodoo. The vast majority of people on this site diving into a honey jar spell are not told it is a Hoodoo spell with animist connections. Is it, then, simply assumed they believe it is the spirits in the ingredients?

And what if someone uses different ingredients? A different color of paper? Doesn't have a photograph, or tears off other people to isolate images of ony the two involved? Syrup in stead of honey thanks to budget or immediate availability? Yes, as an animist, you will believe the spirits associated with these things will still work towards the desired end. But if the ingredients are not the same, while still producing the same result, is it the ingredients themselves or the person's intent to direct the result, which the spirits of the items will respond to?

One would think a person does their research before casting a spell, but then again, it doesn't happen all the time, yea?

For a general sweetening jar, no, I wouldn't. I'd keep it ambiguous, not leaning to your view or mine. But if someone asked specifically for a "honey jar," then yes. Just like I would speak from the tradition if someone asks about "gris gris," "conjure balls," or "jack balls."

Names mean something.

Actually, yes, you can use other ingredients if that's the question. Syrup was actually more common in folk magic because it's cheaper than honey, so you're on a good track. Using what's on hand is a common practice in folk magic.

You are asking a theological question, which when answered within the spirit of the tradition, would be more leaning to the involvement of other spirits. Yes, other people will have different ideas on spell work, this is a good thing and allows for style, but no, no idea is universal. Just as the idea of items having a spirit and working job shouldn't be pushed to everyone neither should the idea of it all being all props and intent. Not matter how "objective" you want it to be, it isn't. It's still based around your own personal research and experiences.

So, I don't see the problem here. Hearts and I brought up ideas to be more inclusive, and help in regards to the specific tradition.

As stated above:

"Names mean something."

AnnaWorks specifically said "honey jar" in the subject of this thread. This changes the talk from a traditional witchcraft sweetening jar to a discussion about a Conjure honey jar. The approach of the two are different and to provide advice without the basic precepts of Conjure in mind would make the advice/answer inherently wrong.

"The jar is not what causes the work, nor any other ingredient."

This is the exact opposite of Conjure ideology and we are talking Conjure here. In Conjure even folk magic takes on some level of spirit/deity work, evident in the use of natural curios or the recitation Psalms and other verses. If you wish to talk about sweetening jars, feel free to do so, but make it clear that is what you are doing.

And as I have said before, nobody is presenting honey bars on this site as Conjure related. Nobody at all. Most people who are told to do a honey jar -- the very name which noe you want to play a semantics game with -- are simply told to follow a set of instructions. None of it is presented in a context of hoodoo, animism, or conjure.

In fact, I am willing to bet that there are other posts telling people that a honey jar -- again using the specific term -- is more about the intent of the person than about the list of ingredients. But somehow it has not been an issue until now?

I really don't know how this has become accusations about what my own practices may even be. I have not attacked anyone else's. Since honey jars are not specifically referenced as a practice in hoodoo or conjure or whatever, and most people do use them as the more generic sweetening jar (again with the semantics game) without knowing there is supposed to be a difference, I answered within the context of its typical use among people here.

You cannot expect a person desperate to try anything to follow a list of instructions in a mad rush for a result to research an entire belief system. But somehow it is disrespectful that I answer according to common context, and fine for the others to do whatever they please.

And if any if this had actually been a theological question, then it should always be explained when a practice is specific to a religion, as magic is not religion, religion is not magic, though the two can certainly intermingle. But giving a person a religious practice without telling a person that it is, is deceptive. Yet somehow taking an action out of a religious context is disrespectful? What about the people who are following practices which may violate their own religious beliefs without knowing? Is that not also disrespectful?

There is no need for this semantic nonsense. A honey jar and a sweetening jar are the same thing. It may well be that the concept did originate in hoodoo and conjure, and the name would naturally follow.

Not everyone who does a honey jar does it in a hoodoo, conjure, or animist context. But they still insist they area doingf a honey jar spell.

Not everyone who makes a witch's bottle does so in the context of European folk magic.

Not everyone who chants the Psalms is doing so in a context of Christianity, or any of the other religions which do so. Some people use them external to any religious context, as merely affirmations of personal empowerment.

Neither is disrespectful.

ChennyVoo, you claim that you were trying to be inclusive. But side I made a statement outside the realm if hoodoo and conjure, but still not only related to the thread but in the correct context of how honey jar spells are most commonly used by people asking for love spells here, you want to discredit, insult, and dismiss my opinion. And it's based in petty semantics.

It's not a thing of semantics. It's a thing about culture, respect, and appreciation of the variety of our practices. But thank you for belittling those things.

Magic is a product of culture, and culture includes certain beliefs about the structure of the universe which should be explored in order to understand the nature behind a certain magical practice. Exclusion of those ideas strips the practice at its core. Hoodoo wouldn't be hoodoo if the Protestant, and sometimes Catholic, influences were stripped from it.

Again, names mean something.

Thank you for stating that I do not have the time to come into every single thread about honey jars, there are a lot of them, and explain the workings behind them. Perhaps one day, I will make a post about the use of honey jars and their place in African American folk magic.

You say that and in the same breathe you also have encouraged research and knowledge on how magic works before attempting it, yes? So, that point does not need to be discussed further.

You're correct though, there is no need for this. There is no need to talk about erasure of practices when it so clearly is a problem which can't be solved by talking to one person through an internet forum. If anyone has tried to discredit or insult someone's views, it would be you for being confrontational about another theory on how magic works beyond the attempt of pseudo-psychology of "intent" and "will power" matters.

I'm sorry this communication break down happened because of a lack of understanding and reading comprehension.

" And as I have said before, nobody is presenting honey bars on this site as Conjure related. Nobody at all. "

You can not present honey jars in a context that doesn't include Conjure without some form of cultural appropriation, which would be ingerently wrong. Plenty of people are presenting them as such, as far as I have seen.

"And if any if this had actually been a theological question, then it should always be explained when a practice is specific to a religion, as magic is not religion, religion is not magic, though the two can certainly intermingle."

Quite correct, Conjure is not a religion, but it is a practice with a long history and standing traditions. It is a tradition of people ripped from their homelands ( Natives, Africans, Irish, etc. ) and forced into slavery or other terrible conditions. This practice helped them to survive and is passed down from generation to generation. It has it's own dogmas and themes that are prevalent throughout each tradition as it was passed down. So, while there is not a Holy Book or a speaking prophet, it is a tradition that deserves respect and that you don't have a right to take from because you 'want to' or because you think you can. Honey Jars are a Connjure working and should be treated as such.

"But giving a person a religious practice without telling a person that it is, is deceptive. Yet somehow taking an action out of a religious context is disrespectful? What about the people who are following practices which may violate their own religious beliefs without knowing? Is that not also disrespectful?"

As discussed above, it isn't a religious practice, it is a traditional practice. If it violates another's religious practices and they haven't studied, is it the fault of the person who decided to get elbows deep in a practice they don't understand or appreciate, properly. In this sense, they disrespect themselves, and the worker/advisor has only attmepted to help and is the opposite of disrespectful in this context.

" There is no need for this semantic nonsense. "

It must be nice to have the privelege to call this 'semantic nonsense' as you tread across a tradition founded in the blood and sweat of the oppressed and enslaved. The only thing that has occured fromt he mouths of Mems, Voo, and myself is a defense of a practice that others are all too ready to strip and appropriate for their own uses and ends.

" A honey jar and a sweetening jar are the same thing. It may well be that the concept did originate in hoodoo and conjure, and the name would naturally follow. Not everyone who does a honey jar does it in a hoodoo, conjure, or animist context. But they still insist they area doingf a honey jar spell."

It is not our responsibility to perpetuate ignorance and promote cultural appropriation. A honey jar and a sweeting jar are not the same because at their core, Honey Jars are animistic and Sweetening Jars are not. Anyone who does a 'honey jar' outside of the context of hoodoo, conjure, and animism would exclude the use of petitioning and psalms chanting which would leave it as the stripped down sweetening jar and not a honey jar. They can insist they are doing a honey jar, but they are not.

"Not everyone who chants the Psalms is doing so in a context of Christianity, or any of the other religions which do so. Some people use them external to any religious context, as merely affirmations of personal empowerment. "

To use Psalms is literally to use the Christian and Jewish faiths, if you do not recognize the fact you are doing so you are appropriating a culture. They may be used as affirmations, but recognition of their origins is necessary, otherwise you are appropriating and disrespecting a people and a tradition.

Funny: one moment it's a "theological question" and a religiois matter, and the next it's not.

Such double standards!

I'll leave this thread alone with the people who can't even be consistent with their responses.

There is no such thins as cultural appropriation only when it's convenient to call it such, and call ot ok when it's done to another group.

That is just hypocritical.

But hey, keep demonizing people while doing the same to their beliefs because theirs aren't as worthy as yoursn

...anyways.