Everything Under the Moon

Can someone clarify the difference between a Love spell and a “Binding” spell? I understand they are both considered unethical since they can overrule someone’s free will, but how would you describe the difference?

There are different kinds of love spells. Those done to hold another's affections are manipulative & coercive. You can expect to receive manipulative effects in your own life. Love spells done to improve your own attractiveness are self-improvement. And there are different types of binding spells. Binding to prevent someone from doing harm is protective. It effects the person's circumstances & not their will.

I guess I meant to say I wondered why some are called "love” and some are called “binding”. Is someone “bound” to the spell-caster whether they love them or not? Cause that doesn’t sound fun at all!

Bindings are always cord or knot spells, thus the name.

Unity vs separation. The difference is great.

SpiritTalker wrote:Bindings are always cord or knot spells, thus the name.

Ah, thank you. I’ve also read that a “binding” spell has the same effect in the spell-caster as it does innthevtarget. That it binds both ways. That would suggest that the spell-caster’s Free will would also be impacted by casting the spell. Is this the case?

barker wrote:Unity vs separation. The difference is great.

Can you clarify? I don’t know what you mean at all.

Unity is the theory that all are "one".
Separation prefers for people to think of each other as though to have their own problems.

The two attitudes are markedly different, obviously. Spiritual people prefer unity because love manifests easily. However, some people, like me, think of separation as a way to define one's own self/identity.

Being "at one" is not the only thing to know. There is unique understanding and what comes of that. I suggest you be careful with binding spells because misgivings, as you would know, can be hazardous to the religious sensibility. Love spells, on the other hand, work when you find someone beautiful enough; not ugly.

Like Spirit said binding for protection is different and does not bind you to that person at all. You might not even personally know that who you've bound ...say in the instance of the local rapist or murderer.
There is a plant that can be used called bindweed, it grows everwhere. It is an excellent natural choice for bindings, but pretty colored ribbon works too
But if you are getting married, now that's where term tying the knot came from! And a binding ceremony can be preformed for that.
Binding someone to yourself without their permission will backfire.
FF

Wiccita wrote:

SpiritTalker wrote:Bindings are always cord or knot spells, thus the name.

Ah, thank you. I’ve also read that a “binding” spell has the same effect in the spell-caster as it does innthevtarget. That it binds both ways. That would suggest that the spell-caster’s Free will would also be impacted by casting the spell. Is this the case?

The writer may have been speaking of a manipulative, possessive binding of someone's affections & fidelity to themselves which would impact both parties by default. I can't guess from one sentence why someone would make a blanket statement. Id expect it depends on the intent of the caster & the slant they give to their wording. A protective act binds the target's circumstances or opportunity to do harm and NOT their will, so isn't effecting the caster's will.

Thank you. Did not realize till now you had responded!