AUTHOR’S NOTE: When it comes to psychic self-defense, the “buzzword-du-jour” is boundaries. The mystical ways to do this are mostly statements of intent: affirmations, invocations, prayers, etc.

We are encouraged to set wards against the subliminal intrusion of those who have the ability to harm us, whether intentionally or accidentally, if we allow them unimpeded access to our subconscious affairs. If psychological bulwarks are established and enforced without exception, these noetic transgressors will have been thwarted and our mental/emotional well-being at least theoretically secured. (Personally, I’m fond of the Wiccan “Rule of Three” or Law of Threefold Return, but that is more about karmic payback than interdiction. We give them the rope to hang themselves and then the Universe “chastises them according to their desserts,” thrice-over. I’ve seen it work.)

It goes without saying that any boundary designed to curtail inbound aggression can also become a barrier to outward expansion that limits our own mobility and range of experience. This must be understood if we are to avoid being hemmed in by our own defensive measures. If we choose to hunker down in that spiritual stronghold despite the personal hardship and decide later to unwisely stick our head out of the foxhole, we should keep in mind the maxim “Discretion is the better part of valor.” A brief, furtive glimpse over the rim is safer than having our noggin shot off. It’s a helluva way to have to live, but sometimes there is no recourse when the snipers are still lurking beyond the perimeter.

I came across an amusing (and intentional) malapropism in James Ricklef’s Tarot Reading Explained: the concept of being “should upon” by other people. (Ricklef may in fact have been alluding to “sat upon” or “set upon,” but I took a more scatological view of it.) While being “shat upon” is certainly more demeaning and demoralizing, being deviously “should upon” by self-serving types who insist on telling us what we “should” be doing to meet their expectations is equally insulting. This reminds me of passive-aggressive parents: they assure their adult children that they wouldn’t dream of telling them what to do, but they are chock-full of “helpful advice” aimed at accomplishing the same thing.

If we want their respect and support, we must tacitly accept their counsel even if we have no intention of following it once they’re out of sight. The same can be true in a public setting, but we must usually be more diligent about putting up a convincing “front” to stave off any pressure to demonstrate our good faith. It can become a matter of deflection rather than outright defiance, and we should develop a nimble “duck-and-cover” strategy to rely on when these people come around. Think of it as a “moveable barricade” that we can trot out when the need arises. It can be as simple as an evasive “I don’t remember you saying that!”.