meirya Wrote:For me, my phoenixness is archetypal: it's a description of the role of my ba (the core part of the self; the soul) and my ba's energetic composition/quality and traits.
My hawkness is somehow related to my ka (spirit, personality, me-this-life); I was not hawk in previous lives. I have never been physically hawk or phoenix, as best as I can figure. Hawk is more than a memory for me. Hawk is energetic, a personality thing, a mental thing... perhaps even totemic as some cultures describe totems. I don't know, precisely. I just know that I am hawk, somehow, at an undeniable level.
I'm going to elaborate on the phoenix bit here. The ba is eternal, whereas the ka is not, in Egyptian belief. If anything reincarnates, it's the ba. The ka either stays with the body, or gets a spirit-body and goes on to the Duat (afterlife of sorts). Hawk is this-life-only. Phoenix is something that has been there every lifetime, and I think influences when and where I incarnate. My role each lifetime has been "Phoenix" - healer-diplomat; cyclic; brightly-burning energy/self. So in that sense, I suppose, my otherness has something to do with reincarnation - but reincarnation is not the cause
of my otherness, and I am native to this plane.
starwind Wrote:I don't know if my cat-ness is...outsourceable...as a totem, rather than something I've actually been.
When I say "totemic as some cultures describe totems", I'm mostly referring to Ravenari's depiction of totems
. Specifically (and this is a quote from Ravenari in Lupa's book on otherkin), in the sense that "totems... are already inside of us, they are who we are. They are not our spirit 'helper' (usually), they do not often take us through the otherworlds, they do not do much more than reflect our nature and personality. . . they reside within." Lupa adds, paraphrasing Ravenari, that "some of the indigeneous cultures of Australia. . . deliberately internalize their totem."
Through further talks with Ravenari on MSN and through LJ and such, I'd say that by her culture's definition of totems
(which is not to say all cultures' definitions of totems), it could be considered that Hawk is my totem, that my experience of hawkness is totemic. I wouldn't say it's totemic in the neo-shamanic/new-age definition of totem, though, as that's usually viewed as more archetypal and external. My experience of hawk is tactile, most definitely not archetypal, and fits with the actual behavior/state of hawks (as I've observed and experienced first-hand when I volunteered for several months at a wildlife rehabilitation center) rather than their perceived symbology in modern times.
Does that make any sense? If
my hawkness is totemic (and I'm not saying it is
; only that it's a possibility), then it's an internalized sort of totem, not an externalized "guide".