It's a phrase that is based upon the mistaken idea that you can assert into another's reality, which you actually can't but it can look like you can.
The idea with telling someone you are placing a "spell" on them is that they now accept the suggestion that you have some power of assertion over them.
Of course, spells don't have to be negative in intent (there are positive spells too) but once your subject has accepted that you have some power of assertion in their lives, they now either fear your assertion (in the case of negative spells) or positively expect your assertion (in the case of beneficial spells).
Whichever way it works (positive or negative), the caster of the spell actually has no power of assertion whatsoever, it is only the subject's belief that is activating thought patterns in their own life which are matched through Law of Attraction manifestations.
Think about it logically. If you were truly able to assert into another's reality, then why would you ever need to tell them about the spell? You would just do it and it would work...except it doesn't :) ...it requires the belief system of the subject to be activated in conjunction.
The best you can do is influence another as discussed in the link referenced above. But it's always their own choice about how to react to that influence.
Follow the idea of spell casting further and then ask yourself why human beings go to war? There are some highly-intelligent and insightful people within the military as there are in all walks of life.
If all these assertion spells really worked the way those wishful asserters want, wouldn't they have developed a way to harness that ability and our armies would just be sitting at home casting negative spells on the other side instead of using up trillions of dollars from military budgets?
Well the general idea is to put a "curse" (usually of evil intent) on someone.
While those who have experience and understanting in the natue of consciusness as an energy and it's ability to be maniupulated with specific intent are here in this forum, In answering this question we maybe getting into areas where this knowledge could be mis-used by someone who is new to this.
I think to answer this question from the perspective of "how to" would be rather irresponsible of us.
It will be no different from giving a child a match stick and an explosive to play with.
So let's be a little bit responsible in how we explore this subject.
answered 13 Jan '11, 06:43
This means to put a curse on someone. Not a good practice. The problem is that it is a double edged sword. Weak people that have no personal power use this type of weapon. Spells do work, but they have a very bad backlash that will blow up in your face on levels not fully understood. Stay away from that area.
answered 13 Jan '11, 15:51
The Knights Alchemy
I've been reading on Magick. I think the right phrase is 'to cast a spell on someone'. (Assuming your intentions are good. I'll speak of a spell not a curse. The process is the same anyway).
For you to do this and being effective two things are needed:
-You casting the spell on someone.
-That 'someone' to be aware of it (whether because they've asked you to do it or because you're letting them know.
The 'spells' act by suggestion. A more powerful mind (yours) acting on a weeker (the other person's). And this other person needs to fully believe (Belief is a key word here) that you are more powerful and it is going to work. It's more in the mind of the 'receiver' than on the 'giver'. You are only acting as a medium for that person to enter into a feeling of 'Positive Expectation/Belief' that will make the 'spell' work (i.e. the thing to manifest).
I hope this helps.
answered 01 Feb '11, 15:15