Photographs or Flowers? Sympathetic vs. Contagious Psychometry

One of the most fascinating psychic readings I ever received was by Deviji, a Hindu seer who lives in the Himalayan foothills. On my way to her place, I picked a large hibiscus blossom. I then handed it to Deviji, who inspected it carefully before proceeding to discuss my spiritual life. Deviji is what is known as a flower psychometrist; this means that she reads flowers the way others read the morning paper.

The word psychometry derives from the Greek psyche (soul) and metron (measure) and its practice takes on disparate forms: by connecting to physical objects, for example, individuals like Deviji are capable of relaying the stories of the people who touched them. Yet the art of psychometry is not limited to picking up vibes from physical objects; instead, it also includes the ability to tune into a person’s character through a picture; this type of psychometry does not require any contact between the image and the person it portrays.

“So,” one may ask, “how come some forms of psychometry require physical touch while others do not?” If the difference is confusing, a basic anthropological distinction can help restore some order.

Writing in the early 20th century, James G. Frazer outlined two basic types of magical action: one is based on similarity; this entails for example using a person’s image to influence her. The other one, instead, relies on physical contact to spread magical contagion; such is the magic of Louisiana’s hoodoo doctors smearing their powders in places where their intended victim will come in touch with them.

Psychometry is certainly not magic in that its purpose is limited to the acquisition of information. However, Frazer’s distinction points to two basic aspects of psychometry: one is the attainment of knowledge on the basis of sympathy (that is, similarity). Such is the case with photographic psychometry, which rests on the assumption that your images are imbued with your energetic fingerprint and will therefore carry information about you. The other type of psychometry, instead, is based on contagion as the notion that anything we touch retains a memory of our own energetic field, thus making it possible for a psychic to read material objects. Flower psychometry falls squarely under this rubric.

Regardless of this difference, both kinds of psychometry are worth exploring. If you are interested in honing your psychometric skills, here is a basic exercise that you can practice with a photograph or an object belonging to somebody you do not know. (In order to obtain helpful feedback, make sure that the information coming through can be verified by a third party.)

Sit comfortably with the picture/object in front of you. Relax; close your eyes; take a few deep breaths and allow yourself to enter a deep meditative state. Focus your attention on the object or the photograph you intend to psychometrize. You can touch it if you like. Connect to it energetically while remaining deeply relaxed; pay attention to your sensations.

After a few attempts, you may notice that some features of the object or the image seem to be vying your attention. This is when you may start receiving emotions, images, words, or even scents. You could also feel physical sensations in your own body. At times, the impressions will trickle in slowly; at other times, instead, they will be overwhelming. As you practice, pay attention to your style of knowing and take notes for the purpose of verification. Once the session is over, perform a small ritual of disconnection from the object and its owner.

Try alternating between images and physical objects; as you keep practicing, you will not only hone your psychic skills, but you will also find out which style of psychometry is best suited for you: sympathetic or contagious?

I always incorporate photographic psychometry in my psychic readings both during Skype sessions and via e-mail.

One thought on “Photographs or Flowers? Sympathetic vs. Contagious Psychometry

Comments are closed.