The Definitions and Misdefinitions of Shamanism: for Hugh Eckert

Jul 14, 2011 21:36

From my blog: 

One of my longtime Livejournal and meatspace friends, Hugh Eckert
Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 3

ianphanes July 15 2011, 16:14:33 UTC
Yeppers.

While I am not a shaman, I have enough clue about it that I recently wrote the following in a discussion of retrieving soul fragments:
http://wiccan.livejournal.com/1493496.html

--------------------

However, I have not seen the concept of "soul fragments" outside of Core Shamanism and forms of neo-shamanism derived from Core Shamanism. In what I've read of the ethnographic literature, many cultures identify multiple souls, but they don't "fragment". That's a very modern--indeed reductionist--view. I suspect the concept of "soul fragments" is the bastard offspring of the concept of multiple souls and the Jungian concept of complexes as functioning autonomously.

In a worldview in which each soul is a discrete entity, "fragmenting" would imply dismemberment and probably death.

----------------------

Beings, not things. "I and thou", not "I and it".

Reply


evcelt July 15 2011, 20:29:31 UTC
Very well thought out and stated. I especially like your placing the shamanic role in its context in society- and by implication establishing that one can use shamanic techniques without being a shaman per se.

How would you differentiate the shaman from the priest? Just to be clear, I'm making a distinction between the "priest" function (dealing with relationships between the Powers and humans in a religious/spiritual group) and the "ministerial" function (dealing with relationships between humans w/in a religious/spiritual group). I know this is an arbitrary distinction, but I've found it useful...

Reply


Another perspective baphometis July 15 2011, 23:10:27 UTC
Wellll... I'm not sure if I would lump all the "Core" based shaman people in with oil barons and other extreme exploiters of the earth. However, I will agree that there is a big difference between world views goin on here. With the Core shaman, these techniques can be theoretically taught to a very wide segment of people with the time and the patience. Alot of the "work" of the Core folks seems to be related to that elusive beast called "personal growth". Then there's the very modern spiritualist (post Cardec) view on the spirits themselves "higher plane" or "enlightened beings" vs. "lower plane" beings. Guess which ones are supposed to help you with your personal growth? The thing is, Core shamanism seems flexible enough that it doesn't really matter whether or not you believe that the spirit world exists separately and independently of the human mind or not- because it all *relates* to human beings in that philosophy. To be a "shaman" in many cultures has nothing to do with being good or a "healer", it has to do with being able to ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up