Let's Discuss Shamanism

There's been a bit of talk in another topic (regarding drug and alcohol use) about shaman, and I wanted to take a moment to spread a little knowledge on the topic. I'm quoting OB1Shinobi here, because their post was the post that prompted me to write this one, but I don't want them to think I'm singling them out. I'm not here to try to prove anyone wrong, or point any fingers, or make anyone feel bad. I just want to spread a little knowledge and information in the interest of education, so I sincerely hope that nobody (especially OB1Shinobi) think's I'm stepping on their toes. I'm just trying to help.

OB1Shinobi wrote: shaman is not an english word so the appropriate plural is a matter of interpretation

it may be the currently accepted usage that the plural of shaman is still shaman

i offer the following

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shaman

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shaman

The etymology (before the Evenski šamán) is in dispute regardless. Only in English is the plural "shamans", however, as I have never seen a Turkic, Mongolian, or Russian practitioner use the term "shamans" ever in my life. This is important because "shamanism" is one of the very few places I get my hackles up about cultural appropriation, but we'll talk more about that farther down.

While we're on the topic, it's of note that the plural form shaman is actually used by Blizzard as the technical plural for World of Warcraft Shaman, which is important because they're largely responsible for almost all modern awareness of the word that isn't based in Michael Harner's plastic "core shamanism." That makes Blizzard kind of a powerful force in this word's modern usage, and while they do fictionalize a lot of things, they do their research beforehand so they have something to base it on.

Also falling under this umbrella is the word shamanka, which isn't an indigenous word, but a Russian modification, where -ka denotes a female shaman. There is no such distinction in the original language, but as Russian is a gendered language (and many female shaman like the idea of having their own word), shamanka has entered the collective consciousness on the matter.

quote by michael harner

"Ayahuasca was taken in every session; they didn’t
do much shamanism without it. At one time historically,
the Conibo had the muraya—

shamans

who worked only
with tobacco—and they were very respected"

http://www.transpersonalstudies.org/ImagesRepository/ijts/Downloads/Harner.pdf

I'm going to say something that might anger a lot of people interested in "shamanism."

Michael Harner is a hack.

Can you learn things from his books and his formulation of "Core Shamanism"? Yes. You can. You can actually learn a great, great deal about "shamanism" from Core Shamanism. But Core Shamanism isn't a study of shamanism. At all.

In order to understand why, you have to understand two important things about "shamanism":

• It's not a religion.
• It only exists in one group of people in the entire world.

That probably goes against everything you've heard about shamanism since the '80s, but those two facts tie in together pretty neatly. Let's tackle them in order.

The reason "shamanism" isn't a religion is because shamanism is only what the shaman does. The shaman, acting as a shaman, is practicing shamanism. The shaman is the go-between; in this sense, the shaman is a kind of priest. So, really, "shamanism" is basically the equivalent of inventing a word like "clergyism." The people a shaman services generally practice some type of animism, interacting as they can with the spirits they believe inhabit the world along their way, but the shaman is the one who acts as a priest for that group or tribe or whatever. They are spirit ambassadors, climbing the axis mundi in an effort to better connect the needs of the people to the needs of the spirits.

It's important to note that not everyone is (or even can be) a shaman in the strictest sense, and therefore, "shamanism" is not a word I would use to describe what non-shaman practice. See, shaman are called by the spirits and forced to be reborn--almost universally through a traumatic experience. A near-death experience, or vivid dreams or hallucinations. In these, it's not at all uncommon for a shaman-to-be to feel every minute detail of being ripped completely apart and rebirthed, a very painful process. This "shaman sickness" is said to attune shaman to both the nature of the spirits (to put one foot in the grave, so to speak) and to the nature of suffering (which is what people will seek them out in order to alleviate).

Shaman aren't the only ones who can do what shaman do, but non-shaman (in the sense they aren't reborn in this fashion) aren't practicing shamanism, they're using shamanic practices in their personal spiritual path. The difference is important because when (in English) we say something-ism, we mean a whole system of practices and beliefs, but when we say something-ic, we mean that thing is similar to (but not the same as) something else. So a shamanic practice is to journey into the spirit world on your own to uncover more about yourself, because that's similar to something a shaman does, but a practice in shamanism would be to do that to retrieve a soul fragment for someone who has brought you a bottle of vodka to help them sort out their ailing health.

As to the second point, true shamanism is limited to the peoples who practice certain Mongolian and Tugusic religions, who have spread over the centuries into Turkey, Mongolia, Siberia, Tuva, and the associated regions. These people are the source of the word "shaman", and therefore it applies specifically to holy men in those associated faiths. Native Americans don't have "shaman", the people Harner studied in the Amazon don't have "shaman", nobody else in the world (except that one set of religions) has "shaman." Unless you have a WoW account.

What Michael Harner did was study non-Tungusic animist priests, and then Joseph-Campbell'ed up a theory about how all indigenous animist priests (save maybe Shinto?) are all just "shamanism", despite having only the barest things in common. Now, those commonalities are very interesting, and worth studying, but that doesn't mean that those religions can just be distilled into common denominators. It's offensive at best, and wrong-headed at worst. This is mostly because "shamanism" as we use it today, cross-culturally, is just a cultural interpretation of the meme of "animist priest". That is to say, it's the underlying animism that is similar, not necessarily the shamanism. It's just that the one influences the other in remotely predictable ways once you understand the culture of the people involved.

(All that said, sometimes I use the common misuse of the word to get a point across if I'm in a hurry or to illustrate a point, because "Odin is a shaman" makes a lot of sense once you see exactly what the Allfather went through and count the number of legs on his horse.)

mr mckenna describes the psychotropic plants as essential to the shamanic path

Then Mr. McKenna is wrong.

My ex-girlfriend took her first-ever hit of acid by herself, but she didn't want to feel alone. So, she called me, and walked me through her experience. When it was over, I asked her "How much did you pay for that? Because gimme a drum, a clearing in the forest, and an hour, and I can get that for free."

The ecstatic state is what is essential to the work done, but how one achieves it is immaterial. Entheogens work for some, but are bad for others. Some prefer meditation, or drumming, or dancing. The point is the spiritual state is necessary, but the doorway is completely unimportant in any non-cultural context. Therefore, new traditions (such as Jediism) should maintain legality in their choice of entheogenic substances, because we don't have the weight of culture telling us that ayahuasca or peyote or the like are sacred to us.

Questions, comments, concerns?
Y'all know how to reply.

Thanks Steam!! This really does deserve it's own thread to not de-rail the other.

I wanted to add a little about this:

OB1Shinobi wrote: mr mckenna describes the psychotropic plants as essential to the shamanic path

i agree, that they are essential (not that im in the position to DISAGREE with mr mckenna lol)
however i do insist that they are essential because of what they achieve or what they allow, and not simply for their own sake

I've never read anything my Mr. McKenna so I don't know what he knows or doesn't know but on this quote I have this to say.

First, I would like to state two things. They're public knowledge but just in case someone doesn't know me.

1. I'm in the U.S. Military
2. I follow the shamanic path

If Mr. McKenna's quote were true, both of my facts could not be. The US Military has a very heavy zero tolerance policy for drugs. The only mind-altering thing we can partake in is alcohol and even that is strictly regulated (or prescription drugs as-prescribed). If psychotropic plants are essential, then I'm doing something wrong. But since my Power Animal or any other spirit I've talked with haven't told me otherwise, I'll keep on truckin'

Are these plants traditionally used? Sure. Can you follow the shamanic path without them? Absolutely.

I'll admit I've read very very little on the use of drugs and what they do. They were VERY taboo in my family so I wouldn't even listen to anything about them other than "BAD". But the bit that I've read/watched about them lately, I achieve the same kind of journeys and experiences without them. I'd imagine they'd enhance or make the journeys easier to accept. Make it easier to hear the spirits and speak with them, but they are not necessary.

If you want to see what the journeys are like for me, Apprentices and higher can find them scattered in my training journal or in my meditation log. Others are more than welcome to ask if you're interested. I could even post one or two here.

Actually I'll post one I just thought about:

This story was told to me in a shamanic journey.
This is the open forum post that anyone could read The Sun and the Vine
This one is in my journal and includes the travel to hear the story and my reflections The Sun and the Vine Journey

uh...other than that I'm still learning but if anyone has any questions I'll answer to the best of my experience.

i appreciate this thread and im going to come back and respond further in a bit but for the moment: this is a link to the page i was quoted from and i would like it to be here so that my words can be seen in their full/appropriate context

http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/110017-drugs-and-alcohol?start=10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfJVoM5vlHI[/quote]

I'd imagine they'd enhance or make the journeys easier to accept. Make it easier to hear the spirits and speak with them

This is where you would be seriously wrong.

Again, the analogy of Steroids and Arnold.

He still needed to put in countless hours lifting weights, attention to nutrition, know all the basics of bodybuilding,etc.

Enhancement to some degree yes, but easier is not the case.

In fact, without knowing the basics, you wouldnt get any enhancement.

Also, you can say you experience the same journeys without them, but you have no empirical experience of such.

Those experiences may read similar, but a person in Hawaii knows what cold is, but does he know what cold is like a person in Alaska?

No.

Its not the same thing, not at all.

You're right Khaos, I have nothing to compare my journeys with any substance ones.. Shoot, I hardly drink alcohol haha I couldn't even tell you what a journey on alcohol is like. Like I said it's just the bits that I've heard/read/seen about I didn't mean it in the way that those who DO take them are any less, only that it's not a requirement to participate. I should just leave it at that in the future instead of saying it's the same or similar. I apologize!

first id just like to familiarize everybody with some of the prominent resources i draw from when i speak of shamanism

since terrence mckenna and michael harner have already been mentioned i will start with them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_McKenna

this is an hour long video where he discusses the psychotropic experience

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lIwkbFWHZw

if you dont have time for that this is 12 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVEcpdLZ8mE


michael harner was my second significant introduction to shamanism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Harner

http://www.shamanism.org/

i found mr harners work because i had previously been introduced to the works of carlos castaneda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Castaneda

this is just over five minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2jRODCXRqE

http://www.prismagems.com/castaneda/

the works of michael harner lead me to mircea eliade

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mircea_Eliade

this is a little more than ten minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YrHgjIgAdQ

there are quite a few others but ive got to give the laptop back lol

The You Tube selection above is an incoherent mixture of Eliade quotes. The child narrator obviously has no idea what she is talking about even though she is reading (poorly) from (presumably) Eliade texts.

It is helpful to think of the shaman as a specialist role of psychopomp performed for one's community. Shamanic practice is an ecstatic technique that can be achieved in a variety of ways: dream, drumming, prayer, meditation, dance, or extremes of sleep depravation, starvation, pain and the like. Drugs are not necessary. Not all ecstatics are shamans. The purpose of the ecstasy is to enter the sacred world with a purpose, for example, a message to deliver or receive, to gain or give some kind of knowledge, to learn the intention of the spirits, etc. Shamans are usually found in animist spiritualties and Eliade's comprehensive study covers most.

im glad that you made this thread

the first thing i guess i should say is that the shamanism i am concerned with is a phenomena - a phenomina which has implications that evolve just the same way as cultures evolve

its much more than a word

i am speaking of something which is a personal experience and most definitely not an academic debate

what i do not want to do is sit around and point internet fingers at one another over whose shamenis is bigger

i dont mean to imply that this was the intent od the thread steamboat, i dont belive it was, and i dont feel youre stepping on my toes - or my shamenis - like i said i am happy to have this discussion

the next thing is that i dont presume to refer to myself as a shaman - especially online with people who have no first hand experience of me

specifically i have no RESULTS other than my life itself

i have not yet lead others into better health and greater unity within their systems - but as far as i am concerned that is my ultimate vocation - my calling, if you belive in such things (which i do)

i dont use the word shaman to refer to myself - i do however fit the profile to the letter

from recurring hospital visits as a child, which included a psychiatric hospital, to having visions and power dreams

up to being very nearly killed by my illness and certainly unable to escape it until i was able to effect my own cure, using the shamanic understandings of "my" culture

(specifically miguel ruiz's four agreements was the catalyst, however i consider this work to be basically an elaboration on that of castaneda)

now i am healthier than i have ever been my life

and i am working on developing a social and vocational foundation from which i will be able to help others reach health as well

but i understand this is not something to try to prove online so i dont ask that anyone BELIEVE anything i say about myself - i simply share the story of my personal experiences and people can glean what is useful for them, if anything, and discard the rest

im saying this because i want it to be expressed that when i talk about shamanism i am talking about my own life

im not in an argument about drugs or about terminology

if it is irksome that i use a word which originally was only applied to one particular group of people but is now being used to describe a much broader multi cultural phenomena
then i can do my best to restrict my terminology to whatever wording you feel is appropriate when i speak in your company

however

im one of the very few who are willing to do this -and honestly ill probably forget

sorry - i simply cant bring myself to care about the words in the same way, (im pretty precise in my choice of words but my focus is different) and any expectation otherwise will only lead to frustration

but if you tell me what word you want me to use then i will try to substitute it for "shaman" when i post here

lastly
im not going to defend mr harner from anyone - its not my job and in any case its not needed

but do you really feel that calling him a HACK is appropriate?
.
considering the influence and contribution his works have on culture today do you sincerely believe thathe deserves the word HACK because he fiddled with the word shaman?

on the subject of psychotropics

my words in the thread that i was quoted from, and with the exception of mckenna the general message of the authors who i refer to as my reference source material up to this point

are consistent in saying that power plants are not the only source or means of shamanic voyage

also i was speaking to an individual who by my interpretation is rather stuck on the idea of psychotropic supremacy

where i say that they are essential i mean that to say that they are a tool on the path which should not be discarded or ignored

they are an essential element of the overall phenomena of shamanism (as i use the word)

this does not mean that everyone who walks that path must lead a psychotropic lifestyle

i have repeatedly stated - and not just in that thread -that there are numerous other techniques which i belive to be prerequisite and that it is the destination and not the route

in fact i have repeatedly advised to research and become proficient at "trance induction" and lucid dreaming BEFORE using psychotropics

thats all one has to say isnt it?

lol
trance induction and lucid dreaming!
theres not much more after that other than suggesting various source material which someone might gravitate towarss and urging commited effort

someone who is sincere will find their way from there

if i didnt make that clear i dont know what else to do but say it again

which i just did lol

lastly i want to add that two more of the more significant influences on my understanding of shamanism are william james and robert moss, both of whom i discovered somewhat recently

steamboat - if there are sources youd reccomend which i havent mentioned i would be very interested and appreciative, because i know that youre knowledgeable in these areas and i am always open to new knowledge

i would love for this thread to be an in depth discussion and information exchange if anyone else is interested

Alan wrote: The You Tube selection above is an incoherent mixture of Eliade quotes. The child narrator obviously has no idea what she is talking about even though she is reading (poorly) from (presumably) Eliade texts.

It is helpful to think of the shaman as a specialist role of psychopomp performed for one's community. Shamanic practice is an ecstatic technique that can be achieved in a variety of ways: dream, drumming, prayer, meditation, dance, or extremes of sleep depravation, starvation, pain and the like. Drugs are not necessary. Not all ecstatics are shamans. The purpose of the ecstasy is to enter the sacred world with a purpose, for example, a message to deliver or receive, to gain or give some kind of knowledge, to learn the intention of the spirits, etc. Shamans are usually found in animist spiritualties and Eliade's comprehensive study covers most.

im sorry about that - i was borrowing a laptop because my phone is way too smart for me to use to post links and im way too lazy to type out urls and i was being bugged to give up the lt

i was in a hurry

i saw that the video showed pictures his prominent works and i figured anyone unfamiliar but interested would he able to go from there

oh and jung

though he is not typically referenced as a shaman per se imo he is highly relevant to the discussion