|
 daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc: 
|
 Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread  [Re: Kickle]
#10399055 - 05/25/09 10:30 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Ever see that video where Jack Black drops acid? At one point, he hears his buddy calling him and he says "Jack? My name is not Jack, nobody can label my essence!" (Later they find out they never dropped acid in the first place)
You do have a point - in your first post too, but this existential integrity also seems to stagnate our ability to communicate the experience, even if the intention maybe to elucidate it:
First of all, to those in the know (within), the nod of one shaman to another... I don't see why any such communication is necessary. (Unfortunately, I think this is where many arguments tend to fall, by petty egotism or elitism; but that is beside the point.)
The importance of communication, is only the concern of translation between the within and without, by whatever degree of separation this happens to be.
Compare it to the alternative, where our modern descriptors do not seem to carry this respect, whether it is a seeker in respect to a "genuine" neo-shaman, or a neo-shaman in respect to a society that would lock him up. Put it this way, finding a shaman would be like finding a guru, where an amount of skepticism should be implied anyhow, and having a bit of dharma burden, the outlines of an essentialist myth, is arguably much better than facing incarceration for whatever reason. (legal or psychotic)
To that, a label which does not call carry tradition is not going to have any more authority than "hippies", "psychonauts", and the "new age" movement in general. An existential integrity of communication may be a step back from the corruptions of a language, but how useful is this? Its always the Jack Black scenario, as I understand it. Existentialism is not a rule of language, but a card that can be played when necessary. The only realistic rule of language is in whatever "effectively" communicates, that is the only authority.
It is just a word after all; perhaps it would be better to acknowledge the impreciseness and malleability of language, and to simply to communicate, even if it is to contrive to and compromise that descriptor - not under the essentialist illusion, but as social.
Basically, what I am saying is the term could used to assert a livelihood, a moral sway, rather than what our current situation is, as the fresh subject of "civilized" marginalization. That is what happens to existential integrity, it is taboo or neurotic until it somehow gains a basis in tradition.
I am not sure what I think. Maybe psychedelics are meant to be underground in modern society, and maybe that is what makes them genuinely existential. I believe that too. Indeed, its almost silly to imagine of any other reality.
--------------------
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!
|
Mufungo
Coming at ya
Registered: 04/03/07
Posts: 2,743
Loc: Knowhere
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Kickle]
#10399068 - 05/25/09 10:32 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said:
Quote:
Mufungo said:
I don't think there are many occupations in the modern age which haven't come a long way from their initial roots.
Does it really matter if a shaman of today isn't like a shaman of long ago (assuming that there really were "shamans" long ago)? I guess it might depend on one's own values around tradition.
True that. I'm speaking from my personal values and my cultural surroundings.
I get the feeling that most everyone who posts here shares my culture, though. And in our culture, the shaman of old would be incredibly ineffective, except for purposes of stroking the ego. "I'm magic" and all that, which in my opinion, isn't about healing.
And yeah, a lot of my personal values are being interlaced.
Just saying it how I see it.
That's cool. Thanks for sharing.
I believe that shamanism is a little out of place in western culture at the moment too. Mainly because our culture lacks a history of it. But from what I can tell, shamanism is growing in popularity in western culture. So if there are people here now who are shaman practicing shamanism with/on clients, then I can't see any reason why a history of shamanism in western cultures can't begin. (on a side note, what word other than 'western' can I use to represent 'our' culture? If there's a better word, please let me know cause I don't like the word 'western') I compare it to Chinese medicine being practiced in western culture.. 20 years ago it was a little strange for Chinese medicine to be practiced in western culture, now it's widely accepted and even covered by some health insurance schemes.
--------------------
|
daytripper23
?
Registered: 06/22/05
Posts: 3,595
Loc:
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: daytripper23]
#10399087 - 05/25/09 10:35 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Etymology:
shaman:
1698, "priest of the Ural-Altaic peoples," probably via Ger. Schamane, from Rus. shaman, from Tungus shaman, which is perhaps from Chinese sha men "Buddhist monk," from Prakrit samaya-, from Skt. sramana-s "Buddhist ascetic."
Language evolves so do traditions. How do they relate?
|
awesomebastard
Lost
Registered: 12/16/07
Posts: 4,891
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Bridgeburner]
#10399186 - 05/25/09 10:53 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The argument the shaman haters often use is that these people making the claim are most likely white suburban kids.
I dont see how this is relevant at all.
If the art of shamanism has any truth to it who would need vectors for spiritual communication the most?
Those in touch with their spiritual side or those who are losing all touch with everything spiritual and natural about life?
Seems to me that if their were "spirits" that attempt to communicate with living organisms they may seek those furthest from their spiritual side.
White suburban culture fits that description.
--------------------
"Absolute certainty is a privilege of uneducated minds and fanatics." ~ C.J. Keyser
Mr. Cypher said: "I just tell the girls how sexy I am and their panties melt."
|
 Kickle
Wanderer
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,978
Last seen: 2 days, 14 hours
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: daytripper23]
#10399190 - 05/25/09 10:54 PM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Maybe psychedelics are meant to be underground in modern society, and maybe that is what makes them genuinely existential. I believe that too. Indeed, its almost silly to imagine of any other reality.
This is where I always end up.
Quote:
Existentialism is not a rule of language, but a card that can be played when necessary.
--------------------
Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction?
Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
Bridgeburner
Not spiritual at all.
Registered: 09/16/06
Posts: 20,010
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Kickle]
#10400487 - 05/26/09 05:42 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
to clarify it up i'm talking about shamanism in today's world.
a shaman is someone who keeps in touch with the spiritual world by traveling there in an altered state of mind (trance, sleep, MAYBE drugs), heals ailments, has ESP-related abilities and who has some degree of clairvoyance. these are just some general points that popped to my head.
a shaman never proclaims himself to be carrying that title: the people surrounding him gradually realize he/she is different or has some unnatural abilities.
the general lines of being initiated by the "other world" into the profession of shamanism is apparent in our culture and cultures all around the globe. the western society lumps it into mental illnesses category and denies all possibility of a psychosis having a positive effect. the shamans in siberia were arrested by the soviets because they saw them as madmen and frauds, ending up sending the shamans into insane asylums.
with no real tribal systems or initiation rites the western world is in a deep spiritual crisis, or that's my opinion anyway. we are hung up on words by either being imprisoned by them or using them carelessly until words lose all value.
--------------------
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Bridgeburner]
#10400849 - 05/26/09 08:43 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
b0red5tiff said:
a shaman never proclaims himself to be carrying that title: the people surrounding him gradually realize he/she is different or has some unnatural abilities.
Says who? Is a shaman not allowed to take pride in his own abilities and categorize himself as a shaman if he indeed matches the description?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
  
|
Bridgeburner
Not spiritual at all.
Registered: 09/16/06
Posts: 20,010
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: deCypher]
#10401002 - 05/26/09 09:26 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
in most ancient cultures a shaman wasn't someone who worked towards becoming one but a diseased (mentally or physically) person who nearly died due to the sickness but then recovered "miraculously". once healed he (or she) started to perform feats which were unusual. thus the surrounding populous treated that person as a holy man and called him a healer, shaman or something in the lines of that.
taking pride in being able to have such powers seems strange to me because the insights the shaman supposedly possesses deflate the ego quite a bit. plus pride would give very little to his craft imo.
--------------------
|
Quetzalcohuatl
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/09
Posts: 646
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Bridgeburner]
#10401016 - 05/26/09 09:28 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
i used to get a strain of weed that made me levitate
it was swweet
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Bridgeburner]
#10401035 - 05/26/09 09:32 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
b0red5tiff said:
in most ancient cultures a shaman wasn't someone who worked towards becoming one but a diseased (mentally or physically) person who nearly died due to the sickness but then recovered "miraculously". once healed he (or she) started to perform feats which were unusual. thus the surrounding populous treated that person as a holy man and called him a healer, shaman or something in the lines of that.
I know, but what's to prevent a person from going through such a sickness, performing miraculous feats, and then recognizing his own shamanhood? Does one necessarily have to get society's approval before one can call one's self a shaman?
Quote:
b0red5tiff said:
taking pride in being able to have such powers seems strange to me because the insights the shaman supposedly possesses deflate the ego quite a bit. plus pride would give very little to his craft imo.
Would it be safe to say that Brujos and Curanderos fulfill the shaman role? If so then Brujeria would definitely involve some form of egoistic pride IMO.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: deCypher]
#10401119 - 05/26/09 09:46 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
what's to prevent a person from going through such a sickness, performing miraculous feats
Um, because miraculous feats are impossible. Shamans were never in touch with the Spirit World, they were just adept at selling that idea to the populace.
--------------------
|
Bridgeburner
Not spiritual at all.
Registered: 09/16/06
Posts: 20,010
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: deCypher]
#10401164 - 05/26/09 09:58 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deCypher said:
Quote:
b0red5tiff said:
in most ancient cultures a shaman wasn't someone who worked towards becoming one but a diseased (mentally or physically) person who nearly died due to the sickness but then recovered "miraculously". once healed he (or she) started to perform feats which were unusual. thus the surrounding populous treated that person as a holy man and called him a healer, shaman or something in the lines of that.
I know, but what's to prevent a person from going through such a sickness, performing miraculous feats, and then recognizing his own shamanhood? Does one necessarily have to get society's approval before one can call one's self a shaman?
Quote:
b0red5tiff said:
taking pride in being able to have such powers seems strange to me because the insights the shaman supposedly possesses deflate the ego quite a bit. plus pride would give very little to his craft imo.
Would it be safe to say that Brujos and Curanderos fulfill the shaman role? If so then Brujeria would definitely involve some form of egoistic pride IMO.
i don't think no one is gonna call himself "shaman". it's not a car mechanics class that you graduate, get a title and then get on with your job. i think the society starts calling him a shaman because that's what everyone thinks a shaman does.
i think different regions have different attitudes towards this sort of a state. each cultural reality tunnel creates a different attitude, some are more withdrawn and quiet, others more loud and expressive. but it wouldn't be safe to say because words generally are very dangerous in the right hands.
Quote:
Um, because miraculous feats are impossible. Shamans were never in touch with the Spirit World, they were just adept at selling that idea to the populace.
that's your perception.
--------------------
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Um, because miraculous feats are impossible.
Proof?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: deCypher]
#10401183 - 05/26/09 10:05 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
How long you been here now?
Miracles are relegated to an age when men were less rational and superstition was rife.
--------------------
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
|
That's not proof, but I'll admit it's persuasive evidence. My point is that just because you've never seen a miracle does not make their existence logically impossible.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
Kickle
Wanderer
Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,978
Last seen: 2 days, 14 hours
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Um, because miraculous feats are impossible. Shamans were never in touch with the Spirit World, they were just adept at selling that idea to the populace.
I've always found the folie a deux phenomenon to be interesting in this context.
What makes an individual who is near a schizophrenic individual, begin to see what the schizophrenic sees? Close interpersonal relationship seems to be a must, or trust if you will. Also, by todays standards, social isolation or a lack of societal explanations.
Trust and a lack of alternative explanation = both people experiencing the delusion?
Can we really be convinced of reality so easily? Does it merely take someone telling us what we're seeing, or should be seeing, in order for us to see it? Can the mind really create what it feels it should see? If so, how can we ever be sure that society is accurate in any way, regardless of time period?
--------------------
Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction?
Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
Bridgeburner
Not spiritual at all.
Registered: 09/16/06
Posts: 20,010
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
How long you been here now?
Miracles are relegated to an age when men were less rational and superstition was rife.
are you saying that age has changed? we are still irrational and superstitious.
miracle is something that happens despite all opposition or explanation. you can rationalize everything if you try hard enough. being stuck in a skeptic's reality tunnel makes the skeptic the opposite of a christian who believes in miracles: if a statue of a madonna cries tears of blood both the skeptic and the christian have abundant arguments about how it's a miracle/a natural occurrence. a skeptic is never skeptic about his own beliefs, which is why they are just as fallible as the point they're trying to argue against.
this thread isn't about proving something to someone who has pre-decided all proof against their view is faulty in one way or another anyway.
--------------------
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
|
A miracle sometimes can only be explained by a (yet) hidden cause. We also could simply call that coincidence before we know the cause.
'Getting in touch' with a spiritual world doesn't make sense of course if one lacks the concept of a spiritual world. This concept maybe is the most easiest to understand when it happens to oneself.
|
Bridgeburner
Not spiritual at all.
Registered: 09/16/06
Posts: 20,010
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: BlueCoyote]
#10401518 - 05/26/09 11:27 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BlueCoyote said:
A miracle sometimes can only be explained by a (yet) hidden cause. We also could simply call that coincidence before we know the cause.
Getting in touch with a spiritual world doesn't make sense of course if one lacks the concept of a spiritual world.
i agree. focusing on trying to rationalize the impossible is a useless task. "miracle" is a substitute word for an event we don't know the cause yet. if a person has cancer and goes to a person who has been known to make the cancer go away and his cancer DOES go away after visiting the shaman/healer then you may see it as a miracle because you can't explain it and the shaman's explanation does not fit into the current society's reality tunnel anyway. so when you have to choose between a weird explanation and no explanation naturally you're gonna choose "no explanation" so it would not shake your dogmas that much.
--------------------
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: THE "I think i might be a SHAMAN" thread [Re: Bridgeburner]
#10401555 - 05/26/09 11:36 AM (14 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
if a statue of a madonna cries tears of blood
Seeeing as how it has yet to happen, it is hard to make a strong argument with a hypothetical. Analysis on such statues has shown colored oil, but nary a trace of hemoglobin.
--------------------
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds 
All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale 
Kratom Capsules for Sale
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 5 all )
Ego Death
fireworks_god
Learyfan
Food
Anonymous
Jellric
mantis