Arizona Rocks Tours

Catholic Priest and Shaman- a Contrast of Communications

Joe Holman — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:19:21 +0000

The means of association and communication with supernatural beings is hugely variable across the cultures of the world. This differentiation is readily apparent when looking at the shaman and the Catholic priest and their respective relationship with spirit.

A shaman moves through the spirit world. He can transport himself into the spirit realm, talk with spirits, and ask them questions at will. And they talk back. A shaman derives his power from this direct, personal communication with the other worldly. His maneuvering of the supernatural landscape, interacting with animal, mineral, and “land of the dead” spirits, makes him a focal point of a hunting and gathering society. This is usually done on an “as needed” basis; it is not tied to a calendrical schedule. Through his personal experience in the spirit world he can heal, bring rain, and divine the future. He can bring the spirits into this world and remove them from this world through personal interaction.

The Catholic priest is an absolute contrast. He derives his power by a learned competence in the use of ritual. A priest does not have the “face-to-face” relationship with spirits or “God” that a shaman does; he interacts with this spirit world through an institution, a regulated calendrical schedule of rites and ceremonies. These rites are codified and standardized, and passed down from older priests, and later passed down to younger ones. The priest interacts with the spirit world through the intermediation of the institution that is the Church. Priests use supplication as a form of communication with the spirit world. They pray to the spirit world; they do not interact and learn from the spirit world. This is done in service to an established enterprise (the church) for the stability of the society in which the church exists, for the continuation of the church.

The shaman talks to spirits while the priest prays to them. The job of the priest is to maintain the status quo, the shaman is the status quo, and he is a part of the culture. I personally would rather go “down the rat hole” than be subject to the proselytizing of a priest, and put my soul in the hands of a shaman. Just my opinion. What’s yours? Leave a comment!

Culture, Religion, and Disease…Some Thoughts

Joe Holman — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:00:22 +0000

The etiology and treatment of disease is controlled by culture. They reflect the belief system of a culture and are inherently tied to it. Religion and medicine are closely associated with each other in non-western cultures and disease is believed to be caused by natural or supernatural means. As science is an outgrowth of religion, it too is tied to medicine in the west, almost exclusively. Anthropologists have studied non-western cultures throughout the world and have identified six primary disease theories that are prevalent. These include natural causes, imitative and contagious magic, object caused disease, soul-loss, spirit-intrusion, and breach of taboo. The cause of disease western culture is exclusively natural.

Treatment of disease is determined by its cause. Ethnomedicine may treat headaches with sucking, as the cause is an object intrusion created by magic. Western medicine may treat the same headache with synthetic anti-inflammatory drugs like naproxen, identified by its chemical signature C₁₄H₁₄O_3.Epilepsy may be treated in non-western society by performing a ceremony to find and retrieve a lost soul because it is caused by soul-loss, while in the west it is treated with anti-seizure drugs which inhibit the wild firing of neural impulses.

Because of the belief in supernatural causation of disease in ethnomedicine, treatment is very often of a spiritual nature. In the west, all causation is natural and treatments are with pharmaceuticals. In some cases the supernatural treatments are more effective than western treatment for the same disease, as in the case of mental illness. Cure rates using ethnomedicine are more than double those in the west. Because of the tenant of science that requires proof before belief, there are no supernatural causes of disease. It is most interesting to note, though, how effective retrieval of a soul can be in curing a disease. It is belief (religion) that may hold the key.

Who is a Shaman?

Joe Holman — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:52:00 +0000

Religious specialists date to the beginnings of religion. Mediums, shaman, priests, prophets, and diviners have helped, controlled, and advanced religion for thousands of years.

The shaman is the traditional healer. From the Tungus word shaman, or haman, he moves through the world of spirit curing, divining, and chasing ghosts. He communicates directly with souls “on the other side”, asking questions face to face rather than supplicating them. And unlike a witch, all of this is done in full view of his people. The remaining stronghold of the shaman is in northeast Asia among the Yakuts, Tungus, and the tribes of the western shore of the Bering Sea.

The shaman resides not only in the middle world of men; he moves through the upper world of light and good and the lower world of darkness and evil. This is what distinguishes the shaman from all other healers; the ability to communicate directly with spirits. He communes with his familiars, his guardian angel or Emekhet and an external soul known as his Yekyua. This mischievous spirit belonging to both the shaman and a living beast, an animal, is what enables the shaman to do harm in the middle world. This spirit can be a source of irritation to the shaman as it is independent of him and has effects on his life that he has no control over. Effects that can include death.

The shaman uses many things in his practice including special clothing and percussion instruments, all adorned with symbols. He uses these in his séance while he travels to the spirit world in full public view. He can be in two places at once; his physical body twitching and convulsing in the middle world while his soul works in the spirit world. And when his journey is done, he often collapses in exhaustion. He makes these journeys to heal, to dispel spirits, and to maintain the faith of the people. This is not to say that this is a job without risk. If things go wrong, if too many people go uncured, the shaman may be accused of being a witch. More than one shaman of the Pima-Papago and the Mohave has been killed when sickness went uncured. With impassive acceptance, the shaman would meet his fate, knowing that in violent death he would receive an other-worldly fate he may otherwise miss.

Today, particularly in “New Age” communities, many call themselves “shamanic” healers. I have always been skeptical of them. They exhibit no true knowledge of what a shaman is, or what a shaman does. It is a convenient and popular appellation that people adopt with no knowledge whatsoever. They admire the shaman for his “ability” to “get in touch with himself” and the use of spiritual medicine as opposed to mechanical Western medicine. They are completely ignorant of the perils that exist in the real shaman’s craft. A true shaman deals with human fears and illness on a consistent basis. Sorcery is often seen as the cause of illness and the penalty for being found as a sorcerer is often times death. Should a shaman fail in his duties to cure illness regularly, he himself may be found to be a sorcerer. In his practice, he continually assures his people that he is doing all he can to cure them. Willingness to subject himself to physical pain is a sign that he is acting in good faith. A true shaman would never lock 60 people in a sweat lodge while he sits outdoors as they suffer and die inside. The penalty for a true shaman would be certain death. There is no appreciation of the context in which a real shaman operates, the spiritual discipline he adheres to, or the dangers he faces in the pursuit of his duties.Beware, because unless these people travel through the spirit world and communicate directly with spirits they are in no way “shamans”. True shamans learn their vocation over years of training and to reduce their lifetime of discipline to a set of personal development techniques strips the tradition from links to a specific landscape and cultural tradition. This does a tremendous disservice to the peoples who are true shamans. They are warriors in the battle against the darkness of the human heart. Shamanism not only attests to the vibrancy of life, but can also bring violence and death. Next time you meet a “shaman”, ask if death could be the penalty for failure to heal you and others!

The Symbol that is the American Flag

Joe Holman — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 02:20:52 +0000

Many people outside the United States believe that Americans have a “flag obsession”, an almost cult like fetish worship. Why is this the case? What, in fact, does the flag mean to Americans? What does it mean to you Americans reading this? Let know. This is a conversation.

The elevated status given to the American flag as “the” symbol of America is due to the fact that as a symbol, it represents more that one ideal. It has many meanings to nearly all Americans. It embodies patriotism, freedom, national pride, unity, history, democracy, and many other values that Americans resonate with.

From an early age we “pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America” five times a week. We hold our hand over our heart as we say the pledge, symbolizing our love for our flag. We are told stories of wars where the flag rallied troops to victories. When we attend sporting events, we sing a song to the flag; the same song everywhere, before every sporting event. We stand when we sing and we again place our hand over our heart. We remove our hats; everyone does this. Should you fail to observe this respect to our flag you would surely be stared at, sneered at, and maybe even have some harsh words spoken to you. We are taught to respect the flag, never allowing it to touch the ground. In 1989, 36 U.S.C. 173-178 was passed into law that provided criminal penalties for desecration of the flag (this law was later held to be unconstitutional in 1990). This symbol, more than any other in America, stands for all of the shared beliefs, values, and ideals that Americans hold sacred.

Symbols and symbol systems define our reality. They allow us to express in physical form intangible values, attitudes, and judgments. From a very young age we are taught these intangible lessons and are told that our flag represents these things. Foreigners view our flag very differently. To them it stands for things like colonialism, force of will, and even “the evil Satan”. As time moves on, some Americans are beginning to change their attitude toward the flag. Candidate Obama was clobbered because he didn’t wear a flag lapel pin. He was called unpatriotic. This is how ingrained our view of the flag is. But many Americans, immersed in two undeclared and unlawful wars, are beginning to wonder what the flag “really”, stands for. Warrant-less wiretapping, the capture of personal emails, and torture of foreign prisoners has made an impact on our own view of what our flag is. Are those qualities who we are? Do we want to live in country that exhibits and practices those behaviors? Could this symbol of all that is good in this country, become a symbol for what we do to others? As culture changes, so do our symbols. What will become of the flag?

Two Forms of Magic

Joe Holman — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:07:08 +0000

Contagious and imitative Magic are the two forms of Sympathetic magic which is based on the foundation that things, through a secret sympathy, can act upon each other at a distance. Imitative magic acts through the Law of Similarity, i.e. things that are alike are connected. Voodoo dolls are “like” their target. In modern times photographs are often used. During some peoples imitative ceremonies meant to stimulate crop growth, women would sit in an inner circle while the men would dance around and take one after the other. “Fertility” for the crops. Women who had many children were good for planting crops while barren women were bad. Contagious magic acts through the Law of Contact, i.e. things that were once in contact continue to be connected. Finger nail clippings are still connected to the person from whom they came. Hair is very powerful. In Germany thousands of years ago, you would drive a nail into the footprint of a man to make him lame.

What is a Taboo?

Joe Holman — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:38:09 +0000

Taboos prohibit or restrict behaviors or actions. These revolve around sex, food, rites of passage, sacred objects, and sacred people. Taboos function to control the ecology, distinguish between social groups and control them, and to threaten violators with supernatural punishment. These proscriptions are put into place to counter threats to existence and/or social stability. The Jewish peoples have a series of taboos regarding the eating of certain animals. Breaking a sacred taboo is a “sin”, as opposed to a mere civil disobedience. Taboos are the restraint we put upon ourselves. We’ve been doing it for tens of thousands of years and we still do. Hmmm…..

Myth vs History

Joe Holman — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:14:54 +0000

Myth is the narrative relation of the occurrence of events that has a sacred nature. The characters of myth are often symbols for ideals, values, or beliefs and may have never existed outside the myth itself. Myth is typically passed down from generation to generation orally. History is the recordation of events by a witness to a given event. History may be related orally, but it is the telling of occurrences and reference to items, persons, or phenomena unknown outside the world of “myth” that differentiates myth from history.

Another Culture Swallowed by the World

Joe Holman — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 06:16:55 +0000

The last speaker of one of the world’s oldest dialects has died. And with her death, so dies yet another culture. Our indifference to this death of a culture is unforgivable. Hundreds of Native American cultures are only a story, their language lost, their myths but a story. This loss of a culture tens of thousands of years old is reported only on the internet, or maybe the back pages of newspapers. You won’t see it in the headlines. These peoples are our ancestors! How self-centered are we? Our culture is so “self” focused, we simply dismiss the loss of the history that brought us here. Shame on us.

I am appalled.

Read more at http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6143UW20100205

New Series!

Joe Holman — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:01:12 +0000

I will be posting a new series of articles derived from assignments in an anthropology of religion class I am currently taking. This includes magic, witchcraft, ritual, and “modern” religion. I hope you all enjoy this new series. It will be a bit technical because this is a collegiate anthropology course as opposed to my more “off-the-cuff” musings. Here we go!!

History of the Evolution of “Religion”

Joe Holman — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:46:28 +0000

From the belief in souls or spirits, to modern day science, the hypothesis for the root, and development, of religion is discussed. Clifford Geertz, speaking from a perspective almost 40 years old, talks of the evolution of the anthropology of religion. Lecture notes encapsulate and emphasize points that introduce us to why we have religion, and how it may have evolved. Together, a perspective and template is introduced, into which we might analyze our future lessons.

Geertz’s article, “Religion” is basically an historical summary of the anthropology of religion since the mid-nineteenth century. I do find it interesting that there is nothing mentioned of the musings of pre-nineteenth century thinkers. But then, “publishing” was not the way of many thinkers prior. Certainly in an area as ripe for speculation as this, there have been thinkers thousands of years old.

Geertz tells us of the development of the anthropology of religion from the late 19^th century onward. He begins with evolutionism and Tylor, certainly a great thinker of his day. His theory was intellectualistic. The belief in spirits was a way to rationalize death, dreams, and possession. “Belief in spiritual beings” was a way to order the world. Polytheism and monotheism grew from this animistic belief. The practice of religion became more sophisticated. “Cause”, “category”, and “relationship” began to emerge. The world is seen to have become more rational. The “primitives” began to arise from darkness into a more ordered and understandable world. This, it was argued by evolutionists, transformed into the more stable, regularized practices of “modern” religion. These were the “evolutionists” that were soon to be taken on by the anti-evolutionists. And the debate was on. But the debate was for naught, as neither side was persuasive.

The positivist movement against historicist thought began to take hold. Sigmund Freud took the front on a psychological approach, while Durkheim took another. The psychological approach argued that religious rituals and beliefs are derived from deep psychosocial wounds suffered in childhood, while the sociological approach argued for the integrity of social order as the root of religious beliefs. This theory argued that all sacred beliefs were derived from “inward social necessities. And this gave rise to “functionalism”, or “structuralism”.

Structuralism focused on the theory that religion was to “celebrate and sustain the norms” that society is built upon. Promulgated by Radcliff-Brown, the focus became the content of sacred “symbols” These symbols were connected to the people’s well-being. Social and natural needs were reflected in sacred symbols that merged both into a cultural “world view”. Yet this left all mystery, and fascination with these symbols unexplained. And the symbols themselves were vexing. Why one symbol for one culture and another for a neighboring culture? It was theorized that these symbols derived their importance from their “functional” utility in everyday life. It does appear that religious practices of “primitives” do reflect the moral, functional values of a culture. This is an important connection. But what about the emotional connection? What about the philosophical origins. We are still lost in the wilderness of an anthropological explanation.

And so we come to “semantic studies”. As of the sixties, there was no central theory of semantic studies, but Geertz postulates that one of the “most disarming” is to simply accept that expressions of the sacred are real. We need only track them, record them, and compare them. Yet the metaphysical questions are left aside. We are provided with an historical record, but there is no delving into the reasons why religious phenomena occur. What is the purpose? All metaphysical questions and considerations are left aside.

So what was the primitive mind thinking? Why establish this set of beliefs as opposed to that set of beliefs? Perhaps it was a result of a distinctive mode of thought; only now perceptible by a primitive mind. What was the “concept of meaning”? How could this effect further research? Was it possible that the primitive mind was capable of logical, original, and bold thought? Radin sought to establish that it was. Of course it was. The primitive mind was no different than our own. This has become nearly universally accepted. Malinowski, however, broadened the argument. He postulated that the primitive mind knew the distinctive lines between empirical, magic, and religious. The problem is that this isn’t even distinctive today. But who is to say the primitive mind was not more advanced than ours?

Levi-Stauss, working with classification systems, focused on how tribal peoples ordered their objects and their world. He focused on the symbolic structures and they way they are formulated and applied. The concrete images of these structures are of supreme importance. They form the connection between the everyday world and the supernatural. The use of good symbols from everyday life form a nexus that contributes to good thinking.

In the end, Geertz admits that all of these approaches, historical, psychological, sociological, and semantic, still can’t explain “religion”. He is convinced that a comprehensive approach, utilizing all of the above and more, is coming. I hope that it has.

The lecture notes for this week were very informative, and merged nicely with the Geertz article on the history of anthropology of religion. The notes reflect a present day “look back” on western civilization and the current thought existent today.

Using the word “we”, as I am a member of the descendants of the white imperialist ancestors, I decry the atrocities we have perpetrated on “primitive” peoples. Our excuses for slavery, ethnocide, and oppression are sorely lacking. I think the “civilized” peoples were the ones persecuted.

Dreaming and death are certainly phenomena to be pondered. How does that happen? It must be a separate part of us we don’t experience in the “real” world. Belief in souls, belief that all things have souls is a natural outgrowth of our inquisitiveness. My dog looks me in the eye, he sees me. He knows when I’m happy or sad. He has a soul. Animism is a given to me.

Neanderthals must have experienced the same thing. We all have, throughout history. “There is no society without religion”. But there are substitutes, functional-equivalents. They fulfill the need to explain the universe, to explain our relationships, and to give us a meaning for life. Fundamentalism is a cancerous outgrowth of this need.

So what is the meaning of life? Why am I here? What is my purpose? Is this all chaos?

Chaos is a threat to the meaning of life. It is the experience of life without meaning. Bafflement, suffering, and ethical paradox all threaten our perception. Evil also threatens us. Why aren’t things the way they SHOULD be? Who did this to me anyway? My “religion” is supposed to tell me. Where are you, God?