Thread: I am a shaman

modified by sivason

-post was offensive

Originally Posted by cmind

Sacred =/= secret. Just look at a guy like Terence McKenna. Far from keeping his knowledge secret, he tried very hard to spread it as far and wide as possible. Because he thought it was sacred.

And isn't this website another example of spreading sacred knowledge to anyone who wants it? Lucid dreaming is pretty sacred, yet no one here wants to keep it a secret.

Meh. Thank god for that! I love Mckenna and I love LDing.

Terence Mckenna had some real issues (from what I hear, supposedly Dennis talked about it) with the way he presented his stuff. It certainly didn't vibe with Ram Dass the way he took the stage. Judging from the conversation he had with him that is on tape.

But ultimately, was Mckenna a Shaman? He was not. He was a profound story-teller, but he never consciously dared to make the leap to shamanism. Not after La Chorerra afaik. His book true hallucinations goes into shamanism but he immediately shrugged it off as a potential and never truly got into it.

Salvia has been a closely guarded secret for a long time before the west got a word of it. I believe Dream Yoga and Tibettan scriptures had sort of the same faith. At some point they announced that the west was ready to hear the news.. I'm just saying, Shamans tend to think otherwise.

Dude, if Terence McKenna wasn't a shaman, then I'm pretty sure no one here is either.

Ok. I don't want to be offensive or hurt about it. But how certain can you really be about it? There is honestly not much information to work with. Besides, only OP is claiming to be a shaman.

Hope we can do this without resorting to I'm right ur Wrong kind of attituted. I'm just trying to facillitate the discussion

IMO, someone who talks like the OP can't possibly be a shaman. I've heard stories about real shamans down in the Amazon, and they don't sound like teenagers with inflated egos.

Just my 2 cents.

I was kind of a self proclaimed shaman for a few years. It was when I was about 20 and into mushrooms and such. None of my peers gave a crap about otherworldly things and just took drugs to get high. I had some profound experiences and imagine I was fairly close in my approach to what would be shamanism. However, I came to a few conclusions about my own path. 1) Drugs are interesting, but not something you should hold to for long if you want the most potential in life. They only have so much to share, and at some point it is old news. I moved forward. 2) Nature is great, but I started to see deep spiritual virtue in any manifest thing, even macaroni and cheese. I have reverence for nature, but I look at a bigger picture now. 3) I became in awe of God (god/ gods/ the higher self/ the one etc...) and found myself far more drawn into yogic mysticism in which seeking a connection with God was the source of 'bliss,' Then none of the drug stuff mattered anymore.

Being a 'shaman' in modern-day society seems harder than it is from an amazonian village. Shamanism isn't exactly defined well. But say it constitutes what the indians did and it encompasses going into the desert for 3 days and eat Peyote.

This kind of freedom in this society is hard to get by.. Going outside and eating mescaline. I've been there. Encompasses strange faces, very strange experiences. And that is just training wheels for being a shaman if you ask me.

There is also no guidance. I mean, shamans are trained by other shamans per usual. I can very much agree that being trained as a shaman in this society without having guidance is though.

Originally Posted by b12

Would you impart sacred knowledge so freely? If I typed to you the words, you would hardly understand. It's not yet time for you, yet the simple knowledge that the subject exists will in time give you understanding. The words are just words, yet the implications are both challenging and life-changing.

I am curious now. Let us hear it, please.

I am making way too many references to this experience of mine, but when I was in South America, I have spent time with a member of the Krishna Consciousness. This person made sure she said "Hare Krishna" to everyone she met (in subtle ways). The reason is those words purify people from Karma. She wasn't converting people at all, actually, she sort of kept it secret because she didn't want to get people's prejudice but she found subtle ways to cleanse other people. The person didn't need to know what "Hare Krishna" meant.

In the same way, it would be nice if you could say the words, not so we may understand them necessarily but so they may purify us in a way.

I think my story is relevant, because this particular person I'm talking about went to a jungle shaman (Everyone knows about the amazonian shamans!) not too far from where we were and the shaman said she didn't need his hallucinogenic drink because she was above that (spiritually speaking), she could see ghosts and auras.

Anyways, I am curious to here what that shaman had to say, what was your question. It can only do good. And you've already mentioned the story. The value of it won't be diminished from being shared. It will only grow.

When a bee pollinates a flower, who knows if any new plant will blossom from it, but it's the only way it will ever happen.

Besides, you told your friends, and I would be impressed that three users of drugs would be the only people at a high enough level of wisdom to understand this, and not us, which have lots of hallucinogenic experience (That is, dreams). Besides, my understanding of Shamanic practice is that drugs are only a facilitating tool that wouldn't even need to be used by someone who is in great relationship with nature and whatever is beyond, ex. Sivason.

This forum gets more disgusting day by day. So someone gave words of wisdom to b12, regardless of what those words were, it was obviously a personal message that doesn't include anyone else in this thread. B12 doesn't have to tell you those words to prove anything. It was a personal experience and that's what spirituality is. Personal.

What confuses me is not the content of the message (because it's just information, I'd guess drawing knowledge of them could potentially be impossible like B12 said), but the fact that if it's such a personal message of spiritual relevance, which like juroara said, emphasis on personal, how could 3 distinct people reach the same conclusion about it? Even if they're extremely informed about B12 life, I'd think that a shaman message would be unique to him, or....personal.

I mean, if I was in the same situation and my friend said "he was really a shaman!" I'd say "jesus, the man was too obvious, even other people can grasp this apparently deep message about myself after CREATING knowledge out of a piece of information (cause like B12 said, it's not the words that matter, his friend would have to attain knowledge of what they meant in order to agree with him that the man was indeed a shaman)". Right?

If it was intensely personal I don't see how it makes sense to... tell everybody about it.

I was just being a smart ass and should say "I am sorry" to B-12. Sorry B-12.

Thanks for sharing your encounter. I have no problem with calling anyone a Shaman who desires to follow that form of spiritual inquiry. As far as I am concerned if the guy spends lots of time alone in nature and draws his spirituality from it and believes he is attaining a connection with "the spirit world" then we may as well accept his claim. It is not like the guy B-12 met was claiming any certain magical skill that he claimed could be observed.

How is this really any different than if we deny someone's claim to be a martial artist? That claim is not to be a master in one skill or be better than some one else. It is just a claim to having gone through many steps on the path of learning. The same fits the shaman argument.


The man on the path has given no reason to doubt him, so I find it rude to think otherwise, just as it would be rude to reject a claim that one is a Buddhist who meditates a lot.


Now, why was I being a smart-ass in this thread? The OP seems very dramatic and attention seeking in the manner that makes me think they are 16 years old. Add to that not a single comment about shamanism itself or how they practice it. At least no comments that make any sense. Then they fail to respond in any way, such as telling about experiences or philosophies. It came across a lot like "I am a Jedi!!! Yep a freaking Jedi, Play some Star Wars music, because that is how cool I am. No, I refuse to give details, it is a curse to be so damn powerful and awesome."

My comment about B12's experience was just joking around about the nature of comments that seem profound at the moment, but do not seem special when typed out on a forum.

Originally Posted by Denziloe

If it was intensely personal I don't see how it makes sense to... tell everybody about it.

It's pretty straight forward - he briefly mentioned an experience he had that was somewhat related to the topic, but didn't go into any more detail than was necessary. No need to try and poke and prod it.

Originally Posted by Occipitalred

I am making way too many references to this experience of mine, but when I was in South America, I have spent time with a member of the Krishna Consciousness. This person made sure she said "Hare Krishna" to everyone she met (in subtle ways). The reason is those words purify people from Karma. She wasn't converting people at all, actually, she sort of kept it secret because she didn't want to get people's prejudice but she found subtle ways to cleanse other people. The person didn't need to know what "Hare Krishna" meant.

I know I'm going off on a tangent, but I can't stand people that confuse their hippy-isms with spirituality. eg. people who convert to Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. because they think those religions will make them "more enlightened." A monk in meditation is no more profound than a bible-thumper at mass or a professor in a lecture hall.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

I know I'm going off on a tangent, but I can't stand people that confuse their hippy-isms with spirituality. eg. people who convert to Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. because they think those religions will make them "more enlightened." A monk in meditation is no more profound than a bible-thumper at mass or a professor in a lecture hall.

Well, those thoughts are kind of amusing in a weird angle.

In defense to my friend OR. I wouldn't take it too seriously

GavinGill, I will answer your comment. I am not sure I completely understood it so I will respond to it in different ways so that one of my answers will be relevant.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

I can't stand people that confuse their hippy-isms with spirituality.

It's hard for me to understand this one sentence because neither the Krishna Consciousness member or I were being hippies. I was volunteering and had 2 "Spanish" classes per week with different teachers. We talked about culture, religion, and politics. It was very fun talking to all these people with different perspectives. One of them was a Jehova's Witness and it was a lot more fun talking to her than people say it is. My teacher who was an Hare Krishna member just talked to me about her own faith and I asked if I could go with her to the temple (after we had talked about these subjects for many hours) because I had never been to such a religious event.

I am saying this because there is a huge "hippie" traveler culture in South America, and not that I have anything against them, I did not happen to interact with them.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

Eg. people who convert to Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. because they think those religions will make them "more enlightened." A monk in meditation is no more profound than a bible-thumper at mass or a professor in a lecture hall.

This makes a lot more sense! I definitely see what you mean in this sentence. Personally, I don't see what is wrong with it, though. Let me explain.

If you're saying my teacher was looking to Krishna Consciousness for enlightenment, well, why not? She was raised in a Mormon family. Her family was very religious. However back in that time (20 years ago), there was a lot of violence, you would hear explosions in the night, there would be black-outs and gun fire and you couldn't talk about politics to your university profs because a lot of them were part of violent organizations and you could be hurt. Anyways, because of all the violence, and because she did see auras and ghosts and stuff, she just didn't identify with her family religion. She turned to another catholic branch religion. It didn't work for her. In the end, she found the Krishna Consciousness, and that specific religion succeeded in explaining the things that she didn't understand about her life and give her a proper spiritual blooming.

I think it's perfect for people to reach out for Hinduism or Buddhism because they relate better to that. But like you said, there is as much value in a catholic or secular life. Personally, I am attracted by Eastern beliefs. It hasn't prevented me to learn a lot from many different religions and secular school of thoughts.


If However, you are saying that you don't agree that I would bring religious spirituality in the topic of shamanism, well, I don't know, I think shamanism very well fits in the religious spirituality topic. And the reason I brought Krishna Consciousness in the topic is not that I think that it is superior, I am not a member of it, there was just something that I thought was relevant, that is, you don't need to succeed at explaining something to someone, only exposing them to it is valuable.

(I have done catholic-sorcery stuff too in South America. I prayed to a mommy and watched until my candles burned out for my spells to be cast (all good ones). That was my Jehovah Witness teacher that brought me in that secret invitation only place. I'm just saying this because I thought it was very cool, and yes Catholics can be even more mystical than eastern religion believers sometimes).

Originally Posted by Occipitalred

GavinGill, I will answer your comment. I am not sure I completely understood it so I will respond to it in different ways so that one of my answers will be relevant.



It's hard for me to understand this one sentence because neither the Krishna Consciousness member or I were being hippies. I was volunteering and had 2 "Spanish" classes per week with different teachers. We talked about culture, religion, and politics. It was very fun talking to all these people with different perspectives. One of them was a Jehova's Witness and it was a lot more fun talking to her than people say it is. My teacher who was an Hare Krishna member just talked to me about her own faith and I asked if I could go with her to the temple (after we had talked about these subjects for many hours) because I had never been to such a religious event.

I am saying this because there is a huge "hippie" traveler culture in South America, and not that I have anything against them, I did not happen to interact with them.



This makes a lot more sense! I definitely see what you mean in this sentence. Personally, I don't see what is wrong with it, though. Let me explain.

If you're saying my teacher was looking to Krishna Consciousness for enlightenment, well, why not? She was raised in a Mormon family. Her family was very religious. However back in that time (20 years ago), there was a lot of violence, you would hear explosions in the night, there would be black-outs and gun fire and you couldn't talk about politics to your university profs because a lot of them were part of violent organizations and you could be hurt. Anyways, because of all the violence, and because she did see auras and ghosts and stuff, she just didn't identify with her family religion. She turned to another catholic branch religion. It didn't work for her. In the end, she found the Krishna Consciousness, and that specific religion succeeded in explaining the things that she didn't understand about her life and give her a proper spiritual blooming.

I think it's perfect for people to reach out for Hinduism or Buddhism because they relate better to that. But like you said, there is as much value in a catholic or secular life. Personally, I am attracted by Eastern beliefs. It hasn't prevented me to learn a lot from many different religions and secular school of thoughts.


If However, you are saying that you don't agree that I would bring religious spirituality in the topic of shamanism, well, I don't know, I think shamanism very well fits in the religious spirituality topic. And the reason I brought Krishna Consciousness in the topic is not that I think that it is superior, I am not a member of it, there was just something that I thought was relevant, that is, you don't need to succeed at explaining something to someone, only exposing them to it is valuable.

(I have done catholic-sorcery stuff too in South America. I prayed to a mommy and watched until my candles burned out for my spells to be cast (all good ones). That was my Jehovah Witness teacher that brought me in that secret invitation only place. I'm just saying this because I thought it was very cool, and yes Catholics can be even more mystical than eastern religion believers sometimes).

Perhaps I shouldn't have been so vague...

I wasn't knocking you or your friend, your post just reminded me of a certain kind of person that I find annoying. I live close to Vancouver and the city's full of suburban (usually White) folks who think they'll magically become enlightened by adopting some Eastern faith (typically Hinduism or Buddhism), growing dreadlocks, talking about attaining "nirvana" (or at least their half-ass conception of it), and basically living their lives as if they were cartoons. It's as if they see themselves as being on top of the "spiritual hierarchy" because they did some reading on Lao Tzu and "raised their consciousness" by reciting a few "Hare Krishna's" in the morning. It's nothing more than modern-day orientalism. Hippes that think they're sages.

Originally Posted by sivason

The man on the path has given no reason to doubt him, so I find it rude to think otherwise, just as it would be rude to reject a claim that one is a Buddhist who meditates a lot.

This might not be the best example. There are many forms of Buddhist practice that have nothing to do with meditation, and there are many forms of meditation that have nothing to do with Buddhism.

Originally Posted by GavinGill

Perhaps I shouldn't have been so vague...

I wasn't knocking you or your friend, your post just reminded me of a certain kind of person that I find annoying. I live close to Vancouver and the city's full of suburban (usually White) folks who think they'll magically become enlightened by adopting some Eastern faith (typically Hinduism or Buddhism), growing dreadlocks, talking about attaining "nirvana" (or at least their half-ass conception of it), and basically living their lives as if they were cartoons. It's as if they see themselves as being on top of the "spiritual hierarchy" because they did some reading on Lao Tzu and "raised their consciousness" by reciting a few "Hare Krishna's" in the morning. It's nothing more than modern-day orientalism. Hippes that think they're sages.

Haha, silly me!

Well, I think those eastern religions get more hype because they give importance to mindfulness, while western religions give importance to love, and maybe being raised in a place where love is already the big focus, maybe it feels like an evolution when they add mindfulness to the mix. Could that be it? I feel like the opposite isn't true because Eastern cultures still do have love in their faith.

Originally Posted by Verre

This might not be the best example. There are many forms of Buddhist practice that have nothing to do with meditation, and there are many forms of meditation that have nothing to do with Buddhism.

I think it still was a good example because despite all you said, if a person meditates a lot and identifies themselves as a Buddhist, it's still rude to say "You're not a Buddhist."

For example, I don't drink alcohol. I take sips to taste the different kinds (but as it is an acquired taste, I still never like them ) Anyways, when I am at a party, people feel the need to pressure me. I use to say "It's a life choice. I value mindfulness and have chosen not to drink." but then they would start a conversation with lots of people where everyone makes comments like "You're a child. You're so innocent. Just wait for the day you grow up..." and "Why don't you drink?" and "I know people who didn't drink till your age then they didn't know how to control their consumption". I find that type of conversation very "not-fun". I don't know why they feel the need to do it. And the last thing I want to do is further explain my stance because they will think I am attacking their lifestyle. So I have changed my approach. Now, when people tell me to drink, I just say I am Buddhist. The response is great. They just say "Wow, that's so cool!" I don't call myself Buddhist otherwise though but it makes parties a lot more fun! If they drink, I can be a Buddhist! And it's not so much of a lie because I do value and follow the main Buddhist values and I don't drink for the same reason as them.

Now, it has happened that someone else in the room was also Buddhist and they did drink. How rude would it be for me to say they weren't Buddhist? The reason they were Buddhist is because they had anxiety and concentration problems. Buddhism retreats and meditation allowed them to deal with that. We all have our reasons.

Labels are mostly just for the person themselves. Just like gender identity. It doesn't matter what you truly are. Labels are only ways that help you describe yourself and you're comfortable with. If someone is a Shaman, then they are. But what does it mean to them to be a shaman, that's the true question.

Originally Posted by sivason

The man on the path has given no reason to doubt him, so I find it rude to think otherwise, just as it would be rude to reject a claim that one is a Buddhist who meditates a lot.

Sure, but we (or at least I) were not rejecting any claims. Asking for more details about a vague story for the sake of understanding at least peripherally what the speaker is talking about is in no way rude, and certainly not a rejection.

Also, regarding the question asked, much less the answer, in the story to be extremely personal becomes moot when the speaker chooses to announce that there was a question and answer; and remember that the exchange with the shaman was apparently not too personal for his two friends to understand immediately.

Sorry; bad mood this morning.

Originally Posted by Sageous

Sure, but we (or at least I) were not rejecting any claims. Asking for more details about a vague story for the sake of understanding at least peripherally what the speaker is talking about is in no way rude, and certainly not a rejection.

Also, regarding the question asked, much less the answer, in the story to be extremely personal becomes moot when the speaker chooses to announce that there was a question and answer; and remember that the exchange with the shaman was apparently not too personal for his two friends to understand immediately.

Sorry; bad mood this morning.

No problem, None of us rejected the claim that the guy on the path was a Shaman. I agree with you, and was just pointing out that we (as a whole) were not doubting that, as much as finding the post from B-12 to invite further question, plus what I said about how what seems profound at the moment (on acid for example) will seem silly typed out to the sober.

I've only skimmed this thread, but has anybody (especially the OP) defined what it means to be a shaman?

Originally Posted by Descensus

I've only skimmed this thread, but has anybody (especially the OP) defined what it means to be a shaman?

I looked up the most common definitions and the common theme is one who believes they can enter into certain altered states in which they can get insight or vision from "the spirit world."

I have no problem accepting anyone's claim to this. A future common theme is that they reach this state by drug use or other methods such as sleep deprivation or starvation.

A generally accepted sub-theme is a close relationship with nature.




I could call myself a Shaman by these guide lines, but really choose not to for reasons I gave above.

Note that The Shaman believes they are making some form of contact with "the Spirit World" and the truth of such topics as "does such a thing exist" are not relevant to calling oneself a Shaman any more than "does God exist" have a bearing on if someone is a priest.


I would never have doubted a normal sounding member who posted a thread of this title, but face it that does not apply to this OP.

I would further add that a shaman is a professional who's training and occupation is that of entering altered states and communicating with the "spiritual" for the benefit of clients and/or humanity (note: this doesn't require that you believe in anything supernatural). So a teenager who's done shrooms a few times isn't a shaman.

Technically noone is a shaman. Its just a word. But to describe what I was taught and who I am now. It would be the most fitting for lack of a better one. I'm an avid student of mysticism and I honestly believe it can help you to become something much greater than who you are. But how I feel, and how I impact those I live with, yes, even tho it sounds strange and deranged. I am. It's not my ego. It's my dreams that tell me I am.It's the people I've helped, It's the best I can describe what I do with my life. I'm about to graduate and begin my career yet, regardless of where that takes me. I will always be that guy. It's who I am. I need to be the one people lean on, I need to help others. I need to be the voice they can't find. It sounds general and untamed but, it's not about me even though it sounds like it is. It's about how I can help others.
I like that I got a lot of good responses in my inbox from this. I was ready to let the thread just die as is, I just needed to get it off my chest and vent a little but... thank you those who support me, and those you don't believe me or support my ideals or what I believe to be true, thank you too for being the counterweight.

Originally Posted by cmind

I would further add that a shaman is a professional who's training and occupation is that of entering altered states and communicating with the "spiritual" for the benefit of clients and/or humanity (note: this doesn't require that you believe in anything supernatural). So a teenager who's done shrooms a few times isn't a shaman.

True, and more often than not, it requires no actual drug use. After all who would be believe the guy tripping on something.

Originally Posted by sivason

I was just being a smart ass and should say "I am sorry" to B-12. Sorry B-12.

Thanks for sharing your encounter. I have no problem with calling anyone a Shaman who desires to follow that form of spiritual inquiry. As far as I am concerned if the guy spends lots of time alone in nature and draws his spirituality from it and believes he is attaining a connection with "the spirit world" then we may as well accept his claim. It is not like the guy B-12 met was claiming any certain magical skill that he claimed could be observed.

How is this really any different than if we deny someone's claim to be a martial artist? That claim is not to be a master in one skill or be better than some one else. It is just a claim to having gone through many steps on the path of learning. The same fits the shaman argument.


The man on the path has given no reason to doubt him, so I find it rude to think otherwise, just as it would be rude to reject a claim that one is a Buddhist who meditates a lot.


Now, why was I being a smart-ass in this thread? The OP seems very dramatic and attention seeking in the manner that makes me think they are 16 years old. Add to that not a single comment about shamanism itself or how they practice it. At least no comments that make any sense. Then they fail to respond in any way, such as telling about experiences or philosophies. It came across a lot like "I am a Jedi!!! Yep a freaking Jedi, Play some Star Wars music, because that is how cool I am. No, I refuse to give details, it is a curse to be so damn powerful and awesome."

My comment about B12's experience was just joking around about the nature of comments that seem profound at the moment, but do not seem special when typed out on a forum.

I'm sorry if I sounded like a 16 year old. It was mostly me venting about an identity crises at the time and I really didn't want a discussion on the fact so much as to reassure myself that I am who I am.
I can't vouch for everyone who says they are a shaman. I've done little works on the part myself. Still being relatively new past my calling. It's a slow process for me. The biggest sale I can put on my skills was when one of my community members, almost a brother to me came to me and asked me to fix his life. He had failed out of school and lost his two jobs. I can't say how I got him back within the next two weeks because well, I already used my name and it was highly illegal. However a week of me spent working on him, and teaching him what I knew, allowed him to have his schooling forgiven, his jobs back, and him getting a nice refund check from the school.
Of course shamanism isn't some magical skill, it's something everybody holds within them selves. If you can lucid dream you can start. If you can survive your calling to the fact, you are. It's about caring for people around you, it's about putting yourself below them and making thier lives as good as possible through your sacrifices. It's about raising everyone around and not asking for recognition. Perhaps I failed that part and cried out. I did not mean to. I just needed reassuring. Again, sorry if I sounded like I needed recognition, I did not, I needed to talk to myself and posting something permanent is a good way. sorry.

Originally Posted by Descensus

I've only skimmed this thread, but has anybody (especially the OP) defined what it means to be a shaman?

The only defining fact of who is or who isn't a shaman is something called the calling. It's usually a life or death scenario perpetuated in one of many ways. It's hard to determine who's felt the nothingness of death and those who fake it. So, I suppose it's entirely up to the other party to decide for them self who is a shaman. If you believe someone is a shaman, then they are, if not, then they are not. Your perception is your own, it may sound general but however you feel on the matter is right.

Originally Posted by cmind

IMO, someone who talks like the OP can't possibly be a shaman. I've heard stories about real shamans down in the Amazon, and they don't sound like teenagers with inflated egos.

Just my 2 cents.

I respect your thoughts. I'm sorry if I don't live up to your stories. If it helps I'm well into my 20's. And my ego, is usually as humble as a human can get, sorry if I came off needy or such.

Originally Posted by cmind

Sacred =/= secret. Just look at a guy like Terence McKenna. Far from keeping his knowledge secret, he tried very hard to spread it as far and wide as possible. Because he thought it was sacred.

And isn't this website another example of spreading sacred knowledge to anyone who wants it? Lucid dreaming is pretty sacred, yet no one here wants to keep it a secret.

^I agree with this wholeheartedly. +5

Originally Posted by Dthoughts

Ok. I don't want to be offensive or hurt about it. But how certain can you really be about it? There is honestly not much information to work with. Besides, only OP is claiming to be a shaman.

Hope we can do this without resorting to I'm right ur Wrong kind of attituted. I'm just trying to facillitate the discussion

I suppose at best it's up the the individual to believe or not, no-one is really right or wrong due to the doors of perception. I'm sure if even if I wasn't a shaman, there would be a comfy middle ground for me to rest on, and if I was then indeed my reaffirming post would help me strengthen my conviction. After all, who does the person people come to for answer turn to?

Originally Posted by Dthoughts

Being a 'shaman' in modern-day society seems harder than it is from an amazonian village. Shamanism isn't exactly defined well. But say it constitutes what the indians did and it encompasses going into the desert for 3 days and eat Peyote.

This kind of freedom in this society is hard to get by.. Going outside and eating mescaline. I've been there. Encompasses strange faces, very strange experiences. And that is just training wheels for being a shaman if you ask me.

There is also no guidance. I mean, shamans are trained by other shamans per usual. I can very much agree that being trained as a shaman in this society without having guidance is though.

The calling is different for each individual however, mine did come from a brotherly standing point of the journey. My biggest influence was of course my grandma, but her dementia has taken hold strongly in the past few years and few if any of her words are to be regarded so I must make my own path. Most of the time I don't know what I'm doing, I can only do my best when people ask for help. And I give all that I can.

Originally Posted by Occipitalred

GavinGill, I will answer your comment. I am not sure I completely understood it so I will respond to it in different ways so that one of my answers will be relevant.



It's hard for me to understand this one sentence because neither the Krishna Consciousness member or I were being hippies. I was volunteering and had 2 "Spanish" classes per week with different teachers. We talked about culture, religion, and politics. It was very fun talking to all these people with different perspectives. One of them was a Jehova's Witness and it was a lot more fun talking to her than people say it is. My teacher who was an Hare Krishna member just talked to me about her own faith and I asked if I could go with her to the temple (after we had talked about these subjects for many hours) because I had never been to such a religious event.

I am saying this because there is a huge "hippie" traveler culture in South America, and not that I have anything against them, I did not happen to interact with them.



This makes a lot more sense! I definitely see what you mean in this sentence. Personally, I don't see what is wrong with it, though. Let me explain.

If you're saying my teacher was looking to Krishna Consciousness for enlightenment, well, why not? She was raised in a Mormon family. Her family was very religious. However back in that time (20 years ago), there was a lot of violence, you would hear explosions in the night, there would be black-outs and gun fire and you couldn't talk about politics to your university profs because a lot of them were part of violent organizations and you could be hurt. Anyways, because of all the violence, and because she did see auras and ghosts and stuff, she just didn't identify with her family religion. She turned to another catholic branch religion. It didn't work for her. In the end, she found the Krishna Consciousness, and that specific religion succeeded in explaining the things that she didn't understand about her life and give her a proper spiritual blooming.

I think it's perfect for people to reach out for Hinduism or Buddhism because they relate better to that. But like you said, there is as much value in a catholic or secular life. Personally, I am attracted by Eastern beliefs. It hasn't prevented me to learn a lot from many different religions and secular school of thoughts.


If However, you are saying that you don't agree that I would bring religious spirituality in the topic of shamanism, well, I don't know, I think shamanism very well fits in the religious spirituality topic. And the reason I brought Krishna Consciousness in the topic is not that I think that it is superior, I am not a member of it, there was just something that I thought was relevant, that is, you don't need to succeed at explaining something to someone, only exposing them to it is valuable.

(I have done catholic-sorcery stuff too in South America. I prayed to a mommy and watched until my candles burned out for my spells to be cast (all good ones). That was my Jehovah Witness teacher that brought me in that secret invitation only place. I'm just saying this because I thought it was very cool, and yes Catholics can be even more mystical than eastern religion believers sometimes).

While Shamanistic beliefs can be brought into a religious light, It would be best for everyone to wave the idea and instead focus on the core ideals and stray away from what spirits, or the afterlife is unless it can be explained in scientific terms, not only for the promotion of ideals through the board but also for easier peer to peer relationships.

Originally Posted by sivason

I looked up the most common definitions and the common theme is one who believes they can enter into certain altered states in which they can get insight or vision from "the spirit world."

I have no problem accepting anyone's claim to this. A future common theme is that they reach this state by drug use or other methods such as sleep deprivation or starvation.

A generally accepted sub-theme is a close relationship with nature.




I could call myself a Shaman by these guide lines, but really choose not to for reasons I gave above.

Note that The Shaman believes they are making some form of contact with "the Spirit World" and the truth of such topics as "does such a thing exist" are not relevant to calling oneself a Shaman any more than "does God exist" have a bearing on if someone is a priest.


I would never have doubted a normal sounding member who posted a thread of this title, but face it that does not apply to this OP.

I'm sorry I'm a wacko? would you prefer

Look guys, recently i've been having a lot of stress and I need to reaffirm who I am to myself but feel like I'm being vocal
I've been on the path of shamanism for awhile
I like it, I feel like it's what I should live for
the ideals, the beliefs, how I can help people
that all seems pretty cool mang
I feel like I went through this like.... calling thing they did
so I'm going to go for it
yea I had some tutoring on it and what not
but I feel like this is a good spiritual walk down what I want to accomplish in my life.
so I'm going for it guys wish me luck!

no
that's not honest, and anybody who posted that is just confused.
you don't have to agree, but alienating me from the community because you don't agree with what I'm saying... well man, that's pretty rude. I'm sorry if I don't sound "normal" but we are dreamers. and well... Sivason man, I feel like you could've said better.