[Vilturj] inspired by Magicka...as usual.
Dec. 29th, 2007 09:30 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
moonvoiceIn response...
As for finding your way around [in journeying], you usually go with a power animal.
I think this is one of the big differences between neoshamanism and core shamanism, vs. traditional shamanism. If I just went around with my 'power animal' (for which I think you mean totem or primary guide), it wouldn't be enough.
An animal spirit on its own doesn't often have the negotiation techniques necessary, particularly in the otherworlds. And some animals can't even move *between* worlds. For example while the jackal can go between the middle and underworlds, it cannot go to the upperworlds. Likewise, doves cannot travel down to the underworlds.
While there are differences in what animals can go where according to lore and variance in culture, the general consensus in almost all shamanic traditions worldwide is that 'just' a power animal isn't enough.
In fact, without contact with ancestors (or even attempting it) and spirit helpers, an animal on its own (i.e. one who is not a god or deity in disguise, but is essentially just an animal) is the sign of a flimsy shamanist, generally.
Certainly, having a 'power animal' is a great place to start visualising, and I think many people who think they're journeying with their power animal are actually visualising with their power animal (which is of course why they have such superior manipulative power over the visualisation environment).
But journeying with 'just' the animal will eventually get the shamanist into trouble. A responsible animal guide and totem knows that too, and they will tell you that it's not enough. I don't even travel with my totem as a 'guide', he would be virtually useless in some circumstances. That's why I have my spirit helpers, my ancestors, the gods, etc. One power animal? Not enough.
As for finding your way around [in journeying], you usually go with a power animal.
I think this is one of the big differences between neoshamanism and core shamanism, vs. traditional shamanism. If I just went around with my 'power animal' (for which I think you mean totem or primary guide), it wouldn't be enough.
An animal spirit on its own doesn't often have the negotiation techniques necessary, particularly in the otherworlds. And some animals can't even move *between* worlds. For example while the jackal can go between the middle and underworlds, it cannot go to the upperworlds. Likewise, doves cannot travel down to the underworlds.
While there are differences in what animals can go where according to lore and variance in culture, the general consensus in almost all shamanic traditions worldwide is that 'just' a power animal isn't enough.
In fact, without contact with ancestors (or even attempting it) and spirit helpers, an animal on its own (i.e. one who is not a god or deity in disguise, but is essentially just an animal) is the sign of a flimsy shamanist, generally.
Certainly, having a 'power animal' is a great place to start visualising, and I think many people who think they're journeying with their power animal are actually visualising with their power animal (which is of course why they have such superior manipulative power over the visualisation environment).
But journeying with 'just' the animal will eventually get the shamanist into trouble. A responsible animal guide and totem knows that too, and they will tell you that it's not enough. I don't even travel with my totem as a 'guide', he would be virtually useless in some circumstances. That's why I have my spirit helpers, my ancestors, the gods, etc. One power animal? Not enough.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-12-29 11:36 pm (UTC)OTOH, I do walk a really damned fine line about learning about the techniques of others cultures' shamans. I don't want to end up ganking chunks of their practices out wholesale, but I also need to be mindful of what's relevant to this culture, while working with things that make sense to me as a person.
One thing I dislike is the idea that in order to make shamanism relevant to this culture, you have to focus on the technology and urbanization. The Tree is not a skyscraper to me. I know that may work for some people, but despite my being a city dweller, a big-ass building isn't my way to the Upper and Lower worlds. When I go into the lower world, I usually end up going down a groundhog hole in the grass. I haven't been to the Upper world yet, but I think it may end up involving taking flight from the same grassy clearing I see the groundhog hole in (as well as the cave that I go to visit the paleolithic megafauna). Which isn't surprising--the first ecosystems I got to know were grassy open areas with small trees, when I wa sa child.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-30 01:17 am (UTC)Ukh, I don't like this either.
The Tree is actually a mountain for me. Heh.