Welcome to Gaia! ::

There's no reason why you can't research one now and another later. *shrug*

In the sense that the word "Shamanism" has at the very least been adapted by some Anthropologists to describe the practice of a spiritual "specialist" among so-called "animist" groups.

One such Anthropologist, named Eduardo Viveiros de Castro managed to even teach at Cambridge. His article "Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism" was first published on pages 469-488 in the "Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute" of the year 1998. His use of the word "shaman" in this article refers to such a specialist native to the Amazon Rainforest.


That being said, someone cited a definition of shamanism that uses the word "animism" or "animist". That concept is the most enthocentric crock I've seen printed in a modern textbook. E.B. Tylor was one of the founders of Anthropology, published well before that discipline or Sociology discovered the concept of ethnocentrism. He defined "Animism" as "a belief in animating spirits", and called it the most basic religion, alluding to how it was just mankind's way of explaining the world before real science was invented. Nevermind the emotional and social functions of most religions which are also measurable.

Tylor didn't do his study in the field - he just read the reports of others who did the traveling and made contact with other cultures. He was influenced by Darwin, saying that Animist cultures eventually evolved into monotheistic cultures. Others have come behind him and cleaned up his mess, but Tylor's influence is still heavy on the discipline.

What I find most disgusting about it is how many religions *still* get thrown into that "animism" bin by a large segment of academia for dismissal on that basis. Voodoo, a slough of religions from Africa, anything reconstructed from Archaeological data, Neopaganism,.... they're all apparently not "evolved" enough for established anthropological dogma to consider them as anything significant in the Anthropology of Religion. At most, Voodoo and neopaganism are acknowledged in passing as religious revivals within a predominately Christian society, or just marked as aberrations and mostly ignored.

My point? This nomenclature difference comes out of a discipline that still has some growing up to do.

It is important, however, to do so responsibly and respectfully. Some cultures/religions are not looking for new members unless you fit a certain set of guidelines, and the people who belong to these cultures and religions will take grave offense if you try to force your way into them.

Sure ^_^ Hold up, I'll dig out one of the info-dumps....
Do ask if anything is unclear or not detailed enough.

Wicca is an orthopraxic, oathbound, initiatory, experiential, fertility-focused, ditheistic mystery religion comprised of clergy.

What does this mean?

Orthopraxic means that it's defined by practice, rather than belief. Christianity is an example of an orthodoxy. If you beleive the right things, you are a Christian. Wicca is an orthopraxy. What you believe is not as relevant as what you practise. If you practice the right things, you are a Wiccan.

Oathbound means that the bulk of what defines the religion - which, as we have already seen, is the ritual - is bound by oath and secret. Breaking these oaths and the secrecy involved will bring the Curse of the Goddess upon you. There are practical reasons for this secrecy, which we will get to later, although personally I reckon much of it is because Gardner was so into his secret societies and such and it was something he enjoyed.

Initiatory means that it is a religion practised in a group, that one needs to be formally brought into via initiation. This initiation brings one into the religion, and declares one as a witch and a priest or priestess. It introduces one formally to the gods. In this initiation, you experience the gods and a rebirth. You are told the names of your deities, take oaths to keep these secret and to defend your religion and so forth. The fact that Wicca is initiatory means that, however wonderful one's faith, if you haven't been initiated into a coven that traces its initiatory lineage (High Priestess --& High Priest --& HPS --& Gardner) all the way back to Gardner, then you are not a Wiccan.

Experiential means that you are not told about Wicca. The beliefs you hold, you form during the rituals in which you participate. No one will sit you down and tell you what Wiccans believe. Instead, by practising the rituals, you experience the religion, the gods, and the mysteries (we'll get to that later) and thus form the appropriate beliefs. For this reason, if you are not practising the rituals of Wicca, you cannot be a Wiccan, because you haven't experienced the religion. This is why Wicca is orthopraxic. Additionally, this is why Wiccan ritual is oathbound. To properly experience the religion, it must be new to you. You cannot understand it properly without training and context, so reading or being told a ritual will mean very little to you, and if you choose to become a Wiccan later on, knowing the bare bones of a ritual will detract from that experience for you.

Fertility-focused means that Wicca is involved in the cycles of life, sex, death, rebirth. The fertility of the land, and so forth, but also importantly the fertility of humanity. We understand fertility subjectively through our own bodies. So sex is involved in Wicca. Yes, it is. Rituals are performed naked 98% of the time, and initiations are always naked no matter what. There is sexual contact in many rituals, and full sex in the Great Rite and third degree initiation. As an aside, we cannot say that Wicca is a nature religion. Yes, fertility is part of nature... but in the same way that a square is a shape. It's part of nature, not all of nature. Wicca is concerned specifically with fertility.

Ditheistic means that Wiccans worship two deities, the Lord and Lady of the Isles. Now, many Wiccans also worship other deities as well, as the deities of Wicca are not jealous. But, these other deities are worshipped outside the context of Wicca. It is a slight to Wicca to bring other deities into Wiccan ritual, and it is a slight to those deities to try to shove them into roles to which they are not suited. How individuals understand the Lord and Lady of the Isles will vary, as Wicca, as mentioned, is concerned with experiential ritual, rather than belief.

Mystery religions are secret. They are involved with a series of "mysteries" concerned with the natural world and the gods. These "mysteries" cannot be told or explained in words; instead, they must be understood through experiencing them. Someone can tell you a mystery in words, and you can nod and think you get it. Then, years later, you will experience something that causes an epiphany and suddenly you actually get it, on a deep, soul-deep level, and you understand it with all of yourself. That is what mystery religions try to do. They have specific mysteries that they attempt to teach, through their initiations and experiential rituals, by trying to replicate the situations in which you "get it".

Comprised of clergy means that each and every Wiccan is a priest or a priestess. There are no lay people in Wicca like there are in most religions. Each Wiccan not only interacts with but directly serves their deities. Priesthood is a heavy thing, and requires mental, emotional and spiritual maturity and strength. For this reason, and for others, Wicca is not for everyone.

(This info-dump is mine and can be reposted so long as credit is given.)

Yes, indeed it does ^_^ But that's not a bad thing. Wicca isn't for everyone (it's not for me!) but if you're interested in pursuing it, there are websites and mailing lists like "Amber and Jet" that can help you sort of get started.

But don't feel obligated to do that. There are Wicca-flavoured religions like Cunningham's Standing Stone Tradition, and other forms of Neo-Pagan witchcraft that you can learn yourself from books. This sort of thing is much more appealing to many people and there's no reason to stop doing that if you're happy with what you're doing.

Oh no problem with that. I spent years in that kind of place. In fact, even though I've chosen a path, I continue to question, research, and learn about my own path and others.

My problem with it lies not so much that they teach online (they have vids on Youtube and books as well) but that they teach their first degree free and want you to pay for the rest of it. That doesn't sit well with me... Like those phone calls where the first minute is free but you pay through the nose for the next one. wink

You've prefaced everything with "I believe", so there's no cause to ask for sources wink

Just a couple questions, just because I'm curious. If you believe in YHWH and Jesus, Hell and Satan, do you believe you are going to hell? Do you consider YHWH the creator, or one of the created deities? How do you reconcile your belief in an equal afterlife with your belief in hell?