Class Notes for Feb. 17th Magic Seminar

Seminar on Magicians and Shamans

2nd Hour: by Rhonda Rowland

After the break, the discussion turned to the questions generated from the readings. To begin with, a clarification was given of what was meant by Rhonda in her question, "...is it being said [in the readings] that the difference between a magician and a priest and/or prophet is attitude?" In the readings that compared Jesus to a magician, it was mentioned how that his acts coincided with the typical acts of the magician, but his actions or motives did not. His reasons for performing his magic did not involve monetary gain, and he didn't claim that the power was his but came from God. Several of the readings commented on the fact that magicians worked for monetary gain and that they did not share credit for their power, but claimed it for themselves. The question came up to examine if the writers were implying that the distinction between a magician and a priest/prophet was attitude.

So, is attitude a sufficient criteria to base a distinction on. Also, it was brought up how Apollonius saved Ephesus from a plague. He didn't do this for monetary gain, and he gave all credit for his knowledge to Herakles, even going so far as to erect a Temple to Herakles. This was definite example of a magician acting un-magicianlike by the observation made above, and Apollonius was considered a magician. This leads to a need to define Magic within the culture (emic vs. etic). An additional observation made stated that Magic had to find a niche where it could exist;it had to compete (with science and religion) for belief, like in an evolutionary relationship, therefore it evolved differently between cultures. As a result, the methods and practices of magic, the definitions and descriptions of magic, the perception of magic, and the use of magic could be, and as a result is, very different between cultures.

The next question raised was brought up by Dr. Spaeth: "Can magic/magicians exist in a monotheistic society? If all power comes from God can humans have any real powers themselves? how can "black magic" exist in such a society?" Some points raised include: Does a monotheistic religion exclude evil? It is understandable how a belief in magic flourished in polytheistic societies, there were multiple influences possible. Are we truly monotheistic after looking at the iconography and hte saints in Modern Catholocism/Christianity? However, the saints are looked at as intercessors, they are not given the credit for the happenings, that is left to a higher order. The magician takes credit for his own power. Polytheism still exists in modern times in the Shintu and Hindu religions. These religions tend more towards empowering the individual; the individuals go to God yourself. A magical presence is more eminent in these cases. Hinduism is more magical, less scientifically advanced.

Observation: There is a need to see miracles--a hunger to find them: the growing angel movement...

Nest, the modern world is examined. Impressions on Anton Le Vey: he seemed cheesy, dimestore. . .more harmless than expected. In eplanation to references, the Satanic Church was based on overturnings or perversion of Catholic ritual which included Black Masses and death rituals. "Do you call him a magician, does he practice black magic?"--Dr. Spaeth. In explanatin of some of the philosophy: most major religions follow "do unto others." Satanists don't necessarily wish harm, but it is a view of "taking care of my interests first, then you." It was mentioned that it also seemed to have a lot to do with selfish,primal urges--everything had to do with sex. (Back to Anton LeVey)Wright had even denounced him, stating that he got away form his ideas that he espoused.

Observation made: There is a tendency in this room to assume that this religion is not valid. He may be a charlatan, but so is Jim Baker for the Babtist church. What is the evil in putting yourself first, before others? It was mentioned, that it is best for the community to consider the welfare of others before your own, and that even in the wild animals do not operate solely on the basis of their own survival.

"How do we define a magician?" Anthropologists don't use the term magician sense its definition is considered to be too general and broad. Instead, shaman, priest, and prophet are used in various ways.

Identify Shaman/Magician: Pedoclus identified the magician with poet,magus, physician,and scientist. Literally, a magician is a Persian Priest. In ancient times, magus would have different aspects(?)

Shaman--the protector of the group; performed rituals, provided protection and acted for the good of the group. Between God and a priest their is an institution, but the Shaman was directly influenced by divinity himself--he felt a compulsion that he had been contacted by the divinity. It comes down to a question of an inpirational figure vs. and institutional figure.

Priests--performed set calendrical rituals. In times of desperation or crisis, primitive cultures turned over to Shaman to influence events. The priest is a teacher, and is taught "what has gone before, and what should go ahead." The Shaman is a mentor, he helps the student learn for himself, "this has gone before, where do you think it should go." The shaman comes to his position through occurances of ecstatic states due to the spirits working through you, the shaman is called. The priest comes to his position through hereditary lines or study.