Procesos de curanderismo contemporáneo en el valle del Jequetepeque, La Libertad
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2024
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Nacional de Trujillo
Abstract
Dentro del ámbito de los estudios mágico-curativos, incluido el chamanismo y las practicas curanderiles, distinguir a estos practicantes de otros intermediarios rituales plantea diversos desafíos. El principal obstáculo reside en el debate en curso en torno a la esencia misma de estas prácticas. Algunos antropólogos argumentan que establecer criterios confiables y transculturales para su identificación es problemático (Schechner). El curanderismo a menudo es esquivo, lo que lleva a la falta de consenso y complica la distinción entre maestros y otros practicantes rituales. Otro desafío formidable proviene de la intrincada diversidad inherente a las tradiciones chamanísticas en diferentes culturas. El chamanismo, como fenómeno matizado, se manifiesta en diversas formas y prácticas. Los rituales distintivos, las creencias y las experiencias asociadas al chamanismo en diferentes culturas contribuyen a un paisaje complejo, dificultando el desarrollo de criterios universales para identificar a los sanadores (Sidky). Además, la naturaleza subjetiva de las experiencias chamánicas agrega complejidad. A menudo, los practicantes afirman tener encuentros con estados alterados de conciencia y comunicación con espíritus o similares; sin embargo, estos encuentros desafían una medición fácil o, como algunos argumentarían, la objetividad. Dependiendo de relatos personales e interpretaciones se convierte en un obstáculo para distinguir a los chamanes de individuos con experiencias similares que pueden no alinearse con los criterios convencionales de chamanismo. Más allá de esto, los sesgos culturales y las ideas preconcebidas introducen una capa adicional de complicación. Los investigadores pueden tener ideas preconcebidas sobre las características ideales de un chamán, lo que podría sesgar su interpretación de los datos.
ABSTRACT Within the realm of magical-healing studies, including shamanism, distinguishing these practitioners from other ritual intermediaries poses several challenges. A primary obstacle arises from the ongoing debate surrounding the very essence of shamanism. Some anthropologists argue that establishing reliable transcultural criteria for its identification is problematic (Schechner). Curanderismo is often elusive, leading to a lack of consensus and complicating the distinction between masters and other ritual practitioners. Another formidable challenge comes from the intricate diversity inherent in shamanistic traditions across different cultures. Shamanism, as a nuanced phenomenon, manifests in various forms and practices. Distinctive rituals, beliefs, and experiences associated with shamanism in different cultures contribute to a complex landscape, hindering the development of universal criteria for identifying healers (Sidky). Furthermore, the subjective nature of shamanic experiences adds complexity. Practitioners often claim to have encounters with altered states of consciousness and communication with spirits or deities; however, these encounters defy easy measurement or, as some would argue, objectivity. Relying on personal accounts and interpretations becomes a hurdle in distinguishing shamans from individuals with similar experiences that may not align with conventional shaman criteria. Beyond this, cultural biases and preconceived notions introduce an additional layer of complication. Researchers may have preconceived ideas about the ideal characteristics of a shaman, which could bias their interpretation of the data. This predisposition obstructs the objective development of essential criteria for differentiating shamans from other ritual intermediaries. In summary, the complexities in distinguishing shamans from other ritual intermediaries within the field of shamanic studies stem from the lack of consensus on the nature of shamanism, the rich diversity of shamanistic traditions, the inherently subjective nature of healing experiences, and the predictive influence of cultural biase
ABSTRACT Within the realm of magical-healing studies, including shamanism, distinguishing these practitioners from other ritual intermediaries poses several challenges. A primary obstacle arises from the ongoing debate surrounding the very essence of shamanism. Some anthropologists argue that establishing reliable transcultural criteria for its identification is problematic (Schechner). Curanderismo is often elusive, leading to a lack of consensus and complicating the distinction between masters and other ritual practitioners. Another formidable challenge comes from the intricate diversity inherent in shamanistic traditions across different cultures. Shamanism, as a nuanced phenomenon, manifests in various forms and practices. Distinctive rituals, beliefs, and experiences associated with shamanism in different cultures contribute to a complex landscape, hindering the development of universal criteria for identifying healers (Sidky). Furthermore, the subjective nature of shamanic experiences adds complexity. Practitioners often claim to have encounters with altered states of consciousness and communication with spirits or deities; however, these encounters defy easy measurement or, as some would argue, objectivity. Relying on personal accounts and interpretations becomes a hurdle in distinguishing shamans from individuals with similar experiences that may not align with conventional shaman criteria. Beyond this, cultural biases and preconceived notions introduce an additional layer of complication. Researchers may have preconceived ideas about the ideal characteristics of a shaman, which could bias their interpretation of the data. This predisposition obstructs the objective development of essential criteria for differentiating shamans from other ritual intermediaries. In summary, the complexities in distinguishing shamans from other ritual intermediaries within the field of shamanic studies stem from the lack of consensus on the nature of shamanism, the rich diversity of shamanistic traditions, the inherently subjective nature of healing experiences, and the predictive influence of cultural biase
Description
Keywords
Curanderismo, Chamanismo, Pensamiento mágico