21. Mediums In Esoteric Buddhism
2011 DOI: 10.1163/ej.9789004184916.i-1200.93 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Topics | Buddhism |
| Key points | Argues that the term 'shaman' is often a problematic translation for the Chinese term for medium, and that anthropologists like Raymond Firth have sought analytic clarity by distinguishing spirit possession from shamanism. Contends that a Confucian-influenced bias has led scholars to treat spirit-mediumship as inferior to Daoist and Buddhist traditions. |
Abstract
The term medium or translates the Chinese term, which has often been - problematically, in most cases - rendered as shaman. Anthropologists have tried provide some analytic clarity a cluster of terms used label similar involving the descent of a or deity into a host. Raymond Firth understands spirit possession as designating phenomena of abnormal behavior which are interpreted by other members of the society as evidence that a is controlling the person's actions and probably inhabiting his body. Firth applies the term shamanism to those where a person, either a spirit-medium or not, is regarded as controlling spirits exercising his mastery over them in socially recognized ways. There has been a general tendency, following the pejorative view of Confucians, treat spirit-medium-ship as a debased form of religious practice, in opposition what are perceived be the refined traditions of Daoism and Buddhism. Keywords: esoteric Buddhism; Raymond Firth; shamanism; spirit-medium