They are a series of exercises that Mexican shamans (something like that) do to help eliminate a lot of past karma as well as give energy and focus now. I read reviews on Amazon for the DVD and people who have done other energy work (Tibetans, Qigong) tried this and spoke highly of it. My chiropractor recommended it so I thought I'd have a look. Just curious as to other people's experiences.
What is the DVD called?
Yuh can't go wrong with it - everything is authentic and true - enjoy!
As you requested, Treetop, the thread has now been moved over to the Shamanism forum.
Holistic
I got the DVD and viewed it once. There are over fifty individual moves, repeated six to ten times before moving on to the next. Then at the end you combine them all. Like choreographing a dance. Unfortunately, I'm a terrible dancer! It isn't mirror cuing either where you face the screen and mirror their moves, i.e. their left leg is your right leg. They stress that you have to use the left or right foot/arm when they do, which means trying to do things opposite.
If I had a large mirror behind me from which to watch the screen, then I could follow along. So I think the easiest way would be for me to memorize two or three steps at a time and repeat them until it's second nature, then add on.
The DVD doesn't have all the "routines" listed in the Magical Passes book, and someone I know told me to do the routines by the Witches, which aren't on this DVD, so I just bought a used copy very cheaply at Amazon to supplement.
Magical Passes are a lot like Tai Chi, Qi Gong, karate and most of the energy type exercises out there. You are grabbing energy and moving energy.
I have done many of them. I've found some to be very effective. I always do the one to move the assemblage point before doing any ritual. The book and video are well worth your time.
I have done many of them. I've found some to be very effective. I always do the one to move the assemblage point before doing any ritual. The book and video are well worth your time.
The last post was in 2010, so probably no answer here, either. However, if you have done many of them, perhaps you could explain what they are effective for? I can't really see the link with shamanism.
The ones in the book are mostly energy manipulation and for preparing intent. I haven't seen true video in years, because I bought it on VHS, and no longer have a player. The pass in the video that impressed me the most was one to give a glimpse of the nagual (the void), and although the glimpse is very brief, it is astoundingly moving.
I assume that this is in the Shamanism section because these are Toltec magical passes.
The ones in the book are mostly energy manipulation and for preparing intent. I haven't seen true video in years, because I bought it on VHS, and no longer have a player. The pass in the video that impressed me the most was one to give a glimpse of the nagual (the void), and although the glimpse is very brief, it is astoundingly moving.
I assume that this is in the Shamanism section because these are Toltec magical passes.
Are we talking about tensegrity? As in Carlos Casteneda? Okay. Isn't journeying easier?
I assumed we we're talking about Castaneda. Otherwise I'm off topic here.
Passes are much easier than journeying to me.
I assumed we we're talking about Castaneda. Otherwise I'm off topic here.
Passes are much easier than journeying to me.
If there's no journeying, is it actually shamanism?
I've always considered journeying to be but one aspect of Shamanism. There are the passes, stalking, regaining your edge, the recapitulation, erasing personal history, stopping the internal dialog, to many others to list.
I've always considered journeying to be but one aspect of Shamanism. There are the passes, stalking, regaining your edge, the recapitulation, erasing personal history, stopping the internal dialog, to many others to list.
Why do you consider this to be so? What do you see as the point of shamanism? Most of the things you've mentioned here are of value in order to make the journey clearer.
I consider the point of Shamanism to be to become a seer, to perceive energy directly, and the manipulation of intent. I focus on moving the assemblage point, which some may consider journeying, but I don't. My second focus is "dreaming", again not journeying imo.
I consider the point of Shamanism to be to become a seer, to perceive energy directly, and the manipulation of intent.
Would you say, then, that the shamans in Siberia and northern China (who actually came up with the word) are wrong in considering it a job description for those people who go to the spirit worlds and return with healing, power and/or information for the community?
When you say, "perceive energy directly" what do you mean? "Directly" as opposed to what? Where do spirits come into this?
I don't understand the phrase, "manipulation of intent" - whose intent and who is manipulating it?
There are many, many types of Shamanism. The topic was Toltec Shamanism, and I was describing my personal experience with it. I did not imply any spiritual beliefs of any kind are wrong. There just seemed to be a misunderstanding about why magical passes were in the Shamanism section.
"Perceiving energy directly" is a phrase Castaneda uses to describe sensing energy without using the five normal senses.
"Intent" is an energy shamans manipulate. The standard English dictionary definition applies in only a very limited manner.
There are many, many types of Shamanism. The topic was Toltec Shamanism, and I was describing my personal experience with it. I did not imply any spiritual beliefs of any kind are wrong.
That wasn’t what I asked. I asked:
Would you say, then, that the shamans in Siberia and northern China (who actually came up with the word) are wrong in considering it a job description for those people who go to the spirit worlds and return with healing, power and/or information for the community?
This is a definition that is accepted by shamans and anthropologists around the world. What is your definition? And how do you come by it?
I have to wonder why you haven’t answered my questions. Understand, I am not saying you are wrong, more that you are not explaining clearly what you mean.
No, I'm not saying it is wrong.
Shamanism is so diverse that any definition I could come up with for it would not be all inclusive.
Once again, my only point is that Shamanism is not exclusively journeying.
No, I'm not saying it is wrong.
Shamanism is so diverse that any definition I could come up with for it would not be all inclusive.
Once again, my only point is that Shamanism is not exclusively journeying.
Why won't you answer the questions?
I have. You, sir, apparently do not understand. Have a nice day.
You have not answered.
1.
Would you say, then, that the shamans in Siberia and northern China (who actually came up with the word) are wrong in considering it a job description for those people who go to the spirit worlds and return with healing, power and/or information for the community?
2. .
When you say, "perceive energy directly" what do you mean? "Directly" as opposed to what?
3. .
Where do spirits come into this?
4.
Whose intent and who is manipulating it?
(By the way, don’t be so sexist, please)
You have not answered.
1.
2. .
3. .
4.
(By the way, don’t be so sexist, please)
There are many, many types of Shamanism. The topic was Toltec Shamanism, and I was describing my personal experience with it. I did not imply any spiritual beliefs of any kind are wrong.
"Perceiving energy directly" is a phrase Castaneda uses to describe sensing energy without using the five normal senses.
Spirits dont come in to magical passes.
"Intent" is an energy shamans manipulate. The standard English dictionary definition applies in only a very limited manner.
No one owns intent, but the shaman manipulates it.
I am not sexist, but did not know your gender.
If the spirits don't come into it, it would not be considered shamanism no matter where in the world it was practiced.
If you don't know my gender, but still call me "sir" then, yes, you are being sexist.
If the spirits don't come into it, it would not be considered shamanism no matter where in the world it was practiced.
In your opinion, not mine or Castaneda's.
Your argumentative nature lead me to think you we're male, hard to tell on a forum.
Yes, it’s my opinion. It’s also the opinion of anthropologists and shamans all over the world, not least amongst the people who actually gave us the word “shaman”.
The fact that Castaneda (and you) disagree leads many to consider him “sorcerer” rather than “shaman” .(and there’s another totally baggage-laden word!)
So – we have two types of shamanism. I can define mine and you can’t define yours. I don’t think there’s anywhere sensible to go with this.
As for sexism – equating “an argumentative nature” with being male is also sexist. Why not just accept the label?
Hung up on labels much?
You can call me whatever names you will. Any credibility you may have had with me is gone. I know better than to accept either of your labels.
Your definition of shamanism is outdated and needs expansion.
"Credibility"? Goodness. This is an awful lot of twisting around to avoid the fact that you cannot define what you are talking about.
Okay. Let's leave it there. No problem.