> > A shaman does not lend charms, but a spiritist obtains charms through
> > the shaman's good graces with the great spirit. By comparison, the
> > initiate is simply emulating the god.
>
> The usefulness of a charm is purely based on the spirit's relationship
> to the user. A shaman introduces the charm spirit to the spiritist, a
> practitioner obtains his fetishes through worship, and makes a spirit
> ally. Even a hostile spirit, imprisoned for a single use, has some sort
> of magical relationship to its binder (even if the shaman hands it off).
>
> I'd be very wary of letting someone loot charms or fetishes. They are
> not grenades or blaster-packs or the like. . . .
The point I was making was that there is a personal relationship of negotiation between the spiritist and the spirit that is critically intermediated by the shaman and the shaman's relationship with the big spirit boss on the other side. The point was to contrast that with initiates, where no intermediation is needed. It is a direct relationship with the god. (You could tack on a further point that, in veneration, the relationship intermediated by multiple tiers of wizards who each take a cut f the magical action. They are more like resellers, while shamans are more like brokers.)
Perhaps your point was directed to someone else?
Chris
Powered by hypermail