ABSTRACT
Eliade documents shamanism as an archaic and global religious com plex, while Jung focuses on certain special features of shamanism that par allel features of the psychological individuation of the modern individual. Specifically, these are typically recurring personifications of psychic con tents that Jung terms shadow, anima, and the Self, and dynamic inner processes such as dismemberment, sacrifice, and a coming to psychic con sciousness that is comparable to the shamanic flight. In light of the fact that there are numerous varieties of shamanism and that any individual shaman may fulfill the roles of psychopomp, priest, mystic, or poet as well as heal er, it is important for the psychologist to remain mindful of shamanism’s full complexity. While Eliade recognizes the value of psychological approaches, he warns that it is “inacceptable to assimilate shamanism to any kind of mental disease” (Eliade 1974a, xi-xii). The warning is impor tant, for it is also imperative that the psychologist realize how little is under stood through the category of psychopathology.
