We Are All Shamans: Interview with Itzhak Beery

It’s nearly impossible to talk about shamanism in New York City without bringing up the name Itzhak Beery. Born in Israel, Beery was initiated into the family tradition of a powerful Quechuan Yachak from Ecuador and has studied under the Brazilian elder Ipupiara and Peruvian curandera Cleicha. As a founding member of the NY Shamanic Circle and the NY Annual Shamanic Gathering in Central Park, he has spent the last ten years facilitating group healing practices and journeying work. He has a private healing practice and serves as the publisher of ShamanPortal, the “Craigslist for all things shaman."
In this podcast, Beery discusses how a mid-life crisis leads him on an adventure with John Perkins to the wilds of Ecuador, where he begins his shamanic apprenticeship. He talks of opening his third eye, gaining confidence in his own abilities, and learning how to control a shaman’s biggest enemy -- fear. He gives tricks of the trade, including the secrets of candle divinations, egg healing ceremonies, and protecting one’s energetic field from “bad energy.” Beery also discusses the many roles of the shaman, what it’s like to practice in the West, and what happens to us if we don’t “tune into our own powers” and spiritual calling. [Podcast]
Tweet
- 9-24-08
- Talat Jonathan Phillips's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version










Comments
supercast
fascinating Jonathan, thanks for putting this online. inspired to listen again and follow the links./a
The Challenges of Following One's Bliss
Thanks Andy, I really enjoyed hearing Itzhak's insights and experiences and wish I'd kept the mike on after the podcast was over. Being a shaman may appear like a "romantic" or mystical endeavor but to him it also seems like an interesting burden, as well as a love. In his healing ceremonies, he often deals with removing entities that most of us would not want to run into on a regular basis.
After talking to him, I began to see the role of the shaman as also a bit of lonely one, especially for someone practicing in the West. There aren't a lot of people out there who can directly relate to the more challenging healings he's dealt with. He spoke of all of this with such love that I doubt he's ever complained about it, but even some of his teachers have taken on more "normal" jobs in order to not always have to tackle the challenges that shamanic healing brings forth.
Unbridled Mirth
I just had to giggle at the thought that shamanism is a "romantic" endeavor. I seem to be running across people lately who think, to quote one of them, that "shamans rawk."
I tell them that yes, shamans "rawk"--because they went to hell and came back in one piece... sort of... that is, after they underwent an ego death and were ritually dismembered and put back together.
(Disclaimer for police and FBI snoops: No one died in the making of this post. I'm speaking of the Otherworld, not the material plane.)
It's a matter for celebration that shamanic consciousness is returning to the Western mind, though I hope it won't go too much farther without people realizing the difficulty and seriousness of this calling. Though that said, there is also plenty of room for dancing, laughter and utter absurdism. :} But you don't get the fun without the agony.
The Feminine Principle
Hi Zezt,
I think you make some interesting points about shamanism in general and Rutherford's book looks like a good read but I have to say I don't feel your comments really fit what Beery is doing, nor the content of the podcast. One of his primary teachers is in fact a woman, the Peruvian curandera Cleicha, the majority of the people in the class I took with him were women, and in this interview (and in his classes) he tells us that we all have the potentiality of being what is often called a "shaman" but he never comes close to suggesting that this label applies only to men, or that he is supporting patriarichal structures. In the podcast he talks about how we all have these innate powers and need to heed our own spiritual calling, which seems very opposite of your suggestion that he's trying to keep people from learning about their own power. All of this made me wonder if perhaps you've made these comments without listening to the podcast. If that's the case, perhaps you'd enjoy listening to it, as I have a feeling you and Beery would agree on a number of ideas.
The Descent
Interesting thoughts about the descent. The descent is where you face your Shadow.
If you only ascend and don't descend, well, it creates an imbalance.
The male/female tension you mention brings to mind the integration of the anima/animus.
I met my animus last year. Didn't like him.
:-}
Interesting Zetz
I remember my calling into Shamanism. I knew that what I was about to embark upon was going to take some work. I believe though that my journey so far has brought more people into my life. The lonliness of feeling alone with people around has fled. I find that I'm more open to the stories or journeys of others and they find a releif in this. My life seems calmer but it is still filled with it's day to day obsticles (more or less it's the money things that get to me).
Yes, I must say that my life is fuller now and I don't feel that feeling of being stepped on any longer. It does take work figuring out the ways and laws of the Spirit that the Shaman tries to tap into and I have found people with great powers that have laid hidden. But I'm no longer lonely... and the deep dark entities don't seem to be near because I don't allow them near... there seems to be enough darkness in people to take up strain.
I believe being a Shaman is about balance in the here and now. It's about living in the fullness of your humanity as you live in the fullness of your spirituality. You can't climb to high before the trickster will knock you back down... nor go to low without the trickster picking you back up.
The path of life is shared by a Shaman. He is the one to keep all on the path of accepting uncertainity, the beauty of Spirit, he may have a way of showing the unknown that is only known to him. But in the end he is human and he can take you down because of his selfishness or rise you up because of his giving. He can heal you or make you sick... sometimes it's just your own direct actions set against him or her.
Yes, Zetz has a point and when looking back at my own life story and see the darkness of the institution of religion and see the abuse of Empire that has kept the individual and collective Spirit rising to it's full potential, well, I see hell and I look at the times that the trickster kept me stumbling down there always in search of some profound answer to who God is... to who the devil is. I as a Shaman now leave the Great Creator alone. I leave his answer to who The Great Creator is. In the end it all comes down to the Spirit of things, the even plane that we are all connected on Spiritualy. The daily talk of nature. The movement of an individual spirit or collective one. Lonely? Naw. I'm more alive and in company then I have ever been.
The Shaman doesn't wait for the massiah in a lonely state. He or she notices that the massiah that the little brother religions speak about is already here. It is you in flesh and it is all is Spirit.
The Shaman knows who it is able to heal us now and this knowlege will bring out the best in the community or individual. He or she also knows how to hurt... But above and beyond all he knows where your answer is for him to harm or heal. You see maybe if you're a real good Shaman people will not come to you time and time again, you will find those around a Shaman free not to be so clinging to him... the good Shaman never has your final answer to your healing or hurt. He'll give you a little of both if he finds you're getting to close to his answer. And that may be why some people think it's a lonely life, because he or she knows that it is not the answer or opinion that he holds that will make you well. The final answer is the one that dwells within... you.
Now go be happy and leave me alone!!!! There are others. Give yourself the credit.
Peace
P.S. I would like to hear other Shaman's views... Thanks Zetz for your answer. It made me see the beauty within me of being a Shaman. I'm free and in good company. It's an ebb and flow... no doubt... I guess you can say if I packed a auditorium with people that called me friend, and called me their weekly answer, then I would have to say as a Shaman I was doing something terribly wrong.
Hmmm... I like the few I have... to many and I begin to remember names. And every friend that is searching likes to know that you know them.
As a Shaman, I read dreams well, but as a Shaman I have to know you before I know your dreams. You have to stick around for awhile to help me find the answer that lies within.
May the Great Spirit guide us all to a better day.
20 minutes sans video...
That's all of it
Thanks Charlie,
I wish I had more recorded after we turned off the equipment. His stories about indiviual healing sessions are quite incredible and inspiring.
Titles
I can only speak for me. As to what I may be or have 'potential' to be, that is something only I can say.
Only from my own personal experience about which alone, I am certain, I can only laugh at the idea of calling myself 'master' or 'shaman' or anything but the stupid self which writes here.
At the same time, I have to also laugh at anyone who would propose to propose to others they are such 'knowers' or 'shamans'.
I have known and know some talented folk. Some who have attained these 'powers' of 'peeking' into the minds and lives of others, 'psychics' or 'remote viewers' . . . folk with these little talents.
And then they want to set themselves up as 'founts' of wisdom and point out what others lack and give information only they possess and so on and so forth.
I like the thesis: all have what all have.
I am not discrediting the idea that some are more adept at what they know and what they do than we exersize from the same spectrum of potential or really known personally possessed skills. Or is it art? Or is it, really?: science?
Alright. Fine. We can take access to examples as leading us to an interest. If our interest is in any direction, that interest will bear fruit.
Seek, we'll find. Ask, we'll get answers. Knock, and doors will open . . . or maybe not.
WHAT we 'find' may not be the good thing we think.
We'll get some answers. Even many answers as we seek without. The answer I'm interested in is from within. THAT voice is most critical. Why should I follow any other? What, in the final analysis, is what I own? It's not about being closed minded, either. It, for me, is about that within me that is both feeling AND thought. And only I know what I feel.
So, I accept all criticism. All doubt.
What is answered from others may not be 'THE truth'. Or maybe, only, a half-truth. A quarter-truth. A three-quarter truth. Or a 99.999 tenths per cent truth.
As for me, I'd take the latter as a friend about whom I still reserve the right to say: almost, but not quite.
No man or woman can be my 'I am' for me.
I'm of the opinion that that level of certainty can only pertain to my direct, first hand experience of my own consicousness and what I can prove to myself about myself.
From that point forward I can extend this proof or generalize it and thereby accord to others the same. Such will be only my own estimation or 'generosity';
or I can be insane,(as I see such) and think others need my 'injection' of that finding for THEM to 'really see'!
Right.
No example in nature or human history or my admitted limited learning would lead me to believe that I have or can have something anyone else can't also have.
Leave me out of this 'shaman' business. I'm joe-blow, and jack-shit. And even I know 'titlism' is, mostly, bullshit. I still reserve the right to recognise 'authority' as based on greater experience. Where such 'experience' would lead me to bow, I'm out. I bow only to my parents. Much to the consternation of my so-called 'older, wiser' brothers.
Iconoclast. First and last. I worship the only thing I know for certain: my own consciousness, my permanent 'father-mother' and connection, by similarity, with all others.
excellent point
I, uh, that, uh
Is that a koan?
"We are not all shamans - - - And anybody claiming otherwise isn't a shaman either . . ."
So, if I claim everyone is their own shaman, I'm not a shaman so, my claim that all are shamans must be false, because to claim so means I'm the exception and not a shaman and so my claim is false . . . aiiiii!
So, a 'real' shaman will say: all are not shamans, but we are to believe this is the statement of a shaman?
A master asked the student: what is the sound of one hand clapping?
At which the student slapped the master in the face. (kaboom!) 'That', he retorted, 'is the sound'.
Humor, huh, what is it good for?
Absolutely . . .um . . .
:|
?
An addendum
Just so you know, I did not mean that as a 'slap' at you. I find myself slapping myself in the face now and then.
My point is, simply, that I find it pays to deem all 'shamans' as a safeguard against any subtle tendancy towards egoism. While I may not like everyone, that in no way would lead me to think myself so wise as to grant no probity to a particular wisdom different from my own.
I believe in love. Love is always, I find, seeking an inlet to our consciousness. And that it is in according to others what we enjoy as either insights or talents we let love in letting it out. In this process we needn't be simpletons. We can accord while maintaining that subtle form of self-protection represented by the raised single eyebrow while we turn our heads a bit . . . as if to ask: 'really?!'.
I have had periods of time in my little life where I often found the postures and attitudes and proposals of others often exasperating and even disgusting. And my own spontaneous vision in regard to this was very simple, but downloaded worlds of wisdom: a buffalo sitting serenely, flicking its ear at a gnat.
That was probably more about over-reacting than about the 'wrongness' of what bothered me.
"There is another kind of vainglory, which is an over-good opinion we form of our own worth."
From Montaigne, "Of Presumption".
I don't think Montaigne's essay under that theme hangs all together with perfect consistancy. He also noted that love can make its objects seem more perfect than they, really, are. Hence, the provisional nature of accedance. The raised eyebrow. The love I strive to understand is that love that sees the 'inner shaman' or 'brother' or 'sister' of equal worth quite beyond those often most evident 'imperfections' to which we recoil.
I believe we are given insights of an idealism that we appropriate to ourselves sometimes egoistically without really living them. Which may pertain only really to a part of ourselves . . . as yet unexpressed.
Maybe these insights are even only intimations of 'neighbors' we all have with us who have gone on and learned and whom have compassion on us. They stand in the background, we see them only from the corners of our eyes. They do not stand forth in full view lest we turn and begin to worship them and neglect our own work . . . our own unfoldments.
Yet this information can be striven after and finally really expressed. And thereby we attain a kind of new neighborhood or social conviviality with like-thinkers.
In doing so, we have not brought forth some specialness that pertains only to us. It is an accomplishment and we can take all the lessons that lead us to that point and forget them: deed done, lesson learned, character formed from esse to existere.
I wish to finish this response with a pertinent other quote, which I think is pure genius:
"What we call luck is the inner man externalized. We make things happen to us."
Robertson Davies
For good or bad, we unfold ourselves. None can confer upon us rights or potentials, which they enjoy, upon or into others.
[4th or 5th Re-edit. That's it.]
======================
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation." HERBERT
interesting point
though i would counter by suggesting that babies (all babies) are the 'truest' shamans of them all...precisely because they know not that they are shamans.
their gift is pure.
"The Woman in the Shaman's Body"
Hi friends,
I suggest to read "The Woman in the Shaman's Body"
http://barbaratedlock.com/
( I think/feel it's one of the best books on shamanism), by Barbara Tedlock, anthropologist initiated by a COUPLE (male/female) of authentic mayan "shamans" in Guatemala.
The misoginy that contaminated religious/spiritual studies is beginning to dissapear...the first shamans were women or, perhaps, men & women working together (Sacred Balance)...
Ah! I think/feel all of us are not shamans, but all of us can SHAMANIZE, to become SHAMANISTS, and a few people (like in music, etc.) become a "maestros", "virtuosi", if you like...
Warm greetings
Zorro
Pasito a pasito,Todo quiere ser querido.
A 'calling'
I'm not so sure about this. Children are spontaneously 'different' and as they grow we 'edit' them: sometimes approving, other times not or maybe just ignoring.
And so we cannot, I believe or feel confident in any idea that 'shamanism' is some 'speciality'. If being a 'leader' just means being 'charming' or domineering or both and so an "Alexander" or "Jesus" is manifested by 'nurturing' rather than 'destiny', then parents have the greater burden or maybe even 'virture' in bringing such forth to view.
We should be highly cognisant of our responsibility in aiding or facilitating just plain old neutrality whereby no inflammation of ego leads later on to another 'boss' or oppressor. A 'good kid' is good enough for any parent. Beyond that, that 'kid' must answer only to themselves.
I see 'shamanism' as a kind of excuse for people to let an internally equal potential they also possess to just lay fallow. And in keeping with the exigencies of times, 'shamanism' is a kind of 'business' or 'profession' that 'thrives' by such laziness or lack of alertness to internal talents. And boy, do the artists of such know that! Or what? How many shows on PBS are given by people who 'don't know'? WE have advice from only experts. Not one from people just asking questions. And if such were possible, to sell, they'd have to have some 'expert' who will tell us what is or isn't known. As if they know that absolutely. What is the 'ultimate question'? 22?
"KNOWINGISM" is a disease. A disease of laziness wherein people have made life into a kind of bee-hive platform with a 'queen' or 'king' and stratification of folk into some convenient structure of acceptance of 'answers' and mostly 'answers' by 'most popular'. And that goes to selling 'air time' or 'paper space' or some mode or venue subsidized by advertizors of other 'product'.
Give me a break. The ones who are quiet and don't cry at this kind of blankety blank see perhaps more keenly and speak less loudly. Yet they enjoy the benefits of perception and cultivation of insight.
They draw the light to their sprouting awareness without grandstanding or blaring trumpets. Quietly they grow. And when approached as if 'shamans', they also, quietly and humbly respond: i don't know.
======================
I am my own shaman
Itshak Beery podcast
Regarding the supposed EGO of calling oneself "shaman"...
I think Zezt and Rogerscott are in the same boat here. The concept that someone can consider themselves a "shaman" or "witch" or "priest" or any kind of practitioner or wise-person is a completely personal identification. But the idea of declaring oneself a "knower" brings about an ego.
I think it is very important for our society and collective body to have leaders among us, teachers, etc.
But to quote the Tao:
"He who knows does not speak, He who speak does not know."
I think this is the root of many people's aversion to new age "masters". Any time someone gets a rise out of being a teacher or self-proclaimed master, there is the ego poking its head up to say "Hey! Look at me! Look at what I can do!"
True wisdom (as some have put it) is realizing that, as the Buddha said, if there is suffering anywhere in the world, then I am suffering. If there is ignorance in another, there is ignorance in myself. It's a dangerous road to profess oneself as a fount of wisdom without a STRONG dose of humility and reverence for the unity and spiritual equality of us all.
This is not meant to discourage teachers from coming forward with wisdom that we can all benefit from. However while the ascent to enlightenment is an individual path (the "shaman's way"), the greater evolution belongs to us as a collective. We are all our own "shamans" and we are all each other's teachers as well.
Or I could be full of it.
Cheers.
:)
personally, the hardest
Instruction from the lineage of the naguals
Shamanic healing
The benefits of shamanic healing are many and varied. Many people claim to feel lighter, freer and happier after only one session. Additionally, as toxic emotional debris is cleared from the energy field, valuable life force energy is released and utilised by the physical and energy bodies, thus greatly improving health, boosting immunity and often preventing disease.
Shamanic healing