‘엘리아데주의’(엘리아데이즘) 검토를 통한 샤머니즘연구사의 방향성 이해

A critical understanding on the orientation of the studies of the Shamanism with a focus on the problems of Eliadeism

엘리아데의 샤머니즘이론에 대한 비판적인 접근을 통해 서구에서의 샤머니즘연구사가 ‘샤머니즘’ -> ‘엘리아데이즘’ -> ‘네오샤머니즘’의 방향성을 따라 진행되어왔음을 보여주고, 바람직한 샤머니즘연구의 가능성과 방법론을 검토하는 것이 이 글의 주된 과제이다. 구체적으로는 1) 서구 연구자들의 엘리아데 비평에서 두드러지는 문제점들을 지적하면서 엘리아데의 이론이 가지는 핵심적인 측면을 살펴보고, 2) 샤머니즘세계의 철학과 우주관을 예술과 인문학 에서 창작과 비평의 원칙으로 활용하는 네오샤머니즘적인 경향의 접근법과 함께 ‘구체적인 지역문화의 양상과 기원에 대한 실증적인탐구’로서의 샤머니즘에 대한 재인식과 연구수행의 필요성을 토론한다.

The goal of this work is to show the logical and illogical aspects of the Eliade's theory of the Shamanism, argued in his publication Le Shamanism(1951, Paris) In the introduction the author tries to point out the current orientation of the studies on the Shamanism with a frame of ‘shamanism -> eliadeism -> neo-shamanism’. And the author also suggests an effective way of the study of the shamanism with the history-dividing -role of Le Shamanism. In the second chapter, the chaotic situation of the ambiguity of the term ‘Shamanism’ especially in the western world both with the experts and ordinary people is explained with the citation of R. Hutton's recent book Shamans-Siberian Spirituality and the Western Imagination(London, 2001). The author argues that the expansion of the meanings of the Shamanism and the ambiguity of the term is mainly due to the Eliade's purely theoretical and structural approach on the matter. In the third chapter, the author illustrates the critical approaches of the works of I. Lewis, C. Humphrey, R. Hutton etc and the reasons why their theories on the Eliadeism have not succeeded to prove the illogical essence of the Eliadeism. The author points out that the Shamanism of Eliade is not the real shamanism in the Siberia or in any other places in the world but is the pure manifestation of his logical thinking with the help of the various materials he gathered in his book. Eliadeism is a without-substanceunderstanding of the matter and merely a component of shamanism and it has little to do to with the understanding of the nature of the local cultures and the cultural systems in the Siberia. And finally the author is pointing out the problems of ‘time concept’ and ‘archaic approach’ of the Eliadeism, which have not been seriously studied among the experts. In the conclusion, the author tries to show that neo-shamanism is not the very studies on the matter but the applications of the nature and the cosmology of the Shamanism. so, it will be constructive if we take the future course of study on the matter not only in the Eliadeism's way, neo-shamanism's approach, but also in the positive way of research of the origin and the historical changes of the Siberian Shamanism in particular and the societies in which the shamanisms have been shown in general.