I think one reason it is so difficult to find popular trainers or regular people doing “real” horsemanship (a la Ray Hunt etc.) is that it takes a huge amount of personal mental discipline and education to develop the powers of observation and feel and timing that someone like Ray used. Most people don’t have those skills and they are not easy to learn. Thus for them to try to use those techniques would result in frustration, not success.

You

You pose the question of whether human animals should even be riding or attempting to ride horses, emphasizing that many “such practices reduce the horse to the status of violated object who is subject to what Marcuse termed “democratic unfreedom.” Can the term choice even be used when it is constituted of such a false dichotomy?… Such a view rejects the suffering of horses as a viable moral dilemma & cannot be said to honor the best interests of the horse.” My sister, after a young career excelling in jumping, decided on an emphatic NO and ceased all equestrian activity. I try to get a better balance for myself, though I refuse activities that fall blatantly under the umbrella of “use.” Teaching, spreading the word about non-dominant horse training and loving bodywork are a part of my “right living.” Still, I know that some horses love to have “jobs.” It’s a tough question.

You ask, “how do we honor what is in the best interest of the horse when we are attempting to “teach” the horse to “listen,” submit to (obey), & carry us (in a certain way) on their backs?” I do not know the complete answer. I do know that open hearted mindfulness and careful exploration of each interaction is necessary.

I am merely a lazy vegetarian. My goal is veganism. I realize this would be more consistent with my reality.

Thank you so much for your response. As always, you have provided me with material for thoughtful consideration and possibly further posts.

I look forward to reading more challenging comments in the future.

I would suggest that even more fundamental to the question of what underlies this Vaquero tradition & its interpreters & interlocutors is the question of the moral status of non-human animals.

Buddhism to a certain extent–though it does reserve a special sort of “hell” for non-human animal existence (the “Animal Realm”), transcends & encompasses the Dualisms of what Gore Vidal terms the “Sky God” religions (Judaism, Christianity, & Islam), thereby, at least partially, resolving the insuperable (in my opinion) problem of how the Sky God religions address the problem of suffering in/of non-human animals. In Christian theology, for example, there is an entire discipline/school devoted to addressing the problem of suffering–in human & non-human animals alike, called Theodicy. Here’s decent introduction, not problematically biased, on the subject: http://cla.calpoly.edu/bts/issue_02/02lynch.htm).

If one recognizes the moral status of non-human animals as worthy of consideration & respect, then one must also address the fundamental question, given the exquisitely evolved body & mind (brain), bones/structure, & physiology (biomechanics) of the equus caballus, of whether human animals should even be riding or attempting to ride horses.

Moving beyond that basic question takes us to/into another basic question/realm–given that we have already made the decision to ignore what is “best” for the horse or to put it in terms of preference utilitarianism, what is in the best interests of the horse by choosing to ride the horse, is how do we honor what is in the best interest of the horse when we are attempting to “teach” the horse to “listen,” submit to (obey), & carry us (in a certain way) on their backs.

When Enlightened Horsemanship through Touch speaks of training in the Tellington way (e.g., “do not force your agenda”) she is indirectly referring back to these basic questions of what moral status one ascribes to the horse & whether the actions (i.e., training & activities, such as riding) taken as a consequence of the decisions one has made on what one will do with (or “use”) the horse are consistent with that moral ascription. Enlightened Horsemanship through Touch suggests that there are elements of non-dualistic Buddhist dogma/teaching on these questions that can be found in the “original” views & teaching of Ray Hunt & even in Linda Tellington’s training system (if the term “system” can be used).

These all are weighty subjects deserving of much, much more serious investigation, thoughtfulness, & discussion. However, I raise only parts of a few of these subjects in recognition of Enlightened Horsemanship through Touch’s moving consideration of Ray Hunt’s “natural” horsemanship & what has become of it through its interpretation & application by an ever-growing number of self-proclaimed (“natural” or otherwise) horse trainers/clinicians.

Given my newness to the world of horsemanship (a little over 5 years), I find myself constantly reminded & challenged by those who have grown up in what I term the “Opus Dei of the Horse World,” that is, the US Pony Club–among other similar organizations & associations, I am repeatedly told—both by “non-natural hose people (these are almost always people who have been riding for all of their lives but who know next to nothing about equid ethology, otherwise known as “natural horsemanship,” & “natural horsemanship practitioners), that I cannot & do not know anything of importance to them when it comes to understanding horse & what motivates them to capitulate (because that is what human animals seek when they engage in a certain kind of “training”) to the will & direction of human animals (in the competition ring or otherwise).

I am sick of the Clinton Anderson & others like him using domination & fear & suffering to compel horse to capitulate to their wills & direction. If that is “natural horsemanship–or horsemanship, then I do not want it.

They justify themselves & their “training” behavior/actions by their “results.” Such practices reduce the horse to the status of violated object who is subject to what Marcuse termed “democratic unfreedom.” Can the term choice even be used when it is constituted of such a false dichotomy?

I just met one of these “trainers” in Maryland who differentiates himself from other natural horseman by extolling the virtue–& results, obtained through the use of brute force & terror. He justifies his actions by the results, namely, total obsequiousness, he obtains.

Yes, the horse will do what these people subsequently ask.

However, such ways of interacting with the horse can only be countenanced if one regards the horse–& non-human animals (& I am Vegan, by the way) in general, as mere instruments to be used & exploited on behalf of human animals. Such a view rejects the suffering of horses as a viable moral dilemma & cannot be said to honor the best interests of the horse.

I look up to Alexander Nevzorov, Klaus Ferdinand & others–impossible as it may be to achieve their level of accomplishment, as embodying the kind of horsemanship that I can respect.

Thank you Enlightened Horsemanship through Touch for addressing the passing of Ray Hunt & his Bodhisattva’s way of meeting the horse (on the horse’s terms).

Regards,
Shoshin

Remember we are One with Divine Source, perfect, and with special gifts. It is a gift to have you speak for all the horses who do not want or certainly do not need to be “dominated” and to all the people who do not feel good about dominating but have heard the word so often they believe it is the only way and dont know any other language.

Love your horse and treat them as you would love to be treated.

xoxoxo linda

Do post about it. I would be so happy to read your responses.

As to your “tangent,” that’s the most movingly perfect statement of horsemanship I’ve read in a very long time. I’ve forwarded it to Linda as proof that there are mindful horse people out there. It’s so wonderful I want to put it on the front age here as a sticky post.

*namaste*

i think it is both. there is nothing sexy or glitzy about slow patient work that does not produce spectacular results in a single session. sometimes you work with a horse until you get that minute, almost imperceptible, release and then your session ends. how do you sell that? if the horse belongs to a client, how do you justify your fees when the client can’t see the results for herself? if there is no agenda, when completed agendas are how we measure progress? how do get new clients and keep them coming back for more? money and ego definitely figure prominently; horse training is now an industry like any other – a product to be bought and sold. it took me a while, but when i realized that, i knew i’d never be successful at it and i left the ‘industry.’

i also think it is both human nature and culturally ingrained in us to need that instant gratification – we are often unable to exercise patience and plan for the future when we WANT here and now, so i think we gravitate towards those people and methods who promise to satisfy our immediate desires. i think (and a Buddhist might agree that developing that patience, awareness and sensitivity – not to mention extinguishing that desire and accepting whatever the universe gives today – requires an enormous amount of self-discipline, which most people have neglected to cultivate; largely because we live in a culture that promises us we will never have to.

most people want absolutes, where the uncertainty of the world can be safely packaged and dealt with by distilling everything into a convenient formula: if you do X, you will get Y. they want tried and true results, not open ended experiments. only, the real world doesn’t work like that. sentient beings don’t work like that. but acknowledging that fact means accepting there will be failures as we learn to take the time to listen, and learn to react with compassion and empathy to each individual animal and circumstance – receptivity, creativity and nuance too often are neglected.

the other undercurrent i sense is this issue of dominance. i am disturbed by all the talk of ‘being the alpha’ etc. i haven’t found that necessary in my work with horses. they are partners. equals, even – or as close to equal as possible; one may lead, but never by force. i’ve left force out of the equation, and that means physical and psychological coercion. to most of today’s NH gurus, that would make me a bad trainer. but i am still able to accomplish quite a bit with my horses without making them neurotic slaves…

so what deep need is this language speaking to? i have this feeling that it appeals to or satisfies some need for people, especially people who are dis-empowered in other arenas in their lives, to feel in control of something; to dominate something; to be superior to something. in the same way we seek to control the elements and the environment, the horse is a cultural symbol of wildness, freedom and pride, so could subjugating it be an unconscious attempt at gaining control in a universe beyond our control? some even quote scripture, about how some deity supposedly granted humans dominion over animals. that not only offers a degree of psychological protection, but it must make some people feel good; i may not have my own life under control, but i can control the life of another…. does any of that aimless rambling make sense?

some prefer to act rather than react. some do all the talking and none of the listening. i don’t want to be a dictator to my horses, i want to be a friend.

sorry for the huge tangent! i’ll stop now :-\ i’ve gotten totally carried away here (and you’ve gotten a frightening insight into how my twisted mind works this is a great subject, and one i will probably continue to ponder for some time. so, thanks!

This is a fantastic idea!

“I would like to see a competitive/showing world that, even if it can’t necessarily be cured of its evils, can at the very least be opened up to new ideas so that those who take a different approach can participate too. and our judges would be people whose opinions and insight we respect – people who can recognize a relaxed and happy horse ridden without force or resistance…”

People are not allowed to participate if their alternative methods have physical manifestations. Then the traditional world fears for their safety, and in the best case, requires additional release forms to be signed. In the worst case, doesn’t allow participation. Then, as you say, we lose the benefit of insightful judging. Sad, really, but you can understand where they are coming from.

I wish that it didn’t take such energy and resources. It should be easier than that. In an ideal world, differences would be embraced. It seems to me that the horse world is slower than almost any other to accept diversity. Old prejudices hold hard.

Maybe through this post you will find others interested in starting the same thing. Post about it in your blog. See what happens. I will lend any help I can.

i’m not an advocate of any of these things especially, but i recognize their value and would like to see a competitive/showing world that, even if it can’t necessarily be cured of its evils, can at the very least be opened up to new ideas so that those who take a different approach can participate too. and our judges would be people whose opinions and insight we respect – people who can recognize a relaxed and happy horse ridden without force or resistance…

but like you, i lack the energy and resources (and know-how) to get it done. but i like the idea, so maybe there would be others who would want to get involved? where to begin…

I think you have hit the nail on the head, there, definitively, with respect the the question I ask in this post. Thanks for answering it!

I always enjoy talking with you.