Martin Prechtel

One of Martin Prechtel’s most lasting comments for me was his description of the other world and the amnesia we are born with, which disables us from being able to remember or see this other world. He explained this theory saying, “ If this world were a tree, then the other world would be the roots, the part of the plant we can’t see, but that puts the sap into the tree’s veins. The other world feeds this tangible world, the world that can feel pain, that can eat and drink, that can fail; the world that goes around in cycles; the world where we die. The other world is what makes this world work. And the way we help the other world continue is by feeding it with our beauty. All human beings come from the other world, but we forget it a few months after we’re born. This amnesia occurs because we are dazzled by the beauty and physicality of this world.”
This is not something that most Westerners would ever think about or be able to conceive because it contradicts many (if not all) monotheistic religions. His explanation of the world and its inner-workings however, really bring the topics of this class full circle. His story is that of the Leaver story and reiterates the fact that we need to start looking at our impact on the Earth and give back. We have taken and taken and taken and thus forgotten our roots and forgotten to be thankful to all that is provided for us. This rhetoric (Prechtel’s story) can be seen in many Leaver stories, especially those of the Native Americans. It is the monotheistic religions and the societal insensitivity that makes us ignorant of our roles. In many ways monotheistic religions (and here I mean mostly the Judeo-Christian religions) allow people to be unaccountable for their actions. The Taker story is a one way street that tells its followers to push forward, without looking or thinking of the possible consequences. In many ways it also qualifies the depletion of resources and destruction of the planet. Because we are humans and because we are civilized we must take and take and use and consume. That is our prize for our advancements and intelligence. We are simply playing out our rightful role.
This is true especially if one believes in the apocalyptic and doomsday theories that exist out there. These biblical stories allow for disasters, catastrophes, and destruction to happen because it was meant to happen. According to these beliefs the world will come to an end and then God will come and take those who have earned the right to be saved to heaven and those who have not will suffer eternally. My argument with this would not be that it is impossible or untrue, far be it from me to question someone for believing something different than myself. My problem with this is where is the harm in trying to make the world a better place and trying to fix some of the mistakes we’ve made. Why is it so bad to give back and be thankful for what we have been given? It seems to me that these religions, whether intentional or not, are preaching selfishness or at least condoning it. While I think that it is most likely unintentional, it still goes unchecked and people are not held accountable.
Getting back to Prechtel’s story I do think that there is something both beautiful and captivating in what he says. It is very important to see other points of view and experience other ways of thinking. In a world that we’ve been told wants to destroy itself (or wants us to destroy it) he has taken a different path and shown the fragility of the world and a knowledge of things that far supercedes that of our own. His story, or the story of his people, leaves room for both the self and a god or gods. He is preaching harmony and life-cycles, one in which you give back as much as you take. There is something beautiful and humbling about this.

Winona LaDuke

Including Winona LaDuke’s book Recovering the Sacred, in a religion and spirituality class did not make sense to me at first. It seemed more like a lesson in American history than a commentary on religion or spirituality. However I began to see a pattern in the relationship between Manifest Destiny, land seizure, and the theft of Native spirituality. Throughout this country’s history there has been an ever increasing pattern of consumption. As America began to grow in population (European settlement) more and more land was required and taken by force. Native people had not only their land, possessions, and lives taken away, but their remains as well. This pattern of consumption fulfilled the desires and mandates of the Christian faith, while it simultaneously destroyed another.
Native culture has been forced to take a back seat to that of Judeo-Christian faiths. It did not matter that Native peoples were here first, European settlers stole their land which was not only a life source, but spiritual source as well. The land was sacred and the sources of ancestral legends and yet the resources it contained were more important that maintaining Native grounds. This is not completely surprising in a world with a history of conquest and war, but what is surprising is what happened after the conquest. Within the U.S. we have built monuments and museums to our former conquests, which look back and try to help us remember what there once was. The museums like the Smithsonian and other keepers of historical artifacts have been revered and cherished within our society. I know that I myself have gone to several museums and even went to Washington D.C. just so I could venture through the Smithsonian, however I never thought of the repercussions. Going to a museum for me was merely taking a stroll through history. To be honest I often times found it dull or boring because I never once tried to comprehend what I was seeing or attribute any meaning.
LaDuke’s book really opened my eyes to what these museums contain. Yes in some ways parts of our history, but also someone’s ancestor or stolen heirlooms. Things that were taken as spoils of war and then put on display for all to see. The most disturbing of all of these is the remains of the deceased. Bodies taken from their loved ones in order to study, poke, prod, and display the dead. Many of these bodies had their brains and organs removed in order to study and prove that Native people were “inferior” to the white population. These studies were obviously biased and far from scientific and yet took place for many years. Not only that but now Native people are having to fight to get the remains of their ancestors back. Native Americans have been using the court system for years now to fight for access to their ancestors and the ability to lay them properly to rest. While this may seem silly or nothing to make a big deal over for some, the question that comes to my mind is how many European remains do we see on display? Were the tables turned wouldn’t the uproar and mobilization of the community be greater? The fact that these remains are only display sends two important messages, or has two lines of thinking for me. One is that to be displayed in museums like this means that these people are seen as backwards, primitive, and needing to be studied. The other is that so much has been taken from Native Americans, why is it that we cannot and will not admit our mistakes and return what is not ours?
It is because of our culture and upbringing that we justify these wrongs to ourselves. Our culture has been taught to look back and remember, but not to preserve and help thrive. We look and struggle to fix things only after they have become broken, only after near irreparable damage has been done. Both our history and our culture have taught us that it is purely acceptable to be this way and that in fact behaving in any other way is backwards or that of uncivilized people. In this way we are able to maintain and never break from our learned behaviors. If we are taught that it is right to behave this way, then we do not need to question or look for negative consequences.

Thomas Berry’s book, The Dream of the Earth, begins its ninth chapter with a one paragraph summary of the economic and ecological history of the United States. He quite impressively states “After some four centuries of the American experience, we have before us a still beautiful and abundant land, but a land of roads and automobiles and grimy cities, a land of acid rainfall, polluted rivers and endangered species, a land extensively plundered of its forests and its mineral resources, a land with its human inhabitants somewhat bewildered and rebellious against their role as the great consumer people of earth.”(Berry, 109) It cannot be said any more plainly that Americans have had an everlasting and in some ways devastating impact on the earth. The issues and topics that Berry’s writings address are the same of those in Ishmael. As human beings we are given a pretext for our actions and the way we live our lives through our religion or spirituality. For many though, this is an excuse to live our lives without question under strict guidelines, without taking a moment to think about the consequences of our actions.
Berry talks about the three types of spirituality: traditional Christian spirituality, the American spirituality, and the emerging spirituality and how they function within society. He claims that the most devastating of all is the public spirituality. It reigns unchecked, telling humans they need more, more, more. This spirituality has shaped the world into what it is today, but when looking at the grander scale, that is from the evolutionary time line, humans are such a small blip. How is it then that we have had such an impact on the planet? Berry believes it is because we as humans, do not have a functional cosmology to guide us. He states “Yet with such a magical world as we have made, or discovered, we have no functional cosmology to guide and discipline our human use of all this knowledge and skill and all these energy resources.”(Berry, 112) Which translates to mean that though we have the tools, brain power, and will, we do not understand the meaning of what we are given.
I believe that in many ways this is reiterating the story of the Takers. Takers have the tools and the “toys” and because we have them we use them or play with them. As Takers we test what we can do, simply to see the results. The problem with this is that often times, it is not until years later that we see the true results. If we drop a bomb to obliterate those who would do us harm, immediately we see that we stopped them from hurting us. It is not until years later that we see the cancer, illness, and environmental destruction our actions have caused. Stand outside in the sun as a child and burn your skin until it is perfectly tanned. Thirty years later find the melanoma residing within your body. This is the Taker story as Berry is describing it. We have the means and yet have no meaning.

Diana Eck and Karen Armstrong

Diana Eck and Bill Moyers/Karen Armstrong

I have noticed in these readings a common theme, which seem to draw the same conclusion, that is many of the religious acts of intolerance come from fear. Not only that but some religions themselves are motivated by fear and promoted through fear. Eck refers to several instances in the chapter “Afraid of Ourselves” of religious intolerance and violence. Acts which range from various hate crimes enacted to try and scare and force either conversion or removal of peoples of religions other than Christianity in America or letters written to newspapers telling these people they should go back to their home countries and that they cannot really be American. After stating a quote from President Clinton about both the value of diversity and the demons which dwell within the human spirit Eck says “The haunting demons surely include the fear of the foreign and the denigration of the different, whether we speak of race, ethnicity, or religion.”(Eck, 295) What she is addressing here is the fact that so much of the hatred, prejudice, and violence that we see here in America and throughout the world stems from religious and racial intolerance. Even with tolerance there is no understanding and without understanding acts of fear and hatred are permitted.
This reading tied in nicely with the interview performed by Bill Moyers with former nun Karen Armstrong who talked about the ways in which religion has been corrupted and how it is affecting members of society. When asked about compassion and fear she said “Very often when I talk to religious people, and mention how important it is that compassion is the key, that it's the sine-qua-non of religion, people look kind of balked, and stubborn sometimes, as much to say, what's the point of having religion if you can't disapprove of other people? And sometimes we use religion just to back up these unworthy hatreds, because we're frightened too” and furthermore “There's great fear. We fear that if we're not in control, other people will cut us down to size, and so we hit out first.” This method of thinking, strike before you’re struck has been told as Taker rhetoric told throughout Taker history. People are taught to act of out fear, fear of losing, fear of dying, fear of being hurt, which teachers nothing more than to protect yourself and who cares who gets hurt? Reading Armstrong’s words was very profound and in many ways opened new ways of thinking for me. Hearing these words not from a priest, religious leader, or someone who would gain from my conversion was way more informational and helped to map out the way religion has began to function in society.
Being a former nun and admitting her own discrepancies with religion helped me to see things on a personal level and made what she was saying much more real than dense reading from a book. It seems to me that part of the problem is not only that there is a lack of understanding between groups, but that there is a lack of desire to understand each other. I realize too that I am as much a part of this as anyone else. The reason I took this class to begin with is because I felt like I didn’t know much outside my own world. I had no one pushing me to learn more or question, which meant I didn’t go outside my comfort zone. I think this is where people get stuck. They want nothing more than what they can understand, fathom, or relate too. This however creates a problem because people are so diverse and you simply cannot begin to understand others until you hear their stories and try to relate to their point of view. Both Eck and Armstrong mention ways in which religion has been corrupted, but that is the problem. Once people are involved there will always be misreadings and misunderstandings. Eck’s talk of the hate crimes that have persisted and increased in America and Armstrong’s telling of the religious persecution, acts of terrorism, and general lack of understanding of each other both hint (blatantly) at a much larger problem. The reasons these crimes and acts keep persisting is because people are taught to be so afraid of what they don’t understand. Technology keeps advancing and yet our way of thinking does not. Though the formula has changed people still rely on their gut instinct, which tells them to protect themselves and fear the unknown.

Diana Eck

Diana Eck’s book, A New Religious America, has raised many questions and comments for me. She brings to light religions I have both never heard of and know nothing about, which is interesting, but also a little troubling. Troubling because of how little either school or life experience had taught me about the diversity of religion. When I was little and first beginning to even grasp the concept of religion and what it meant I knew only that it was a way of thinking that influences how a person chooses to live their life. As I got older I started to understand that there were multiple religions practiced within the United States, but the only ones I knew of or ever heard anything about were Christianity, Judaism, and Catholicism. Now that I am older it is apparent to me that there is a reason that this is the case. Eck’s book highlights the multitude of religions present within the United States, which not only go unnoticed, but have historically been said to be a “threat” to America. Although America boasts religious freedom, it is also said to be a Christian nation, which until recently had banned the teachings of Evolution and has historically had problems separating church and state.
Though this country has been said to be founded on the ideas of freedom and equality, its history has proven it to be something far from that (unless of course you were a moderately wealthy white Christian male.) Religious and racial intolerance have been cornerstones in the founding of this country. However Eck’s book enlightens its readers to the fact that the American religious landscape, as well as its racial landscape, has changed drastically from its beginnings. Because of this Americans have been forced, though through much pain and suffering to be tolerant and aware of different perspectives and beliefs about our positions in the world.
Some of the questions which she poses in her book are “How many customs and languages can we accommodate? How much diversity is simply too much? And for whom?”(Eck, 2) All which are so simple and yet conversely such profound and thought-provoking questions. These questions were present at the beginning of American history (for that matter world history) and are still present today. Based on the various religious wars that have spanned the known history of the planet and my first response to them would be to say “few”. Though it may seem easy and sensible to tolerate another person’s point of view and beliefs, the planet has seen countless battles fought in the name of God and religion. Evident as it may be that there are numerous religions in America, countless efforts have been made to convert, indoctrinate, and force people to all believe in and follow the same line of thinking. I realize that Eck’s book and research actually show the change in religion in America and the rise of religions other than Christianity as dominant, but the question still remains “what does this mean?” Yes the religious landscape has changed dramatically from what it once was, but has this changed American ideals, morals, beliefs, or practices? Even with the changed landscape, the message is still being sent to other countries that America is a Christian nation and furthermore in this sense “Christian” has come to mean good, clean, virtuous, and pure, while other religions have been seen as a contrast to this, being impure and often times evil.
Eck makes inarguable the fact that because of this changing landscape Americans need to learn how to become not only tolerant, but embrace the religious freedom that the country was said to be founded on. Because our religious landscape is now so diverse brutish tactics, discrimination, and bullying that once took place no longer have any place in this society. The idea of pluralism (which the country was allegedly founded on) has already been introduced to America in the form of multiculturalism and now in having a multireligious society as well. If the idea of pluralism is really accepted in American society than embracing this multitude of religions only makes sense. Whether or not people choose to accept it, the world is an extremely diverse and constantly changing place and because of this learning to respect and appreciate (as cliche as it may sound) is necessary for not only for Americans, but the survival of the planet.

Religion and Empire

Religion and Empire-
The two articles for this week explore the concept of identity and how it has been formed and manipulated within this country. The nation was built upon “white” ideals and morals, crushing and systematically eradicating any deviance from these beliefs. The native people already residing in the U.S. were forcibly moved, raped, murdered, and converted which left behind a legacy of destruction in the history of this country. Andrea Smith addresses this calamity by then looking at how this history still to this day affects Native Americans and their self-image.
At first the article did not make much sense to me as a spiritual reading. It seemed to be mostly a history lesson about genocide and cultural destruction. Upon further reflection though, I found myself wondering how this history has shaped the peoples of this country and how one would view themselves and feel about their world with this history. ‘As long as we destroy ourselves from the inside, we don’t have to worry about anyone on the outside’(54) This quote best describes how systematically the cultural and eventual self destruction took place for Native Americans. It demonstrates how other than actual warfare and physical brutality, American society has managed to create feelings of low self-esteem and self-worth for peoples outside of the dominant (white) culture.
As part of the means of colonization and integration into American society, U.S. soldiers raped and sexually assaulted women (and sexually humiliated and mutilated the men.) “Apparently, Native women can only be free while under the dominion of white men and both Native and white women have to be protected from Indian men, rather than from white men.”(57) The article explains that while some sexual assault may have existed before colonization, colonization was really the catalyst for the introduction of the concept of male domination over females. “However, this view of the Indian man as the “true” rapist serves to obscure who has the real power in this racist and patriarchal society”(57) It spread the message that women were inferior, weak, meant for sexual pleasures, and reproduction. For women in tribes the history of colonialism and incorporation of “white” ideals spread the message that somehow sexual assault was acceptable because speaking out against it would damage the tribe and community. In some ways this was then a way of saying that the individual and the body and spirit of that individual are of little concern as long as the “whole” or community are ok. This line of thinking takes away from ones self-worth and ingrains in the mind the thoughts that rape is just something that happens and should just be forgotten about. It does not provide any accountability nor does it provide any explanation for the history of why and how rape happens.
Perkinson’s article also looked at identity and how it has been created in this country. His article explored the meaning of “whiteness” and the value attributed to that label in this country. The country was built upon the “white” dream and “white identity.” Historically members of this nation have been taught to view the world through a “white” lens, which leaves those members who do not fit that mold to feel inadequate and subhuman. When I think about spirituality and try to interpret its meaning, I think about how people view themselves, find inner peace, and understand their place in the world. Perkinson’s article outlined the difficulties in being able to do this however when a person is always being told to look through a different lens, one in which a person will never be able to meet the requirements (because they cannot change who they are or the color of their skin.) This article then is really talking about the issue of internalized racism. When people in this country are told to be a certain “white” way and cannot fit this image, there then often times is a belief that those who do not belong are somehow inferior. After being sent this message for years this concept then becomes internalized. A person’s self-image is then that they will never be enough and can never be seen they want to be seen.
Perkinson talked about his own self-image and how people have called him “black,” but while he is honored he can never really claim this title. Though he saw it in a compliment, to be black is more than liking certain music, knowing various dance moves, and living in a specific neighborhood. To be called “black” is to be part of a struggle and a history that Perkinson says he can make no claim to. This issue is important because as Perkinson explains, its like making a claim to something which unless you’ve been a part of that struggle you can’t fully understand. It is like saying being “black” is a fad or something you can wear without understanding the context behind it.

Peer Response

In reading Andrew’s blog I wanted to critique once again the impact Takers have had on the planet and what can be done about it. The message that I took away most clearly from Ishmael was the impact the Takers have had on the world. In a very short matter of time (comparative to other time lines) the Takers have managed to deplete many of the Earth’s resources and cause environmental destruction. What is most sickening about this is the fact that the Takers enact this role because they believe it is the role they are meant to play out and that there is no way out of this role. Ishmael in his teachings was trying to make clear to Allen that it is ok to believe or be ignorant of enacting this role as long as the Takers then become enlightened and try and do something to change this. Where the problems begin is in believing that nothing can be done about this behavior and that even when a person becomes enlightened about this destructive behavior they do nothing to change it. Quinn’s novel begs its readers to stop taking for granted the immeasurable gifts we receive from the planet on a daily basis and understand that the rate at which we consume these is having a much greater impact on the planet than we realize.

I do agree with Quinn in that people need to take responsibility for their actions and that humanity has a huge impact (whether good or bad) on the planet. However, where I differ in opinion with Quinn (and agree with Andrew) is that this book only provides one possible explanation for why things are the way they are. My fear with this book is that it seems to make a statement that it is “the way” and the “gospel truth,” without providing other reasons why things have played out in the course of the planet’s history. A person reading this then may place all of their faith and understanding of the world in this one book (which I know has a huge cult-like following.) Also since the book Ishmael is all about questioning and the quest for knowledge, then I feel that I must agree with Andrew and not be too quick to place all of my hope, and trust in this one theory without trying to find other answers to the planet’s problems. I do believe that Quinn provides very plausible theories as to how Mother Culture influences and has allowed humans (the Takers) to cause the destruction they have, but without further investigations it seems that we would again be leaping blindly into one person’s point of view. I think the most important message that Quinn tries to send and what we as readers should take from this experience is that whether Taker or Leaver we are all part of this problem and we all share the planet (not just with human beings, but all life forms) and must recognize that humans are the only ones who act as though the planet was made for us, not us for the planet.