After reading the brief autobiographical excerpt from John Fire Lame Deer, I want you to think about and answer ONE (you can address more, but don't feel obligated to do so) of the following questions:
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
3. From pp. 67-69 JFLD goes on a bit of a rant about white (frog-skin) culture. Is this rant completely unfair, somewhat true, completely true? What is his general point about white American culture?
4. Did you learn anything new about the Sun Dance from JFLD's description?
5. What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
REMEMBER: No anonymous posts - please post under your first name and last initial. Refrain from using internet short hand (no 'lol' or 'u,' etc.). You do not have to create a completely new comment as your participation; you may respond to someone else's comment as your contribution and participation, BUT be courteous to other posters. No personal or ad hominem attacks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think JFLD’s opinion of “frog-skin” culture is actually quite fitting. Everyone is so concerned with money and material objects, especially in here in Manhattan. He’s saying that we have lost touch with nature as well as the animal kingdom (which most humans forget they’re a part of). I completely agree. I’m not saying that I’m in touch with nature – I myself am a city girl and can barely tolerate nature. That’s not right and I know it. People should appreciate the world they live in, not change it to fit their needs.
ReplyDelete2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteJohn Fire Lame Deer feels that a real vision must come from ones own juices. He explains that a vision is different from a dream. A dream is almost like a false vision, whereas a vision is authentic and natural. It can be seen as false because it is induced by consuming a hallucinogenic. “JFLD says that, “And if you take an herb-well, even the butcher boy at this meat counter will have a vision after eating peyote.” Here, he is saying that essentially anyone can have a dream, as long as they take peyote. In contrast, to have a real vision one must do real spiritual work and clear their heads, and then it will come to you “sharp and clear.” I think that JFLD is against mixing the sacred pipe and the peyote because it is too tempting to use the peyote to get a quick dream and people become dependent on it, he said that peyote is some people’s only religion.
I agree with John Fire Lame Deer when he says you are not a true Indian without a vision. From what we have learned so far it seems to me like connecting with the Gods is a huge part of the religion. Some Indians look at peyote as being lazy , so I assume not receiving a vision at all is very looked down upon. A vision to this culture is like almost as important as praying to out culture. Although I am not one to judge if people in the culture are more "legitimate" indians if they go through with a vision quest or any form of receiving a vision, I feel that from what i have learned it is very important in their culture to receive visions.
ReplyDelete1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteTo JFLD, having vision is a very important factor of being an Indian. By saying "that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian," is very understandable. He means that Indians sacrifice and work so hard to get visions, so if a man partakes in the sacrifices and purifications just to be let down with no vision then he cannot be an Indian. I actually disagree with this statement because men should not be discriminated as non-Indians for not being able to get visions. It is not a fact that visions come to every man that prepares for them, so if a vision does not come to a man it is not his fault, and he should not be punished for it. Technically he is as much of an Indian as a man with visions.
5. What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
ReplyDeleteI feel like JFLD’s statement on p. 74 is extremely moving because he is stating that the Indians do not ask for insight or pray for insight; instead they try to gain it themselves. He also states that they (Indians) gain the most insight from fasting on the hilltop or tearing their flesh at the Sun Dance. I found this particularly interesting because they gain the most insight from suffering, which is contrary to the beliefs of Christianity. A few sentences before this statement, he is discussing the white men and their religion, and how they don’t suffer with Christ. Although I don’t completely agree with his interpretations of the white men, I feel like this statement on p. 74 is very accurate. Indians try their hardest to gain insight by suffering and feeling pain because pain to them is not “abstract,” but very real. On the other hand, Christians often pray to saints or their “guardian angel” for insight and answers to their questions.
There is much mentioned in the bible concerning growth through hardships and suffering. Jesus Himself suffered and died on the cross. And what about Job? Fasting is a common practice still done t o gain spiritual insight and closeness to God. As for praying to saints, it's catholics who do that not Christians in general.
Delete3. From pp. 67-69 JFLD goes on a bit of a rant about white (frog-skin) culture. Is this rant completely unfair, somewhat true, completely true? What is his general point about white American culture?
ReplyDeleteI think what JFLD said about the white/frog-skin culture was very unfair and too general. I think that JFLD's message in his rant was that the Indians are much more in touch with nature, which I think is fair to say. However, JFLD says, "'What is cultural deprivation?' Answer: Being an upper-middle-class white kid living in a split-level suburban home with a color TV" (p. 67). Just because those labels apply to me does not automatically mean that I have no culture, and can't appreciate nature like JFLD and other Indians. Our skin color does not define how we feel about nature. Contrary to what JFLD says, I don't believe that you have to walk "a hundred feet to the outhouse on a clear wintry night, through mud or snow" (p. 67) to be connected to nature. There are many other ways of doing so. JFLD should not judge other people's ways of life, just as we shouldn't judge his.
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteI understand where JFLD is coming from. The Indians' rituals have a lot to do with visions and not seeing one is a very bad sign. Usually, if someone can not see a vision, they would use peyote to, as we see it, hallucinate. I do agree with the fact that if you are under the influence of peyote and you do not see some sort of vision, there is something strange going on. I do not agree with the fact that if you do not see a vision, you are not considered a full Indian. They have other rituals that do not include a vision and I think excluding others just makes them hypocrites.
2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteI think that JFLD’s rejection of peyote is correct, because like he said, “If you dream, that is no vision. Anyone can dream”. I find this to be true, because while dreaming may seem like a vision, they can be very general. Dreaming in this sense is false and not a true vision, that you are fully experiencing. I think that he believes that the peyote is also a false vision. He thinks this because the peyote is a “vision” that originates from something material; an object. He believes that all he owns is his body, and to connect with the spirits, he must be pure and empty in his mind in order to receive this vision. In order to get a true vision, directly from the spirits to you, then you must be pure in both your body as well as your mind; you must be your fully true self in order to get a direct vision.
5. What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
ReplyDeleteReligion seems to be a very personal matter for the Lakota people, and I think it is highly admirable that these people attempt to take religion so much into their own hands. Many Christians would be appalled at a practice like the Sun Dance, when in reality, the dancers are suffering like Jesus, the man we worship. It would be logical if the people who adore Jesus, a man who suffered, would try to follow his example by reenacting his suffering to a lesser degree in rituals. However, when people who do not even worship a figure such as Jesus attempt to use physical suffering as a way of worship and a way of getting in touch with creation, the Christians banned this practice! The Lakota people go to great extents to be in touch with creation through the Sun Dance and hanblechia. They should be commended for keeping in touch with the roots of their religion and not simply having religion be something indoctrinated in their minds.
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteI think that John Fire Lame Deer means that if a man is not strong enough to get a vision, he doesn’t deserve to be called an Indian. I agree that, although a person will be still be an Indian, getting a vision is the most powerful maturation ritual they have. It really proves that a person is willing to sacrifice of themselves. that they are in touch with nature, and that they can stay in touch with their heritage – all of which makes a true Indian. However, now that many Indian tribes have begun to use peyote, this no longer holds true. He is right when he states that any old boy working at a meat counter can get a vision with peyote. It cheapens the vision quest and makes it easy for everyone that wants to call themselves an “Indian”. So, I agree with him that everyone who deserves to be called an Indian should be able to cry out for and receive a vision, but not everyone who receives a vision is a true Indian.
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteI think what JFLD means when he says "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian" is that a true Indian always has visions, or dreams. It is part of their tradition or custom to have these visions. JDLF also says that visions are "a world beyond the frog-skin world" which basically means that they value it more than white people. He also says that they are dangerous to white people, which they metaphorically try to keep away with cannons. As it is said in the book, the Indians received visions by fasting and staying in the vision pit for four days and nights, hoping and praising for a dream. Also, people used to dance continuously until they finally saw their dead relatives.
I agree with JFLD, because if having visions is a part of your tradition or custom, you should follow through with them. If you don't then how can you possibly be a part of a that religion?
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteI think that John Fire Lame Dear is stating that without a vision, you aren't meant to be an Indian. I think he is saying this because visions are a huge part of the religion and determine where you stand in the religion, and if you do not have a vision maybe it means you do not belong as an Indian. He also talks about how some people get a vision from dancing so intensely that they see one of their dead relatives. If you go though all the rituals and effort of looking for a vision and cry out for a vision but still do not get one, it may show that it is not your destiny to become a full Indian and partake in the Sun Dance.
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteVisions are very important in Indian traditions. Vision quests have been a part of Indian traditions for hundreds of years. When an Indian is partaking in his hanblechia, he is finding out valuable information about his life. His hanblechia may tell him what he will be when he's older, or other things he needs to know. Visions are when the Indian god speaks to the Indian. If the Indian god does not speak to them, they are not a true Indian. I agree with JFLD's opinion that in order to be a real Indian, you have to have had a vision. Visions are a very important part of Indian tradition that has been in practice for hundreds of years. This is a very important step in Indian religion, and without it one cannot call himself an Indian.
3. From pp. 67-69 JFLD goes on a bit of a rant about white (frog-skin) culture. Is this rant completely unfair, somewhat true, completely true? What is his general point about white American culture?
ReplyDeleteI think JFLD’s view of “frog-skin” culture, regardless of how bluntly and generalized as he gave it, is actually quite accurate. However, his view that cultural deprivation is “Being an upper-middle class white kid living in a split-level suburban home with a color TV” is both very unfair and far too general. The color of our skin does not correlate with our appreciation of culture, and I have to believe that accusations such as this are born of both lack of understanding and a long memory of persecution and prejudice.
However, in modern day society, a lot of the main concerns of the population are solely material, and people are constantly thinking of how we can “fix” nature to best suit us, the modern population. We have almost completely lost touch with nature, viewing trees and animals as a commodity and something that only serves us, and by destroying and/or undervaluing nature, we are affecting the planet in ways we cannot even begin to predict.
Heard of Climate Change, guys?
Welcome to the 21st century, where we are really just beginning to become aware of our negative impact on the environment. We need trees. We need our environment to be stable. Not just for ourselves as the human race, but for the animal and plant species that we depend on for survival. What will happen to them if we continue on our path of environmental destruction? Things are getting better currently, but when you look at our society and what we’re doing to our world through the eyes of an Indian such as JFLD, we of the “frog-skin culture” must seem pretty despicable. In the eyes of JFLD, we really have lost touch with nature, and in saying this I don’t believe he means we have lost our appreciation of it, we simply appreciate it for more economic reasons, and this is something that needs to be fixed, and fixed very soon.
Just a little bit on #5 before I delve in: He is taking a direct stab and Christianity which I find highly offensive. Actually, I find most everything he says is offensive. # 3: Also, his rants are always directed at whites. No comments on Hispanics, blacks etc. Just whites. Can somebody say racist? I took extreme offense to his “joke” amongst his tribe on page 67: “what is cultural deprivation? Being an upper-middle class white kid living in a split-level suburban home with a color TV.” WELL OKAY. Let’s pick on the upper-middle class white kids! His generalizations make its way through everything he thinks pretty much- it goes beyond his “joke”. I can do it just as easily. What is a barbarian? John Fire Lame Deer! Ha-ha. The difference is, I don’t believe my joke, it isn’t the center of everything I say, its principle doesn’t govern my life. I don’t actually think he is a barbarian. He is also an extreme hypocrite, so much it disgusts me. He makes fun of our culture- how we live is our culture (maybe a certain John Fire Lame Deer needs to look up “culture” in the dictionary?”. We are not culturally deprived- we just have a different culture. Anyway, back to the hypocrite part. He makes fun of us for watching TV. Well I can’t help but quote him: “…I have seen it all on TV.” Wait a second; did he just say he was watching TV? Goodness... I guess that by his standards, he is culturally deprived too! He is right about many things however; he just makes it sound negative. He makes it sound like our culture and the way we live is a bad thing. He is entitled to his own opinion though about how life should be lived. This doesn’t mean he is right, this doesn’t mean I am right. However, we are all more or less allowed to live the way we want to. His definition of comfort is clearly different from mine. I assume we both want to live in comfort. However, he completely bashes the way we live (my definition of comfortably, that is). He says we have basically broken our animals so they’re not even animals. I’m pretty sure that happened a long time ago with the Neolithic revolution, and not just white people have done this either. I just wish he wasn’t so utterly bigoted towards Whites and Christians. If so, he might even see that we are not all the same so he should stop generalizing. Although what he says is somewhat true, he puts our culture in such a negative light, and his generalizations are immense. Maybe some people are how he describes, but he can cool it with the stereotypes. However, he clearly is biased/ racist. At least we’re taking the time to learn about his culture and try and understand his people’s ways. I bet he can’t say the same. So shouldn’t we be feeling bad for him, because he is so culturally deprived?
ReplyDeleteI agree with JFLD's rejection of the peyote. I think that he feels that these two beliefs shouldn't mix because his tribe is big on the idea of visions and vision quests and the peyote can just give a vision to just anybody and it won't mean as much. Visions are believed to be very personal and it should take time to get them but if you have something that creates these visions in much less time it is not as powerful.
ReplyDelete1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteMuch of Indian life is focused on the hanblechia – “crying out for a vision”. We also spoke briefly in class that within this primal religion, there isn’t any division when it comes to the different aspects within our lives. Religion is unified and part of the whole identity. Within Indian culture, the vision quest is much of an initiation from childhood to adulthood, and without this, one is not fully Indian. With that being said, I completely agree with JFLD. Much like other cultures, the vision quest is a passageway to adulthood; a Jew wouldn’t be a Jew without a Bat Mitzvah, a Christian undergoes confirmation (even modern, though not exactly religious a Quinceañera for Latinas – transition from girl to woman). Each of these few examples demonstrates how different cultures are not whole until completion of this transformation.
I agree with John Fire Lame Deer on his views about peyote. I think that it's wrong to use peyote when looking for a vision because peyote is a hallucinagenic drug, and it is basically a free vision. If you see a vision without peyote, I think that it would be more powerful to the person than if they had the help of peyote. However, I don't blame the Native Americans for using peyote in the past, for they weren't aware of it's hallucinagenic powers. I also understand how the Native Americans would want to carry on the tradition.
ReplyDelete2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteI agree with JFLD's opinion on peyote. He believes that people have lost sight of their values and beliefs and made peyote a large portion of their religion, instead of a simple tradition. He states that "The real vision has to come out of your own juices. It is not a dream; it is very real." After quitting peyote, he was able to have a real Sioux vision and it meant more to him than having a peyote induced vision because anyone who takes peyote can have a vision, but it takes a real Sioux to have a vision without a drug.
1.JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteWhen JFLD says this, he speaks from hi own experiences. In his culture and "religion", if we could call it such, teaches that in order to grow into one's full self, they need to have experienced a vision. Some may disagree; however, I do not. I believe that because I am not part of his culture, I cannot make a determination if it is true or not. I have to take his word for what he says to be true. Also, because he is not the only person to feel this strongly about visions, it must be true for them. I emphasize the phrase "for them" not to discredit them, but instead to shed light into the fact that his is not the only idea or belief based on his culture. Again, I cannot rightly make a determination if his opinion is based at all in fact because my culture, heritage, and religion are not identical to his.
2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDelete- JFLD's rejection of peyote is right. Since the Indian traditions and religion is so big on the vision quest and the entire process that leads up to the visiov itself, there should be no reason to use a substance that gives a false vision. In my opinion, the statement JFLD says, "Anyone can have a dream." is true. Peyote is more like a dream than a vision, and dreams can be vague the majority of the time. Unlike peyote, the vision seen by the men of the Indian tribes are very personal and spiritual, and bring the men closer to the creator.He feels that the two beliefs shouldnt mix because in order to get a vision, one has to maintain purity, and by using peyote, one is altering their body and they are not pure anymore.
What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
ReplyDeleteI believe that this statement is very powerful because he is comparing his religion to Christianity. In Christianity Jesus suffered for all of our sins. The Lakota people believe that it is more sacrificial if they themselves are going through the pain for their tribe. This quote is pretty much stating that in order to experience something so divine you must work for it even if it means pain. It also states that the significance and experience would not be the same if they were handed it through someone else. I agree with this statement because if you want something then you must work hard for it because not everything in life will be handed to you.
JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDelete- To the Indian’s having a vision was the only means of importance for them. It showed the transition between childhood and manhood. If a boy did not have vision he was not considered a man. And if the visions were bad he was considered crazy. The visions determined what the boy would become. If he had visions bout medicines he would be a medicine man. JFLD said that his grandmother made a blanket for him specifically for that trip. The hanblechia was so important and something to look forward to. The whole family prepared the child for it.
JFLD’s rant is true. The settlers came to the Americas and practically destroyed the Indians’ way of life. All they did was take more and more land, pushing the Indians farther away from their homes. JFLD states that the settlers took 200,000 acres from the Pine Ridge. He also states how they captured animals like wolves and domesticated them for pets. I can see how that could upset JFLD. His people saw these animals as brave and majestic. Now they are just “lap dogs,” for the settlers enjoyment. JFLD makes are really interesting point about the white settlers being afraid of the world. I completely agree. They came to the Americas not knowing what they were going to find. When they saw the Indians, I think it must have frightened them to see how different their culture was from theirs. JFLD’s point about white American culture is that they don’t like change; they want everything to be the same.
ReplyDelete3. JFLD goes on a bit of a rant about white (frog-skin) culture. Is this rant completely unfair, somewhat true, completely true? What is his general point about white American culture?
ReplyDeleteI think that John's rant about American culture is somewhat true, but at the same time so contradictory. There are so many parts of his "tirade" that conflict with themselves. To some extent he says that the Native Americans believe that all life is precious. Then just a few lines later states that what coyotes eat are the "rotten and stinking things". Earlier, he talks about how Americans aren't understanding of the Native American culture and to some extent are quite ignorant. Just a few lines later he follows up by making a long, quite unfair description of the way Americans live and the society we live in. I find that John Fire Lame Deer's perspective on American life and the way we live is very close-minded, although so was the way the early colonial settlers treated his tribe.
2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteI agree with John Fire Lame Deer's rejection of the peyote. Visions are very important to the Native American religion,and having one is considered the most direct sacred experience. It is the closest they get to God.Since this tradition is so meaningful, it makes perfect sense that JFLD would not want to receive visions through the peyote. It is taking away from the sacredness of the tradition. He is right in saying that anyone could receive visions/hallucinations that way. He is trying to keep the vision's importance. He doesn't want to mix the two ways of receiving the vision: the pure, correct way without peyote, and the use of peyote, which gives false visions.
1. JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteI think John Fire Lame Deer is trying to explain how deeply rooted this ritual is in the tribe. It's so central that man who goes without seeing a vision is not connecting with the religion in a way that is necessarily. It is also kind of a failure because the visions are supposed to guide you to your profession. I agree with him in some ways but not in all. I agree that men who see visions are a huge part of the community and really powerful and set you up to be a true Indian, but I don't agree that all men who don't experience visions are automatically not an asset to the community.
3. From pp. 67-69 JFLD goes on a bit of a rant about white (frog-skin) culture. Is this rant completely unfair, somewhat true, completely true? What is his general point about white American culture?
ReplyDeleteI think he is right. Americans hardly ever do anything for themselves. Native Americans bless and welcome all nature and sacrifice themselves for their religion but now people are not grateful and complain if there is too much rain or sun. They also cannot be bothered to wake up early to go to mass for a man who gave up his life for us but the Lakota’s lives are their religion. Americans no longer try to experience, instead they are content to watch others. People are materialistic and no longer accept nature. I see why a Native American who takes pride in his own wildness will find it strange that we try to change ourselves and all the wild around us
JFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteFrom our studies of the religions, we know and understand the importance of the visions. The visions to the Indians can be considered one of the most important parts of their actual beliefs, however, I don’t think that the people who are unable to have visions should not be considered Indian. They cannot be held accountable for not being able to produce a visions, however, I think this is easier to answer with my beliefs rather than those of the Indians. For them, they could assume it was a sign that the person did not have a vision, while I would think differently.
I really liked reading another story about Native American culture, this time from a man's point of view. I thought that lame deers's quote about how an indian isnt a real indian unless they've had a vision is true. Visions are such a central part of Indian culture and religion that if one didnt have one it would be difficult to call oneself a true Indian. Visions are about more than the actual act of having a vision, they are deeply connected to ancient rituals. They help one connect to the past while learning about the future. Visions, in spite of the different ways one recieves one, are a uniting factor throughout Indian tribes. They help to define a young Indian's life and can have a huge influence on what he chooses to do.
ReplyDeleteJFLD states on p. 65 "You can almost say that a man with no vision can't be a real Indian." What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteI agree with JFLD's statement. I think he means that without going through the necessary steps or practicing the Indian rituals of the religion one can not call themselves a true Indian because they are not partaking in one of the most sacred and valued rituals, the vision. The Visions are believed to be symbolic and mean something incredulous. Revealing things about ones life. It is like an initiation almost to being an Indian because of how crucial the vision quest really is. When i red this statement and thought about the question, I tought about confirmation in the Catholic Church is what makes one a true catholic and an adult in the church. I associated the two because without being confirmed i think one is called not a true Catholic and it is a crucial part of the religion and i think JFLD is saying the same thing for the Indian religion with the vision quest.
Question 5: In relating Christianity to the Lakota religion, John Fire Lame Deer compares the idea of suffering and what place it holds in each religion. He accuses the whites of being okay with letting their god suffer for them, while he maintains that the Lakota are not willing to do so. He says, “Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand” (74). Assuming that the “insight” John Fire Lame Deer is referring to can be achieved by suffering, one is led to believe that the Lakota truly feel connected to their religion only when they have experienced sacrificial suffering firsthand. In terms of Christianity, the parallel belief would be if all Christians were resurrected in order that they feel fully connected to Christ and the Christian religion. This concept is very new to me. It makes me wonder: can one feel a truly profound connection to their religion if they haven’t made any sacrifices like this one?
ReplyDeleteI found his comments about the sun dance to give even more insight the ritualistic side of it than Mary Crow Dog's biography. As he explained the part about self sacrifice, it made sense, but describing the different ways to pierce the skin, or that fact that women didn't have to pierce the same way was a little more inside the tradition than I would have otherwise looked to find.While I wouldn't want to pierce the same way the men do, if I was Lakota, it still seemed slightly sexist in the way men could handle more pain than the women could. But the women still had to go through childbirth, and maybe that's what kept them from piercing, to keep their bodies from too much harm.
ReplyDelete2. I agree with Lame Deer's rejection of peyote. First, it is almost cheating to get a vision, which the Indians consider so sacred and important to their culture and identity. Second, the peyote was inducing it, not his own being. While reading JFLD's descriptions of his times using peyote, he had no control of what he was hallucinating (very similar to LSD), so it is not a true vision since it did not come from you.
ReplyDeleteSomething that stood out to me while reading though was when JFLD said something like "we want to be like the animals". This made me think of how the Europeans called them savages and animals. I just thought it was interesting that the insults the Europeans were throwing around to describe Indians was almost a compliment in their sense.
5. What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
ReplyDeleteThe Native American culture is very close to the nature. They want to experience the visions and feel close to Nature. While in Christianity we have Jesus suffering for God, they have a more direct connection and suffer, they don't want to have their insights given to them by others, but earn it themselves.
5. What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
ReplyDeleteI think JFLD is contradicting his own principles when he says this. He had strongly criticized the “frog-skins” for not being tolerant of Indian culture and religion, while, at the same time, he is not acknowledging the fact that Christian beliefs are different from those of the Indians. JFLD says, “We believe that it is up to every one of us to help each other, even through the pain of our bodies. Pain to us is not “abstract,” but very real. We do not lay this burden onto our god, nor do we want to miss being face to face with the spirit power” (74). Just because Indians believe that inflicting pain on one’s own body is their way to “experience the sudden insight,” he assumes that it is the only way to do so, even for a completely different religion like Christianity. Christians have other ways to experience God in very real ways, such as transubstantiation, which is a point that Lily brought up in class. Also, Christians do make sacrifices (e.g. giving up something during Lent), but those sacrifices tend not to be as extreme as Indian self-sacrificial rituals, such as skewering of the flesh.
I believe John Fire Lame Deer is saying that the visions are such an important and defining part of their culture, that one cannot fully be a part of it without it. If one is not willing to receive this vision, either through the vision quest or peyote, they are not worthy to be a part of the Lakota tradition. One must not be afraid to receive this vision and fully become “a man,” or they cannot call themselves a Lakota. Ninian Smart talked about “borrowing” parts and pieces of other religions and adopting them into yours. He called himself a “Buddhist Episcopalian.” I deem that if one does not practice they entirety of their religion, they cannot identify with that title. John Fire Lame Deer feels the same way. He does want a Native American to call himself a Lakota if he has not received his vision, because all the other Lakota men have bravely endured the vision quest or the peyote.
ReplyDelete1. JFLD states on p. 65 “You can almost say that a man with no vision can’t be a real Indian.” What do you think he means? Do you agree with him?
ReplyDeleteIn this quote, John Fire Lame Deer is emphasizing the importance of the vision quest or the “hanblechia:” an idea which was also stressed in Mary Crow Dog’s autobiography. He believes that in order to be a devote, complete Indian, one must experience this vision quest. This vision quest held such great importance because eventually, a vision was granted to whoever was seeking it. I definitely agree with what JFLD says here. We know from our studies in class that the Lakota placed a great importance on their rituals, such as the vision quest and the Sun Dance. Therefore, because the Lakota practiced rituals so thoroughly, one of these important rituals being the vision quest, I think that someone who did not experience it does not have the right to call himself or herself an Indian. One is missing an entire part of the religion’s beliefs and practices without performing this ritual.
2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteI believe that John Fire Lame Deer was making the completely correct choice in quitting taking peyote. I agree that taking peyote does not count as having a vision. Anyone can take drugs and see things; that doesn’t mean they are connecting with God or some supernatural being (though they may BELIEVE they are because of the drugs’ powerful effects). JFLD states, “The real vision has to come out of your own juices. It is not a dream; it is very real” (66). I wholeheartedly agree that the dreams and hallucinations induced by peyote are not real visions. In order for it to be a vision, it must come only from what’s inside you because it is supposed to be helping you find your path in life. Drugs will not help you find your path; they may show you the easier path, but the best path will come from deep reflection and solitude that leads to true visions.
I believe he is describing the fact that while Christians seek the intercession of angels and saints, Indians learn from their own experience of the world and through their own sufferings. However, I think he insults the Christian faith when when he says, "and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand," as he attempts to cut down the Christian faith. Asking for help does not make you less strong, but throughout our lives we try to learn our limitations and to know that there are some questions that cannot be answered using the human mind. To think that one can solve all of one's own problems or be able to, alone, gain any knowledge of the world, is to think oneself godlike. I believe that there comes a time when human logic falls short of divine intervention and when the aid and wisdom of the divine or saintly is the only means left to find the answer you seek.
ReplyDelete(My answer was for question #5)
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteI agree with his rejection of peyote. Much of JFLD's culture is about creating (or receiving) a vision, or going on a vision-quest. One of the main reasons that the vision-quest is popular is because it shows devotion and dedication (since they would essentially be starving themselves). Therefore, by using peyote (a hallucinogenic drug) it makes it easier to create a vision and therefore requires less devotion. I also agree with Aine when she said that using peyote doesn't allow them to have a connection with a supernatural being and therefore doesn't meet the requirements of the vision-quest.
5. What do you think of JFLD's statement on p. 74 when he writes, "Insight does not come cheaply, and we want no angel or saint to gain it for us and to give it to us secondhand..."?
ReplyDeleteI think that JFLD's quote is very interesting, because he is telling us that the Indians did not want to pray to Gods or guardian angels, like we (Christians) do, but he is saying that Indians wanted to gain insight themselves, not through someone else. He said that they mostly suffered in order to try to gain insight, like going into mountains and not eating. In order to gain insight, it is not easy or short, it takes time and is hard. This is all interesting, because by gaining their insight, Indians suffer by not eating or participating in the Sun Dance, while we Christians, do not belief in suffering to gain insight, and we do pray too God and to people, or guardian angels, to help us.
2. What do you think about JFLD's rejection of peyote? Why does he feel that he "shouldn't mix these two beliefs" (i.e. the sacred pipe and peyote)?
ReplyDeleteI found John Fire Lame Deer’s opposition to peyote very interesting. The way he described those who used peyote to facilitate visions made peyote sound like a religion within itself, making people lose understanding of their Lakota/ Native American religion. Using peyote is described as almost an addiction, and I think that JFLD’s opinion is that associating the drug use with the vision quest takes away from the whole point of the ritual.