0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
The Politics of Ecstatic Research
I can’t see how an atheist who doesn’t believe in any form of spir-
ituality is able to respect [our beliefs]. I’m trying to think of a way
to respect that belief [atheism]. Without an individual’s own spirit
there is no way to connect to the metaphors, the teachings of others
which allows us to relate to others’ beliefs. Atheists have nothing to
look at for similarity or for understanding metaphor. A Christian
has a soul. Someone who is not a Christian [an atheist] doesn’t be-
lieve in a soul. A Christian can relate to our shxwelí [spirit or life
force] and the connections to rocks, trees, and fish. A person with-
out that belief can’t relate to it and that must affect their understand-
ings and interpretations.^3
I have not known indigenous people to subject researchers to pu-
rity tests of spiritual orthodoxy (in part because there is often no or-
thodoxy in indigenous practice), or to ask them directly to accept
the epistemological basis of life as understood by indigenous peo-
ples. The cultural adviser holds the position that “it’s not a question
of having some [particular] belief,” adding, “One of our teachings is
to respect the beliefs of others. I don’t want to say that our culture is
the best or that we are the most spiritual. But our beliefs have devel-
oped with the land and resources here, and aboriginal rights and title
comes from this respect” (interview, March 11 , 2004 ). In this case,
the spiritual adviser brings up an eminently practical consideration
regarding how researchers understand spirituality, arguing that tribal
claims to aboriginal rights and title rest on their own notions of the
landscape and epistemology, and human relationships to other enti-
ties. In indigenous theory, then, although not from a Euro-Canadian
viewpoint, denial of this epistemology, through failure to understand,
jeopardizes land claims.
Part of this issue concerns the nature of the political process. Re-
cently, a newspaper reported the case of an indigenous band that had
won a land claim case in court. The band leader proclaimed the judg-
ment a defeat because the band had been forced to contest the case
in a court that was outside its own indigenous system of law, and the
court had not recognized the basis on which the band made the claim
to the land. In this case, the band members regarded their control of