When have argued for or against such worldly conventions?
Am I not also 'man'? I clearly I see that others appear conditioned to
think in this divisive way. Doesn't mean I'm going to buy in, or dive
into that mental cesspool as a prerequisite for engaging in the
conversation or the rest of life.
This superior/inferior business is the business of 'ordinary mind'. I
neither deny it, nor claim to function otherwise. I simply see it for
what it is: Self-serving nonsense. A 'natural' defensive mechanism in
over-drive that allows all manner of atrocities to be committed in the
name of protecting/bettering things.
Whether or not my lack of conditioning in this regard allows you to
justify categorizing me among the common or "rarer breed" - is just more
of the same erroneous thinking.
Seeing 'man' as the enemy is nothing special, nothing new. The list of
available enemies has simply expanded to its logical limits. We are all
NOW the top of our own list. Is that really a surprising development?
Fight battles when you must. Just remember that battles make wars - they
don't win them. That's just strategic propaganda to rally the troops.
There is no winning in war, only chances to end war. This can happen
before they start by realizing the futility of this desire to always be
winning the game of divide and conquer and letting the cycle - the
dharma wheel - wind down as the inertia bleeds off.
Possible, but unlikely. War is what we naturally do, just not always
with weapons. All rational thought, is combative (fortunately there are
other forms of reason).
All life is a form of struggle. Some find only ugliness in this, but
there is also great beauty, if you look.
KG
On 10/10/2012 7:02 PM, Merle Lester wrote:
KG..whether you agree or not..that is the state of the world..man
sees himself superior to nature... NOW.
..there are some who walk amongst us that do not..a rarer breed...
witness the destruction of nature as we speak
you'll have to give edgar some brownie points
he's seen it/ witnessed it
where are you hiding?
under a rock?
merle
Perhaps Edgar is just conditioned more 'Old Testament' than 'New
Testament'. ;)
Either way, this business of Man vs Nature sounds like a Sunday School
lesson on our 'special' role/responsibility - of dominion over the
creatures of Earth. We are 'in His image' - not them (which points to
something far more profound/simple than the literal/superficial
interpretation most imagine).
Responsibility for one's actions is fine. Working together, fine.
These recognize fundamental interdependence and impermanence of it
all. Arrogant assumptions that Man stands somehow apart from the rest
is BS used to justify all sorts of positions. One of them, being the
belief that man stands apart.
I'm not saying the idea isn't useful. I'm warning that it IS, and that
this is precisely what we see playing out!
KG
PS - Intention (karmic desire for change) begets expectation
(suffering over this). If the road to hell is paved with GOOD
intentions, the path to total annihilation demands only the BEST
intentions. If we are busy with all this, what we humans 'interfere'
with is realizing effortlessly arising compassion. Always available
when we stop deluding ourselves. Realizing this, change flows accordingly.
On 10/10/2012 6:20 AM, Bill! wrote:
Edgar,
What's REALLY important is that it's been framed wrong. It's been
framed as humans vs. nature, or as you put it humans 'interfering' in
nature. As long as humans think they are not part of nature and taht
all their action are natural there will be this problem.
When a beaver builds a dam is that interfering with nature? When a
squirrel shits in the woods is that interfering with nature? When a
human splits an atom is that interfering with nature? When a human
manipulates DNA is that interfering with nature?
What is the quality that humans have that other animals don't have
that renders them capable of interference - IYO? (I just made that
up, IYO = 'in your opinion')
...Bill!
--- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...>
<mailto:edgarowen@...> wrote:
>
> Come on Bill.
>
> In human discourse about Man's impact on nature, that's the way
it's defined, and the whole issue is framed, as you well know...
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
> On Oct 9, 2012, at 8:45 PM, Bill! wrote:
>
> > Edgar,
> >
> > This was a VERY SERIOUS response.
> >
> > Why is it that you think the things that humans do are
'unnatural' or against nature but the things that other life does is
'natural' and okay? A friend of mine very wisely (IMO)once suggested
that all ethics should be applied to humans and other life forms equally.
> >
> > What is the quality that you believe separates humans from the
rest of nature so that human activities and artifacts can be labeled
as 'interference'?
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >
> > --- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Joe,
> > >
> > > Come on, it's a serious issue...
> > >
> > > Edgar
> > >
> > >
> > > On Oct 9, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Joe wrote:
> > >
> > > > Edgar,
> > > >
> > > > And Humans are just the tip of the iceberg, too.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know why plants and animals insist on interfering
with the way Nature works.
> > > >
> > > > For example, on the early earth there was a nice atmosphere
without oxygen. But blasted Cyanobacteria evolved which like to sip
the methane and other gases there were back then, and started
polluting the atmosphere with ...Oxygen!
> > > >
> > > > Then -- wouldn't you know -- other organisms formed which
turned CO2 into even MORE Oxygen, with a help from light from the
Sun. The nerve! They got away with it, though, because there were no
Police. The rug was pulled out from under Nature yet again!
> > > >
> > > > Later, some animals evolved, which USE the oxygen.
> > > >
> > > > Much later, some of these animals of the Mammal variety
called "Beavers" began to INSIST that they interfere with the stately
FLOW of river tributaries and streams, by ...damming them up! Such
nerve. You may be sure that this caused inundations upstream, and
occasional floods downstream when the dams burst. Havoc. Bye, bye,
Nature!
> > > >
> > > > The nerve of these organisms: Micro-organisms, Plants, and
Animals. Always interfering with the way Nature works!
> > > >
> > > > At least on the Moon there is no such interference, there's
just a continual, thin, rain of meteorites pummeling the surface, and
no atmosphere to make things rust.
> > > >
> > > > Oops!, some exotic Mammals left some footprints on the Moon,
and some machinery, during the last fifty years. WHY must there
always be such interference? The Moon had been Nature's nice, quiet,
haven for rock and dust for so long. Why must things always go downhill?
> > > >
> > > > --Joe
> > > >
> > > > > On 10/7/2012 9:26 PM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > Why do humans always insist on interfering with the way
nature works?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
