Is The Earth Sad? Options

Dudes well as i am a fulltime Nec practitioner, so i post that in this section coz there might be smthing related to the Nec:



I have been waking earlier these days due to exams. when go out before sun rise, still in the dark, then the breeze is still cool, when you still get to feel the spiritual world energy, there is a sensing from the planet that i get. its a sort of saddness...



About 10 years back i was waking about 4am for revision also, and previously i felt lazy and dormant and a bit null concerning emotions, but now as i into the magical for a bit more that 1 yr, i can sense emotions....



This reminds me of Final fantasy where the dudes could hear the earths cries.

One thing i would like to metion is that since i got my Bandar, i no longer have nightmares as such. But once when a real powerful evil stuff got into our dimension, i sensed that through a nightmare. No Worries the evil is gone.

But since sometime i have been also getting dreams of Alien ships getting into earth and trying to kick our butts in ways thats horrible. Once i was even like tracked by sorts of helicopters but fortunately another army of helicopters came to flee that one.

Well these need interpretations, Seraphim told me that the helicopter might be a demon monitoring me and my Bandar and the spirits protecting me came to piss it off....



But coming back to the earth, i really wish the feelings i got are only my imagination. what i feel is that the earth showing it being destroyed. a sort of weeping as in the final fantasy movie. :-(



Anyone want to say something on this feeling.?



mystick

Greetings A Smoking Fox,

I fear that you may be extrapolating notions from my argument that do not exist. I have gone through your post and have made an attempt to address each issue you bring to the forefront to the best of my abilities. I ask that in the future you do the same for me,so that I may know from where you gather the information and accusations you level against me.
I accept your point… indeed we can damage the planet temporarily

Well, no need to comment on this, since i agree.

Here I respectfully disagree… indeed the destruction of dinosaurs was necessary to bring forth the age of the mammal. Yes in a sense it delays evolution, but it also paves the way for new forms of evolution that could not arise in the previous epoch. This is crux of my thesis…it is everywhere around us; things die to make room for newer and different things. Natural selection is a clear example of this, albeit at less drastic scale.
Fair enough, that is your opinion
Once again, I turn to the above example. In the long-run, when life on earth reaches a status-quo (i.e. no new apex species will arise via natural selection)…destruction is the only means by which life can extend in a new direction. Now here we get into religio-philosophical issues, and thus naturally we will not all agree.

Natural selection is perfectly fine, and i agree that to that point some destruction is needed.
But human beings are no longer part of that cycle of natural selection. We have awarenes of our action, we know that by doing such and so we cause death to certain life forms in nature. We do this because it is easy for us to burn fossil fuels, and it is easy to use batteries that contain poisonous substances. Its far more easy to not recycle our garbage, and so on.
These are choises that are made from the notion "me me me, i i i". These choises that destroy life are selfish choices, they are based on the superiority of our human life.
That is the main problem i have with your logic. You claim that being nature loving and being against the destruction of life on earth is selfish, that it is based on the greatness of our human ego. While i think its more logical to be the other way around.
If you think about other life, and try to maintain it, is that not giving. Is that not being free of the ego, to let go of some comforts for the good of many others?

It is my belief that humans are not the purpose of creation. Our physical “hairless monkey” bodies are merely vessels to incubate the immaterial aspect (soul, life force, spirit, call it what you will) that has evolved alongside our physical bodies. This immaterial aspect is one in the same with the spirit of the earth, the gods, and the goddesses as it is an emanation of the One, the Godhead. It returns once more to this source to be emanated again in the next cycle of creation.

i agree, wich is why we should not just waste the other forms of life on this planet. I think the birds sitting in the tree in my back yard have the same right to live as me. Wich is why i don't kill them. Sure, worms would have a feast over the birds dead body, but who am i to interviene, who am i to play God.
Wich is what you are claiming. You state that it is the human ego that thinks we have to "save" the earth. That our destruction of life on it is natural. Yet, by saying so you are playing god on this earth. You are actively destroying life becouse you think you have the "natural" right to do so. I am actively searching for alternatives that have a small impact on the environment.
I can not see how you can claim that as being the hugenes of my human ego.

I enjoy torture; that is why I stick a pitchfork in the earth and into my girlfriend each and every day (heavy sarcasm).
No, what is egotistical is the belief that we can function outside of nature, fix nature, heal nature. We are nature and as I expressed in my first post everything that we make and do is nature. By destroying the current ecosystem we are letting nature take its course, by not-destroying the current ecosystem we are letting nature takes its course. In the end nature’s course will be destruction and then creation once more. My point being that whether we bring it upon ourselves or nature brings it upon us it is going to happen, and when we talk about saving the planet – we are really just talking about saving ourselves, or at least prolonging our existence. I have no moral objection to this; however, I do think it is a reflection of the human Ego and should be expressed as such.

I agree to a certain extent. Yes, we are part of nature. But we are also destroying eco systems beyond our own.
By doing so, yes we are damaging our selves, and killing our self of in the end. But not only our self, we are also killing millions of other life forms on the planet. So yes, your point is completely valid, but not the only possibility.
You can either, safe the earth for your own skin, wich is selfish.
Or you can safe the earth for the other life forms living on it, wich is generous.
It seems you are fixated on that first option being the only option, while i function according to the second one.

Read above, or better yet, understand the above.
An enlightened being realizes that there is no separation between him/herself and other life. There is no hierarchy of what comes first as there is no separation.
Have I been advocating the death of millions? No, re-read my posts, I explicitly mention the words “hypothetical” or “perhaps” to indicate an alternate view point that is worth considering. Not once do I say that we should blow each other to bits, I only posit an alternate perspective viewed from outside the realm of human experience.

I respect that you are trying to provide the other point of view. Becouse otherwise i would not be able to have this discussion.
But i do not think there is reason or logic in your point of view.
An enlightened being realizes that all life has the right to live, it does not consume natural resources to provide comfort for only himself at the expense of many others. The buddha was a beggar, and he would not even kill a worm. His environmental impact was zero, nothing, nill.
If you truly realise that there is no difference in life, then you would not use that as an excuse to promote killing.

Man, I must be a horrible writer. You did not comprehend anything that I wished to get across. Either that or you’ve become too emotionally attached to this subject and have opted to pick and choose my statements to fit your argument. I quote the last paragraph of the post that I directed to you yesterday:
Perhaps I should be more clear. I embrace the destruction in whatever form it comes. I am not condoning selfish consumption to bring a quicker end. I am simply addressing the issue of this threads topic in a manner distanced from our human experience.

I know perfectly what you mean. I also embrace the destruction when it comes. But i think it should not come from human hands.
We have our intelect, and we know what damage we can or cannnot do. I am against useless killing of life. Its not natural.
Life feeds on life, but we don't feed on life, we poison life and let nothing usefull come of it, wich is not natural at all.
Our ego is what seperates us from nature, we consume and seek out whatever pleasures us, with complete disregard for the costs.

besides, if you really believed your own philosohpy, you would live by it. And that means killing yourself because you would make great worm food and plant fertilizer. But that is not the case, you value your own life. You value the life of your loved ones and friends. You value other human life. Wich is perfectly natural. If your mother dies you would not embrace her death, you would be devastated, such is human. And you certainly would not advocate her destruction.

Your logic is like me going out on a busy shopping street and start shooting around, not caring what i hit. And then me claiming it is enlightened to do so, since all life is one anyway.

We are killing nature, and we know it well. There is no excuse for that. And we should do all we can to minimize this, because we can.
Because we are aware of the damage we do to life. And we are capable of preserving it.

I understand your point of view perfectly, but it just makes no sense. There is nothing to be gained from our destruction. Natural selection is one thing, but we are not doing natural selection. We are killing for no reason but our own entertainment. I am guilty of this as well, while my computer hums silently on, fuels are burned to power it, fuels that destroy our ecosystem. All for typing this message. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blush2.gif)

Your logic is flawed, because if i just ask you "Why would you advocate this, what do you have to gain from pursuing destruction" then you would have no answer. There is no reason, no goal, and no purpose other than personal pleasure that drives our destruction of life on earth.

This post has been edited by A_Smoking_Fox: Dec 20 2006, 08:52 AM