This was initially posted in GAIA tribe and inspired by Roy's posts(For me, this is GAIA) and the many responses to it. GAIA I & II are great threads! thank you Roy, or perhaps the grace that has brought it to be expressed through Roy. Either way, there is gratitude for it's expression, a lot of good sharing and flavors of perspective that are intermingling and 'feeding' one another.

This has been coming together since I read those posts about two weeks ago. I can't say I have the scientific knowledge or have read most of the material that has been mentioned, but this doesn't feel to be necessary for a response. There are so many of the individual sharings that I find fascinating and would have enjoyed responding to, but instead this writing felt to be expressed.

The language used here, especially toward the end, may seem difficult to follow, because it is using metaphorical phrasing and relative conjuntures of words to convey a certain feeling or understanding if possible. So please bear with it, reading slowly and possibly contemplatively.

Thank you... :)

In regards to overpopulation: there are many ways that it is being seemingly dealt with naturally and man-ually, an enactment of depopulation. Regardless of 'right or wrong', it will be as it will be...but how will 'we' respond in the awareness of how it appears now? I agree that it seems that the increase in births is a response to feeling threatened and with Agent Smith's assesment (from the Matrix) to a certain degree:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Agent Smith: "I'd like to share a revelation I had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we are the cure."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And this where I disagree. For as much as we are the plague we are in our essence the cure as well.

To clarify:

As far as the "bacterium/virus theory"(not based on scientific fact, just analogous understanding for this discussion) seems to go...when threatened or left unchecked: intensification of multiplication.

But here is where my ignorance of the basic functions of these fail: does a bacterium behave in this manner? or is this primarily viral? Do most forms of life behave in this manner and are they perhaps killed off too fast to overwhelm? Is this why Man is overwhelming other forms of nature, beacuse it has no natural predators besides ourselves? Is this why Nature is projected as being hostile and threatening, because it is being perceived as separate in our identification as the 'ruling species' and to perpetuate rationalizing destruction or the attempts to 'control' Nature?

What I am familiar with hearing is an animal population may increase when the natural predator is gone, when there is an imbalance already begun by extracting part of the natural order. And what is becoming apparent is that Man has irresponsibly been messing with that natural order, and going to extremes in trying to deal with it or waiting to deal with it until there are extreme circumstances or just not addressing it at all. In this sense Man appears to be a 'virus' that has made the world *sick* with it's ideas of separation and superiority, ignorance and negligence and lack of conscious respect.

Nature will, in one form or another, deal with this. Or rather continually is, it's just taking Man awhile to recognize it. Whether 'the dealing' appears to be man made or by natural causes is irrelevant in the sense of the bigger picture. Because as someone in a response appeared to point out essentially: how 'life' gets defined is a matter of perspective and not indicative of reality. It depends on perception, the images of life are getting defined, but is Life?. Do the forms define/label themselves or has the mind of Man? Does Life say "I am this or that..."? Does it even say "I Am"? Does it need to point out the obvious? Is the pure essence of Life, which includes the life/death cycle, an egoic identity?

The definition of "dealing with it" is focusing on a suppposed moment, happening in time, defined by the mind, but once consciousness opens to a wider view by not focusing in on definining, to *view* the broad spectrum of the field of happenings(activity of Life), to take it all in, that moment(as a supposed separate occurance in time/space) is gone or revealed as not real or separate(illusory) and timeless/spacelessness is revealed. When the focus goes within, whether scientifically into form or meditatively into personal consciousness, new realms and lifeforms/images(thoughts) appear and then disappear the further 'in'. Revealing again no-thing...Now...

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

What is 'real', what does that mean? Is it what can be perceived, aided or not, with the senses? Does it denote a *constant*? When 'no-thing' is found upon examination, is there an assumption that something must be wrong? That we are just not seeing correctly?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This is one of my favorite *real* moments in a movie from Blade Runner...

Roy Batty: "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams ... glitter in the dark near Tanhauser Gate. All those ... moments will be lost ... in time, like tears ... in rain. Time ... to die."

Deckard: "I don't know why he saved my life. Maybe in those last moments he loved life more than he ever had before. Not just his life...anybody's life...my life. All he'd wanted was the same answers the rest of us want. Where do I come from? Where am I going? How long have I got? All I can do is sit there and watch him die."

This has the essence of the analogy of being a drop or wave in the Ocean...if it developed an identity, forgot it's Essence/Home as it splashed up out of the Ocean, it's experiences may seem grand or frightening, but they, and it, disappear when reunited with the the full wonder and wholeness of the Ocean that is attuned to Essence/Source: Water.

This is metaphorical and not truly representative of Wholeness, just to illustrate that whatever can be perceived has it's source. No one aspect, or even sum, of manifestations is 'reality'. Trace it all back, in or out and the same Source will be divined.

Our bodies, identities, are like this drop. But we as conscious beings have the ability, endowed from our Essence, to discern what is our true nature: the drop identity or the essence of water? The drop may appear separate from it's source, but it is still essentially SAME. The drop(being) may not be able to fully conceive or perform in the way the Ocean(Beingness) can, yet has a synchronicity of ability, qualitativeness and can divine the truth/essence of itself.

The facing of mortality, death, and the apparent meaninglessness of *my experiences* in the big picture. Yet, what is the primary interest? Life...the reality of "I", not the story(illusion) of it. In the clarity of Life("I") there is natural compassion and honoring of Life. What is 'meaning'? What is the true 'meaning' of life? As far as I can see this can be defined all depending on the individual experience and perspective. So how does one get passed the individual perspective and story of 'what is'? For 'me' it was to find the truth of "I", that is before, throughout and after the experience of identity(me). To divine Essence...

This is the challenge of language/communication that possibly makes this a complex issue, but in regards to overpopulation it is possible to look at patterns and extrapolate some basic understanding: wars, industry, environmental and societal degredations, all interconnected, with the major increase in population starting around the beginning of the last century, I believe, appear to be like an organism that is instinctively, perhaps not altogether consciously, reactively not necessarily responsively, replicating. Exponentially to the degree of perceived threat.

There are more hazardous conditions being created through the unconscious/reactive behavior, along with more damaged/malformed beings(speaking purely on the basis of a projected 'ideal' genetic/mental survival, not on physical appearance either. One could look 'normal', yet still have genetic/mental 'defects'), thus the genetic impulse to propagate more to increase the chances of healthier beings. Depending on what one determines as 'healthy'.

And at this point in world society there seems to be a focus more on *how many* rather than *how well*, quantity, or the lack of, instead quality and an agreement on true well being.

If the predominant scientific/pharmaceutical and socio/political approach to health is being used as the measure, it can possibly be seen that these are not so healthy or intune with nature.

But what appears to be, is that there is more saturation of hazardous conditions effecting faster than can be compensated for. And as this continues the unhealthy genetics and mind patterns(in over-identified fear and desire) are replicating as well, compounding the problem. This is possibly where some of the scientific community rationalizes 'eugenics', which was/is not just a 'Nazi' plan, but rather something that may have been forwarded through that movement and may still be actively being pursued today.

When there is seeing how the industrialization/consumerization of society is effecting everything, and a reluctance to acknowledge, take responsibility for and change this(for whatever reason), or a desire to stay or be in control, then finding ways to directly counter-effect or 'purify' is potentially a choice for those that feel above or beyond 'normal' society. Or to rationalize "this is what must be done" to keep the species alive and living at the level of consumption that we are. 'We' being the top consumers, thus making the lower consumers, 'them', somewhat expendable(still need a workforce, for now, but robotics are making amazing advancements). 'Playing God' and creating the *image* that is desirable, whatever that may be. Not saying this is definitely the case, just a possibility gleaned from patterns of mental/genetic behavior in the unfolding world story.

Humanity is a virus based in the sense that we appear to be in a more reactive mode of replicating, than a responsive one, and on what Smith describes as the predominant trait of 'humanity': "You move to an area and you multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area.".

But perhaps it is coming to be recognized what this is getting us. That this is not our original nature, and thus becoming more conscious of ourself(as at least a relative whole/one world), and what is or is not healthy for us. What we may need to do and what we may need to stop, before any real change is made for the betterment of survival or continued interaction with the rest of Life, here on earth or out 'there' amongst the cosmos. I will say though that there appears to be a strong effort to influence belief on what 'betterment' is from many different angles, to keep people from taking an honest and indepth look at themselves and the world that is not separate from them.

While I agree that I have an interest in sharing this intimate understanding of Life, and feel it could help, I do not want to impose any beliefs. This gets in the way of true, direct, understanding or knowing...and these words are not accurate, but such is language.

Not that "I" know more than "you", in the sense of two individual identities relating, but as it is felt/known here that 'we' are not separate and are essentially same. And just sharing that with mySelf, if it is to be heard. It is the essential stopping of fixating on beliefs, definitions and patterns that reveals life as it *is*, which includes as it *appears* as well. This clarifies awareness of patterns and the ability to examine them freely.

It is the imposing of definitions and beliefs upon Life that obscures it's true beauty and reality from the mind.

I do my best to not add to this and to clarify when I can. To remain as open as possible to "not knowing", so as not to rigidify a belief, to facilitate sharing of perspective, in the light of ultimately not needing to know. For what is it that 'needs' to know? What is truly concerned or worried about what 'goes down' or how Life appears to manifest? Life/Essence or the ego/mind of form?

In not being essentially separate, and primarily or solely identified as a form, there is the natural compassion for, and understanding of, why form worries. Which may be responded to in many different ways, it's not to know ahead of time, but it will be responded to as best as possible with the intention for form to be relieved of it's over anxiousness with worries and desires, to possibly come to realize passed it's appearing reality, to it's source(essence). Shifting perspective from 'drop' to 'water', through the potential of not adhering to any perspective or definition, at least momentarily.

So this appears to be the core issue: as long as there is a living of life in ignorance of our essential unseparateness, and the continual fixation on our appearing separateness, then there will be a looking to(fearing/desiring) 'other' to be kept *safe* or to be *whole*(satisfied or fullfilled). This is included with the perception of a Higher Power, one that is also looked to to inform what 'should' be done for the supposed safety, survival and comfort of 'me'. A reaction to stimulus (fear/desire) more so than a conscious response from a knowing of wholeness. It will remain possible to 'program' or influence society based on the knowledge of human genetic/mental behavior and the identification with this as primary reality, essentially real. As is the case in the world today from various aspects of society(science/military/media/religions-spirituality, etc).

The reflective example of childhood and maturity: We can consciously mature by letting go of concepts that have served for awhile, that kept the body safe as needed, but are no longer needed to be held onto to be happy, to 'know' Self/essence and to respond as Life rather than react as a fear based being that places it's survival/comfort above all else. Stopping the over-identification with the animal survival instinct and being fully responsible to all as Self. Realizing past/within individual nature to divinity that is undivided. It is the individual that is 'programmed' and influenced, but what is the ultimate force of the forms of Life?

Is that force programmable or able to be influenced?

Is the immediate sense of self, before the definition of self, ever separate from source/force?

Look and see...

And if not, then how are you not Life/Essence/Source? Not as an individual being 'that', not 'you' as is thought to be defined, but purely before, during and after being 'any-thing'.

This is not to be accepted or believed through mental figuring, but if these questions resonate can be investigated directly for one's self.

Regarding Earth, environmentalism and "what's getting saved?":

Some perspective from George Carlin, that if you don't *feel* George or appreciate his sense of humor, you may find a little offensive. But this is what I feel George does(whether intentionally or not, but I tend to feel it's intentional): reaches in and YANKS at those strings of identification and 'unconscious' judgments, that may feel to be attached to, so they can be seen/felt(perhaps more or for the first time), brings it up to the surface. It's possible though to hear the true underlying message, because he states it fairly plain amidst all the hyperbol, but it could be missed if the stuff that 'offends' is fixated on. ;)

George points to the absurd aspects and arrogance of 'humanity' and the need to be aware of this and the ability to laugh at it as well. If we can't laugh at our 'stuff' without taking it personally(defensively) all the time, we are going to be too serious. Which is a root of the problem today: taking the 'me' to be most important, defending/protecting "me and my life", which discounts the rest of Life.

Here are a couple excerpts:

~~~~~~~

"The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ’cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic.

The earth doesn’t share our prejudice toward plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, “Why are we here?” Plastic…'asshole."

~~~~~~~

"We're going away. Pack your shit, folks. We're going away. And we won't leave much of a trace, either. Thank God for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. Maybe. A little styrofoam. The planet'll be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance."

~~~~~~~

It has the sense of pointing to our inherent mortality as a form of Life, to face the inevitable death of the body, so we can honor Life without the need to obsess on physical 'perfection' or stress about 'survival'. What passes away and what survives, remains when form has passed on or shifted it's energy pattern? And what is aware of form and shifting energy?

Here's a link to the full piece if you care to read it all ;P :
www.chaparyan.com/2005/04/g...s-fine.php

I can't say I fully agree with his perspective and that it can be known that we do not, or will not, have the ability to totally render this planet devoid of all sentient life, turn it into a dustball, or even blow it apart somehow, but neither can I truly say that this planetoid, Great Being, or speck of cosmic dust, however it want's to be perceived, really *cares*. This feels to be the possible heart of the matter, what is being investigated in these threads, the 'reality' of what this IS we are discussing.

Is not belief formed by the identity of life or 'self'? And vice versa: is not identity shaped by beliefs? What is formless, unshapable, always here in every circumstance? And has no need for belief, to be believed in?

It can be said what things appear to be to 'me', but is it necessary to make appearances a definitive absolute? Is it even possible? By thier very nature, things that appear disappear. In manifest reality of objective/subjective that is in continual change, is there an unmanifest constant reality? Wouldn't attempting to define the unmanifest "source"(which is before and is the unseen within appearances) of Life, be impossible and redundant if the forms of Life are the metaphorical definitions that point to Life? The forms of existence that point to the inherant reality of formless existence. Labeling the manifest appearance of Life is no problem, just not necessary to 'know' Life, to LIVE. And truly only becomes a 'problem' when there is a valuing of the definitions/labels/story of appearances of Life more than the actuality/reality of Life, that leads to war about which definition is 'right'.

This analogy just came: the fingers of the right hand at war with the fingers of the left hand about the perspective of what should or shouldn't be done with the Body(Earth/Universe), who is better because of location on the body and the essential nature of where it all came from. In examining and debating about it from an outward perspective, relying on being informed by beliefs about appearances, it is an endless and fruitless search. It can obviously be seen that they are 'connected', but it isn't enough, there is still too much listening to the mind's beliefs of 'right and wrong'. Of tribal history, of philosophical/intellectual/religious beliefs, of whatever definition can be identified with or 'owned'.

Let's say though, the fingers had the ability to tune into the electric current of the themselves and trace it back to the body and found that the source of the current didn't stop there, but went beyond it, beyond what they had deemed and defined to be "GOD". Coming to find that the mind's definitions are limited and are not capable of encapsulating divinity/source...but can divine resonance of all 'being'...and this resonance reveals wholeness...that is undifferentiated... unseparable essence that is inherent nature...reality.

With the conscious ability to 'look within', to seek our source, there is the chance to stop the search and the warring.


Fingers may think they are the 'doers', but's it's not true, not reality...

As this favorite from Hafiz speaks to:

The Only One

From man's perspective
In this intricate game of love,

It is so easy to become confused
And think you are the do-er.

But from God's Infinite Certainty,
He always Knows

That He is the only One
Who should ever be put on trial.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is there an intense examining of the physical to extract an understanding of 'essence'? It has a suppositon that what is being looked for is a 'thing', material which can be viewed or grasped in some way. Yet it seems that aspects of the scientific community are coming to recognize that this may not be so: that Nothingness IS.

The pure paradoxical that is unfathomable to mind, that is wanting to describe and find some-thing'.

"What is GAIA?" is examining identity. This is essentially asking, "who/what am I?", is it not? Somone mentioned this in a way, essentially recognizing we are asking "What is 'life'?". This feels to be the crux of the matter. How do we come to know what life is? What is 'this' that animates, enlivens, makes it possible for all 'this' to appear? It seems to go beyond definition, yet is self-evident. Are the organisms and circumstances of life the full reality? If all forms of life were to cease to be, what would BE? If the disappearance is possible anyway. ;) Which, I believe, science has stated is possible and has most likely been the case.

What is the case when there is deep sleep? Not saying that the physical world disappears, but the experience of all sense activity stopping being consciously registered(yet on some level not unawared) and then it's reappearing, along with the identifications of it, is a pointing to the arising manifestation of form, the relative world, and it's disappearance. As a dream appears and disappears, so does 'reality'. As in a dream perspectives, identities change, but what remains the same? What does all appear to or arise in? Through waking, sleeping and dreaming life, what is?
Through appearing birth/death cycle, what is 'living' this manifestation?

It comes down to the mind wanting to be able to define the undefinable, and on some level knowing it will never be able to accomplish this, yet not knowing what else to 'do'. Since defining is the natural activity of mind. It is in the over-fixation of this defining that the simple and inherent is-ness or essence of Life is overlooked.

In regards to Gaia: There has generally been a resonance with Nature, not so much as a concept/diety, but as Life/essence that is the same within 'me', of not being separate really. Not saying I have been a perfect steward, but fairly respectful and moderate of how I play/tread in/on this world, mySelf. I did not always understand it consciously this way, but now I do. Not just a mental understanding, because it is recognized that when there is no thinking about what this world or "I" am, there is no apparent separation, and that this is the fundamental nature of existence, of self. Separateness(forms in relation to each other) appears, but there is not an overall belief in this being 'reality'. Personality still has it's definitions and tendancies, but there is clarity, awareness beyond, through, within that is unaffected, unchanged.

This does not mean that the absence of belief endows a form with the ability to ultimately defy or overcome physical realities, but not to say that it is not possible either. Just that there is the recognition that what believes this *should* be the case is still an identified form, mental concept of 'me'. Essence has no need to transcend anything, because there is nothing to transcend: All is of Life/essence.

Appearances are less important, and ultimately unimportant, because appearance is not the primary reality or 'truth' of Life/Essence/Self that is Living/Being. This is Peace that is Freedom that is Love...

This is subtle, but I am doing my best to describe a shift or absence in perspective, so if you are interested, take your time with this...

There may be an appearance of a revealing of 'unity/oneness'...of timeless unidentification (no "I" thought)...a dropping away, absence of definition to mind revealing a substratum field and a full functionality of being...but when thought reappears or arises in this field the mind is conditioned (genetically or otherwise) to be engaged with it, place attention onto thought...believing that only 'things' or the definitions from mind are real or what is most important or primary.

Even though there may be a resonance with what was 'glimpsed' as essentially real and being 'no state'...conditioned mind defines what is 'revealed' as a 'creation' of mind(a state)...but what is the true creation/state is 'thought definitions' and this "I"...overlooking the disappearance of thinking about 'me'...about natural activity/being...and labeling the 'revealing' as an 'experience' for 'me'. Identifying with thought as reality, thus essentially masking the faceless reality of being.

And depending on identification with various aspects of story about 'me', this 'experience' is either desired or feared. Focusing on experiences (illusion/drama) of 'me', distracting from reality of 'no-me'. This is not to discount relative reality or experiences of form(me), but to discern what is truly real, thus reality being unimpeded or obscurred through deception/illusion. Nothing to discount, no discounter, only Life.

To mind(ego) Essence(being no-thing) does not compute.

Essentially saying:
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

But it's too late, the curtain has been drawn and shown that, along with the curtain, the man too is an illusion. Revealing mind/thought to be illusory in the sense that it is not full reality, not Source. Because this is what is revealed: what all thought appears to, has never covered and can never cover: Source, Awareness...there only appeared to be covering in the identification and attention to thought as 'real'.

Ego fears it's inherent unreality, and in this there can be an unwillingness to accept reality. Which is okay, reality doesn't need it to.

It is as it is.

It is like the awaking of the body from deep sleep, there is initial consciousness before the image or thoughts of "self" appear, then they appear and this absense of identity(me) is overlooked, but what is present in absense or appearance?

So what to believe or trust? How is life to really be 'known'? Can it be physically/mentally? Is it possible that it is beyond belief, trust or faith? Experience? Essentially, if there is a clear recognition that 'you' are Life, then how can there be two 'yous'? One to know the other. If essence is reality, what is knowing what? What is the 'knower'? And what is really known?

As far as the conceptualization of Earth/Mother/Gaia: there hasn't been a need to ritualize/conceptualize what 'this' all is, even though I have enjoyed participating in Earth consciousness in many ways, being involved with Beltane and other celebrations of life, and even being May King one year. I didn't feel it was *necessary* that it made any difference essentially to 'me' or the Earth, just that it was an enjoyable way to express and share in Love. It was more of an unfolding of this intimacy of self through exploring sexuality/spirituality, which, while beautiful, also revealed more of the same patterns of distractions with beliefs.

Beliefs aren't needed, but there is the availablilty/potential for Love. This is the invitation of Life: Know thyself, Love. Not an imposed image of what 'love' is, based on a form's conditions, but purely as Is. Yet there is free will for all conscious forms to choose 'separation' as reality or to stop believing the mind's definitions as reality. And to stop following the impulse to create reality how it is thought it 'should be' based on a personally identified concept. The potential to realize Reality is our Nature that is naturally creating, all-ways. Which includes the destructive as well as the constructive. It is appearing, in this identified moment of time, to be 'out of balance' into being more destructive right now on this little dust ball. And perhaps we can, as a species, get out of Our way to realign. ;) Either that or have Nature eventually do it for us. 'We' can deal with it all now with/as Nature...or we will be what Nature is dealing with.

It's really quite simple. We(mind/identity) just complicate Life with all the attempts to figure it out and label/define 'every-thing'.

{ Said after this long 'undefining' definition. ;D }

This is how it resonates here anyway.

Peace, Skeye