From: beaver.cs.washington.edu!gnosys!sys6626.bison.mb.ca!toad (toad)
Subject: Re: Science and Spirituality
Organization: system 6626 BBS, Winnipeg MB
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 08:29:41 GMT

Original-Sender: sys6626.bison.mb.ca!toad (toad)

NativeNet@gnosys.svle.ma.us writes:

> Original-Sender: Martha Dunham <BROWNVM.bitnet!ST402621>
>
>[Quoted text deleted; please trim quoted articles when possible.-mkk]
>
> In my field of animal behavior, I come across many unexplainable events.  To
> some extent, I can point my finger at the sheer complexity of an animal's lif
> On the other hand, it is equally plausible (in a scientific context and given
> our current level of ignorance) that I am seeing evidence of spirituality in
> animals.  My understanding - to bring this back to the discussion at hand - w
> that native americans attributed such depth of character to animals as well
> as to themselves.  After reading Peshewegunzh's posts, I am less sure.
> It seems that he is saying that equating man with beasts is a Bad Thing.
> This may be a semantic question - is there any real difference between
> seeing ourselves as no better than the beasts (to paraphrase Peshewegunzh)
> and seeing beasts as no less than ourselves?  Yet the question is interesting
> because of where it can lead us.  Does respect for all lives require
> acknowledging spiritual being in those around us?  Or is our place in nature
> really up on a spiritual pinnacle? It seems to me the natural
> consequence of believing ourselves to be the center of the universe is
> the ultimate destruction of our environment - as we are seeing today.
> Thus seeing animals as similar, or in other words related to us should at
> least make it easier for us to live together with them.
>
> I would like to hear what others have to say.
>
> Cheers,
> Martha
> ST402621@brownvm.bitnet.edu


I enjoyed your letter, It is not often that people  who believe as you do
voice there opinions. I should state that I agree with you on the
question of whether animals have spirits that are fundamental to
themselves ( to this I mean that they are not part of some external-being
force that uses them ( as some religions interpret  the animal entity ))

The animal entity is very similar to man's, the problem is that man is
faced with the problem of implementing these creatures into his own
conscious understanding.

One must realize that man is faced with the question of intepreting his
environment based on not only the needs of his understanding but also on
the basis of his conscious need for self image.


The idea of knowledge as a goal is reasonable for theory, however, when
one starts to define real-world needs of the conscious self one is better
to interpret the knowledge goal systemthe ability of the self to
limit, rather than acquire knowledge, especially when we are talking of
the conscious self.


 one views the conscious mind purpose as a limitting rather than
acquiring system, then many of man's premises and fundamental beliefs may
be viewed with greater awareness of the  true value of these socalled
knowledges.
How man views animals, for the most part, based on the  conscious mind,
is more a question of what man must think if he is to be able to live in
his real-world environment.

To view animals as indeed, worthy of the same respect as man, would put
ma veritable disadvantage when it came time to    eat that animal.

This may indeed not be the reason that man first viewed animals as less
than himeslf - ( Indeed, it is more likely that he  merely based a
primitive judgement on the animal based  on the animal's ability to
understand and respond to man's communications with that animal - very
similar to the way people view foreigners to their  countries - as
lesser, stupider, and less able based on their inabilities to respond to
man's communications - obviously good logic would realize that it is the
inability to communicate rather than to  respond that is at play here -
that is if one were to take the time to think about it - however, rarely
do people take the time when viewing others,  animals, plants, or people
) However, this may, indeed, be the reason that man has maintained these
beliefs - It is far far easier to think of animals as being less than us,
when we have been set into an environment where we are to depend on them
so profoundly. ( Slavery would be another study for the belief
foundations that allow  the conscious mind to set about the goals that
are fundamental to existence and desire )

If man were to realize that animals are  not only capable of thought, but
maintain a profound lifeforce of spirit that is in no way less than his
own, then not only the very structure of man's environment would need
modifying but also his profound  and  most fragile  sense of self, the
ego - To come face to face with the way that man and his ancestors have
violated  the whole set of like and loving beings -  well,  let us merely
say that there are profound reasons for man to not  believe these things
-

I am writing some papers on these things, and felt  that  you might be
interested  in sharing some of these,  however, the question of man's
enlightenment to the animal world is not one of the acquistion of
knowledge, rather the question is -

Is man even capable of believing ( as a race ) that animals are his
equals -      Obviously not by the criterions that  man has set to judge
his fellow   man, ie IQ, technology, and    the various linguistic sets
of ability -


However, if man were ever able to view past his fundamental limitting
conscious awareness, then it might be possible to perceive and interpret
the  animal from its truer identity of    spirit.



The animal is loyal, faithful to man, - Man inteprets this as superiority
of the man.
The animal is loving, gentle to man, - Man interprets this as being
weaker than man.

If Man were able to, he would perceive fundamental  glimpses of the
true nature of  spirit within the animal - Far more valuable, and
precious than ever the IQ, talent, or the language  abilities of man ever
have been.



Not having the time to verse my theories on this primordial field within
the finite confines of this letter, I thus beg your forgiveness if this
all seems   abit like the rambling of an animal-lover - But I hope, as a
researcher that you might take the time to think on  these things and
view the knowledge that man has provided from his   observations of the
animal kingdom   based on the  possibility that man has CHOSEN to
inperpret  the data to, and to base his  intepretations,  perhaps more
based on   his conscious need, than his  quest for  ever greater
understandings.

I would be interested in hearing your response to these thoughts -


                          Spiritually,

                                         Q.T.Toad


;--- (toad) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64
;E-mail: toad@sys6626.bison.mb.ca
;system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8

Newsgroups: alt.native