although i dont support the practises of christianity, i do draw a lot of inspiration from the doctrines. in particular, i think the story of "the creation" is a source for many keys of understanding.


genesis 2:6,7


suddenly, upon eating the fruit, we are cast into a land which no longer flourishes with plenty. it is by our own sweat and blood that we must survive. this world, and everything in it, is cursed with death. this creates the condition of SCARCITY. scarcity is the most basic economic principle. scarcity is what turns the wheels of all of society. scarcity is what allows the consolidation of power and wealth, upon which all of our beloved ATS conspiracies are based.

importantly, there is a pre-condition scarcity: desire.

by seeking after only those things which you percieve to be "good", you set up the very dichotomy which the principle of scarcity depends upon. this is called: desire, A.K.A. "partaking of the fruit..."

long story short: desire leads to scarcity leads to death.

according to God's original command, we should eat of every tree in the garden...and thus have life everlasting.

unfortunately, we are many many (who knows how many?) thousands of years in the future of the "original sin". we live in a huge system which has been built upon the concept desire=scarcity=death. we hardly know anything beyond it...

...but does that mean it is not acheivable?... is it desirable, or even possible, to return to such a state?

how many of you would give up your personal desires and return to the flourishing garden of plenty?

As I understand it, the Garden of Eden story is actually an allegorical account of our transition from hunter/gatherer people to farming and pastoralist people.

Hunter/gatherers work approximately 3 hours a day to meet all their daily needs. Farming people work much harder and have less to fall back on should their crops fail. Hunter/gatherers can just pick up and go elsewhere.

The Eden myth always seemed to me to be a rather wistful pre-agricultural race memory.

"allegorical" is not a good word. it implies that the event did not actually occur.

i appreciate your use of the word "myth". it portends not only that it might actually have happened, but also that its meaning transcends its telling. in the proper use of the word "myth", it is understood that it is a recursive symbol which continues to play itself out no matter which period of history it finds itself in.

it is important to remember that, as a recursive symbol, each and every human being that is born is destined to re-live it. and being that it is a symbol of our very creation, i believe that it tells us exactly how we got mixed up in this foolishness to begin with.

no. i am not sure that i would be willing to return to hunter/gatherer in trade for my technologically proficient lifestyle.

but i took some lovely mushrooms last week and i realised just how much i miss being a part of the earth and its natural order.

Good thought provoking matter here. I have always taken that particular passage to mean that human life was in the Garden in a state of innocence and eternal life. Choosing Original Sin then condemned humanity to the tree of life - the genealogical tree and to experience death for the first time. Just my tuppence worth.

It would be worth a try wouldn't it? I'd give it a try, but probably would not want to stick to it. I really like being self concious and self aware and having the ability to think and explore and experience things and learn.

I like your thoughts, to me they apply greatly to unneeded desires of status and materialism... However, the desires for enjoyment, knowledge, and existence are things that I really like. Is that so bad?

If we desire absolutely nothing then how are we going to appreciate the flourishing garden anyway? If we desire absolutely nothing, then we would equally appreciate a cesspool I think.

no! according to the story, the "tree of life" was sanctioned off by Seraphim with Flaming Swords! eternal life is unable to be accessed by the very command of God himself.

we should not be allowed to have the everlasting life, so long as we have unanswered desires.

so, thus, the answer to your question is that:

as long as you WANT a thing, you will never have it.

your wanting of it seperates you from the having of it.......

no. i dont think that it would be worth a try. i dont actually believe that it is even possible.....well....maybe....

....if you have ever been to the place where MIND, itself, *STOPS*.....



all of these things: enjoyment, knowledge, and existence; are available to you exclusively by means of PERCEPTION.

perception is the functional means of desire. therefore: in a state of non-desire, you must NOT insist on perception.

opposite of perception is KNOWLEDGE.......but this is not the kind of knowledge that science will give you. it is the knowledge which is exclusively inside your soul.

from time immemorial, it is the fate of man to constantly seek after that which is good.

but, according to the Buddha, a cesspool is as worthy of a subject as any.

Adam was naming animals and stuff and asking questions before they ate from the tree of life. He had perception the whole time. I guess you are assuming that we get to keep things even if we don't want them? But I think that once we truly let go, they are gone as far as we are concerned (unless brought back to attention by desire). Such is the power of a mind or The Mind and for lack of a better word, perception.

...a very challenging question, novise.

i think that Adam was able to know the animals during the naming process by becoming connected to their essential nature.

development of perception requires an historical context, while knowledge involves a connection with the very moment of experience: eternity. god, himself, speaks to us from this eternity.

the trick is that we are given ALL things freely and infinitely. sweet and bitter, pleasant and unpleasant.

it is the fate of mankind that we must constantly seek after that which is good.

if we deny perception, and thus desire, reality does not disappear, it is augmented. if we were to truly eat freely of every tree in the garden, we would transcend the meaning of "man".

I understand better now what you mean about perception and knowledge. Perception can cloud what we see, and these things in general. It's almost always better to try to see things without judging, cause once you judge your perception is clouded, and I guess you miss out on what the knowledge or natural object would be.