Editor’s note: DGR believes that it is necessary for organizers to be strategic and efficient in organizing against ecocide. This also includes using technology as a tool for organizing. Therefore, we do not engage in “virtue signalling” and individual lifestyle choices by avoiding the use of technology. However, we are also aware of the harmful effects of these technologies. The following piece is a delving into the impacts of all actions we take and asks “what will be left to carry forward?”
Mankh (Walter E. Harris III) writes, small press publishes, and is the author of 17 books. He travels a holistic mystic Kaballah-rooted pathway staying in touch with Turtle Island and the cycles of the Seasons. His website: www.allbook-books.com
By Mankh
On a day when i am out and about carrying something that has taken a lot of effort to produce, a chunk of notes and written bits for the next book in the works, yet they haven’t been typed into the computer file yet, carrying that little stack of papers, i suddenly become extra cautious, telling myself: Don’t spill coffee, remember where you put it, don’t lose it!… And later on i realize that every day is truly like this, if you think about it and put it into practice, but not ‘practice’ rather deep appreciation and caring for everything and everyone that has brought ‘the item’ to this moment, your own efforts and all those who have helped you along the way, as well as all the experiences and stories of your life thus far written in your heart and feet and hands and organs and mind and soul . . . creating a kind of humanuscript or living story that you are virtually forever editing.
All those who have helped along the way includes, to name a few, the Sun and Earth that have been there and will continue being every day. How much is pre-scripted and how much you write your story is up for discussion . . . i think it’s a bit of both.
Yet the script cuts both ways, literally: “script” from “skrībh-, Proto-Indo-European root meaning “to cut, separate, sift;” an extended form of root sker- (1) “to cut”, also sker- (2) ker-, Proto-Indo-European root meaning “to turn, bend”, Latin scribere “to write” (to carve marks in wood, stone, clay, etc.); Lettish, skripat “scratch, write;” Old Norse, hrifa “scratch.”” (etymonline.net)
On the one hand we can’t help making our marks, leaving footprints, scratching books and such like, yet on the other hand why are we so obsessed with making marks, scratching books, carving into wood and stone, too-often literally defacing the Earth, blowing up mountains, and we’ve all seen the photos of scars due to extractive mining, the faded-brown swaths of deforested Amazon reflecting a scorched Earth policy, not simply a military policy, while the Amazon delivery trucks grow in numbers in the neighborhood.
No matter whether you are carrying your new-born child, a crystal vase, your magnum opus or simply a loaf of bread from the store, every living thing carries within it and emanating from it an immense amount of history and effort and hopefully joy to get it there to you where you are now holding it or perhaps ingesting it. In the long haul, seems to this scratcher that we are here so as to simply carry it forward, whatever “it” is — and that includes water and land.
i have no idea who planted the forsythia and azalea in the backyard of the house before i started living here but i thank them b/c every year like clockwork, just as the forsythia’s bright yellow is mostly turned to green is when the azalea begins opening up its neon red.
Aside from a literary manuscript, etymologically a manuscript is a mark/scratch/cut you make with your hands. Literally it cuts both ways: You could cut up the forest (destroy), or you could carve a piece of art, scratch some letters into a book (create). Then again, even by writing a book, you’re cutting into the forests for more paper. Is there such thing as a win-win situation anymore?
The Kogi (Original People of the Sierra Nevada mountains of Colombia) have no famous authors because they have no books. However, they can ‘read’ water. Think about that! . . . And from what i know, they are in the category of Peoples least likely to cut up the Earth, rather carry Her forward.
To further follow the word-roots, “to turn, bend” suggests another flavor of “script” accentuating the need for adaptability rather than cutting, and, like a Taoist, unassumingly going with the flow . . . “A skillful woodsman leaves neither tracks nor traces.” Now that’s something that would have archaeologists declaring ‘No Taoists lived here’; and they’d be inaccurate.
Everyone experiences cuts in life, some of them heal and some scar. Yet the continued scarring of our consciousnesses and of the Earth reflects the regurgitating of outdated “scripts” and taglines such as “progress” “faster downloading speeds” “you gotta upgrade” “trust the science” “the bottom line” “best seller” “the customer is always right” “education is the key to success” “and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
If the humanuscript continues to cut up the Earth at the current pace and subdue or lord it over others it considers inferior, what will be left to carry forward?
Truck photo by renaissancegal/Getty Images Signature/Canva
Title photo by eleonimages/Canva
”The typical mystical character over-focuses on the
subjective “feeling” aspect of the life process at the expense of the
objective “action” aspect. He is thus more concerned with mind or
spirit or soul than with the body and the physical world it exists in.
Consciousness, feeling, spirit is for him the primary reality. He
becomes convinced that subjective reality antedates and overrides
in importance the merely physical reality of the body and the
external world. The typical mystic develops this conviction to the
point that he believes that consciousness is independent of the
body. This is expressed in the belief in the personal soul, survival
of the individual personality after death, and the experience of an
unobservable supernatural realm in which consciousness (and
usually one or more superconsciousnesses) exist somewhere
somehow independent of the physical reality known to the senses.
With this view there is a corresponding de-emphasis on the
physical world, on the body, on conceptual thinking (as opposed to
feeling and intuition) and on action.”
https://radix.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/mysticism_and_mechanism.pdf
I have great reservations about citing or endorsing any form of mysticism in the on-going fight for the survival of the biosphere. While I agree that help from any source is always to be welcomed, my experience with mystics is that they always end up advising doing nothing or depending on wishful thinking instead of action.
Tzindaro, The essay is about what can be done to protect, defend, and preserve habitats and Mother Earth. Your comment seems to have nothing to do with my essay rather simply because “mystic” is mentioned in my bio you comment. A simple definition is: “”Mystikos” Greek: ‘seeing with the eyes closed.'” Thus anyone who remembers their dreams can loosely be considered a mystic. And i know people who are mystics who are quite active, clear thinking, compassionate, and so forth. And holistic includes body, mind, spirit, soul, inaction, action…
You are right. The word triggered my response because of my many experiences with mysticly-minded people effectively sabotaging activist groups with irrelevant ideological trivia. In my vocabulary, ”mystic” means ”impractical”.
I must have missed the part of your article that told how to sabotage things, win over masses of converts by propaganda, etc., or otherwise ”protect habitats and Mother Earth”. The only part I saw seemed to be about changing ourselves, something which does not need to be done by activists.
I included the link to the source of the quotation I sent to show that my criticism of mysticism does not mean I was favor of mechanistic science either. I consider BOTH mysticism and mechanism to be distortions of natural thinking, which can still be seen in small childern. And a movement to protect the earth does not need either. What it needs is more fighting spirit. My experience has been that mysticicim in activist movements too oiten results in resignation, acceptance, and doing nothing practical.
My concern was that DGR, one of the very few ”hard line” eco groups around, was promoting ideologies that can only end in lack of practical action. If I am wrong in your case, I appologize.
Thanks, Tzindaro. Every one has personal experiences with groups or types of people who may accurately or inaccurately reflect the labels given to them. One thing to clarify, my article doesn’t tell “how to sabotage things” or “win over masses of converts by propaganda”. Rather it’s basically a call to appreciate where every living thing comes from and for each reader to consider how they can carry forward those gifts. So i don’t consider that an ideology rather presenting a scenario with some info can help see things in a different light and perhaps spur action.