What would nature be like, if us humans never existed?
Imagine a virgin forest, a dense green vastness that stretches beyond sight. The trees would be close to each other in some places; clearings here and there; and rivers that would flow through the forest creating foggy labyrinths. Small rodents would roam around. Birds would set up nests, high in the crown of these proud trees. But that, as poetic as it may sound, is just our perspective. How does it really feel to be Nature, without a single trace of one’s humanity? not a thought or even signs of it; no impression, thus no words. This I ask myself.
It is truly and utterly hard for me to imagine such a scene for an eternity. Is it because I love myself so much?! If there is a god – I muse – he’s surely the very ‘form’ of the ego. Over these thousands of years he had grown fond of what he had created. In his chain of thoughts, not a link is rusted with the stain of doubt. I am eternal – he thinks to himself and of himself. He isn’t wrong, of course; he created the world – at least the noumenal one. He had become so accustomed to his existence that he doesn’t even doubt it. (Except Descartes, that one almost knew how to doubt…)
I wonder if… in fact I’m pretty sure Jesus was the first (at least to my knowledge-) to grasp the idea of ‘übermensch’ – though it would not be called this way, of course… He might not be as natural as Zarathustra; but he did have his ‘Father’ entrusting this heavy burden upon him – in modern language: He felt guilty and responsible for all those children that were killed by Herod, king of Judea during his birth. Jesus had beaten Freud on his theory by quite the few hundred years (consciously or not) – he had known that he and his ‘Father’ are one; but that tricky snake that is the language, had tricked everyone else.
So cursed and slippery is the snake’s tongue: “It will give you knowledge of good and evil” it said. And it’s true what they say; the devil never lies, he just uses language against you – he is language (maybe). The fruit indeed gave us knowledge of good and evil, but it involves placebo…
I wonder; what was that fruit? Meat? – meat has always been a taboo in so many cultures in one way or another. Or is it a symbol for knowledge? Through knowledge we have learned that: “God is dead and we have killed him” and that the world that we know is just an illusion; thus any external reality is absurd and devoid of meaning. But we always had people of ‘good’ will: the gods, then Jesus (for a large portion of the planet), later philosophers and artists. An artist creates cults; like schools of thought or schools of craft, religions, or simply by presenting oneself as an example. Most people on this planet need to follow something; some fools believe in dreams, while others believe in rules. I’m really curious how the ancient cultures really saw the world, not how school and the bible teach us. They clearly grasped the essence of things, but the language was not rich enough to express what they felt – not that it could ever be able to… There is also the progression and classification of knowledge to consider. The achievement of spiritual understanding is a state of being. It becomes art when we try to explain it, albeit through words, sounds, pictures etc.
But did the trinity exist before the fruit? How far does the idea of ‘The Trinity’ go? Did Jesus imagine it outside his head as the universal will, or just from the noumenal one. Since he says that ‘They’ are simultaneously distinct and a unity, it’s easy for me to presume he addresses the human mind. Even if we call ‘The Trinity’:
-‘Father’, ‘Son’ and ‘Spirit’/’The Holy Ghost’;
-‘Logical’, ‘Spirited’ and ‘Appetitive’, like Plato;
-‘Super-Ego’, ‘Ego’ and ‘Id’;
there remains the constant number three. They may have called them differently or referred to slightly different things; it’s really hard to tell… I personally go with the Freudian classification, though the spiritual stuff sounds pretty good as well – especially as an homage to the ancient religions and arts.
Either way, regardless the names we give ourselves and what identity those selves assume, there’s always the will of one:
the Random Atom!
P.S.: not ‘t.R Atom’ the writer but the concept!