Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-11-2010, 04:36 PM   #31
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
There's no literal fruit, of course, the story is metaphorical. Agriculture would be that metaphorical fruit.
Yes, of course! (Smacks self upside head.)

You may be interested in the fact that my masters thesis was entitled "The Garden Of Adumbrations". In it I briefly mention the Garden of Eden, which is congruent with other creation myths and stories, like Arcadia for example.

One of the most interesting things I found is that the word "paradise" comes from the Persian "paridaeza", which means "enclosed orchard". A garden has always been a restricted place, set apart from the rest of the world. How we treat a garden now, as a fenced off exception to the usual urban clutter, is not an aberration (as some believe) but in fact corresponds to the normative use.

Likewise "nature" has no meaning apart from those things created by mankind. There was no nature before humans arrived. The world has no need for nature or paradises -- only we do.

04-11-2010, 05:12 PM   #32
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072
Excellent!

Used to be, long ago, or not so long ago depending on where in the world you lived, that the wilderness was danger, hunt, not human control, and human land was separated from it. Humans would save a bit of wilderness, walled off, as the holy place, the grove, grotto, woods. And humans would wall off a bit of their own, off from wilderness. The point that nowadays we wall off our gardens from other humans and their effluvia is excellent. Also, 'nature' as we now think of it came once we'd pretty much considered it all ex-wild, in other words, under our dominion. (I forget now where I read about the first time landscape was seen, someone climbed a mountain...)

Agriculture is a fruit of the tree of knowledge, and so is monotheism, science, the industrial revolution, Leonardo, Beethoven, Shakespeare, the plague and the mercury poisoning, the Empire and the Gentleman's war, space travel and genocide... Without the fruit of eternal life (which in some versions God was afraid they'd discover next) knowledge is maya, rushing and progressing and finding oneself not quite measuring up...

So agriculture meant settling down; the concentration of food production meant larger towns where other specialization can take place: the clergy and learned, the artists and the craftsmen, smiths and scribes, kings and garbage heaps, the diseases of civilization and the idea of famine. Taxes. Death and Taxes. Invented at Eden.

So: what's east of eden?
04-11-2010, 05:33 PM   #33
Veteran Member
causey's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,757
Very interesting, the last two posts. Thank you both.

QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Likewise "nature" has no meaning apart from those things created by mankind. There was no nature before humans arrived.
Yes--and 'before' humanity there was no "before" either; indeed, even "nothing" was not.

---------- Post added 04-11-2010 at 07:35 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
So: what's east of eden?
Perhaps, the inverse of power-action-knowledge (the kind of knowledge that entails power)?
04-11-2010, 05:54 PM   #34
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
So: what's east of eden?
I don't know. But in this town Eats of Eden is a health food store. I kid you not!

QuoteOriginally posted by causey Quote
Yes--and 'before' humanity there was no "before" either; indeed, even "nothing" was not.
True, of course. But that takes us into a different realm, that of philosophy of language. Which is either extremely simple or tediously complex.

04-11-2010, 07:29 PM   #35
Senior Member
Green_Manelishi's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: On the edge ...
Posts: 179
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
There's no literal fruit, of course, the story is metaphorical. Agriculture would be that metaphorical fruit.
So you believe.
04-11-2010, 07:49 PM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
QuoteOriginally posted by Green_Manelishi Quote
So you believe.

Personally I think it was a banana.


.
04-11-2010, 08:03 PM   #37
Senior Member
Green_Manelishi's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: On the edge ...
Posts: 179
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Personally I think it was a banana.
God does not reveal the kind of fruit; it's irrelevant.

What is relevant is Adam and Eve were told to not eat of the fruit of that tree. Then along came you know who and asked Eve "Did God really ...? And do you think that's fair? What's He so afraid of? C'mon ... one little bite won't hurt. You'll be just like Him !!!'

To this day the dafties continue to listen to his lies.

04-11-2010, 08:23 PM   #38
Banned




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,055
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
One of the most interesting things I found is that the word "paradise" comes from the Persian "paridaeza", which means "enclosed orchard".
Interesting - I read this on Wikipedia as well, earlier today:

QuoteQuote:
"Paradise" (Hebrew פרדס PaRDeS) used as a synonym for the Garden of Eden shares a number of characteristics with words for 'walled orchard garden' or 'enclosed hunting park' in Old Persian.
Here's a link to the Wikipedia section.
04-11-2010, 08:26 PM   #39
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by Green_Manelishi Quote
God does not reveal the kind of fruit; it's irrelevant.
I think it was cheese. Really tasty cheese.

Because if not, why would it be called the Garden of Edam?
04-12-2010, 07:55 AM   #40
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Yes, of course! (Smacks self upside head.)

One of the most interesting things I found is that the word "paradise" comes from the Persian "paridaeza", which means "enclosed orchard". A garden has always been a restricted place, set apart from the rest of the world. How we treat a garden now, as a fenced off exception to the usual urban clutter, is not an aberration (as some believe) but in fact corresponds to the normative use.

Likewise "nature" has no meaning apart from those things created by mankind. There was no nature before humans arrived. The world has no need for nature or paradises -- only we do.
Well, that's kind of an argument from *language,* which tells us something about what we may think, not so much about 'Nature' per se: we're part of Nature, too, ...though we draw lines around human endeavors where we're isolated from all *but* what humans shape and define. There's some danger of the usual 'Nature doesn't exist, so we can do whatever we want to it without consequence,' ...it's definitely a very human-centric view of the cosmos, that, but that's hardly surprising, when the whole world's considered an artifact.

Keep the climate/s those forms of myth come from, too: sometimes it seems that 'desert Gods' (so-called) often seem to come from places where the systems of life look sparse and are less-obvious. Conditions *did* shift in that region, for a lot of reasons, over time, and people do in fact tend to see that kind of thing as reflecting things about Gods.

If *survival* is about scarcity and toil and austerity and fending off wild beasts and marauding strangers and all, kings being the ones with the nice abundant gardens and fences and walls and swords, ...people will tend to think 'that's the order of the world,' ...It may not be so elsewhere. One may see different dynamics elsewhere.

Cycles of creation and destruction, you seem to find in many places where there are bigger seasonal shifts or things like monsoon rains. Transplant one belief system to another, and it may not fit: people may not be able to cope with all the 'abundance' and think the world has *way too little order in it compared to how their beliefs say things ought to be.*

It's one thing about someone having taken someone else's texts and materials, proclaimed them to be 'How things need to be everywhere for everyone,' adapted them to another place to displace what was going on *there,* and then going still *elsewhere* to displace the native cultures that may be better-adapted to those conditions.

The loss of one's own culture is one of those things that I think is a terrible trauma on the human spirit, one that carries forward across generations, even after people have ostensibly-forgotten just what has been lost.

That very relationship with 'Nature' seems to be one of the biggest motivators, in fact, to pick up the threads of a lot of our scorned heritages: certainly in America, there's a real sense, taken in one way or another, that we've come to a really living and abundant place and can't cope with it, in the process, nearly wrecking it: we may identify with people richer than we or our families have ever known, and certainly have what through about all of human history would be a *beyond kingly* standard of living, but too often still live on a 'scarcity' model, and in the process don't know the meaning of 'Enough' or 'Balance.'

It's been very interesting to watch things from my own perspective in the Pagan revival in America: unlike how most faiths see things, at least retroactively, we don't actually need to re-order secular society, ...have a perfectly-good one here, if only we use it properly.

It's gone for me from realizing from experience, "Ah, the Ancient ones never left us,we left Them," and thinking I was about the last in the world, to meeting others, and gathering, and sort of cleaning up a lot of old karma and etc etc, to right where things, I've become increasingly-convinced, ...left off: Problems of civilization.

A big part of recent turmoil I see out there in response to these problems is actually that some views consider, from their own sense of origins, that "change is bad, change must be stopped, change means someone has done something terribly wrong and we'll be punished, change *is* punishment," ..even if they know darn well things can't go on quite as they have. ....even to the point of declaring 'eternal war' or worshiping at the altar of 'The End Of The World,' or in milder forms just being helpless.

In the process, it seems this society takes flying around continents and just about literally moving mountains for granted, but can't even *consider* rearranging how and where we live and work and how we get there. ...Yes, there's gardens, so to speak, but maybe even a sense that we've pulled 'Outside nature' so far around ourselves that 'Outside the Garden' has become the cage. Maybe, in a way, that perspective's been there all along, for some, at least.

I think a lot of Biblical types try and transpose this idea of this world where there's some walled garden among what's presumably-wilderness, with some scattered objects, people, and cities out there, onto conceptions of Nature Herself...

When conquistadors came to this continent, interestingly enough,they were looking for the 'cities of gold' and 'fountains of youth,' despoiling all along the way exactly the kinds of things that were the real treasures.


When people say 'Nature' now, they usually *mean* a 'garden,' some separate place to retreat to with lots of trees, and no wolves or snakes.


You know, the proverbial "Pave Paradise and put up a parking lot."
04-12-2010, 08:03 AM   #41
Veteran Member
causey's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arlington, VA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,757
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
I think it was cheese. Really tasty cheese.

Because if not, why would it be called the Garden of Edam?
It was a pineapple--the perfect taboo fruit. (You can scare kids with it.) But there must have been cheese there as well. And plenty of ripe, delicious Ecuadorian bananas.
04-12-2010, 09:10 AM   #42
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by causey Quote
It was a pineapple--the perfect taboo fruit. (You can scare kids with it.) But there must have been cheese there as well. And plenty of ripe, delicious Ecuadorian bananas.
Pineapple and cheese!

Actually, contrary to what Manelishi says, it was previously-considered *very* important by some to consider the translation as 'Apple' 'literally' (to then use the 'literalism' as giving 'reality' to certain symbolism, of course) ...most apples you'd see not too long ago were *cider* apples, for one thing, (The idea that nicely-palatable ones grow on trees in the wild as a rule isn't quite the case, actually,) and people who were for Prohibition in one form or another used it pretty extensively as 'Poor people should be ashamed for having drink or any easy food, ' (Apple trees that grew the right fruit for eating are actually kind of rare without more modern manipulations,)

Guess figs just didn't work for that.

Also, interestingly enough, it goes to the 'Great Hunger,' where the 'pommes de terre' imported to Ireland were considered a sign of how 'lazy the Irish are' ...cause it could feed people without much effort (so they could grow export crops for the Brits,) ...and of course since the imperial masters saw fit to only import one variety, when a single blight wiped out all the food crops, they said, "See those lazy Irish, undone by their own sinful laziness... The Bible said so... Keep the grain coming... "
04-12-2010, 09:31 AM   #43
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,072
"¿Qué es más macho,
pineapple or knife?"
04-12-2010, 10:34 AM   #44
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Well, that's kind of an argument from *language,* which tells us something about what we may think
All arguments are from, by and with language. Indeed the whole world is an artefact, a construct of our perceptions and ability to frame those through language.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
There's some danger of the usual 'Nature doesn't exist, so we can do whatever we want to it without consequence,'
Though Nature doesn't exist outside of our conception, objects in the world certainly do. How we treat them comes back to bite us in the ass. Chop down trees, run-off minerals alter, salmon die, we farm fish, they get parasites and disease, escape into the wild, infect and kill off more species... No reason to hypothesise a "Nature" in any of this, not even in order to justify ecological conservation.
04-12-2010, 10:45 AM   #45
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
All arguments are from, by and with language. Indeed the whole world is an artefact, a construct of our perceptions and ability to frame those through language.

That's talking about our *perception,* before we even talk about talking about it through language. Before we even start talking about what *specific words* are.



QuoteQuote:
Though Nature doesn't exist outside of our conception, objects in the world certainly do. How we treat them comes back to bite us in the ass. Chop down trees, run-off minerals alter, salmon die, we farm fish, they get parasites and disease, escape into the wild, infect and kill off more species...
Agreed, here.



QuoteQuote:
No reason to hypothesise a "Nature" in any of this, not even in order to justify ecological conservation.
Reason *is* the 'reason.' ...Justified or not, conservation is the thing to do with what we've got. As concrete as it gets to talk about it. In that sense, it's beyond 'hypothesis' into 'the only theory that accounts for what we can observe.' There is no waving it away and claiming unimportance, not in any of the terms language defines. So, yes, the notion of 'Nature' *justifies.* Where nothing else really does.

'What to do' is clear enough, broadly speaking.

Saying 'It doesn't matter' ...justifies nothing, cause the veracity of matter of the matter of Mater is that matter is material to the very matter.

Say *that* twenty billion times fast.

Consequence, though, if we want to be linear.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
agriculture, christianity, eden, garden, judaism, myth, myths
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's the origin of your PF Username? Damn Brit General Talk 194 07-20-2020 11:36 PM
Macro East of Eden vietlh81 Post Your Photos! 7 10-07-2009 04:33 PM
DA* 16-50mm Myth Burgerbrater Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 09-30-2009 08:38 AM
Gardener of an Eden. Please comment. Saul Photo Critique 7 01-26-2009 03:49 PM
Origin of Pentax K-series Reps Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 09-13-2008 05:37 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top