Adam's reaction when asked about the fruit is interesting. At first he called the woman, "bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh." The meaning of that statement is found in the commentary that follows, "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." Adam realized that the Woman was one flesh with him. She did not have an independent identity. But he was reacting out of fear when he called her "the woman you gave me." This is significant. She had gone from being me to being mine.
As bone of his bone she was equal to him, but he now viewed her only as a gift. It does not matter how much a gift is admired and appreciated, it is never equal to the recipient. A gift can be abandoned, discarded, mistreated, destroyed, in addition to being cherished and appreciated. It simply is not equal to the recipient. Why the change? Not because she had changed. She was the same woman. Adam viewed her differently because of something she had done. And in that moment the seeds of human misery were planted, because inequality is the root of all human violence, in the same way that inequality in pressures are the root of all violent storms.
A systems level discussion on Organizational Leadership and World Peace written by:
© Darius A. Lecointe, Ph.D., J.D., M.A. Join in the discussion here or through dalecointe@gmail.com
8 comments:
There are many interesting things about this story—like God planting a taboo in the garden. Or the common assumption that the serpent is suggesting god-like immortality rather than rejuvenation through death and rebirth.
But to your point . . .
Well said—and a nice opportunity to talk about what equality and parity mean from a systems perspective. The air pressure at 10,000 feet is not equal to the air pressure at sea level. But from a systems perspective, there is parity. So this is not the same “inequality” producing the disruption you point out.
Similarly, from a systems perspective, humans will never be discretely (the reduced-separate) equal even in a state of perfect parity. This is important because in many of our conversations about equality, resources become equally distributed commodities—with no awareness of what would create better parity in terms of nourishment, opportunity, potential to learn, sequence, situation, etc. Said more simply, what you need to support your fullest expression in this moment does not parrot what I may need—at least from a reductionist point of view. So parity—or symmetry—may appear unequal without a systems perspective.
As always—thanks for making the effort to share these ideas. I have suggested others visit.
DAL -- I hope you get a chance to speak on this in some unsuspecting church somewhere. It's a very strong prompt.
What is the relationship between action and identity? Christians often like to quote the saying "By their fruit ye shall know them."
What does that mean to you?
I love prompts. Your question just prompted me. "By their fruits ye shall know them" is often used in a forensic manner, to expose the real person which we think has been masked by other things. You prompted me to view it relationally. Their fruit enable me to know and understand them. Not to accuse but to understand.
Good point Avonia. As I was reading my post it occured to me that the storm that results from the difference in pressures does not attempt to change those pressure areas. It occurs in the region of their convergence, and there it serves as a creative zone. We tend to view storms as destructive only because we insist on dwelling in their paths.
"Dwelling in the path of the storm" suggests something interesting about design. We often work to change people's behavior instead of working to change context.
Saying that sin or a satan creates a context that is "out of our hands" doesn't help any.
Aha... I am reading The Enchiridion by Epictetus, and he also suggests that harmony comes from working with the nature and relationships among things rather than being blown to and fro by actions.
It's a short little book; I think you'd like it. Epictetus was a Stoic.
Great thoughts from each of you!
My education and understanding are far more limited than yours but your offerings have prompted some responses.
D, your thoughts on the difference between seeing a partner as oneself as contrasted with a "gift"/possession is very compelling. It reveals the shift between authentic and dysfunction in a relationship. I'm not sure I agree with your position that Adam and Eve did not have healthy, independent identities before that shift. I would like to hear more of your thoughts on "independent identity" and whether or not it can function within the "one flesh" state. Then, I can determine if I agree with your statement or not.
It's hard NOT to live in the paths of those places where unequal pressures and temperatures converge, as those points are constantly in flux. Recognizing that there is the potential for a storm as well as being informed of the possible intensity of such allows one to choose to make the proper preparations to safely ride out such a convergence.
Bill Gates and a group of others are attempting to find a way to cool the Gulf waters to alter the intensity of hurricanes so there won't be repeats of Katrina. They don't see the creativity of the storms.
Is it wise to attempt to change natural conditions/systems rather than to accept and adapt? What are the consequences of such actions?
In Yellowstone (or Yosemite... can't remember which for sure now...blush), forest fires were fought with extreme force until biologists/botanists realized that the fires were needed so that Sequoias would be prompted to pop out their seeds and the forest floor would be properly prepared for the growth of these seeds into seedlings. Man stopped interfering with the fire cycle.
Bringing this back to the human system, how do you encourage enlightenment and a return to a healthy state as a species without encouraging the development of those individuals who grasp what is needed for the repair? Those who, in turn, will prompt other individuals to think outside of the damaged system and so on? Bringing individuals back to proper understanding will begin to repair the anamoly. Right?
Humans are autonomous beings. When I said that the Woman did not have an independent identity I was looking at the issue from Adam's perspective. She was not separate from him, but being part of him did not mean that he controlled her being.
Post a Comment