One of the facets of becoming a "grownup" that I enjoyed was the experience of moving out of a rental house into one that my wife and I purchased. No longer did we have to deal with landlords (regardless of how good they were!). We didn't have to see whether or not they'd allow our cat(s). We didn't have to put up with all of the walls being white or beige. We could change the shrubbery/garden plants to suit our tastes. Ownership was good! We could do ANYTHING with our house (well, almost, especially if there was a Homeowners' Association involved).
Of course, few of us actually own our houses. Most of us are in the position of having a bank/lender own the building/property; we are simply hoping that we'll get to the point where we can get to the point where we've bought it from them. In the meantime, the lender is trusting that we'll keep their asset in good enough shape that, in case we were to default on the loan, they could recoup their investment. It's a trust issue.
For a number of reasons, I started to think about this "trust issue" beyond the scope of home-"ownership". I was recently in a workshop where I heard quoted the Christian theologian Douglas John Hall: "We own nothing; we are entrusted with everything." This was in the context of a discussion about the concept of "dominion" -- as in Genesis 1.26 where, after God creates humans, they are given "dominion" over the earth and its creatures. Does that mean that humans OWN the earth/creatures and are able to anything they want with what they "own"? Certainly some people seem to think so. Or, does it mean, as Hall puts it, that humans are entrusted with everything? The latter idea, of course, implies that at the "end", the earth and its creatures are returned "as good as new" or improved!
I recalled, too, that a somewhat similar notion is found in the Bhagavad Gita. Especially spelled out in Chapter 5 is the idea that all of creation is part of the Divine, that it reflects the Divine. If that is the case, then any action taken with regard to any creature is an action directed at the Divine, This implies both any positive action (such as community service) or any negative action (such as harm). The implication is that we are beings entrusted -- all of us -- with the welfare of all others.
And then, of course, I recalled the oft-quoted Native American proverb: “Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.” Beyond that proverb, there are numerous other quotations from past tribal sages about the "folly" of western beliefs about land "ownership". The notion contained within them all is still, holding the earth in trust.
But what if we expanded the notion beyond holding the external environment -- water, air, birds, fish, mammals, amphibians, etc -- in trust. What if we held our relationships with one another as "trust" relationships rather than utilitarian? Certainly not all of our relationships are transactional, but what if, for example, in negotiating, we were as concerned that the other party leave enriched and empowered as we were for our own success? Ponder the possibilities.
Namasté,
For a number of reasons, I started to think about this "trust issue" beyond the scope of home-"ownership". I was recently in a workshop where I heard quoted the Christian theologian Douglas John Hall: "We own nothing; we are entrusted with everything." This was in the context of a discussion about the concept of "dominion" -- as in Genesis 1.26 where, after God creates humans, they are given "dominion" over the earth and its creatures. Does that mean that humans OWN the earth/creatures and are able to anything they want with what they "own"? Certainly some people seem to think so. Or, does it mean, as Hall puts it, that humans are entrusted with everything? The latter idea, of course, implies that at the "end", the earth and its creatures are returned "as good as new" or improved!
I recalled, too, that a somewhat similar notion is found in the Bhagavad Gita. Especially spelled out in Chapter 5 is the idea that all of creation is part of the Divine, that it reflects the Divine. If that is the case, then any action taken with regard to any creature is an action directed at the Divine, This implies both any positive action (such as community service) or any negative action (such as harm). The implication is that we are beings entrusted -- all of us -- with the welfare of all others.
And then, of course, I recalled the oft-quoted Native American proverb: “Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.” Beyond that proverb, there are numerous other quotations from past tribal sages about the "folly" of western beliefs about land "ownership". The notion contained within them all is still, holding the earth in trust.
But what if we expanded the notion beyond holding the external environment -- water, air, birds, fish, mammals, amphibians, etc -- in trust. What if we held our relationships with one another as "trust" relationships rather than utilitarian? Certainly not all of our relationships are transactional, but what if, for example, in negotiating, we were as concerned that the other party leave enriched and empowered as we were for our own success? Ponder the possibilities.
Namasté,
Gary
No comments:
Post a Comment