The Original Religion
Within all religions today there is a common core, an inner spiritual transmission going back to the dawn of human consciousness, to a time when religion was not necessary.
The original purpose of religion was to bring sacredness to life. Imagine a time (whether prehistorical or transhistorical) when human beings lived moment-to-moment in the presence of the sacred. Religion was unnecessary. There was no separation between spirituality and life, no distinction between the sacred and the mundane, no division of the Godly and the worldly. When we lost the ongoing and immediate sense of sacredness, then we needed religion to bring us back to it. “Religion,” after all, means “that which renews our connection.”
No matter that modern religions have been distorted into a force for separation and not connection. If we look carefully within any one of them, we will find traces of the Original Religion, the religion borne from that immediate, experiential identity with the divine. Born from the divine, it also has the potential to bring us back to the divine.
I am afraid that when I use phrases like “bring us back to the divine” I am strengthening a separation that is actually an illusion. The Original Religion is not a program for attaining to a divinity separate from ourselves or the world of matter we inhabit. It arises from the felt experience that no such separation exists. To even use words like “divine” or “sacred” establishes them as separate categories of existence and widens the division.
We have a name for the Original Religion. We call it animism, and it is still practiced today by isolated groups of indigenous people. We usually define animism as the belief that all things have a spirit: including animals and plants, rocks and streams, the wind and the sky. Actually, this belief is a step away from the original animism, which is perhaps better termed “panentheism,” a belief in the indwelling divinity of all things. Panentheism says not that all things have a spirit; it is that all things are spirit. Spirit is not a distinct element that can be separated out from the being itself. The entire universe, and everything in it, is irreducibly sacred. Everything that exists, even two apparently identical drops of water, is unique, special, and sacred.
The panentheist thus lives in a constant state of reverence. Each action takes on a sacred significance. Each word is a prayer. Each event is divinely arranged, a communication from the All to a temporarily separate piece of it, the self.
The detachment from this way of being began with the earliest rudiments of human separation from nature: symbolic culture and domestication. When we try to encompass the infinity of the world within a finitude of labels, we distance ourselves from its immediacy and uniqueness. As the author of the Biblical Genesis understood, to name is to objectify and therefore to own. Domestication of plants and animals, similarly, risks converting them from coequal beings sacred in their own right into chattel, subordinate to human purposes.
This process was well underway in the Mesolithic if not before, but human beings still lived in harmony with nature because they had beliefs, stories, and rituals to reconnect them to the truth of the irreducible sacredness of all beings. Shamans were the original priests, the caretakers of this sacred knowledge, which they recognized is indispensable for human beings’ survival. In those days, we understood the necessity of religion renewing or remembering our connectedness. It is necessary because it is true, and no being can live very long or very well outside of truth.
Traces of the original religion survive within the esoteric traditions of modern religions, embodied in teachings like, “God is everywhere,” “God is in all things,” or “Everything happens for a divine purpose.” The experience of God’s constant presence is essentially the experience of the Original Religion. The mystics tell us that it is a Presence so close and so intimate that the self is submerged in it. The Presence suffuses all life, each moment of it, and it shines forth from every being we encounter. We have the sense of living in a wholly divine world, a holy world. And because the same Presence shines forth from all, our customary sense of division falls away, and we have the feeling that you and I are really the same being looking at itself through different eyes.
This is actually very easy to experience, at least for a split second. Look someone in the eye, and pay attention for an instant of recognition and union. It is so intensely intimate that we usually cannot stand it, so we shift our eyes away or shift our mind away, and forget that moment before we realize it has happened.
I think the original motivating intent of religion is to seize and expand such moments until they widen to encompass all of life. Even the attenuated rituals of modern life have something of this power to evoke the presence of the sacred, which we can then recognize was there all along, immanent and waiting.
Any religion can connect us to that presence, even an atheistic religion such as Buddhism. After all, if God is in everything and everyone, and not external to everything and everyone, what does it really mean to say God exists or does not exist? Buddhism speaks of interconnectedness or interdependency, and we typically understand that to mean a kind of relationship among separate subjects. The true teaching goes much deeper. It says that our very existence is woven out of relationships, that we are our relationships and nothing else. Inter-existence would be a word for it. And so karma is not an externally imposed punishment for doing ill to a separate “other” being; it is simply the direct consequence of all that we do, because the other is not in fact other.
In Western religion we can apply the same understanding to the Golden Rule. Perhaps when Jesus said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” he wasn’t prescribing a moral rule. He was simply stating what was, from his perspective, an obvious truth: As you do unto others, so you are in fact doing unto yourself. This is obvious from the felt perspective of nonseparation.
Every action is significant, every word deserves mindfulness. God sees everything. There are not some words and actions that don’t matter and others that do. Everything matters. Everything is sacred. Nothing is left behind in the cold dead world of the mundane.
Does that mean that our sacred objects, our times of meditation and prayer, our rituals and observances have no purpose? No. Their purpose is to remind us of the truth. The purpose of a holy object is not to say, “This object is holy and others are not.” The purpose of a holy object is to remind us of the holiness of all objects. The purpose of a ritual is to remind us of the sacredness of all action. The purpose of a prayer is to remind us of the sacredness of all speech. And, when we see our holy men or women as divine, it is to remind us of our own divinity and the divinity of all.
Too often the teachings of our great spiritual leaders have been perverted, so that holiness has become something outside ourselves. When that happens, we naturally trust external authorities in most matters, and lose the confidence and ability to be the creators of our own lives. Today, more and more people are returning to the truth: that we are divine beings living among other divine beings in a world that is itself, in its parts and in its entirety, wholly divine.
Whether conscious or not, it is this realization that ultimately motivates the environmental movement, the peace movement, the justice movement, and so many other areas of activism. None of these make sense in a world of force and reason, where more for you is less for me. Why should I care about the fate of other beings? As long as I can insulate myself from the blowback, why not just maximize my own security? Arguments for justice or the environment that attempt to appeal to rational self-interest (“think of all the medicines we could derive from rainforest plants”) are never compelling. They do not compel others to change, as forty years of failed environmentalism demonstrates. Nor do they compel meaningful changes from within. We cannot scare ourselves into virtue.
That is why the panentheistic revival in all its forms is key to the transformation of the planet. Underneath all the New Age expropriation of the trappings of indigenous spirituality and shamanism lies a yearning to return to the living realization of the indwelling divinity of all things. It is a way of seeing the world profoundly at odds with modern materialism’s reduction of the universe into a pile of stuff: generic masses subject to arbitrary, purposeless forces. And it will engender profoundly different results. Can you imagine a science, a technology, an economy, a culture founded on reverence? That is the promise of the once and future Original Religion.
Tags
Who is online
449 visitors
The whole ground of human life seems to some to have been gone over by their predecessors, both the heights and the valleys, and all things to have been cared for. According to Evelyn, “the wise Solomon prescribed ordinances for the very distances of trees; and the Roman prætors have decided how often you may go into your neighbor’s land to gather the acorns which fall on it without trespass, and what share belongs to that neighbor.” Hippocrates has even left directions how we should cut our nails; that is, even with the ends of the fingers, neither shorter nor longer. Undoubtedly the very tedium and ennui which presume to have exhausted the variety and the joys of life are as old as Adam. But man’s capacities have never been measured; nor are we to judge of what he can do by any precedents, so little has been tried. Whatever have been thy failures hitherto, “be not afflicted, my child, for who shall assign to thee what thou hast left undone?”
Henry David Thoreau (2016-02-18). Walden, and On The Duty Of Civil Disobedience . Dossier Press. Kindle Edition.
Great Article Larry!
A big part of DBT (dialectical behavioral therapy is about "mindfulness" and the concept that opposites not only can exist and be true, but must exist for the other to half to exist. When I read your article it came to mind.. in many ways a basic principle of this therapy is that we are all interconnected.
BTW, I do believe in what we NYers say: "What goes around, comes around", or instant Karma, or the butterfly effect. What we put out there, does affect us, whether we realize it or not.
Thank you Perrie, glad you enjoyed it.
Separation is an illusion. We seem to be alone in fooling ourselves otherwise; all the rest of Nature perceives reality headlong with eyes wide-open.
:~)
I don't think we know, or can know, whether we or not we share divinity.
It is a nice way to look at things though.
I don't think we know
Have you ever considered trying meditation...its not what you think!
I don't think we know, or can know, whether we or not we share divinity.
Well-- OK-- that is a thought you have....
Of course there's a big difference between actual deep knowing-- and "knowing about".
Between knowing something intellectually, and actually experiencing it.
I have experienced the divine-- but only for brief periods. (It takes a lot of work--and intense focus-- over time. And the first step-- is the intense desire to do it.).
I'm not familiar with DBT (sounds like maybe CBT with a bit of so-called "mindfulness" thrown in?). But they didn't invent the concept of "mindfulness"-- that's been an important part of Buddhism for a long, long time.
(Probably also of some forms of Hinduism-- but they would use very different words to describe it. I lived on a Yoga Ashram for 3 months. The place had very spiritual vibes-- but the one thing that surprised me is that while they practiced what we might call "mindfulness meditation", they were not aware of embodying the Buddhist concept of mindfulness in their daily lives as Buddhists would...I was surprised).
Also, in the east they look at "opposites" differently than we do in the west*. We think of opposites as being different-- they think of opposites as being different degrees of the same thing.
_________________________________
*In the West and in western systems such as science-- even conventional western religions. But: the mystic branches of western religions are quite similar to Eastern religion---various forms of Christian mysticism, the Jewish Kabbalists, in Islam its the Sufis.
Great contribution and thank you Krishna.
while they practiced what we might call "mindfulness meditation", they were not aware of embodying the Buddhist concept of mindfulness in their daily lives as Buddhists would...I was surprised).
One of the consequences of following mindful type practices ultimately must be the complete release of self. Easier said than done.
Modern Animism sees the same sorta release in understanding that being one with Nature is going to require a return to Nature in very fundamental ways. Also easier said than done.
One of the consequences of following mindful type practices ultimately must be the complete release of self. Easier said than done.
In some forms Hinduism, the path is systematically laid out in a book called "The Yogi Sutras of Pantanjali . This is usually has the original Sanskrit, then those words spelled out phonetically, and the English translation. In addition there are a lot of footnotes by the modern editor --the Guru who wrote the commentaries (explanations).
The edition I used (linked to, above) has explanations by HH The Reverend Swami Satchidananda. (He's the one on the cover of that edition, he's also the one who was at Woodstock in that famous photo . He'sknown for his ecumenicism. Perhaps best known for this quote:
Truth is one, paths are many
I am not recommending that book, however, as its really only useful for someone ommitting themselves to the path, to doing the practices. And its almost impossible to do without a good spiritual guide or "guru"
(cont'd from previous post)
However, the path toward what the Hindus call "enlightenment" ("Release of Self") is a long one. It takes dedication-- including doing various practices such as the asanas (yoga postures), meditation daily, self-purification etc. And it takes a long time!
That is why there is the tradition of having a guru, or teacher. To guide the aspirant along the path and help him/her avid the pitfalls. (And the pitfalls are many....)
Of all the practices I've done, perhaps the most powerful was daily meditation. The effects over time are amazing! (Science has studied meditators and have proven that regular meditation has numerous physical benefits-- lower blood pressure, better health, stress reduction, often states of serenity-- and over time, ultimately, bliss).
But most scientists don't study the spiritual benefits as they as so rigid minded as so f*cking left brained! (They're generally really into being 'right").
But they didn't invent the concept of "mindfulness"-- that's been an important part of Buddhism for a long, long time.
DBT is based in Buddhism, hence the mindfulness and the ying yang parts of the therapy.
Also, in the east they look at "opposites" differently than we do in the west*. We think of opposites as being different-- they think of opposites as being different degrees of the same thing.
Well that goes along with things being either right or wrong or that opposites ideas can't both co-exist. This is all part of DBT and how we learn to deal with stress.
Well that goes along with things being either right or wrong.
Well, IMNSHO, the need to be right is what causes so many people in online forums to get into these nasty fights!
What used to be called "left brain"-- thinking, analytical, judging, setting limits, seeing opposite as different, believing in the constructs of time and space-- and the illusion of separation.
(As opposed to "right brain", which is not analytical and "rational" but rather intuitive. Its true knowing-- rather than merely knowing about. It transcends the "illusion of time and space". Its not judgemental. The knowledge that not only do opposites exist, but that they are merely different degrees of the same thing- each contains part of the other).
or that opposites ideas can't both co-exist. This is all part of DBT and how we learn to deal with stress.
Actually, IMO, one of the best things for achieving this is meditation-- sitting for maybe 20 or 30 minutes once or even twice a day, repeating your mantra. Over time that changes the relationship between the three dimensions of consciousness*:
-The Self-conscious, or ordinary waking consciousness. Thinking. Analyzing. Judging.
-The Subconscious. Where dreams come from. In one system. this is what produces results in the world without taking action.
-The Superconscious. The source of intuition, and connection to higher energies/forces. (or if you believe in it, your way of connecting with the divine). Time. space, judging, analyzing, & the illusion of separation don't exist here. (neither does "matter"-- rather, everything is just vibration...).
______________________________________________
*There are different systems, or models, of consciousness. The one I find to be most useful uses those three dimensions.
Why do I like it? Because it works! (For me)
or that opposites ideas can't both co-exist
Here's the symbol of the "Yin-Yang". Opposites.
The black and white colours indicate the opposites of Yin and Yang. But notice--not only do they co-exist, but each contains some of the other-- the black area has a dot of white-- and versa-vice!
(Damn clever those Chinese!)
Damn.. that was a typo Krish. I meant can exist.
Damn.. that was a typo Krish. I meant can exist.
Well, in one sense they can-- & in another sense they can't! (At least if you're a Buddhist-- they are all a bunch of enigma lovers! . . . one hand clapping & all that sorta stuff that that turns them on...)
"When man first attained the upright position, he took a look at the stars...and decided they were something to eat. When he found he couldn't reach them he decided they were groceries belonging a bigger creature and that's how Jehovah was born."
''We have a name for the Original Religion. We call it animism, and it is still practiced today by isolated groups of indigenous people. We usually define animism as the belief that all things have a spirit: including animals and plants, rocks and streams, the wind and the sky.''
Actually the part about it only being practiced by ''isolated groups of indigenous people'' is incorrect. This is the basis for all native religions and there is a large following in the U.S. Canada and around the world that live this life and respect that all things are related, and each as a spirit or soul.
Gakina Awiiya (we are all related)
Actually the part about it only being practiced by ''isolated groups of indigenous people'' is incorrect. This is the basis for all native religions and there is a large following in the U.S. Canada and around the world that live this life and respect that all things are related, and each as a spirit or soul.
Interestingly, I think there seems to be some increasing interest in these ideas amongst many "modern" people as well . . .
I think that your correct Krish. Many young people are starting to see the wisdom of this system.
"Everything that exists, even two apparently identical drops of water, is unique, special, and sacred."
Is radioactive uranium sacred and special? Is an asteroid speeding towards us at 200,000 mph sacred and special? How about the violent chaos of a lightening bolt? Sorry, but this article is a bunch of new age naivety.
When humanoids first developed the ability to reason, they had little useful knowledge with which to form explanations of nature. Had they been given a Hubble telescope and an electron microscope, and the understanding that they themselves are composed building blocks that are made up of mostly empty space and electromagnetic energy, they would have formulated very different ideas about life. Had they known what a cell is, and that there are more bacterial cells in their body than human cells, they would have a very different understanding of true symbiosis. Because they didn't have these tools and this knowledge, they felt much more special and sacred than they are in reality. They invented gods to fill the enormous vacuum of scientific knowledge.
Everything that exists is in a position relative to something else. This relativity is the very way we describe everything.
This means that the tiniest microbe IS unique. It is the only one that can be described , in the way that it is , relative to all other microbes.
-
If we say that man is meaningless in the vast cosmic oceans, we must also say that an individual human being is a universe compared with microscopic creatures and grains of sand. It's all relative.
-
I think the article is fine for what it is, but in terms of a claim that animism connects us to true spirituality in a way that other spiritual traditions don't , that is something that is just not knowable.
I think the article is fine for what it is, but in terms of a claim that animism connects us to true spirituality in a way that other spiritual traditions don't , that is something that is just not knowable.
I do appreciate though John that that at least, leaves your room to maneuver. Krish just put up a sweet article dealing with that very issue... Letting Go .
When humanoids first developed the ability to reason, they had little useful knowledge with which to form explanations of nature.
When Homo Sapiens first walked upright out onto the Savannah they weren't asking, or seeking any explanations of Nature. To earliest Man, all the creatures, grasses, rocks and features of the world around them, were inseparable from Nature. They regarded themselves and everything around them as direct agents of Nature; they did not hold any gods that floated outside of that reality in any regard whatsoever,,,they actually had none. What they did see as special and worthy of their attention and time (which is the essence of worship) was the beauty and awesomeness of the world around them, and their relationship to it. We assume that since so many humans now days seek for diety to worship, and since modern Humans are so much more evolved than early Humans, then surely we today must be that much less superstitious, and much more knowledgeable about the truth of reality. I would challenge that as well.
Had they been given a Hubble telescope and an electron microscope, and the understanding that they themselves are composed building blocks that are made up of mostly empty space and electromagnetic energy, they would have formulated very different ideas about life. Had they known what a cell is, and that there are more bacterial cells in their body than human cells, they would have a very different understanding of true symbiosis.
True symbiosis.
Homo Sapiens entered the hunt at a lower rung of the ladder, than they presently occupy. Our own ancestors the Apes were poorly suited to being top dog for a very good reason,,,,they weren't dogs! But seriously, they weren't; and, wolves were most likely the predator at the top (lottsa evidence for this)at that time, as well as the behavioral model Humans quickly adopted/adapted. The intelligence and use of tools, gained from Chimps, was accompanied by wide streaks of aggression and violence amongst themselves. This doesn't present in wolves, and allowed for high success as societies, and hunters. Humans would have recognized that as part of the reason they were on top the food chain, and would have emulated it. Actually there is more evidence as well that Home Sapiens and Canines teaming up, was the catalyst that launched humans across the globe. Together, they were a truly unbeatable force. Neither Canines or Humans knew a dang thing about the biology of the other, or themselves. Imagine that.
At one time humans had an intimate, constant, and overwhelming sense of symbiosis. It was part-n-parcel to eating, warmth, shelter, companionship....on and on and on and on....
At one time there there was no need for words to express and grasp symbiosis, in such an important and meaningful way. Those relationships would have taken on a uniqueness and value that could only be understood and grasped by moderns humans with words like religion or belief system, sacred, holy....
At one time Humans used to understand in a very real, right up in your face, on the biting edge of reality, symbiosis. A recognition that the most important aspects of life are the relationships that make up reality while we are alive. All the relationships, not just human ones, but other life forms and structures that make up the natural world all around us. Relationship to early humans was recognized as not only most important thing; but, was to be perceived and held as worthy of our time, effort, and sacrifice. In other words, worthy of worship, in a very real sense, not the fakey, modern version of it.
Compare that to our modern scientific, progressive, and oh so wise "understanding of true symbiosis". At one time the waste produced by Humans was little different from that of the other animals on the planet. Today nearly every aspect of Humanity spews waste that kills many other animals on the planet, and is literally poisoning the planet as well. At one time humans were so well attuned to the world around them, that they could wake in the morning and know where the game would take the hunt, just from senses readily available. Today humans are so far removed from Nature and the truth about reality, that they can't understand how they were killed while taking a selfie while posing with a wild animal or falling off a cliff. Today modern Humanity, so very well versed in symbiosis and relationship, is killing itself of at a higher rate than ever and see no reason to do otherwise.
Because they didn't have these tools and this knowledge, they felt much more special and sacred than they are in reality.
No. Their highly trained and attuned sense of relationship and interconnectedness, led them to believe that all things and their relationships were special, sacred, and worthy of our time and attention. This was long before religion or gods or any such thing.
Their ontology was one of being in the here and now so intensely that the only explanation we modern humans are able to attribute to it comes across as mystical or religious, yet to those early humans would have merely been the way in which they shared their lives with every thing around them. Relationship was god at one time.
When Homo Sapiens first walked upright out onto the Savannah they weren't asking, or seeking any explanations of Nature. To earliest Man, all the creatures, grasses, rocks and features of the world around them, were inseparable from Nature. They regarded themselves and everything around them as direct agents of Nature; they did not hold any gods that floated outside of that reality in any regard whatsoever,,,
Some would describe that as a knowing that everything was one . . . the illusion of separateness only developed later on...
they did not hold any gods that floated outside of that reality in any regard whatsoever,,,
That notion that separation is actually an illusion, that god is not something outside yourself, has been mentioned by enlightened beings throughout the ages. To cite but one example:
Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
--Luke 17:21
When Homo Sapiens first walked upright out onto the Savannah they weren't asking, or seeking any explanations of Nature. To earliest Man, all the creatures, grasses, rocks and features of the world around them, were inseparable from Nature. They regarded themselves and everything around them as direct agents of Nature; they did not hold any gods that floated outside of that reality in any regard whatsoever,,,
Some would describe that as a knowing that everything was one . . . the illusion of separateness only developed later on...
they did not hold any gods that floated outside of that reality in any regard whatsoever,,,
That notion that separation is actually an illusion, that god is not something outside yourself, has been mentioned by enlightened beings throughout the ages. To cite but one example:
Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
--Luke 17:21
Yeah it is pretty cool when ya think about it. There actually are some fairly salient premises present East and West, and, really from all over, that look closer to earth for enlightenment. One of the things that makes particular sense are the respect for the natural world in nearly all those practices. An understanding that being separate from each other and he world around us, is an illusion, a spell in it's own right. We are not immune from reality, no matter how much we deny it.
When humanoids first developed the ability to reason, they had little useful knowledge with which to form explanations of nature. Had they been given a Hubble telescope and an electron microscope, and the understanding that they themselves are composed building blocks that are made up of mostly empty space and electromagnetic energy, they would have formulated very different ideas about life. Had they known what a cell is, and that there are more bacterial cells in their body than human cells, they would have a very different understanding of true symbiosis. Because they didn't have these tools and this knowledge, they felt much more special and sacred than they are in reality. They invented gods to fill the enormous vacuum of scientific knowledge.
Actually you''ve got it backwards.
There's a difference between wisdom & knowledge!
The more knowledge a person has, the more stuff they know. But how useful that knowledge is depends upon how they interpret it. Knowing more and more facts is not the key. Rather, understanding the significance of those facts, knowing what they actually all mean-- that is wisdom.
One would think that knowing the vastness of the universe, as well as the workings of particle physics, would dampen the self importance factor. Instead, they were formulating their place in the world without even knowing how babies are made, what a germ is, why that bright thing in the sky keeps going away and coming back every day, and the concept of zero as a number.
One would think that knowing the vastness of the universe, as well as the workings of particle physics, would dampen the self importance factor.
It has nothing to do with how much information you've accumulated! Rather, its your understanding (or lack of understanding) of what all those gigabytes of data in your head actually means. Its the context you put them in.
Having tons of facts pales in importance compared to being able to put them together in a way such that you can gain important meaning from them-- seeing the bigger picture. (This is usually referred to as "Synthesis" {as opposed to "Analysis" which is the opposite}).
Now-a-days,(especially with the Internut!) Its easy to gather facts-- more than perhaps most people can handle. Its easy. But interpreting those facts, and especially the overall picture presented by those facts taken as a whole ("synthesis") requires skill.
Having tons of facts pales in importance compared to being able to put them together in a way such that you can gain important meaning from them-- seeing the bigger picture. (This is usually referred to as "Synthesis" {as opposed to "Analysis" which is the opposite}).
Now-a-days,(especially with the Internut!) Its easy to gather facts-- more than perhaps most people can handle. Its easy. But interpreting those facts, and especially the overall picture presented by those facts taken as a whole ("synthesis") requires skill.
And in addition, it requires a bit of mental flexibility-- being open to learning new things. mental rigidity is a major obstacle to gaining wisdom (as opposed to merely collecting facts).
The key to learning new things is not only being open to them, and being open to the possibility that sometimes you may be wrong-- but also being able to let go-- of ideas (& belifs!) you've been clinging onto for a long time.
People who take particle physics seriously are swayed by expensive projects . There is still far too much about that topic that is not comprehended ...
People who take particle physics seriously are swayed by expensive projects . There is still far too much about that topic that is not comprehended ...
Yes. (And this may make Hal A Lujah's head explode) but interestingly, there is another "school of inquiry" that has views similar to the latest discoveries in particle physics-- and that is ancient Hindu mysticism!
Mystic revelations about the Higgs "Bozo" ?
Mystic revelations about the Higgs "Bozo" ?
Yup. So much so that it often causes some people to spontaneously break out into song & dance!
the concept of zero as a number.
Interesting that numeration is a human construct, an abstraction, that no more truly represents reality than does a piece of bubblegum.