A natural inquiry

The problem in defining an experience with nature is my inability to define the relationship between each element in this universe that

begs the title "nature." Sure I'm able to label things I see as 'natural' but I fail to visualize the congenital hierarchy which seems to govern 

everything i may or may not perceive. What is the correspondence between human nature and environmental nature?

It's easy to say that the only truth I can believe is that which I've experienced, but when I see no order to that which I've experienced,

it's time to look big picture.

"A single thing is only so far beautiful as it suggests the universal grace. "Nature is that which inspires one to look beyond; to look around

and recognize that there's something larger going on than this world. The reason we find it entrancing, beautiful, and mysterious, is because

that which it reflects is so.

Emerson says that "each moment of the year has its own beauty, and in the same field it beholds, every hour, a picture that has never been

seen before and which will never be seen again." This is why exploring nature, having a unique encounter with the natural world, is

is so exciting to us: its a unique encounter with the astounding beauty and ultimate majesty of the one who created. THIS is why those moments

of experiencing the beauty of nature forces us to think clearly, to think larger, to suddenly have our priorities straight. This is why one can examine 

the most miniscule of natural commodities and marvel at its intricacies for hours. This is bigger than us, and it's in everything.

We can experience it on a daily basis, and in in least likely situations. When searched for, it will present itself (he is where Emerson and I disagree)

and in the most curious ways immaginable.

An experience of nature, in my opinion, is completely unique to the person themself. Of course its different; clearly were all different people.

Each moment is a special gift in which we have the ability to encounter, and should be honored lest it be taken for granted.

How better to know the creator than to admire and experience his handiwork?

Anne Frank sums it up:

The best remedy for those who are afraid, lonely or unhappy is to go outside, somewhere where they can be quiet, alone with the heavens, nature and God. Because only then does one feel that all is as it should be and that God wishes to see people happy, amidst the simple beauty of nature.

friendship revisited

It remained there like a festering sore covered by an infinite amount of barbie bandaids. 

I was still mad.

My Emersonian experience was not so much a day, but a test case. A kind of W.W.E.D.-in-this-situation, and one situation in particular. 

I kept up the menial small-talk  and occasional get-togethers in sheer concession that she would, in fact, never fully comprehend the origin of my frustration. I left it alone, because I believed that brilliant someone who said "everything heals with time." 

Maybe I was being melodramatic. Probably.

But in retrospect, it was worth it, for what was revealed to me when I objectively compared my actions to the words of Emerson, made quite a difference:  It was not her problem at all. 

Why did I expect her to complete me? I still held the her actions against her, and even more so, passed judgement on her character because I wanted a different outcome.

In reality, I was unfulfilled with what my own actions. I couldn't let go of the fact I had fallen short, and therefore prosecuted her for my unhappiness.  

The definitive paradox of friendship is that you must be an self-contented individual before you can be part of  collaborating duo. The failure to do so results in co-dependence, unfulfillment, and ultimately, as in my case,  disappointment. 

It is so like human nature to compel us to seek another to supplement our short- comings. It's also the easiest thing to do. There's a fine line between complementary and reliance, but a grand divulgence in ultimate outcome.

"The only way to have a friend is to be one." Though this might entail kindness, forgiveness and compassion (three thing I could use in my situation), it also requires a certain degree of self-content. No, this doesn't mean you have to have it all together or stand to gain nothing from a friendship. It's the simple recognition from time to time, that 'I can't look to others as a source of my self-image, happiness, or fulfillment.'

As I realized this (among other things) and reflected upon my situation, I am still greeted with the same reservations, but a severely less degree of bitterness. I recognize that she could've been handled her part better, but that's living, and I now consciously afford her the amnesty I, so many times a day require. 

"Be not a slave to your own past." I refuse to hold myself and her in shackles to a past situation. It's not fair, nor decent, nor in any circumstance friendship-like. To be a friend is an evolving lesson, and I am content that Emerson got right: All life is truly an experience. 

Regalos

Let's be honest: who can really define a gift? 

Gift is no more than a name we've given to represent this anomaly of the human spirit: the inclination to give. In my opinion, the desire to give is just as inherent as the desire to take, though appears in varying degrees. Nevertheless, humans in all their opposable thumbed intelligence have made a considerable effort to try and explain their ideas of what a gift should and should not be, in an attempt to regulate the emotion behind the giving.

Lost? Not surprising. 

Let me clear up. When we define gifts, we are defining the ideal way they should be given. (ie: selflessly, without expectation of return), because we WANT them to be given for the purest of reasons. We want people to be capable of giving whole heartedly and the like, because it means we as humans may not be so bad after all. 

So where does Emerson fit into all this? He believes, as do I, that we are capable of giving selflessly, without expectation, and out of the purest joy of our hearts. It's possible. But it's not easy. Our nature is at a war as we try to balance the desire to give and take. 

How many times do we give gifts because we can't wait to see how the people react positively? This is fantastic because it means we want to see them happy. But- this also means we expect to gain some kind of peer validation, or 'i-owe-you' status by giving them a gift they love. They're going to feel, no matter how slight, a need to 'repay,' and this according to Emerson is a sign something is wrong. 

Emerson warns us, (and flat out rebukes us) for giving in this manner. Much of "Gifts" is really a 'how-not-to-give' list in a greater attempt to correct our personal motives for giving. He's not just correcting our actions, but changing our hearts and minds. When he says "the expectation of gratitude is mean" what he's trying to say is STOP BEING SO SELFISH as to expect something in return! If Emerson were to make a list of how to give gifts, it would look like this: 1. its is easiest(but not best) to give someone something they need

2. True gift is to Give of yourself

3. Don't attempt to buy meaning; worth is not proportional to cost

4. Hold no part of yourself back when you give

5. you're in a loose-loose situation when receiving gifts 

6. Do not expect gratitude 

7. "Do not flatter your benefactors"

8. Doing them services is not giving of yourself

9. "Love them , and they feel you"

Ultimately, Emerson says that giving should be an expression of love. For this reason, when one gives, it should be of themselves, without expectation. We as humans believe gifts should be given this way, not just because we WANT humans to be capable of these things, but because we KNOW they're capable. "Actions reveal priorities" as Ghandi said, and as long as we follow Emerson's guidelines for true giving, our motives will be just as pure. 

"Self- Relience" Post 1

"We but half express ourselves, and are ashamed of that divine idea which each of us represents."

As humans, we never fully expose or convey our innermost thoughts or ideas for fear of embarrassment, vulnerability, or recognition of the inalienable light we each unknowingly contain.

Upon reading this quote, my mind immediately jumped to a famous quote: "Our greatest fear

is not that we are inadequate, but that we are powerful beyond measure." Emerson's realization and recognition that within each person resides a "divine idea" brings forth a whole new sentiment of self-awareness and empowerment. This so called divine idea, to me, means a certain spark of divine light uncovered by the fingerprints of a very near creator. Being a transcendentalist, i feel Emerson could agree.

By recognizing the presence of said 'spark' we are forced to confront our very human- and often subconcious- fear of exposing the light within, in greater favor of comfortable conformity. We naturally seek approval, and thus are afraid to follow our "Inner Institution" that may lead us elsewhere.

This quote fits perfectly with when Emerson said: "What i must do is all that concerns me, not what people think." After informing us that we each contain an irrepresable light, he gives us instructions on how what to do with this light. He tells us NOT to worry about people perceiving us as something were not, because if we try to control others' we in turn drive ourselves to the point of insanity. He says "SPEAK your latent conviction and it shall be the universal sense." All you can do is act in accordance to your 'Intuition,' and as long as you've gained your own self-contented approval, the world's opinion really won't matter.

Though this may come off as a generic 'be yourself' talk, Emerson gives his message teeth by taking it a step further. Not only should we follow our inner guidences, but be unapologetic for it as well. How do you have any control over others and their emotions? Its not your responsibility, and therefore you shouldn't spend time censoring your actions for the sake of others.

Here's where it gets personal for me. So often I look to the reactions of others to approve/disprove my actions. I allow my self image and appraisment to be interpreted through the eyes of another. We can do more than allow our Divine spark to guide and illuminate our lives- no matter what direction it leads us in- because according to Emerson, those are the places we should never be afraid to go.