Man attacked by bear

[Buddy]

Does anyone remember this from the Wave? It's still a beautiful piece, to me. I thought it would make an interesting addition to this thread as a reminder that we simply don't know who all is part of what soul fragment or group soul, or whatever. IOW, that guy might just as well be one of us on a soul level, so we could ask ourselves, from the point of view of STO candidates: would anything within us change if we suddenly realized that he was an integral part of our existence? If no, then maybe that's good. If yes, then there's an opportunity for growth, I suppose.

I hope Laura doesn't mind the quote being placed here and that someone will enjoy this again. :)
(my bold)
[quote author=http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/wave13e3.htm]
Chapter 37
[...]
OM: You do not believe that when you sit before a group you do so alone? You are there as a representative of the spiritual world. Fools like myself become teachers, because we find suddenly that there is no one else. It's as simple as that. You realize how great is the gulf between you and others. There is a curtain between you. And you understand that this curtain is good for neither of you. The house out there is burning. You can see the flames, but those others cannot see the flames. ... Now the question is, can you leave those people in the flames? Would it not be the act of a Fool to snatch one, or perhaps two, out of the conflagration?

MH: If that is what they want.

OM: They cannot see the flames, but they do not wish to be burned. You see. You know that there are two sorts of flame. There is the soft and slow flame of the inner heat, and that terrible burning flame which consumes, and which feels no human pain. ...You cannot continue widening the gap between yourself and the world, What for others is light is for the Teacher an old light - another word for darkness.We live in a foolish paradox, for while we have forever, we do not have much time. [Hedsel, 2000]

And that was my answer. The house is burning, and I am a Fool who seeks to snatch as many as possible from the flames. And it is an act of creativity - a commitment to an idea. And, just as I finished reading this book, I received a message from a friend who wrote:

Laura, Sharing your life and trials and fiery initiations through your pages is a raw fire walk on this planet. I know how lonely it feels in the moment of retelling each drama, re-experiencing even the sensory memory, that served to strip another layer off your (by now) Zen flesh and Zen bones. Yet at this stage, it is also a refreshingly cool wind that passes through awareness to allow ourselves to be that thoroughly exposed...as if that wind of the exposure is blowing off a little more residual bits of flesh still clinging to our bones.

And yet, in reading those truths (those of us who know and can relate), the storytelling is understood to be a beautiful performance art of your soul's expansion under the tutelage of our future selves. Such a spectacular display of universal love and timelessness and beauty and truth and cosmic humor it is.

Yes, when the truth (as lessons and dramas) hit us here in 3rd density in the matrix, we process it as painful (because of our programs)...but after a while, if we learn to relax, life in the matrix is do-able. Like anything painful (childbirth, for example) relaxing is the way to avoid the worst of it (and minimize scarring...which is to carry pain into future time).

So I see this dance of your posts and the stimulation they provide as an exercise in networking that seems to have a wonderful cosmic purpose. That cosmic purpose is that networking in the matrix is a group lesson that can greatly accelerate both individual and group awareness. Many times I have found this group energy fascinating...for example, a dream of a friend seems to act as a preview of coming attractions of a meditation insight that comes to me, and that is mirrored in the life movie of another friend, etc.

...It is my theory that we are moving towards this understanding of group mind and interconnectedness in this coming year. I am feeling we are all going to become much more aware of this networking synchronicity. One of the lessons of duality is to understand we are not really separate beings, but suspended together in One Mind. Playing there with telepathy and other ways to explore expanded awareness is a birthright we can claim and enjoy with like-minded others.

Thanks, Laura, for being a scout and going out and expanding our playing field comfort zone so we can all expand together. You rock, girl. Can't wait for the next pages! M.
Thank you, Michele. From one Fool to another.[/quote]

 

[Guardian]

Once the intellectual center usurps the energy, one is a step closer to the "go get 'em and cut 'em down to size" thinking that CAN lead to revenge and retribution towards others.

Exactly. If there is something besides the fear of retribution that will stop a human/corporate predator in their tracks, I haven't found it yet. Evil people (psychopaths) will only stop doing evil things if they perceive an IMMEDIATE cost to themselves. Don't expect them to understand any long term repercussions...they can't. All they can understand is what's happening to them NOW. They have no compassion, no empathy, ALL that concerns them is their own situation and an immediate threat to themselves.

A good example is the situation I'm involved in with Duke. Before I go into a meeting with the opposition I want to be ANGRY. I intentionally pull all the images of their desecration to the forefront of my mind to start those brain juices flowing. I get myself "all worked up" and by the time I walk in the door, my senses are razor sharp. I can process information (10-20 times?) faster than I can in my normal state of awareness. I can hear their breathing, smell everything from their emotions to what they had for lunch....and see details in a room full of people that I might have missed otherwise. There is no such thing as a "distraction" in this state. EVERYTHING becomes a part of the whole.

This is also why I seldom speak at such meetings. I sit at my keyboard and take notes while watching, listening, and learning. Occasionally I'll pass a note to whoever is speaking for us when I catch a lie being told by the other side. By the time the meeting is over, I usually know what "retribution" the psychopath we're facing fears the most....what they are afraid we will "cost" them.

The emotion of "anger" is a powerful tool, and I think we come equipped with it to help us deal with predators that chose to prey on us at MANY levels.

At the very least, it can be intense enough to overwhelm any compassion towards certain other humans and set up a "Hatfield and McCoys" type of reciprocal loop.

I agree that being able to control your "off" switch is of equal, if not greater importance than being able to control your "on" switch. I also think friendly reminders are one thing your friends/family are for when your blood's up. A couple weeks ago, I was in a car full of friends after a meeting not too different from the one I just described. A close friend was driving and without a word she turned off the road, down a side street, parked, and told me "Ok Betsy, meeting's over, bad guy's gone, you need to go to the river now. We've got to {do personal stuff} and you don't want to take that with us"

I knew she was right, and intended to take a side trip when I got back to my own car, but she beat me to it....and I hadn't said a one single word since we'd left the meeting.

Note: In case you may be wondering, I wasn't offended in any way either. My main concern was to try and express myself well enough to keep myself out of hot water and not to offend YOU. :)

Well thank you Bud...as long as we're both trying not to offend each other, I'd say we've got about a 50/50 chance we won't ;D

 

[Guardian]

Well you gotta consider that pathology is a disease of the mind/emotions, and people are running around essentially diseased. In another thread you pointed out that a rabid fox becomes "irrationally" violent,

Yes, and I'm usually the first person some of my friends call to shoot a diseased animal that represents a threat. First I kill it, then I mourn it....usually bawl like a baby.

well here we have an example of a human who has been hurt and is irrationally vindictive towards what is essentially nature just being nature. Perhaps it would help to consider that he's not necessarily a "bad" person undeserving of life and health,

I never said he was.... please don't put words in my mouth. I said he was stupid and deserved to be mocked for his stupidity since he refuses to acknowledge it.

but he's stupid,

Exactly...we've already established the difference between an ignorant person and a stupid person on another thread. I have the utmost compassion and simpathy for ignorant people.... probably because I am one. However, I DO NOT show simpathy for stupid people because in my personal experance, doing so just encourages them to be even more stupid.

Yes he's ignorant,

No, he's stupid....or a liar, or both? He claims to have been raised in the outdoors, and yet he still blaims bear for HIS multiple mistakes.

Exposed sure, but mocked, I'm not so sure.

So it's ok to expose human stupidity, but we should be very serious when we do so? No lauging at the stupid people? Why?

Well not everyone who ever enters a forest is an expert at all the dangers in the forest. Ideally maybe they ought to be,

"Maybe?" You have some question in your mind as to whether or not a person should educate themselves before entering potentially dangerious situations?

but life is just more complicated than that, and people often do things that they don't fully understand the dangers of - they may be partially to blame, but still, have a heart!

In the situation we're discussing, the man claimed to have been taught the dangers since childhood, yet he still showed reckless disregard for his own safety, then blamed bear for acting in a very predictable manor, and blamed the government for not allowing the slaughter of bears during their mating season.

That just comes off cold.

There's a very fine line between "cold" and "rational"

You cared about Gimpy's limp but not about some person getting mauled nearly to death?

When someone like Mr. Kibble earns themselves a do-over, I do not mourn. I save my sympathy for people who will benefit from it.

How do you know Gimpy didn't get that limp because of a lack of awareness on her part? Did you consider that she could be partially or even fully to blame?

It doesn't matter to me how Gimpy got her limp, what matters is that she's not limping around blaming everyone else for her troubles.....and suggesting the mass slaughter of innocent life because she doesn't want to take responsibility for her own situation.

If so, would you still care, or would you root for whatever hurt her, and hope for maximum damage?

Well, since mass depopulation seems inevitable, I guess I am kinda hoping the really stupid humans get to go first.

 

[Guardian]

Hi Guardian,

I get the feeling this is a powerfully emotional issue for you

Yes it is.

and perhaps an excellent opportunity to examine and observe yourself.

No "perhaps" to it.... everything I do is an excellent opportunity to examine and observe myself :)

Did you notice you are putting an animal ahead of a fellow human and yet you know neither.

Yes I did notice that. I frequently put nature ahead of a "fellow human's" perceived wants and desires. You could even say it's a regular habit.

I feel you have made several assumptions and broad statements about this person and yet you know very little about him.

I know what he did, and what he said....and that's all I've commented on?

You seem so blinded by your emotions that you cannot muster an ounce of concern for him.

Oh I could if I wanted to...emotions are after all a choice. I chose not to show an ounce of concern for him because he would not benefit from it, and neither would the bears he wishes to have killed.

And yet you assume the bear was perfectly in its right to do what it did.

Absolutely, bear was a bear in bear territory. He did nothing unnatural, unexpected or unpredictable.

I don't like seeing anything die, but I try to understand why some people chose to hunt and others are satisfied to leave the killing to slaughter facilities.

I perceive a HUGE difference between killing for survival and killing for SPORT. All life consumes other life to live, this is a given....but only humans destroy life needlessly, just for the "pleasure" of killing. Headless and hide-less carcasses are left to rot like garbage during "hunting season" by walking ego sacks who find the slaughter of wild animals amusing.

Is it possible that hunting is ok in some cases?

For food yes.... for "sport" NO!!!!!

Could this have been one of those cases?

Absolutely, the stupid human was grubbing around in bear's food range so yes, I believe bear was completely justified in hunting him down, chasing him up a tree, and biting him in the butt repeatedly.

Is it possible that the moratorium on the spring bear hunt has increased bear populations to the point that they are now found in places they would have never be seen before?

Not according to the studies in the links Heimdallr provided

Is it possible that the reason the person made the comment about reinstating the bear hunt was because a bear attacked him in a place where bears had never been seen before and not because he was making excuses for mis mistakes?

Since Mr. Kibble stated that he left his pepper spray home, it stands to reason he knew there were bears in the area.

Just some thoughts you might want to consider if interested.

Thanks but I've heard all the "We want to slaughter more wildlife for fun and profit" arguments before....nothing new here so far.

 

[Guardian]

I got that limp from MS. How did I get that? I don't know, but am beginning to suspect many years of neurological damage from eating wheat, corn, and soy, among other nuerotoxic foods. That would stem from ignorance. ;)

In other words, you know you're ignorant...so you're NOT stupid. ;)

It's not nice, or pretty, or even externally considerate, but that's the reality.

...and we are both fast approaching the age when "reality" is that annoying time between naps :P

 

[judyanderson12]

Once when I was living in east Texas I was in a craft store waiting to get a frame done and observed a mother with her 8 yr. old son who was there to get a frame for his picture of his first "kill" on a hunt with his dad. Gotta say, it made me feel very sick. Yet I also remember as a child watching my grandfather head down to the pond with a sack of puppies (to drown) because they had too many dogs as it was -- they also had 13 children. I could paint a fuller picture of his life, but suffice it to say, there are lots of cultural things that are difficult to comprehend, but the only aspect of it I have any control over is my actions.

 

[Guardian]

For years, the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (O.F.A.H.) has warned the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) that the cancellation of the spring bear hunt and its replacement with the provincial Bear Wise Program would negatively impact public safety.

What the people who want to kill for fun and profit are saying is completely contradictory to what the independent study concluded.

In response to growing concerns regarding black bear–human conflicts, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) commissioned the Nuisance Bear Review Committee (NBRC) during 2003 to examine black bear–human interactions throughout Ontario. To some residents, the increasing human–bear interactions have resulted directly from the MSBBH. Yet, while the NBRC did not find “any connection between the cancellation of the spring bear hunt and recent increases in nuisance [bear] activity,” it did recommend that “a limited spring black bear hunt be re-instated for socioeconomic reasons, but under strict conditions” (Poulin et al. 2003)

Humans have grossly overpopulated huge regions of the planet, to the great determent of the planet. Does this fact give 4D Beings the right and justification to terrorize, hunt and slaughter us for their sport and gain? Maybe we should let them start in the nurseries and kill us dangerous, over populated humans while we're still young?

 

[Guardian]

I must have read too much into your choice of words and apologize for coming to the wrong conclusion, if I did. But it did sound to me like you were blaming the victim.

I think you might have confused my posts with Gimpy's? I'm the one blaming the "victim" I think what happened to him was his fault, because he was stupid. I blame him and not bear, or some unproven notion of "too many bears in the woods" being promoted by people who want to kill bears for fun and their own personal gain.

 

[Guardian]

Once when I was living in east Texas I was in a craft store waiting to get a frame done and observed a mother with her 8 yr. old son who was there to get a frame for his picture of his first "kill" on a hunt with his dad.

To me, this is an example of ego in action....

Yet I also remember as a child watching my grandfather head down to the pond with a sack of puppies (to drown) because they had too many dogs as it was -- they also had 13 children.

...and this is an example of a painful necessity.

I could paint a fuller picture of his life, but suffice it to say, there are lots of cultural things that are difficult to comprehend, but the only aspect of it I have any control over is my actions.

That's all we need. Hopefully, if we pick good, our actions will affect the actions of others in a positive way, then their actions will affect others ...and so on. :)

 

[Gimpy]

Gonzo, you are showing evidence of black and white thinking:

I derived the sense of you blaming the person because of your statement that it is just the risk of going out in the woods, which in my mind, equates a blaming of the victim, especially when you coloured your post with the earlier statement of rooting for a bear in such an encounter between bear and man and your mention of having no feelings for the man.

I don't think that having empathy for someone is letting emotions rule you. If you think the work means not having empathy for fellow humans, then the Work will lead you to something close to psychopathy.[/quote]


[quote]I often wonder if one of the reasons that many of us have a history of despising mankind for its conquest over nature and a preference instead for nature to beat man down, is actually another case of lizzie meddling, creating more divide and conquer. I had to make a concerted effort to rediscover humanity after hating it for so long.

The above quotes show an either/or, black and white thinking tendency, Gonzo. In your thinking, as shown above, a person has your idea of empathy or they have none. People either despise mankind or they don't. You seem unable to see any other alternative.

You keep putting Guardians words into my mouth as well, and I think she's right when she wonders if you've confused us with one another. She and I see things in similar ways, but we are not cookie cutters of one another. :) (though I think she'd love my martial arts street cane, and way cool "Fallen Foo" Kata's) :D


Another quote in bold points out what appears to be the crux of your upset: "I had to make a concerted effort to rediscover humanity after hating it for so long."

I don't hate humanity Gonzo, nor do I do a happy dance when someone is damaged by their ignorance, or stupidity. The C's have made it plain "You play in the dirt, you get dirty."


Did you consider that being mauled by a bear is part of this man's lessons? He said he comes from a hunting family, but displayed none of the woods-sense of a person raised in one. What good will it do this man to feel sorry for him? Not feeling sorry for him does not automatically mean having no empathy. It means letting this man learn his lesson without adding emotionalism in order to say you care.

 

[Beau]

I blame him and not bear, or some unproven notion of "too many bears in the woods" being promoted by people who want to kill bears for fun and their own personal gain.

Do any of the hunters use the bear meat and fur? Or are the bears just hunted to reduce populations?

 

[Guardian]

Do any of the hunters use the bear meat and fur?

Some hunters use the meat, and some leave it to rot because "it's too heavy" The point is that they are not required by law to harvest the meat, either for their own consumption, or to turn it over to a food distribution to the needy program.

They don't have to work...they just pay to play. Death for a few dollars.

Or are the bears just hunted to reduce populations?

The bears are killed to generate revenue for local businesses according to every paper I've read so far.... including the one you pointed me to. The most recent count of Canadian bears that I've been able to find was done in 1994. It found the bear populations to be mostly "stable"

http://wildlife1.wildlifeinformation.org/000ADOBES/Bears/Bears_IUCN_ActionPlan/bearsAP_chapter8.pdf

While there are many "estimates" being made by hunting organizations (who stand to profit handsomely from the killing) no one wants to pay for a study to actually count the bears.

 

[Guardian]

though I think she'd love my martial arts street cane, and way cool "Fallen Foo" Kata's) :D

Ohhhh, I wanna see...got a picture?

 

[Aaron r]

Fwiw I don't think mocking and laughing at other peoples supposed stupidity is cool. Aaron

 

[Gonzo]

I blame him and not bear, or some unproven notion of "too many bears in the woods" being promoted by people who want to kill bears for fun and their own personal gain.

Do any of the hunters use the bear meat and fur? Or are the bears just hunted to reduce populations?

Hi Heimdallr. I know from living rurally for a while that sport hunting is really frowned upon, regardless of the prey. The only time I have witnessed a form of sport hunting is catch and release fishing derbies, where people catch a fish, measure and document the catch and then release it. I personally can't understand how people think this causes no significant harm (except for the occasional ripped lip) and, when I was young, used to wish such anglers could experience having a hook set in their cheek in the hopes they could develop a greater sense of the effects of their actions.

Since I don't involve myself with hunting or fishing, I decided to look up the various laws for my own satisfaction and to try to answer your question factually instead of based on my subjective experience.

Apparently, in Ontario, it is actually against the law to let hunted game meat spoil. You can't just kill game for the head or some other trophy piece. There is, however, a disturbing black market of poachers who kill bears strictly for their intact gall bladders (that contains bile) to be sold to Chinese consumers, who follow traditional Chinese medicine. Bear paws and bile are huge industries and stories abound of bears having the gall bladders removed while alive so the recipient can somehow benefit from drinking the bile of a living bear.
For more on this, check out "WHY GALL AND BILE?" at _http://www.arktofile.net/pages/why_e.html or, from the same website, info including a film about bile farms, called BEAR PHARMinc. - _http://arktofile.net/dafreebears.html

The main lobby group for hunters (the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters) have a brochure where they specify what is expected of "responsible hunters" - bearing in mind that this is perhaps as much about PR and creating optics as it is about education...:
From OFAH's "Responsible Hunting Brochure", available in PDF at _http://www.ofah.org/hunting/index.cfm?ID=19

Respect for Wildlife
Hunters have a deep respect for the animal they pursue.
Their interest in wildlife extends beyond the field, and
their concern for wildlife and the environment extends
to nongame and endangered species.

The responsible hunter is prepared, confident in their
abilities, and aware of their limitations.

• They shoot only when a quick, clean kill is assured, and forgo the long-ranged or obscured shot that may wound an animal or be unsafe.
• They make every effort to avoid injuring game, and go to great lengths to retrieve a wounded animal.
• They are not wasteful. Hunters make full use of the animals they take and are aware that it is against the law to let game meat spoil.
• They measure the success of the day by the quality of the outdoor experience, not by the game taken.

It is actually a rather interesting regulatory environment. Anyone who gets a hunting permit for the fall bear hunt (since the spring bear hunt is currently under a moratorium) has to go through a reporting mechanism after the hunt, regardless if they catch a bear or not. The Ontario Ministry of Natural resources apparently uses these reports for statistical and analytical purposes to better understand and manage black bear populations.

Here's a brief history of the regulatory environment regarding bear hunting in Ontario:

• Before 1961, the black bear had no legal protection. In fact, they were classified as a nuisance and their killing was encouraged - between 1942 and 1961 an average of 850 bears were turned in annually to collect a bounty from the province.
• In 1961 the black bear was officially classified as big game, which ironically afforded the species greater protection as there were no restrictions on their hunting prior to this classification.
• In 1987, the province created the Provincial Black Bear Policy and Program, managed through the ministry of Natural resources. Through this program, several restrictions were added to the hunting regulations to better protect bears, including prohibiting the hunting of cubs, mothers with cubs, shooting a bear in a den or withing 400 metres of a waste disposal site. As well, non-residents had to use the hunting services of bear operators (I'm assuming they are a form of guide) and had to fulfil specific reporting procedures.
• In 1996, changes to the legislation restricted hunting to one bear license per hunter per year.
• In 1999, further changes occurred, including the mandatory reporting of "problem bears" destroyed in defence of property, the creation of a licensing regime for tourist operators offering bear hinting services, licensing of dogs used in bear hunting and a penalty increase of up to $100,000 or 2 years imprisonment for certain violations. The hunting of bears while swimming; disturbance or destruction of dens, and possession of a gallbladder separate from the carcass were also prohibited.
  Also that year, the spring open season on bears was cancelled to address concerns about the potential orphaning of cubs during the spring at a time when they are most dependent.
• In 2004, hunters residing and hunting in parts of Northern Ontario where there were no sustainability concerns, were allowed to take a second bear.
• In 2005, the reporting of bear hunting efforts and harvests became mandatory.
• In 2009, the ministry created the Framework for Enhanced Black Bear Management in Ontario (OMNR 2009) to create a more consistent, science based approach to bear management across the province.

Related Links:

• Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources - _http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca
• Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters - _http://www.ofah.org

Regards,
Gonzo