The Field of Zaadz, capitalism and the questioning of intention

While visiting family recently I perused through a collection of works from Kahlil Gibran and found in The Wanderer the following:

The Field Of Zaad

Upon the road of Zaad a traveler met a man who lived in a nearby village, and the traveler, pointing with his hand to a vast field, asked the man saying, "Was not this the battle-ground where King Ahlam overcame his enemies?"

And the man answered and said, "This has never been a bettle-ground. There once stood on this field the great city of Zaad, and it was burnt down to ashes. But now it is a good field, is it not?"

And the traveler and the man parted.

Not a half mile farther the traveler met another man, and pointing to the field again, he said, "So that is where the great city of Zaad once stood?"

And the man said, "There has never been a city in this place. But once there was a monastery here, and it was destroyed by the people of the South Country."

Shortly after, on that very road of Zaad, the traveler met a third man, and pointing once more to the vast field he said, "Is it not true that this is the place where once stood a great monestary?"

But the man answered, "There has never been a monestary in this neighborhood, but our fathers and our forefathers have told us that once there fell a great meteor on this field."

Then the traveler walked on, wondering in his heart. And he met a very old man, and saluting him he said, "Sir, upon this road I have met three men who live in the neighborhood and I have asked each of them about this field, and each one denied what the other had said, and each one told me a new tale that the other had not told."

Then the old man raised his head, and answered, "My friend, each and every one of these men told you what was indeed so; but few of us are able to add fact to different fact and make a truth thereof."

Follow this link for the online version and other works.

Besides the similarity of name, I feel this applies to our zaadz community in the sense of being cautious of holding onto or rigidfying a definite concept of what this community is 'about' and limiting the expression and consideration of perspective. This is not to say that structure is not warranted or intention should not be implied and supported, but rather to say that it is felt to be unfortunate this site is being structured around such a strong idealism as 'capitalism' with, what appears to be, the unwillingness for some true open consideration of what is felt to be the 'bottom line'. Sure, there have been some great debates on 'capitalism', but it feels to be more in the line with letting people blow off steam while the intent is set in stone, rather than a feel of open flexibility and willingness for change with this.

Unfortunately, I lost the link (and Brian if you read this and remember the discussion could you place a link?), but I came across a discussion between two or more members around 'capitalism' and noticed Brian's warning to one member that was strongly questioning it. Essentially that if he wasn't going to be positively supportive and was just going to 'piss' on people's expression, then he might not belong here. From my perspective though, this member was not 'pissing' or being disrespectful and in fact some of the other capitalism supporters were being rather sarcastic.

If what Zaadz is promoting as 'spiritual maturity' only allows for 'positive' feedback in the form of affirmations and sweet sentimants, how is this integral to existing in a world that does not function in this manner and can be rather 'dark and negative'? What is being supported? The maturity of self that stands strong in the face of adversity? Or the insecurities of self that feel the need to be 'comfortable'?

I totally understand facilitating a space that allows for open expression without fear of disrespectful retaliation, but there is also the ability to allow for strong debate that may get a little heated, but can be reminded, or exampled to, what is appreciated and most constructive. Not essentially told to get in line or leave.

I still feel the following questions are very relevant:

What is really being served? What is the bottom line intention that this site is in service to? What is truly being supported?

This stems from the honest feeling that egoic consumption placed as primary does not serve true spiritual unfolding, realization, and is not supporting the realities that today's world society is facing. Granted, zaadz is only just beginning, but from most of what I have read on the underlying intention and goals:

Zaadz' Busines Model: (aka: how we're gonna make money)
 
Zaadz: The first two months, today, the next two months & beyond!

...there is a feeling of mostly focusing on surface 'positive' appearances and actions in the approach to considering the effects of capitalism and industry in general. Essentially no different than the 'greening' movement of industrial corporations such as

Monsanto: saying and doing

Shell: saying and doing

Pfizer: saying and doing

Here is an article that reports on the infractions of corporations.

And for perspective on Whole Foods here is an interview with John Mackey, and these articles on growth and practices , plus this forum thread. How much can Whole Foods grow before they become more harmful than good? And is it already too late?

For more perspective about commercial/economic growth, here is an article titled 'The Elephant in the Room' 

(6/12/06 update: In cheking the links on this post, I noticed the page this link brought up was not the one I had originally seen this article on, it was this one from the Ecologist , but when I had attempted to use that link when first posting, it did not work, so I searched for another. I must not have looked over the page, because in viewing it today I looked at the bloggers 'About Me' and noticed this:

Name:Bill Totten Location:Kyoto, Japan

Bill Totten is founder and president of KK Ashisuto, Japan's leading independent distributor of packaged computer software for large organizations.

I recommend reading thier company philosophy . I haven't finished it or know if it's absolutely followed, but what I have read so far is great if it is. More soon...)

From what I have read it sounds like Mr. Mackey would be fine with dropping all organics if his customer base demanded it. If the stores growth increases the number of people that perhaps shop less consciously, are less concerned or knowledgable about true sustainability, but are attracted by the upscale image and 'healthy' appeal, then how is this any different than any other large scale corporation such as Wal-Mart?

The bottom-line still feels to be about the sustainability of the store's existence rather than the integration of true economic and ecological sustainability of the community it is in existence with. Not taking in the 'whole', yet pandering to egoic appeal by presenting an 'image of wholeness'.

Pandering in this case being: to cater to the lower tastes and desires of others or exploit their weaknesses. I feel it is unfortunate that he put profit above health by rationalizing that to exist the original store had to change to meet 'demand'. This brings to question: what is the initial intention of the effort? Is it to profit enough from a 'healthy' image so one can afford to become 'bigger and better' to promote a less healthy image. Or is there a true intention to support and example health no matter what the cost? Even if it means not being able to continue being a 'business'?

I worked at Good Earth natural foods in Fairfax, CA for about 7 months in '04 while they were in the midst of another expansion. It was obvious what they were willing to compromize on healthwise and in operations, while still projecting a 'sustainable small guy' image, and how it effected the workers and local community's perception of them. They denounced Whole Foods for a lot of thier practices and unsustainability, yet at the same time obviously sought to be more like them. It's an insidous pattern of being identified as a 'business', puting the business entity first, rather than being truly clear on it's practices, intentions and place within the whole.

I will add that, overall, I feel that most everyone there, owners included, truly had an interest in being a part of a 'healthy and sustainable' business and felt really good about working there. It was just when it came down to the finer points of operation and questioning what 'health and sustainability' is when things got a little murky. Because then the compromizes started adding up in light of the 'bottomline' of sustaining the business. But this is felt to be the general case with 'business as usual', that all over the world we are coming to see that how our system of exchange has developed is unsustainable, unhealthy, and what may serve the shift in 'relationship' is to truly examine what these unhealthy patterns are and how they have come to be.

A relevant quote on Capitalism
This was randomly found by a link in a Tribe forum.

"The problem with capitalism as far as I'm concerned, and there are many others as well, is that in fact it is a lose/lose proposition. It really does not work for the (artificially created) "haves" or "have nots." Capitalism as an operating system defaults to profit, involving artificial tallies on some mythical ledger. It is not at all about getting the work done, getting the stuff we need grown/manufactured and distributed, creating opportunities or encouraging good work habits. It's more like gambling, wasting resources on the chance of a hit. The rationale that ends up deciding what gets done for who becomes that artificial demand for wealth rather than any actual value added to the individual, the group, humanity, the planet, and so forth. Nobody's real interests get served."

From what has been expressed here on Zaadz, of the integration of 'capitalism and spirituality', it is felt that ultimately what is being served is a corporate industrial 'brand'. More in support of the ego's seeking for 'fullfillment and satisfaction', which is the underlying motivation of consumerism that has wrought much of the suffering on the earth and it's inhabitants, than in support of true awakening to the reality of self that is not in need of attaining anything 'more' or to 'become something better' to be whole, happy and complete.

The ever-present Wholeness that is aware of the full scope of existence, it's inherant connection, and how best to be responsive to it...not as 'some-thing separate' to supply the egoic entity with a sense of safety or satisfaction, but as Self that is naturally respected, loved and nurtured.

Here are two great essays that speak of the potential hazards of 'spirituality' and how it can be used as another distraction, just like anything else:

Get Serious by Melvyn Wartella

What is next ... after spirituality? by Steven Harrison

I just read this previous essay after writing most of this blog post, coming back here to insert this. I was looking for a link to another essay, but this one sums up better,
synchronistically enough, to what is expressed here.

Self-help only goes so far. Working on the many 'wrongs' of body/mind can be endless, which makes for a good 'physical/psychological/spiritual' market, and can be helpful to a certain extent, but if one is truly interested in getting to the heart of matters, then investigating the reality of body/mind cuts to the source of all 'problems' and reveals and supports wholeness regardless of appearing imperfections. This also supports any 'healing' or clearing up that may be helpful in relative relations.
 
This is not something 'spiritual', nor is it non-spiritual, and merely includes the willingness to not define 'who is doing what', to know before, during and after all appearances or experiences of 'Now', what is inherently unchanged, real and whole...and always Is.

The intention to support one's body/mind/spirit is beautiful, but we are faced with the reality of the possibility that we may not have much time left to ponder and play, to attempt to perfect the body/mind. 

My true interest and intention in life is to support awareness that fears not any imperfections of self, that faces 'darkness and negativity' openly, this that is the Heart of all being. If there is room for this here at Zaadz I will feel grateful to be a part of this community. If not, then I will depart and may all be well.

Namaste, Skeye