Have you ever heard of this American couple who have raised two babies at once, and in the same way? One is their own child, and the other a newborn chimpanzee. "At first we write , the monkey was ahead of the little man on all counts, he walked, ate, was moving much more quickly and easily as his 'little brother'. But everything changed the day the latter could understand speech and use it. From that moment, as they say, he lost the chimpanzee in the mist! "
So who is better? In order not to demean the animals, I'll start by quoting a hymn. This is the best testimony I've ever heard to our animal friends: "We should give thanks to animals for their innocence fabulous and grateful to put on us the sweetness of their anxious eyes never condemn us "(1).
That already puts them at a high level. However, it remains that, in the experience of American couple, the little man, as and when it develops its faculties, is ultimately the best of its ability to improve. The animal will remain far behind him, even if he is ahead in the beginning.
This does detract from the praise given to the animals. It remains true, and, in my opinion, there is a reason for their "innocence fabulous", and "the sweetness of their anxious eyes" who do not condemn us. I see so the animal somewhat like a foolproof model of what we should be, we, as speakers. We who can deviate so quickly from our original innocence of childhood. We who are called to reclaim this "innocence fabulous", by fidelity to the divine law inscribed in us, not as an irresistible instinct, but rather by a secret speech to listen and put into practice. We, who are also called to put our eyes on the other, "never condemn them," as do so many animals, and as we usually do so bad!
could think: We like this model, animals only driven by their instinct , forfeiture for any human! It is true that they can not help but be what they are. That is precisely why they can be our model. On some points, at least, if we do not put in merit. Because normally they can not deviate from what has been programmed into them. He did not have the right, but we, we can, and often we do. It is a disobedience to natural law and divine. Disobedience was called: sin. Means leaving the axis that directs us to the truth and our happiness. Sometimes, we defined the sin: missing the target! I like this definition. Then again, who is the best, humans or animals?
(1) Christian Bobin .
0 comments:
Post a Comment