Necessary Destruction and Abusive Destruction

  1. Is destruction a law of nature?
    “It is necessary for everything to be destroyed in order to be reborn and regenerated. What you call destruction is no more than transformation that is aimed at renewing and improving living beings.”
    – Has the destruction instinct been given to living beings for providential purposes?
    “God’s creatures are the instruments that God uses for attaining the divine ends. In order to feed themselves, living beings destroy each other with the dual purpose of maintaining the balance of reproduction – which might otherwise become excessive – and utilizing the remains of their external envelopes. But it is only the envelope that is destroyed; the envelope is only an accessory and not an essential part of the thinking being. The essential part is the indestructible intelligent principle, which is developed through the various metamorphoses that it undergoes.”
  2. If destruction is necessary for the regeneration of beings, why does nature surround them with the means of self-preservation and conservation?
    “To prevent their destruction before the proper time. Any destruction that occurs too soon retards the development of the intelligent principle. That is why God has given to each being the need to stay alive and reproduce.”
  3. Since death should lead us to a better life and deliver us from the ills of this world, and should therefore be desired instead of dreaded, why do humans have an instinctive horror of it and see it as a cause for apprehension?
    “We have already stated that humans should seek to prolong their life in order to accomplish their task. That is why God has given them the self-preservation instinct: it sustains them in all their trials. Without it they would frequently give in to discouragement. The secret voice that tells them to avoid death also tells them they may yet do something more for their progress. Whenever danger threatens them, it is a warning to them that they must take advantage of the time God has granted them. But ingrates usually give thanks to their lucky star instead of their Creator.”
  4. Why has nature placed the agents of destruction side by side with the means of self-preservation?
    “The remedy beside the illness. We already have told you: in order to maintain balance and to serve as a counterweight.”
  5. Is the need for destruction the same on all worlds?
    “It is in proportion to how material each particular world is; it disappears altogether in a purer physical and moral state. On worlds more evolved than yours, the conditions of existence are altogether different.”
  6. Will the need for destruction always exist for humankind on the earth?
    “The need for destruction diminishes among humans to the degree that their spirit overcomes matter. That is why you may observe that the horror of destruction follows upon intellectual and moral development.”
  7. In their present state, do humans have an unlimited right of destruction in regard to animals?
    “That right is limited to the need of providing for their food and safety. Abuse has never been a right.”
  8. What about destruction that exceeds the limits of need and safety: hunting, for instance, when it has no other objective than the pleasure of destroying needlessly?
    “It is a predominance of the animal nature over the spiritual nature. All destruction that exceeds the limits of need is a violation of God’s law. Animals only destroy to satisfy their needs, but humans, who have free will, destroy without need. They will be called to account for abusing the freedom granted to them because in such cases they yield to evil instincts.”
  9. Do those cultures that carry their scrupulousness to excess regarding the destruction of animals have any special merit?
    “Such excess is a sentiment that in itself is praiseworthy, but it becomes abusive and its merit is neutralized by other kinds of abuse. They act more out of superstitious fear than true humaneness.”

Contents
Home