Lately I have been thinking that the point must be reached when scientists, politicians, artists, philosophers,
men of religion, and all those who work in the fields should gather here, gaze out over these fields, and talk
things over together. I think this is the kind of thing that must happen if people are to see beyond their
specialties.
Scientists think they can understand nature. That is the stand they take. Because they are convinced that they
can understand nature, they are committed to investigating nature and putting it to use. But I think an
understanding of nature lies beyond the reach of human intelligence.
I often tell the young people in the huts on the mountain, who come here to help out and to learn about
natural farming, that anybody can see the trees up on the- mountain. They can see the green of the leaves; they
can see the rice plants. They think they know what green is. In contact with nature morning and night, they
sometimes come to think that they know nature. But when they think they are beginning to understand nature,
they can be sure that they are on the wrong track.
Why is it impossible to know nature? That which is conceived to be nature is only the idea of nature arising
in each person's mind. The ones who see true
nature are infants. They see without thinking, straight and clear. If even the names of plants are known, a
mandarin orange tree of the citrus family, a pine of the pine family, nature is not seen in its true form.
An object seen in isolation from the whole is not the real thing.
Specialists in various fields gather together and observe a stalk of rice. The insect disease specialist sees
only insect damage, the specialist in plant nutrition considers only the plant's vigor. This is unavoidable as
things are now.
As an example, I told the gentleman from the research station when he was investigating the relation
between rice leaf-hoppers and spiders in my fields, "Professor, since you are researching spiders, you are
interested in only one among the many natural predators of the leaf-hopper. This year spiders appeared in great
numbers, but last year it was toads. Before that, it was frogs that predominated. There are countless variations."
It is impossible for specialized research to grasp the role of a single predator at a certain time within the
intricacy of insect inter-relationships. There are seasons when the leaf-hopper population is low because there
are many spiders. There are times when a lot of rain falls and frogs cause the spiders to disappear, or when little
rain falls and neither leaf-hoppers nor frogs appear at all.
Methods of insect control which ignore the relationships among the insects themselves are truly useless.
Research on spiders and leaf-hoppers must also consider the relation between frogs and spiders. When things
have reached this point, a frog professor will also be needed. Experts on spiders and leaf-hoppers, another on
rice, and another expert on water management will all have to join the gathering.
Furthermore, there are four or five different kinds of spiders in these fields. I remember a few years ago
when somebody came rushing over to the house early one morning to ask me if I had covered my fields with a
silk net or something. I could not imagine what he was talking about, so I hurried straight out to take a look.
We had just finished harvesting the rice, and overnight the rice stubble and low-lying grasses had become
completely covered with spider webs, as though with silk. Waving and sparkling with the morning mist, it was a
magnificent sight.
The wonder of it is that when this happens, as it does only once in a great while, it only lasts for a day or
two. If you look closely there are several spiders in every square inch. They are so thick en the field that there is
hardly any space between them. In a quarter acre there must be how many thousands, how many millions! When
you go to look at the field two or three days later, you see that strands of web several yards long have broken off
and are waving about in
the wind with five or six spiders clinging to each one. It is like when dandelion fluff or pine cone seeds are
blown away in the wind. The young spiders cling to the strands and are sent sailing off in the sky.
The spectacle is an amazing natural drama. Seeing this, you understand that poets and artists will also have
to join in the gathering.
When chemicals are put into a field, this is' all destroyed in an instant. I once thought there would be
nothing wrong with putting ashes from the fireplace onto the fields [Mr. Fukuoka makes compost of his wood
ashes and other organic household wastes. He applies this to his small kitchen garden.] The result was
astounding. Two or three days later the field was completely bare of spiders. The ashes had caused the strands
of web to disintegrate. How many thousands of spiders fell victim to a single handful of this apparently harmless
ash? Applying an insecticide is not simply a matter of eliminating the leaf-hoppers together with their natural
predators. Many other essential dramas of nature are affected.
The phenomenon of these great swarms of spiders, which appear in the rice fields in the autumn and like
escape artists vanish overnight, is still not understood. No one knows where they come from, how they survive
the winter, or where they go when they disappear.
And so the use of chemicals is not a problem for the entomologist alone. Philosophers, men of religion,
artists and poets must also help to decide whether or not it is permissible to use chemicals in farming, and what
the results of using even organic fertilizers might be.
We will harvest about 22 bushels (1,300 pounds) of rice, and 22 bushels of winter grain from each quarter
acre of this land. If the harvest reaches 29 bushels,
as it sometimes does, you might not be able to find a greater harvest if you searched the whole country. Since
advanced technology had nothing to do with growing this grain, it stands as a contradiction to the assumptions
of modern science. Anyone who will come and see these fields and accept their testimony, will feel deep
misgivings over the question of whether or not humans know nature, and of whether or not nature can be known
within the confines of human understanding.
The irony is that science has served only to show how small human knowledge is.
By "OneStraw Revolution"
No comments:
Post a Comment