Only when I found, or accepted the ability to love did I begin to create a life according to my desires. This requires a perpetual deconstruction of old "self" to grow into a new "self." It may be cliché to use the butterfly as an example, but I am fascinated by the process this tiny creature goes through (mind you, I do lament the destruction of the caterpillar in the previous story, as it seems it didn't live up to its purpose. However, it served an important role/purpose for the hornet - something to keep in mind as this pertains to the the nature of sacrifice and its relation to death). The caterpillar is not free. It crawls and lives slowly. Only about 5% of them make it to adulthood and many die from their first feeding of the milkweed plant. It is certainly a stretch to compare, but as far as transformation goes, we could relate this to people.
How many of us are simply born into environments conducive to our temperaments, learning styles, minds etc. that provide for us the conditions needed to transform into "monarchs"? Few of us, if any. And if we should find ourselves resilient enough to make it to a transformative stage - should we not have compassion for the caterpillars we once were? I assume, for people, this state would be achieved near death (if one considers death by natural causes/old age. Certainly caterpillars can be gobbled up by prey - it doesn't mean they are butterflies!). The caterpillar is living a slow and rather arduous working life to attain its freedom/monarch state. Do people not have to work and grow, stage to stage, to progress in life and achieve an "enlightened" existence?
Doesn't a caterpillar look much like a plant stalk, and a butterfly - a blossom? Is it strange that caterpillars feed off of what they blend into, and butterflies feed on blossoms - also the final stage of a plant growth (before it turns to seed to reproduce other plants)? Does this suggest a process of transformation that exists in all life, and does it also have to do with the destructive/creative process that has been present since the "Big Bang"? Are we not seeing the creation of the universe in the transformation of a caterpillar to a butterfly?
(Photo source: The Caterpillar Lab - https://www.facebook.com/TheCaterpillarLab)
It is common to think of "things" as separate. The caterpillar is eating the plant. Or, is the plant becoming the caterpillar? The plant is being "destroyed" - killed. But, suppose there is one whole consciousness. The consciousness of the plant would be dying (transforming) into the caterpillar. Perhaps unconsciously we know this, which is why we call butterflies, "flying flowers." Essentially, they are! We also often say, "You are what you eat," without realizing what it actually means. I suppose that "sayings" lie between language and symbolism - symbolism which is often thought of as visual. I believe it is important to note that written and verbal language came after depictions, (cave drawings, magic, religion {cavemen used to draw animals on the walls believing it will attract them when hunting}). Perhaps this is because our brains learn primarily from visual stimuli, what we see around us. It is not strange to think that, even in the age of information, we can learn something new by simple observation of life/nature.
(It is important also to note that in the un-evolved state of the caterpillar, the creature is destructive to the plant as it feeds off of it. Yet, in its advanced form, it is fed by and lives harmoniously with the flower/plant.)
