After death, animals in nature undergo decomposition and weathering to complete the ecological cycle, while humans are cremated and buried in the ground after death, and no longer participate in the transformation of life energy.
Does this feel "unreasonable"?
From the parting of ways with the lower animals, human beings have developed civilizations, and we have survived and disappeared in society, seemingly beyond nature, but in reality, human beings have never really left the confines of the earth's ecosystem.
Does taking resources from nature and then using them in nature not lead to the depletion of resources, does it mean that we have not violated the law of natural cyclical development?
Destroying the natural cycle or respecting life? In the natural ecological environment, the food chain is intricate, and each species has its own restrictions and responsibilities to maintain the ecological cycle of the earth.
Whether the practice of cremating remains is contrary to this ecological law is worth considering.
From plants to microorganisms, from vegetarians to carnivores, nature maintains ecological balance through the cycle of life and death. It is often seen that animals are often left in place after death, or floating in the water, showing the cycle of life.
After the end of life, the changes in the body are noticeable. It is either eaten by other animals on land or in the sea, or it is broken down by microorganisms in their environment. Eventually, the parts that cannot be reused are returned to nature and become nutrients for the soil, entering a new cycle.
Nature's ecosystems are some of the best on earth"How it works", after countless years of evolution, it has also given birth to many effective"tools"。these"tools"Assist nature in the recycling of most organisms on the earth's surface, including the well-known scavengers such as earthworms, vultures, termites, etc., as well as some common carnivores.
Behind the seemingly unharmed phenomenon, there is a question worth pondering. In natural ecosystems, animals survive through energy cycles, but what about humans?
Are we also animals, and do we follow the same ecological laws?
Even if the species are different, the contribution after death is the same, and each organism can be turned into spring mud to provide nutrients and heat for other creatures, showing the fairness and harmony of nature.
If human beings, as highly evolutionary creatures, become independent from the natural cycle because of the evolution of civilization and create a new way of post-mortem treatment-funeral system, then does this mean the destruction of the development of the natural cycle?
Cremation is generally accepted in our society today.
When human life comes to an end, we choose to send the body to the crematorium, where the hot tongue of fire consumes all the muscles and organs, leaving only some ashes and bones that cannot be destroyed by the fire.
The energy released by the human body during the combustion process is like providing fuel for a fire. However, compared to nature, this part of the energy seems to be wasted.
If humans are placed in their natural environment, their energy will be absorbed by living organisms, just like other animals.
From the point of view of the biological chain, substances such as fats and proteins are absorbed by the upper animals, while some tiny organic matter is broken down by bacteria and fungi and finally becomes part of the earth.
It has been argued that the act of human cremation is tantamount to wasting these valuable substances.
The ashes are sealed and buried deep underground, which is difficult to solve for thousands of years and stench for 10,000 years. Human beings depend on nature, but they deprive them of nature, and they cannot return to the ecology after death.
Together, we call for environmental protection, because to protect the environment is to protect ourselves. Human beings are closely related to nature and cannot survive independently from the nourishment of nature.
Should we revisit our funeral practices and consider whether they are wasting natural resources? Looking back at history, we can look to the funeral methods of the ancients to find the answer.
02 The ancient Chinese burial system, which retains the intact body to show the glory and wealth of the world after death, is actually a manifestation of feudal superstition.
With the rapid development of modern science, people's belief in the afterlife has gradually weakened, and the study of ancient tombs has become more and more in-depth. These ancient tombs are not only witnesses of history, but also precious materials for the evolution of mankind itself.
Mausoleums in nature, which do not decay for thousands of years, are called "tumors". In order to build mausoleums, the ancients did not hesitate to use various materials for waterproofing, anti-corrosion, and anti-theft. Some princes and nobles are even more extravagant, and the articles and ornaments in the tomb are still well preserved, and the burial goods are abundant.
These mausoleums are full of treasures of ancient cultures that are worth exploring and studying.
Despite their great value for modern archaeology, these relics pose a potential threat at the ecological level of the planet. After the death of living organisms, they are not naturally recycled, but instead "expand the field" underground.
Moreover, the space they occupy cannot be naturally decomposed for thousands of years, and can almost be considered permanent.
From a modern point of view, this kind of behavior is undoubtedly a waste of land, human and material resources, extremely detrimental to the development of the environment, and not conducive to the reuse of energy.
Of course, the ancients did not have the long-term vision we have now, and their cognition was still stuck in the myths and legends of the gods and the earth.
The ancient burial system was able to be preserved intact because of the abundance of resources at that time, and the population density was not high.
With the continuous progress of society, the means of production of human beings have undergone earth-shaking changes, our use of energy has reached the limit, and at the same time, the rapid development of medicine has also extended the length of human life, so that the number of people has shown a significant increase.
In countries with fixed territory and limited land resources, cremation of ashes for burial is more sensible than traditional coffin burial in order to make more efficient use of land. According to statistics, modern Japan has one of the highest cremation rates, which also proves the feasibility and advantages of this practice.
The lower the per capita land resource ownership of the country, the more the burial area is compressed, and cremation has become the main way to save and reuse resources. By looking at the evolution of human burial, we find a problem.
From coffins to cremation, human improvements in posthumous arrangements have always stemmed from more efficient considerations of social activities.
Have we ever wondered if these funeral systems can be sustained when we think outside the box and look at them from the perspective of a global ecosystem?
Unfortunately, these practices are already quietly taking a toll on our environment.
In today's world, cremation has become the main way of human burial, not because it is loved by humans, but due to the increase in population density, which is 1 per second on EarthEight people died.
However, the impact of cremation on the ecological environment cannot be ignored.
While cremation is not as widely used in all countries as in Japan, the number of cremations is still quite significant globally. But from an environmental point of view, the cremation process will actually bring a certain amount of pollution.
To initiate the cremation process of the human body, diesel fuel is usually used, resulting in an increase in temperature. In this process, a large amount of greenhouse gases are released, which undoubtedly wastes the energy of the human body, while also consuming more available energy and emitting pollutants that are harmful to the environment. ”
While the impact of individual cremation on the planet may be minimal, the potential risks posed by this practice cannot be ignored as the population grows and cremation rates rise.
There are many kinds of organisms on the earth, and although humans are the highest in the ranking, we cannot maintain an absolute advantage in the face of the huge number of other biological species.
It has been argued that the resources consumed by human death are insignificant compared to the waste of being alive. Taking the food chain as an example, the energy in the earth's ecology is transferred from plants to animals, and then to higher animals or humans, and the energy conversion rate of each layer is gradually decreasing.
The initial conversion rate was only around 5%, and as the levels increased, the energy consumption of each link increased. The "waste of resources" that humans can cause in the process of growing up is even greater than the waste caused by cremation after death.
This argument is not nonsense, and in practice, it is.
Despite the efforts made by humans to protect the Earth's ecosystems, they are insignificant compared to the over-exploitation of natural resources.
It's like Earth Hour, which makes up a negligible percentage of the year's resource utilization, but it can save a lot of energy in just one hour, and it has a real effect.