Rust and Stardust indeed!

A question I often ask myself - as does everyone interested in environmental issues does, I think - is: To what extent is degradation an inevitable process of the ongoing experiment with civilisation? Or to put it another way: did we get to the state we are in (both the glories of it as well as the darkness) unconsciously? And so, how on earth are we going to begin learning our way out of it?
A related issue is: What difference can I make? Or 1000 people like me. Or a million. Can we really do anything at all? Of course, I have often heard that the answer lies somewhere between yes and no. No, we might never change anything. Yes, we already have. No, we might never change anything. But Yes, it is important to keep trying. And keep trying we will. Some of us will give up, some of us will not, and some of us will give up and then resume.

On a deeper note, though, I can't help but think of all those who talk about the essential illusion of reality. By that I don't mean the absence of circumstance or cause and effect. These are Are, of course. But underneath them, there is this thought, repeated endlessly through the ages, but particularly well put by H.P. Blavatsky:
"The Universe is the periodical manifestation of (an) unknown Absolute Essence."
So, at the deepest levels, we do not know what turns the cosmic wheel. And, as Stephen Hawking put it, to know why it turns at all would be "to know the mind of God".
And yet, we all know that: "Yet, the Universe is real enough to the conscious beings in it, which are as unreal as it is itself" (another one by Blavatsky).

Is this enough of an imperative for continued action? That the universe is real enough? That is an open question and to some extent irrelevant in the everyday workings of environmentalism.
Yet, in opening the deepest basis of action itself to scrutiny, it paradoxically opens a path towards remarkable balance and perspective: The Universe is real enough to the conscious beings in it - which as unreal as itself. What are the tiny things that keep us from the 'deepest driving desires' which the Upanishads say form our true essence? And if the preservation of nature (read: beauty, wholeness, truth, whatever words you want to insert) is, as many have felt, a deep 'driving desire', perhaps the rest is really just rust and stardust.

Incoherent or simplistic as this may be as a justification for continued blood, sweat and tears, it is a thought that has shone one small white shaft of light into the dark place inside me that is filled with doubt.
And for that, I am grateful.

(On a slightly irrelevant note, and just to dispel some of the existential confusion the thought of not actually existing might have engendered (I do flatter my own post, I know), look at the talk page on Wikipedia's article on the Upanishads. It seems that these people could do well with reiterating to themselves the basic philosophy of the writings they so hotly debate: the rest is rust and stardust!! The 'divine hand' that prompted the scripture in the first place must be laughing its sides out.)