Very nice review Jay, Although I don't agree that death is an abyss, a hole that can't be filled. It all depends, I think, on how broadly my identifications and identity stretch. To the extent that one identifies deeply with broader domains of reality that extend beyond the organic individual, "death" becomes merely the passing of a constituent element and not something fundamental in and of itself. So the greatest pain of losing a child reflects this natural tendency to see this life force as the essential element (in this case as expressed in our own DNA) which when violated is extraordinarily painful to accept. On another level, this abyss of death can also be dismissed as illusion, as only the living have a concern with it. I'm sure you are really commenting on the degree to which we as humans do need to create methods by which we address this imperative to continuation, rather than suggesting it is really so impossible to address. In being selfless, we seem to really be acting in line with our oneness with others and so deepen this awareness that we are part of that greater and continuing reality.
That's "Jayarava", thanks - no need to shorten it in writing, there's no hurry, and the name actually means something which shortening it obscures.
I don't presume to offer answers to this problem. I have no experience of death personally - being still alive. A few close calls, and plenty of family and friends have gone beyond - I've seen a few corpses. Even killed animals. Enough for me to know that I do not understand death.
It is interesting to see where people find comfort in the face of death (I'm compiling a catalogue of afterlife beliefs). Glad you've found something that works for you, and I hope the child's death you are talking about is entirely hypothetical.
Certainly a nice orticle. As you may recollect that i have written something anout Thirumoolar,the saint poet of Tamil-Nadu, who have dealt such matters vividly. He says activeness and continiuty though the natural urge of mankind will ultimatly lead to grief and distruction. "Being motionless { keeping the beathing to mimimum or nil} is the most difficult thing a man can aspire" But once we do that that is the begening of etrenity.The deathless life --they are called Siddhar in Tamil people without body but only life. There are 18 such Siddhars in this universe, we are told. pl comment vasan
Vacha. No I don't recall reading anything by you. Thirumoolar sounds like a very disturbing individual. Tibetans speak of 84 siddha. Others of 84,000. Why would there be a limit? It's just a story someone has made up.
The demonisation of humanity is an ongoing aspect of religions - both western and eastern. I hate it.
I agree about the disconcert death brings in our lives (how could not I?). But why do you need Metzinger's premise? No matter how and why we achieved self-awareness (and I doubt we can have a precise knowledge of something which is by definition completely alien of our actual understanding), the idea that our life has an end is almost unbearable. In passing: I tend to see also the scientific idea of the persistance of genes as a conforting belief;-) "They" have nothing to do with "me" and to believe that they have, means upholding some sort of "religious" belief in unconscious entities like genes. Let us just face the disturbing truth of death and see (as you suggest) whether we can make some use of our short time here (for instance, by helping others).
We don't need Metzinger at all, but it was reading his book that made me think of it in this way. I'm interested in Metzinger's models and ideas - without necessarily buying into them.
I think most people look briefly at death and then very quickly find an "answer" to the problem so they never have to face it again. And all the better to be with a group of people all ignoring death in the same way. This is religion in a nutshell!
The central goal of Buddhism is often called amata or amṛta 'the deathless'. The Greeks had ambrosia 'undying'. Gods are immortal and everlasting in many religions - though one of the first sentences in my Pāli primer is devā cavanti (I'm sure you can work it out as the verb ending is the same as Sanskrit). Forever and ever amen. One could argue that even the religions which play down the individual personality do so in order to assuage the fear of death (as per what Earl wrote above).
I don't many people can really face death - I don't think I can do so with equanimity anyway. But doing something useful, helping people is always a good thing.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
[Image]In this post I want to look at a theme that I explored in my recent talk at the London Buddhist Centre (available on Free Buddhist Audio). Thomas Metzinger points out that evolution has imbued all life with a powerful urge to continuity. We humans experience this on a number of levels - we will do almost anything to ensure our personal continuity; and most of us will also try to ensure our genetic continuity by procreating. We share this fundamental drive with all life - animals, plants, and even viruses. Indeed a virus does little else except reproduce itself with no sense of purpose, but relentless efficiency. The 'urge' for continuity underlies all of our other basic needs - shelter, food, water, air. I did not see the film 127 Hours, but I know the story - a man is trapped by a boulder while climbing and after several days cuts his own arm off in order to get free. It's a true story. Likewise people survive through all kinds of adversity and oppression - concentration camps, ship wrecks, wars, and slavery. The survival instinct is extremely powerful.
But at the same time evolution has given us consciousness. Emerging (probably) out of our need to regulate our internal milieu and optimise our response to the environment we animals began to model our own internal states using our complex brains. At some point our awareness of ourselves became part of the picture - we became aware of ourselves as being aware. The advantages of this are manifold. We can better grasp social interactions because we can understand what another is feeling through emulating emotions; we can learn what others do by imitating them; and we can imagine various possibilities of action and weigh the consequences. The benefits of having an ego are huge, and in particular it allows us to be moral beings. If any other animals have this ability it is only very rudimentary.
But Metzinger also notes that with the evolution of this amazing new ability comes another kind of knowledge. The knowledge that we will grow old, become ill, and die. Death is a certainty. When we see a corpse we know that something we value is missing. We can hold decay at bay with preservatives such as formaldehyde or honey, but the corpse is only preserved and does not continue except as inert matter. Life leaves us, consciousness leaves us. Seeing a corpse can be a profoundly, existentially disturbing experience, but it is also entirely natural and inevitable for all living things to die.
This certain knowledge of the inevitability of death creates a conflict with our most basic and powerful drive which is for continuity. It is the proverbial irresistible force meeting an immovable object. Not continuing is an option few of us can really take seriously as an option because deep down inside our most singular and powerful drive is to keep going. We Buddhists have memorialised this conflict in the story of the four sights - in various different tellings the youthful Siddhartha sees old age, sickness and death, (as if) for the first time, and he is engulfed by the dilemma. In those days men and women left their home life and social ties to seek an answer - they were called śramaṇas 'toilers'. The Buddha to be joined first one and then another band of wanderers seeking the way to the deathless. Our story says that he eventually abandoned all previous methods and found the way on his own, and that this 'way' is what we pass on from one generation to the next. The details are specific to Buddhism, but the theme is universal.
Most human cultures have stories about post-mortem continuity, be it a return to earth (usually via some intermediate state) or arrival in some version of a perfect world. Although genuine nihilism does crop up from time to time, I think we are mostly naive eternalists. Almost all of these stories require consciousness to be distinct from matter, to be able to exist without a body - that is to say a mind/body duality. In Buddhism we even find it said that consciousness causes a body to come into being. Those who curate these stories -- priests -- often become powerful and rich, but at the very least they are usually respected and influential. However, even in the presence of powerful priests, ordinary folk will often maintain their own local traditions of continuity through local spirits and ghosts and the like. The interesting spin in India is that repeated rebirth came to be seen as a burden to be put down in favour of something more satisfying which the spiritual masters called variously brahman, vimokṣa or nirvaṇa.
Whatever we make of these stories - whether we take them literally or dismiss them, or find some compromise - we all face this tension between the continuity imperative and the certainty of our own death. The great magnitude of the tension is reflected in the grip we take on these stories - some people will kill or be killed before giving up their particular story. Many people are just not equipped to deal with the idea of death as a discontinuity, and most are not willing to see it that way. There often a hint of moral condemnation from religious people against those who declare that no continuity is possible. During his US Presidency George Bush apparently opined that an atheist could not be a citizen or a patriot for instance.
The fact of death is an abyss, a hole that can't be filled. It is not something we can fix on it's own level. But we can bring light to the situation. We can care, i.e. care about and care for other living beings. We can be kind and generous. We can be selfless. Although consciousness brings the abyss of knowledge of personal death, it brings the blessing of selfless acts of kindness. Ironically we find fulfilment in selflessness.
6 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formVery nice review Jay, Although I don't agree that death is an abyss, a hole that can't be filled. It all depends, I think, on how broadly my identifications and identity stretch. To the extent that one identifies deeply with broader domains of reality that extend beyond the organic individual, "death" becomes merely the passing of a constituent element and not something fundamental in and of itself. So the greatest pain of losing a child reflects this natural tendency to see this life force as the essential element (in this case as expressed in our own DNA) which when violated is extraordinarily painful to accept. On another level, this abyss of death can also be dismissed as illusion, as only the living have a concern with it. I'm sure you are really commenting on the degree to which we as humans do need to create methods by which we address this imperative to continuation, rather than suggesting it is really so impossible to address. In being selfless, we seem to really be acting in line with our oneness with others and so deepen this awareness that we are part of that greater and continuing reality.
Sunday, May 08, 2011
Hi Earl.
That's "Jayarava", thanks - no need to shorten it in writing, there's no hurry, and the name actually means something which shortening it obscures.
I don't presume to offer answers to this problem. I have no experience of death personally - being still alive. A few close calls, and plenty of family and friends have gone beyond - I've seen a few corpses. Even killed animals. Enough for me to know that I do not understand death.
It is interesting to see where people find comfort in the face of death (I'm compiling a catalogue of afterlife beliefs). Glad you've found something that works for you, and I hope the child's death you are talking about is entirely hypothetical.
Sunday, May 08, 2011
Certainly a nice orticle. As you may recollect that i have written something anout Thirumoolar,the saint poet of Tamil-Nadu, who have dealt such matters vividly. He says activeness and continiuty though the natural urge of mankind will ultimatly lead to grief and distruction. "Being motionless { keeping the beathing to mimimum or nil} is the most difficult thing a man can aspire" But once we do that that is the begening of etrenity.The deathless life --they are called Siddhar in Tamil people without body but only life. There are 18 such Siddhars in this universe, we are told. pl comment
vasan
Monday, May 09, 2011
Vacha. No I don't recall reading anything by you. Thirumoolar sounds like a very disturbing individual. Tibetans speak of 84 siddha. Others of 84,000. Why would there be a limit? It's just a story someone has made up.
The demonisation of humanity is an ongoing aspect of religions - both western and eastern. I hate it.
Monday, May 09, 2011
I agree about the disconcert death brings in our lives (how could not I?). But why do you need Metzinger's premise? No matter how and why we achieved self-awareness (and I doubt we can have a precise knowledge of something which is by definition completely alien of our actual understanding), the idea that our life has an end is almost unbearable.
In passing: I tend to see also the scientific idea of the persistance of genes as a conforting belief;-) "They" have nothing to do with "me" and to believe that they have, means upholding some sort of "religious" belief in unconscious entities like genes. Let us just face the disturbing truth of death and see (as you suggest) whether we can make some use of our short time here (for instance, by helping others).
Monday, May 09, 2011
Hi Elisa
We don't need Metzinger at all, but it was reading his book that made me think of it in this way. I'm interested in Metzinger's models and ideas - without necessarily buying into them.
I think most people look briefly at death and then very quickly find an "answer" to the problem so they never have to face it again. And all the better to be with a group of people all ignoring death in the same way. This is religion in a nutshell!
The central goal of Buddhism is often called amata or amṛta 'the deathless'. The Greeks had ambrosia 'undying'. Gods are immortal and everlasting in many religions - though one of the first sentences in my Pāli primer is devā cavanti (I'm sure you can work it out as the verb ending is the same as Sanskrit). Forever and ever amen. One could argue that even the religions which play down the individual personality do so in order to assuage the fear of death (as per what Earl wrote above).
I don't many people can really face death - I don't think I can do so with equanimity anyway. But doing something useful, helping people is always a good thing.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011