Peter 3:15
contains the following advice: “Always be ready to give answer to anyone who
asks the reason for the hope you have.”
In the
little essay, I will attempt to do just that. (Admittedly, the hope I have is on
somewhat shaky grounds; nevertheless.)
We have
learned in the first part of this essay what the problem, as I see it is: how is
a human being to maintain faith in the goodness of existence when faced with
the reality of death? A faith not based on wishful thinking might not be easy
to obtain, but it is possible.
In the
first section, we discussed the human situation. Chance, as many scientists
claim, might have initiated life, but once replication began, the Darwinian laws of adaptation to the
environment and survival of the fittest replaced chance as the drivers of
evolution. The will to survive is essential to all life forms, especially
conscious life forms. For most creatures, death and aging are not problems,
because they lack the intellectual capacity to experience them. Not so with
humans, who have an acute awareness of ‘that bourne from which no traveler has
ever returned.’
What
happens when the will to survive confronts oblivion? Myths arise; belief
systems that assert reasons that counter that ultimate bad reality, death.
According to most religions, cessation of life is not final; justice, which
hardly exists on Earth, will be fully realized on the other side, for instance.
You were
perhaps confronted with such myths in childhood in one form or another; you have
also perhaps drifted away from them in adulthood. Yet a belief in a cosmically
meaningless existence is cold comfort to organisms programmed with the will to survive.
Regarding the meaning of existence, is it really the best option to stick one’s
head in the sand like an ostrich, until that dreaded high tide comes and sweeps
you away? Is diversion the best answer we doubting Thomases have?
Although
many pass through life without serious attempts to transcend ignorance, most persons, at
least those of my age, know something about life’s meaning. Research has proven
it; relationships, not fame or money, are the key to happiness. After many years, I
still remember many things from Martin Buber’s wonderful book, Ich und du,
which extols the centrality of relationship. He posited three forms of
relationship, namely, to God, to Nature, and to human beings. God, for
instance, can be thought of as a mysterious intimation of deep meaning when
experiencing a relationship, rather than the ‘man upstairs.’
Love, or at
the very least, mutual respect, relieves the isolations of the ego. Many
contemporary scientists and psychologists deny the absolute existence of the
ego, however. One of the fundamental tenets of all forms of Buddhism is
anatta, the conviction that the abiding self is a fiction. Maybe; but
without an ingrained belief in the importance of one’s ego, human beings
wouldn’t survive. How long would humanity last if we all decided to always turn
the other cheek? As Simone Weil asserted, those that live by the sword die by
the sword—and those that put it down die on the
Cross.
Yes, a
sturdy ego is necessary for survival; but if the ego is believed to be the only important thing in life, all
the evils of solipsism and selfishness arise, thus assuring that paradise on
earth is not on the horizon. What is it in us that cheats, whores, and begs, a
great dramatist of the past century asked. An unbalanced ego! If we are never
lifted beyond ourselves through love of others in the widest sense, greed, hate
and delusion, the banes of existence,
tend to rise. If the ego is unbalanced by love of humanity and devotion to
rewarding work; well, you know what happens; look in the mirror, turn on the
TV.
Prophets,
philosophers, etc. have known what it means to lead a good life, since very
ancient times. But what about the problem of death?
2.
In Part l,
I included a poem of mine about non-fundamentalist faith and secular knowledge,
which I repeat here:
The Scales
What does
this speck think it is,
One grain
become a black hole
Compact
beyond the cosmic scale
That tips
trillions of stars?
Albeit a
very vast bubble
That very
slowly breaks—
What does
the world think it is,
Denser than
its source?
Mere
observers find no answer here:
The needle
always points to zero
Until one
puts one’s hands down hard
on one pan
of the scales.
A mustard
seed on one side,
On the
other, galaxies—
Faith or
knowledge, I ask you,
Which one
matters more?
Well, it’s
time to put my hands down hard on one side of the scales. Namely, on the side
of faith. I define faith as an inner conviction that life has ultimate meaning,
despite any evidence to the contrary. But in my book, faith must transcend
knowledge, not flout it. How does it manage to do that?
We
mentioned that in earthy life, relationships, love, are most important.
Research has borne this out. The way to transcend ego in life is through loving kindness, no doubt about that.
But our inner lives aren’t everything; what about the cosmos, which appears
completely indifferent? If God does indeed control the universe, he is
certainly very silent about it.
There is
little evidence that cosmic meaning and personal meaning are related. We find
meaning in life through relationships, but what about support for us in the cosmos? I hold, as stated
previously, that awe is the proper reaction to the unimaginable size of the
cosmos and countless stare; for many of us, there is no hint of redemption
here.
How do I
keep faith in a meaningful cosmos then? My faith might be on shaky ground, but
it is faith, nevertheless.
In South
India, one of the names of the divine is Kadavul, which literally
means inside/outside. We have intimation of the inner meaning of life through
love in all forms; of the cosmic meaning of life, we have no evidence.
Here is the
leap of faith: inside and outside forms a unity. Thus, the universe will reveal cosmic meaning in
the future, albeit not any time soon. In the meantime, we believe that the
outer, cosmic meaning, not only exists but will somehow be revealed in the
future.
The
importance of relationship, after all, has been revealed, as the universe has
awoken compassion in humankind, relatively recently. The ‘outside’ revelation is to come.
In John F.
Haught’s provocative and splendid book, God After Einstein, the author
comes to a similar conclusion. (I picked up this book thinking it was a book
about physics; I was surprised to
discover that it actually a book about theology—Haven’t read one of those in a
long time.) He divides world views into three basic types. The first he calls Archeonomy,
the view taken by a majority of scientists. According to this, life may have
meaning on Earth, but it has no cosmic counterpart. Thus, for them, life is
ultimately meaningless. Inexorable,
impersonal laws govern the universe; life’s meaning thus dies when humanity
dies. Chance is the initiator and sustainer of the universe, not any entity
that might be called Father, as Jesus of Nazareth assumed. Haught’s view is as follows: humans are key to
the ‘awakening of the universe.’ Many scientists forget that the universe has
already awoken to compassion in ourselves, a cosmic phenomenon which is ignored
by ‘scientific pessimism.’ The second type of worldview, the typical religious attitude,
he calls Analogy. In this belief system, God lives in eternity, beyond
time, a realm which we will know better after death. Experience of eternity,
sometimes called cosmic consciousness, however, lacks evidence. Perhaps the
ancient Buddhists were right: according to the doctrine of anicca, there
is no permanence, everything changes. Thus, although they have a life span
much, much longer than humans, stars are subject to birth and death as well.
Eternity is thus a construct of the mind, lacking a counterpart in phenomenal
existence. The third view, the one the author accepts, is called Anticipation.
The universe reveals itself as it awakens in time, not beyond time. Knowledge
of cosmic meaning is therefore ‘not yet.’
In other
words, the Kada part of the divine, the inside part, has already been
revealed to us; the universe has awoken to love and compassion for as long as
human beings have existed. The -vul part, the outside part of meaning,
however, has not yet been revealed.
This is a
faith to live by. We are to find meaning in earthly relationship and experience
awe regarding the universe. In due time, however, we will fully understand “What is really going
on in the universe,” the subtitle of Haught’s book.
Faith
asserts that while meaning is found in our lives, it is somehow related to the universe
as well. The contrary view is that the universe is not awakening at all, and
that the dividing line between humanity and the cosmos is absolute. Your choice. The scales are waiting.
Yes, I’m
putting my hands down hard on one side of the scales, the side of faith. A faith
that transcends reason and logic without flouting either.
I conclude
with a poem I wrote after reading Haught’s book:
Be Not
Afraid
How dare we
tell our myth to hurry up?
It took the
universe an extremely long time
To awaken
compassion. Broken images,
What will
you be when cosmic healing comes?
Ash. Dust.
All goodness gone? Yes,
We still
await redemption. How long
Will
hapless flesh have yet to fail about
For that?
In the eye of creation, we motes
Imagine
cosmic love—Nothing lasts
While greed
and hate create
Expensive
gadgets? “They also serve
Who sit and
wait” Where is Milton now?
Dare we
expect resurrection?
Why do we
still love, hope, and care?
Our myth is
quiet, yet our myth survives—
Today we
are broken. Tomorrow we thrive.
The message
of this essay is contained in the title of this poem. Have faith.
