5.22.2023

And Death Shall Have No Dominion--The Problem of Life and Its Possible Solution Part ll


 

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.

No comments:

Post a Comment