Divorce
Divorce is painful. I am in the middle of one. It hurts, it makes you doubt and question everything you thought was worth something in life, such as love, fidelity, commitment, shared experiences. Divorce is a great way to flush your life down the shitter and see if it goes or if you survive and pull yourself free of the vortex sucking you into the sewer of broken marriages and broken vows.
My soon to be ex-wife tells me, which I find hilarious, that I'll be better off in the long run; she knows she's doing the right thing, choosing to be happy, la la la. Then she'll say "take care" when we get off the phone. It kills me -- "take care?" Does she care whether I take care or not? It's wonderfully blatant hypocrisy (wonderful because it's so unmistakable, so in your face, so, without a doubt, false sentiment).
I have trouble concentrating at work. I have trouble relating to people who have not been through divorce. I have trouble finding meaning in my life. I am trying, believe me. I read Viktor Frankel's Man's Search for Meaning soon after divorce began to take shape loom into view. I loved the book and felt I learned a lot. For one thing, no one's got more reason to have insight about suffering and how to end it than someone who's found well-being after surviving Nazi concentration camps or any kind of similarly horrid experience (unfortunately such experiences are all too common throughout history and even today, but we all like to think that Nazi Germany somehow realized and put an end to the deepest levels of depravity and suffering -- but I don't believe it -- I'd love to, but I don't see evidence for it). Another thing I read at the same time is Plato's Symposium, which is a Socratic dialogue on the definition of love. It was great and so true and even kind of Buddhist in its conclusion, but too much to go into here right now.
Pema Chodron, Tibetan Buddhist, talks about abandoning hope. She talks about how giving up hope completely is the best and, arguably, necessary beginning for a life of peace and compassion. Because there is nothing to lean on or hold onto in a non-theistic religion like Buddhism. Buddhism is realism. Hope is a grasping for something that isn't there and that we should learn we don't need. Why do we want what isn't there? Let it go. The real world that is here, right in front of us, is more than we could ever have hoped for. We just have to be willing to receive it by releasing our grip on empty hopes and fantasies and accepting what is as it is; things as they are. This message is not just Buddhist. We learn in the ancient Greek myth of Pandora that Hope is one of the evils of the world. When she opened the jar of evils and unleashed them on the world, Hope was the one thing that she managed to close the lid on.* Hello?! That means Hope was one of the evils! Anyone paying attention here in the West? The Greeks told us the same thing about the evil of hope over 2000 years ago. No westerner needs Buddhism, but a lot of us seem to only be able to understand our own culture and history by taking another look at it through a lens of something different such as Buddhism.
I thought of Dante's Inferno and the words over the gate of Hell: "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here." Well, Dante wasn't Buddhist, but he might agree with Pema that since there is no hope in Hell, you really are better off abandoning hope if that's where you find yourself. That sign on the gate of Hell isn't just a threat or a command to be obeyed: it's a message of love and compassion; your suffering will only be greater if you hope that it will end. Because in Hell, that ain't happenin'. Might as well enjoy it if you can, because there's no escape. Ciao.
* An anonymous comment when this post was originally published stated that in the original story Hope was "the only benefit left for man." I went back and re-read the story in Hesiod and this was my response:
My soon to be ex-wife tells me, which I find hilarious, that I'll be better off in the long run; she knows she's doing the right thing, choosing to be happy, la la la. Then she'll say "take care" when we get off the phone. It kills me -- "take care?" Does she care whether I take care or not? It's wonderfully blatant hypocrisy (wonderful because it's so unmistakable, so in your face, so, without a doubt, false sentiment).
I have trouble concentrating at work. I have trouble relating to people who have not been through divorce. I have trouble finding meaning in my life. I am trying, believe me. I read Viktor Frankel's Man's Search for Meaning soon after divorce began to take shape loom into view. I loved the book and felt I learned a lot. For one thing, no one's got more reason to have insight about suffering and how to end it than someone who's found well-being after surviving Nazi concentration camps or any kind of similarly horrid experience (unfortunately such experiences are all too common throughout history and even today, but we all like to think that Nazi Germany somehow realized and put an end to the deepest levels of depravity and suffering -- but I don't believe it -- I'd love to, but I don't see evidence for it). Another thing I read at the same time is Plato's Symposium, which is a Socratic dialogue on the definition of love. It was great and so true and even kind of Buddhist in its conclusion, but too much to go into here right now.
Pema Chodron, Tibetan Buddhist, talks about abandoning hope. She talks about how giving up hope completely is the best and, arguably, necessary beginning for a life of peace and compassion. Because there is nothing to lean on or hold onto in a non-theistic religion like Buddhism. Buddhism is realism. Hope is a grasping for something that isn't there and that we should learn we don't need. Why do we want what isn't there? Let it go. The real world that is here, right in front of us, is more than we could ever have hoped for. We just have to be willing to receive it by releasing our grip on empty hopes and fantasies and accepting what is as it is; things as they are. This message is not just Buddhist. We learn in the ancient Greek myth of Pandora that Hope is one of the evils of the world. When she opened the jar of evils and unleashed them on the world, Hope was the one thing that she managed to close the lid on.* Hello?! That means Hope was one of the evils! Anyone paying attention here in the West? The Greeks told us the same thing about the evil of hope over 2000 years ago. No westerner needs Buddhism, but a lot of us seem to only be able to understand our own culture and history by taking another look at it through a lens of something different such as Buddhism.
I thought of Dante's Inferno and the words over the gate of Hell: "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here." Well, Dante wasn't Buddhist, but he might agree with Pema that since there is no hope in Hell, you really are better off abandoning hope if that's where you find yourself. That sign on the gate of Hell isn't just a threat or a command to be obeyed: it's a message of love and compassion; your suffering will only be greater if you hope that it will end. Because in Hell, that ain't happenin'. Might as well enjoy it if you can, because there's no escape. Ciao.
* An anonymous comment when this post was originally published stated that in the original story Hope was "the only benefit left for man." I went back and re-read the story in Hesiod and this was my response:
The jar is filled with evils. Why would Hope be in there? Zeus prevented Hope from escaping out of the jar. Is Hope an evil that would have harmed men like all the others? Or was Hope a good thing that mixed in with the evils -- yet did not escape from the jar? Hesiod does not say.
Hesiod may be saying that there is no Hope for mankind anyway since only if Hope had been released from the jar would it exist in our world (whether it is a good or an evil).
I think it's open to interpretation. I'd be interested to hear what in Hesiod's text supports the argument that Hope was a benefit left for man.
posted by Scott M. Stirling | 12:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home