Is Life An Incurable Disease?
The infant is born howling
and we laugh.
The dead man smiles
and we cry.
Such a paradox. Is seems that death is the sole moment in a being's existence that is truly peaceful; at peace; without war. How is it possible that we, as humans, can be afraid of this moment?
In truth, I suspect that most people - if they should reflect and be honest with themselves - I suspect that they are afraid of other people/beings dying. Afraid of being left behind. Afraid of being alone and having to deal with those feelings without the person who is no longer available to fight in the wars.
What a species. How dare we deny peace? How dare we deny tranquility and openness and acceptance and freedom?
Humanity. What a word. The OED offers three definitions
1. Human beings collectively
2. The quality of being humane; benevolence
3. (humanities) Learning concerned with human culture
We pride ourselves on our humanity.
We are proud of being human?
We are proud of our benevolence?
These two - human and benevolence - in my perspective, rarely co-exist amicably. Humans are not a benevolent species. An infant in born howling and we laugh? A dead man smiles and we cry? Where is the humanity is such emotions? We celebrate the pain of the infant being forced into the world, forced into consciousness. Does this infant want this? Does the infant have a choice?
The dead man smiles. He is finally free. He is a peace. No longer conscious. No longer at war. We mourn his freedom and his peace. Why do we mourn? Humanity is selfish. Humanity is ambitious in its own illusionary existence.
The political battles for power are no more than a lie - they are an attempt at a 'face-saving front' to hide the lie. It is unacceptable to steal your rivals' food / home / husband / life. So we pretend we're fighting for the good of 'others' - fighting to offer 'others' a 'better life'. What do the 'others' stand to gain from you battling it out, throwing vile words and sentiments, just to hold a position of power that is solely a construct of the imagination of a being that will finally no longer fight when the drag of consciousness departs.
How dare you fight on my behalf.
Do you fight because you fear to be overwhelmed by the illusion of your own consciousness? That consciousness will not will. Death will win. Why is it all about winning and loosing? There is, after all, only one solitary outcome. Death. The end of conscious awareness. The moment of peace and freedom. You cannot fight death. Death will overcome your consciousness no matter how hard you battle during your illusionary blink of being. You can fight to be rich. You can fight to be powerful. You can fight to kill others. Doesn't matter. It's all construct and it is not yours to hold. When the peace comes, you will be equaled. You will no be. There will be no you; no me; no we; no reality.
We spend our life working to better ourselves. What a nonsense. Precisely what will it achieve? A peaceful life? Contentedness? Prosperity? Hope? Love? Joy? Hate? Acceptance? Humility? Superiority? Death.
What is your end goal when you confront your emotions head-on and look at yourself? Your end goal is nonsense. The outcome is always the same and your impact, your individuality, your consciousness is just a temporary illusion that will end in time. The only question is how much time?
This very much depends upon what time is. An illusionary construct of conscious awareness? So why bother? I bother because my conscious illusion tells 'me' that 'I' exist. Therefore 'I' experience time even though there is no time. There is no me. There is no birth, ageing, or death.
So tell me, why do we do it? Why do humans strive for a sense of individuality. Strive for a peace within their being - in their mind or consciousness. A being that is only an illusion of the collective making. It is all entirely meaningless, purposeless and ultimately: it is not real. There is no peace until consciousness is extinguished. There is no freedom from consciousness until the moment in which the physical illusion is broken in 'death'.
Yes, yes, I understand the construct of 'enlightenment' but it is just another construct of the conscious human. Enlightenment of the kind that we all seek - however overtly - will come when we shed our garment of consciousness and 'die'. Then, and only then, will the imagined dressing of enlightenment be achieved and then, and only then, will it not be relevant. The moment that the 'I' is dead is the moment in which the overused term 'I' will be guaranteed in it meaninglessness.
We seek an unachievable enlightenment? And that seek is an inevitable and unavoidable part of the human condition?
Keep swimming.
This piece is meant to challenge and cause the reader to think. And it does! It makes me think of what we call the ego - or consciousness - that tends to label the unknown or the frightening in order to 'lighten' up the tension and fear of what in its many forms is felt as an expereince of death. I am a great lover of the works and the images of William Blake and he talks about the need to hatch out of a mundane and limiting 'egg' in order to enter into real life - that this requires the abandonment of petty assurances, repressions and rationalizations - of accepting life in its totality as it really is. I feel the author is exploring similar territory in her own right. It also makes me think of the phrase 'the psychotic drowns in the unconscious, the mystic swims' - if this is what you mean by swimming - keep swimming! Carol L.
ReplyDeleteVery true, death is final and the great equaliser.
ReplyDeleteThere is that middle bit between birth and death that creates the problems, the pain and the confusion. It creates the search for meaning and purpose.
Even if the Physicists and the Mystics are right in that matter does not exist - I for one and most others too live in that illusion of matter and relationships. And to hold that duality, if it is one, creates many problems. Truth becomes perception which is so personal. And then we, I start to turn around my own nose or ass and the process of I said you said, me right you wrong starts and all the confusion going with it.
If I take it more to the collective or historical my perspective stays still personal and somewhat painful but as Hannah says it does not matter so much - or does it?
even if we not bother or care it has a consequence personally or collectively.
The question that arises in me is how come we are so emotionally affected. Why do we take things so personal? Hannah raises for me many questions. Accepting death might include accepting life, accepting as it is?
One foot in front of the other - keep swimming - compassionately