"There are two kinds of sufferers in this world: those who suffer from a lack of life and those who suffer from an overabundance of life." Samsara as nirvana anyone? This is from the old guy in the cafe/bar/I can't quite remember what the setting was. I've been thinking about a distinction in types of suffering; one split I considered was between pain and suffering, but maybe calling it two kinds of suffering works best. It never sat right with me that suffering was necessarily negative. I interrupted myself writing this to check in with my friend Colin who studies Buddhism, and he led me to some interesting thoughts that I'll post on later.
"In hell you sink to the level of your lack of love; in heaven you rise to the level of your fullness of love." From a preacher guy on the television; a short clip. This caught my ear, not sure why. Does anyone have thoughts on this? Not quite sure what it means to me yet/what the implications are.
how about this -
ReplyDeletesuffering is not a negative thing. can't you suffer waiting for a good thing or isn't suffering usually somehow correlated to good or happiness? but suffering is obviously not a good thing right. so suffering can be not good without necessarly being bad. so isn't it therefore in between good and bad? Couldn't most things be described this way? As no absolute of two polar opposites but as something in between.
I am starting to not only question Phaedrus use of the knife, that which can cleave ideas. Not only question its usage but also valuableness as as a tool. Is something not defined by its opposite? Can you ever truly separate anything until its by itself if you can't even dislodge it from its opposite? I think connections to an idea are more or less infinate. I defy to find a single idea of thing that can be defined solely by itself BY ITSELF.
No idea how this is applicable but the same more or less goes for metaphysics as a whole. there is a greek word that is useful - schole. it is the root of the word scholar. The word loosely means leisure but it means that you have the time where you are free from obligations. The distinction is that you are not just loughing on vacation or something - you are free from obligation like food or health problems so that you can stop worrying about your body and start thinking, studying things that are timeless and of a higher level of being then your physical existence. such is metaphysics. a study.
i think its interesting that part "caught your ear" because i definitely have missed it on my own cinematic waking life adventures.
ReplyDeletethe whole thing with my boethius "consolation of philosophy" study ended up being that philosophy brings him to enlightenment with the realization that the creator is perfect and thus cannot contain evil, therefore his creation (the world, humanity, etc.) cannot contain evil. what humans perceive as evil, bad or imperfect is simply the lack of perfection. and what this means in a larger sense is that perception is everything. humans or the self (the individual) is/are responsible for crafting their view of their circumstances.
so the response that resonates with me after reading this quote and considering it for the first time is that we as human beings have a huge capacity for love but that it is circumstantial how "full" that capacity is. if hell - what i visualize from cultural knowledge and the words connotation as the worst possible place - is simply where we are with absolutely no love then we can deduce that the speak places a profound value on love. also from our perception of it, love is important and must be cherished and not taken lightly - i'm speaking of love in a large generality since no specifications were made to define whether or not we're talking about romantic love, familial love, etc. but i think that part of the point of this excerpt is that even in general terms everyone has the capacity to love and to put one self in a position without love is the worst imaginable existence and to open oneself and perceive love as attainable is to become closer to the divine, a sort of salvation or state of holiness...
Jumping right in off of that last sentence: I think I understand what you mean by holiness or divinity, but the words are loaded with the implication of transcendence and removal. Kierkegaard, in Fear and Trembling, talks about the "Knight of Faith," an individual whose faith in God is complete. A quote:
ReplyDelete"Most people live dejectedly in worldly sorrow and joy; they are the ones who sit along the wall and do not join in the dance. The knights of infinity are dancers and possess elevation. They make the movements upward, and fall down again; and this too is no mean pastime, nor ungraceful to behold. But whenever they fall down they are not able at once to assume the posture, they vacillate an instant, and this vacillation shows that after all they are strangers in the world...One need not look at them when they are up in the air, but only the instant they touch or have touched the ground–then one recognizes them."
You can replace the "faith in God" part with the ideas we've been dancing around: fullness of love, embrace of Dynamic quality, etc. Kierkegaard goes on to note that these knights are at once "transcendent" but also firmly rooted in their stride; the MOST fully rooted, to be specific. There is no removal - I interpret the divinity/holiness reference in this light, I think.
Are the conclusions in your second paragraph Beothius' or your own? Curious about the perfection part of it. And Ben, I think you're right about the suffering thing - not positive or negative, it just IS. Does suffering have Quality? Suffering - is - quality, like everything else. The same question as "Does Lila have quality?" The question is self-defeating in its construction.