*Blessed is he...

In a conversation with my supervisor yesterday, we began talking about Buddhism and what the tradition, at least its philosophical aspects, might think of the concept of 'hope.' Buddhism teaches us that we should not be attached to worldly things or anything of this life. One of the principled statements from Buddhism is that 'Life is Suffering,' which I explain a bit more below (a post I wrote elsewhere quite some time ago). When I was asked if there is such a concept of 'hope' in Buddhism, I was reminded of Alexander Pope's comment: "Blessed is he who has no hope, for he is never disappointed." This statement seems to fit right in with the Buddhist statements about attachment and suffering. If one does not love or hope for things, suffering is diminished and there is no disappointment. In the animated series 'the last airbender,' Aang says, "The monks used to say that hope is a distraction. So maybe we need to abandon it...We need to focus on what we're doing right now. And that's getting across this pass." In lecture, my supervisor mentioned how Colin Murray Parkes said that the price for love is loss. "He wasn't the only one to say it and he probably won't be the last to say it either." If there is no hope then there is no disappointment. And disappointment is suffering, discontent. If there is no striving, there is no fall; without attachment no loss. However, in Buddhism the aim is to attain enlightenment which is an act of striving or aspiration in itself. One could argue that although the term 'hope' may not be relevant and one limited to the western context, the sentiment of 'hope' the striving for a state that is better than the present one can be said to exist. Otherwise there would be no such thing as an enlightened state.

Here rather crudely, I offer some implications of the degrees of being content or discontent in our actions and speech. In a way, it is another method of framing the relationship between art and audience. What seems to be lacking or unaccounted for are the subtleties and nuances of feigning content or discontent and their extensions of expression. One could argue that the act of feigning one or the other because it is not "genuine" it will be represented in their actions or language. At the same time, we could argue that there are those who are very good at feigning contentment or discontentment. On another note, we could even say that these frames of contentment and discontentment are false dichotomies of looking at the relationship. There are many who say they are content with something but do not seem to be, or vice versa. How many would recognize their own contentment or satisfaction with life or recognize their discontentment? Part of the concern is the amazing ability to delude or deceive one's self in the sense Sartre speaks about 'bad faith.' Nonetheless, the post was written years ago and with some entertainment for thought I raise it again here. I cannot say with any certainty that I still agree or disagree but enjoy the act of pondering the subject:

 

The Buddha spoke of suffering as a discontentedness, dissatisfaction, or inner turmoil with one’s life. And no doubt we all have our own share of suffering in that sense, dissatisfaction with life or discontent with the way things are going in our lives. Albeit these dissatisfactions may vary from person to person and to various degrees, but nonetheless we all have them - even for those who seemingly don’t have any worries or those who seem to be in “control,” “cool,” “calm and collected.” Suffering exists for all; we all have our worries and concerns. Many may be content with one aspect of their lives but perhaps not in another. The multifaceted complexities of life are such that it is possible for degrees of content-ness and discontent-ness.

What becomes interesting in the manifesting actions, as a result of such content-ness or discontent-ness, are the behavioral and lingual expressions reflecting one’s current perspective on life. Naturally, expression is as varied and diverse as the nature of one’s contentment and/or discontentment. To this end I don’t want to go into the various forms of expression but rather the effects of such expression, the consequences of expression. It would seem plausible to categorize expression into three forms of affect: positive, negative, and neutral - and of course we have all the “gray” areas in between. Another necessary distinction is within the act of expression: the intention of the expression and the extraction from that expression. In other words, we have the intention of the expression whether it was directed towards some thing or some one or whether it was simply a method of self-catharsis that happens to affect another; and of course we have the simple observational statement that means nothing but the perception acknowledging the observation - perhaps in the type of intention directed at some thing or some one. In contrast, we have the extraction of that expression, which is the meaning or effect upon another from that expression. In this regard the expression and the effect of the expression may or may not be congruent with one another and may even be oppositely construed. Naturally the extraction of expression is hermeneutical and contingent upon the individual’s cognitive attention in what that person “wants” to hear or focus on. This may be a direct product of social nurture or conditioning in how to interpret or understand something. Similarly the expression itself is also a product of one’s social environment in how to express one’s thought efficaciously. Nonetheless despite our absorption of thought and modes of communication and interpretation, there is a tremendous gap between the communicator and the communicated. Many will extract based upon tone and the seeming gist of what is being said. In this extraction, the expression of the expressor carries a particular "energy" that influences or impacts, to varying degrees, the person who the expression is directed towards or any extractor of that expression, which would entail an absorption of that energy carried in the expression.

The energy carried in expression is then correlative to one's sense of self, self-esteem, and state of happiness - contentness or discontentness- as transmitted and extracted from those who those expressions are directed towards, and at the same time the extent or degree of impact that energy has on the person is also related to the receiving person's degree of self, self-esteem, and state of happiness - contentness or discontentness - as the energy is absorbed pursuant to that person's mood or disposition at the time of transmittance.

The output and intake of energy from one person to another lies in one's own degree of self and rendition of his or her quality of life. In this sense expression can be considered as an indicator of self in the measure of happiness, or rather, simply a reflection of one's state of being.