Friday, July 9, 2010

Betrayal




When we are first born we are nothing (as well as everything). We are equipped with specific tools chief of which is a sense of identity. It’s noteworthy that the first thing that usually happens is that we are given a name. The child opens its eyes and sees. And all it sees (it thinks) is a part of itself. It is only by learning the names of the people and objects around it that the divide between it and the outside world is established.

From there the child begins to make certain assumptions. He learns to manipulate specific objects - his mother, for instance - to get what he wants. She presumably knows what she must do in order to attend to his needs. He needs to eat; his diapers need to be changed. His dependence on her continues not as demand, but as expectation. It would never occur to him to say, “Thank you.”

The child’s name circumscribes his identity. His first allegiance is to himself (which now includes his parents). He does not see them as separate from himself. Later, as his world view expands, he must determine his own proper place within it.

No matter how complicated it may get, no matter how many paradoxes arise - all due to and resting on false assumptions - the shadow of his first life experience remains: I am (singularly responsible, either through my action or inaction, for) all I see.

Religion derives from identity and the desire to secure for oneself a place within eternity. In this, one’s assumptions become critical. Clearly the lion’s share of one’s efforts go towards achieving and maintaining one’s target position. The time may come when previous alliances and dependencies are no longer useful. These are then jettisoned. Guilt may arise from such acts as abandonment or betrayal that may have become essential to the service of one’s perceived (greater) self. Meanwhile, the shadow of one’s very first assumptions invariably come back to haunt.

Only saints are spared this dilemma. At this juncture ordinary people are faced with a choice: either to recognize and accept their limitations; or to strive for ever greater control on one hand, or utter dependence on the other.

Hinduism recognized this dilemma from the start. It created the caste system within which everybody is assigned their place. The promise of a higher entry into the next life (provided that one adheres honorably to one’s duties) helps the lower casts to endure. Only wise men realize that it is only a matter of appearances; that suffering as well as joy is spread out evenly among all.

In the West every individual is held responsible for his own fate, which (whether one admits it or not) extends to the afterlife. As we are our own severest critics the question of salvation comes into play. Liberals tend to fall victim to ego from which stems the infantile presumption of utter co-dependence with the universe. Therefore, for just one to be saved, all must be saved. Conservatives tend to harbor more modest ambitions. They are content with saving only themselves and perhaps a few others. They also tend to be happier, successful and self-satisfied.

Point of note: Identity drives all. This is why only a man of outside lineage can agree to commit an act of betrayal.

No comments:

Post a Comment