Subject: suicide + Yoga 101
From: Benjamin Samuels (madhava@sprynet.com)
Date: Mon Feb 28 2000 - 13:43:42 EST
----- Original Message -----
From: LR Pearson, Arts 99 <lp9616@bristol.ac.uk>
> I find it very difficult to imagine exactly why Seymour killed himself,
> it's one of those things which has been a "fact" for so long that it
> almost doesn't need a reason. However, I was thinking about the
> comments about suicide as a duty and, given Seymour's Messiah status in
> the Glass family, it could be that he felt that he simply could provide
> any more spiritual guidance, it was time for him to move over and make
> them get on with it. A bizarre kind of a duty, which inevitably
> backfired, as they were all haunted by his death rather than freed by
> it.
All this talk about Seymour as messiah and his death as a spiritual action
has got me thinking a little. One thing is that I agree with is that I get
this powerful feeling of love and respect for Seymour when I'm reading about
him. I think it's easy to see where this comes from. We are seeing him
through the eyes of Buddy who has never ceased to see him in just this sort
of light. We can ask all sorts of questions about what that means about
Buddy, and, serparately, we can ask about Seymour himself and about what he
did. When I think about Seymour it's hard for me to see his death as
anything but a cop out and a defeat. And it's obvious he should know
better. One point to back this up is that it is mentioned in _Franny_ that
Zooey still finds himself repeating the bodhisatvas vows before each meal
because of his early education from Seymour. These vows mean something like
even if I reach a point in my spiritual evelution that I can choose not to
be reborn, I will still take a human body for the sake of others, as a
selfless act. It was brought up in passing posts that we can interpret
JDS's books from one theological viewpoint or another but that it seems he
presents a certain, though not too specific, theological sort of perspective
in the books themselves. Buddy tells us himself exactly how he classifies
himself. though I don't have it in front of me to give you the exact ratios
that he says it in he describes himself as mostly a karma yogi with a little
jiana thrown in.
Heres some analysis of that in which I get a little carried away explaing
Yoga. Skip down to the next paragraph if you want to stick with the
discusion about Seymour. There is some scope for debate about how Buddy's
classification should be interpreted because there are so many different
schools of yoga that use these terms somewhat differently. I study and
practice yoga and am likely to be in tra become a sanyassi
or renunciate, monk, a year from now. From what I've learned these names
(karma, jiana, and yogi) are all from Sanskrt. There are different ways of
translating them, and the common understanding of the word karma is a little
off from what I have come to understand. The word karma literally means
work or action. What we often hear referred to as karma is called Samskara
in Sanskrt . This translates as the fruit of action, the REaction that is
in potential form which follows by law of
nature from any action. Yoga means union, union between the self, the
individual soul or ego, with God, the Infinate, the Univeral Soul and one
who lives to reach htis goal is a Yogi. To be one in thought, word and
action- not saying one thing while thinking differently and doing something
else. There are many paths to this goal- one is Karma Yoga in which one
works to become concious that all actions as being done not by the ego but
by God to God and for God because God is All That Is.
It is service to God through his expression as the Universe. It should be
mentioned that God has an agenda in this theory, he wants all his children
to reach the goal of union with him so serving Him is helping others to
reach that goal as well. Be it through providing the basic neccesities for
others
or teaching them meditation. For Buddy this would be mostly his writing
which is spirtual oriented and helps others to reach some insight. Also his
teaching at a school could be done in this spirit. What one does isn't
quite as important as your consiousness during you actions. Another school
or
path of or to yoga is Hatha Yoga. This is actually what most people think
of as
the meaning of yoga when it is commonly used in western cultures. It means
the practice of phyical and psycho-physical
exercises that bring you towards a relization of your oneness with god. It
is based in a science that is just beginning to uncovered by wertern
medicine. One other example of a school of
yoga that should be mentioned is Astaunga Yoga which is the eightfold
compilation of many yoga techniques and is classicly and famously
codified by Pantajali in his definitive yoga sutras. Jiana, (which I know I
must be spelling differently than JDS and is pronounced Gee-on-a) means
knowledge. Maybe proper understanding is more along the right spirit. A
Jiani or a Jiana Yogi is one who achieves realization through spiritual
understanding. It is often said to be a dangerous path though, for
knowledge that isn't acted upon is worthless. Sometimes it is compared to
the bananaleaf which is used in India as a disposable plate. After you
finish eating you throw it away. Spiritual knowledg isn't absolute, you
throw away when you get to where it takes you. Bhakti Yoga is the path of
Love, it is reaching God through your feelings towards H(er im). In a way I
would probably classify Buddy as more Bhakti than anything else. So much
for a quick word about yoga- I guesse it's always that with the things you
care about.
So back to Seymour, from the perspective of yoga at the end of a human life,
the soul contnues to live and is reborn into another body in order to
express the samskaras, the potential reactions of actions taken in previous
lives. If in the course of human life there is enough mental development
and spiritual progress, which I will define as integrating the realization
that you are one with God into your life, then at death you may have
sufficient concentration to lead you to a different state of existence in
which you are liberated from the compulsion of taking another body. This is
called mukti. However, this get's you free of te cycle but not out of it.
According to Yoga philosophy only when you have both achieved this
liberation and experienced all your samskara's does one get the Grace of
complete merger in God, and complete cessation of Being. This is called
Moksha and can be very confusing. It is essentially the goal in spiritual
practice and rarely achieved by humans. It seems a bit a strange goal-
almost a kind of suicide. (see, I was't saying all this just because I like
to hear it, I am trying to go somewhere with it.) The classic answer to
that is that you don't lose yourself really, you find yourSelf, that is, you
become God. Like a drop of water falling into the ocean no longer thinks I
am a drop of water, it thinks I am the Ocean. I am God.
Seymours death does not seem, by any means to be related to moksha. I could
easily see how we can guesse that he might have had liberation in the past
and chose to incarnate again, whether for selfless reasons as do
bodhisatvas, or selfish ones- to use up all his leftover samskara so he can
get moksha. Some evidence for it is all the side comments Buddy makes about
these brothers havng lived many lives together.
The world view or theosophy that JDS presents in the Glass stories, and
also strongly in _Teddy_ seem to fit in pretty closely with Yoga as I've
just described it. And so there is little to make us think Seymours suicide
was something that could be justified by these ideas which Seymour seemed be
proponent of. Yet Buddy loves him soooo much, and JDS write so well with
that love that as a reader I feel that love too. The effect of that is to
make us (Buddy as brother and writer, me [and you?] as reader) want to
rationalize, and justify his suicide. Perhaps Buddy succedes. His writing
about it seems to evoke some sort of spiritual experience- a place we each p
repare for ourselves at the time of our death [SaI] I find myself really
rooting for Buddy in this respect. For one thing, unlike someone else who
metnioned that they don't like the Glass stories as much as JDS's other
writing beacause they don't recognize the characters in their own life as
much, I feel a lot of recognition for the Glasses. So much so that I often
suspect JDS of basing them (at least loosely) on real people from his life.
Further, in my family I am the oldest brother and have a strong leaning
towards a spiritual life. That makes me associate quite a bit with Seymour.
That makes me really appreciate the love of Buddy, who even when Seymour
fails, keeps on loving him. Seymour never, as far as we are told, tries to
be a messiah or guru to his family. It happens by default because of the
personalities of the family members. I also think that the spiritual ideals
with which these characters were living with play crucial role in
understanding them. (fine time to state a thesis:) To believe in the
existence of a God that has an agenda, and not based on fears implanted at
childhood, but by a mixture of love for the ideas and scientific evaluation
of the circumstances of existence, creates a strong force. It's a lot to
live up to. And society can often seem so stupid in light of these ideas.
Though beautiful and fantastic as well. So Seymour couldn't take the
pressure any more, and checked out. Not as we assume Teddy must have, that
he has burnt off all of his Samskara from past lives and is now going to
join God as One, but because, maybe, he felt sticking around longer in this
life would just be eating more bananas. Struggling to balance two
conceptions of self- one as God expressed through a human body, the other
the materialist life as cosmic accident sort of view, maybe the materialist
going along with society getting married and all was actually starting to
appeal to him so much that this is what scared him out. He was so damned
happy all the time at the end of his life.
To get myself into even more trouble here, assuming that is, there is still
an awake reader, let me relate it to Christ and how I feel that he might fit
in here. Suppose Christ was this pretty enlightend guy that, working for
God's agenda, wanted to help others get enlightened as well. Unfortunately
he botches it up a little, ends up dead and his life co-opted by people with
completely different beliefs and values than he himself had and lived. And,
these people do some pretty crummy things in his name. That's a bit of a
failure. but we love him anyway. he tried.
My sincerest appologies for this mess of a post that has dribbled out of
over the last couple days. I hesitate to send it all at this point but do
so for anyone with enough courage to scower it the few gems it may contain
and bring to life anything of interest.
Love,
Madhava
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Mar 02 2000 - 19:30:24 EST