Last Saturday our dharma book club discussed a book I recommended. This post captures some of that discussion, and why I chose the book I did.

When I was first asked to pick our next book, it was pretty obvious to me what my selection would be: Alan Watts“Wisdom of Insecurity”. Written in 1951 by a British scholar in comparative religions, it was one of the first books in English that brought Buddhism to an American audience, including the Beat Generation. More recently, it also played a pivotal role in my own movement toward Buddhism.

Back in 2002, I decided to review my existing philosophical beliefs. In high school, I’d adopted Existentialism after reading Sartre and Camus and Ionesco in French. It had appealed to me as a typically angst-ridden adolescent, but did it still serve me as I approached 40?

Coincidentally, I had just begun blogging here on LiveJournal, so as I spent the next year plowing through Nietzsche and Sartre, I was able to document many of my thoughts along the way. One of the most important of those thoughts came from the following passage in William Barrett’s 1958 book “Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy”, a book I read in January of 2003.

The Self, indeed, is in Sartre’s treatment, as in Buddhism, a bubble, and a bubble has nothing at its center. But neither in Buddhism nor in Sartre is the Self riddled with negations to the end that we should, humanly speaking, collapse into the negative, into a purely passive nihilism. In Buddhism the recognition of the nothingness of ourselves is intended to lead into a striving for holiness and compassion—the recognition that in the end there is nothing that sustains us should lead us to love one another, as survivors on a life raft, at the moment they grasp that the ocean is shoreless and that no rescue ship is coming, can only have compassion on one another.

That one somewhat convoluted reference was the first I’d heard of any commonality between Buddhism and Existentialism. Apparently, although the two philosophies began with similar assumptions—that there is no paternal creator god, that there is no inherent meaning in life, and that man has no permanent essence that survives his corporeal body—Buddhism offered something that I never got from Existentialism: a positive and ethical way of living one’s life based on those assumptions. That was the seed that got me thinking about looking into Buddhism. You can read my original comments on Barrett’s book here.

Just a few days later, I found myself browsing at a local Barnes & Noble. I’d scanned the entire Buddhist section and gotten nearly to the end of the alphabet without seeing anything that called out to me. Then I saw this tiny little paperback with an eye-searing lime green spine and the words “THE WISDOM OF INSECURITY - ALAN W. WATTS”. The cover blurbs seemed to intuit exactly what I’d spent the previous year looking for, so I immediately picked it up and blew through it.

Watts was the first author I’d read who, rather than restating the existential problem and wringing his hands, provided a rational and fulfilling way to respond to those conditions, without resorting to the self-delusion of unproven faith or its opposite extreme of pessimism and despair.

Even today, I’m stunned by the serendipity and good fortune I had to happen upon that exact book, because it was the perfect gateway to all the wisdom, development, and fulfillment that has followed. You can read my original reaction to the book here.

So that’s why I selected that particular book. It has an immense amount of personal meaning for me.

As you might expect, I was a little anxious about sharing something that personal with others, even my fellow meditators. That feeling was compounded by the long wait: three months passed between when I was asked to select a book and our discussion of it!

However, it didn’t take long to get a reaction. As soon as he learned of my selection, one of the attendees emailed back: “AMAZING selection!!!!!!! I will definately [sic] be there. I cannot express how amazing this book is to read.” Okay, that’s one solid vote of confidence!

Another one came a few weeks later. Socializing after a sitting at CIMC, one of the attendees showed me her copy of the book and mentioned that she was enjoying it. That’s two!

But as she flashed the book, its amazingly ugly lime green and purple patterned cover caught the eye of the woman who had officiated at the evening’s meditation. She recognized it immediately and also effused about it, indicating that, like me, it had played a big part in her coming to Buddhism. That really made me much more confident about the selection, since she’s a longtime practitioner who is known for managing CIMC’s “sandwich retreat”.

By the time our book club discussion came around, even the woman who hosts the group made a point of letting me know that she was enjoying the book. So I was able to go into the meeting without too much self-consciousness about it.

That’s not to say that the book received unalloyed praise. Watts’ language was both commended (in his choice of metaphors and images) and critiqued (in his tangential rants and sometimes inaccessibly complex sentence structure).

Eleven people attended the meeting, and about half had read the book, which is a bit better than normal. Let me gloss over a few of the topics that came up during the discussion.

One comment that was repeatedly made was how pertinent Watts’ words are today, even sixty years after he wrote them. He wrote about consumerism and how everyone was chasing the newest, best television. It stunned us that in 2010, we’re still being sold new and supposedly much better televisions, just as was the case back in 1951! He also anticipated our need for ever more rapid and imposing forms of entertainment. He could surely have been talking about last week in this passage:

There is, then, the feeling that we live in a time of unusual insecurity. In the past hundred years so many long-established traditions have broken down—traditions of family and social life, of government, of the economic order, and of religious belief. As the years go by, there seem to be fewer and fewer rocks to which we can hold, fewer things which we can regard as absolutely right and true, and fixed for all time.

We spent some time talking about how religious faith can be a comfort, but once it has been pierced by skepticism, you can’t ever restore that belief. That harkens back to my own feeling that you cannot simply decide what you believe; belief is not an object to be so simply controlled, and you can do little more than discover and perhaps indirectly influence what you believe. As one attendee put it: the challenge of Watts’ book is how to stay connected with modern reality in the absence of mollifying religious faith, without being scared.

Another big theme that people pulled out was that our feelings of insecurity are the direct result of the fact that we want security. If you want something, by definition it is something that you feel you do not have now, so the more desperately we seek security, the more insecure we feel. This was likened to the concept of the “power of attraction”, where one must be careful to cultivate the vision of having what one wants, not the wanting itself, because focusing your energy on the wanting presumably reinforces your yearning and the absence of the thing you’re after.

Our discussions also circled around the Buddhist concept of conditioned behavior, and the large degree to which our actions can be reduced to a response to the situation we are in, based on patterns of behavior that have been successful for us in the past. Where this got interesting was our realization that as dharma friends, we are each providing conditioning factors for one another, and hopefully influencing one another such that we will all make wiser, compassionate, and more fulfilling decisions in the future.

Another amusing tangent had us discussing the idea that on average, your friends are more popular than you are. This is mathematically true, because we all tend to be friends with outgoing people who are already very popular.

Obviously, the discussion was much broader than those few items, but I wanted to capture those in particular, and they’ll also give you a flavor for where we went with it. Overall, the discussion stayed pretty well on-topic, and people kept returning to the book and reading key passages aloud, since Watts’ prose is eminently quotable.

In preparation for the book club, I re-read “Wisdom of Insecurity” myself last week. After three readings, almost every single page has something highlighted on it. It’s an extremely dense book in terms of the profundity of its concepts, and I feel that although it’s only a thin 150-page paperback, one could easily base a semester’s study around it.

I wanted to highlight a few things that I got from this most recent reading that I didn’t mention in the book club discussion.

Here’s a great passage, where Watts begins by commenting on our impossible and irrational desire for permanence:

For it would seem that, in man, life is in hopeless conflict with itself. To be happy, we must have what we cannot have. In man, nature has conceived desires which it is impossible to satisfy. To drink more fully of the fountain of pleasure, it has brought forth capacities which make man more susceptible to pain. It has given us the power to control the future but a little—the price of which is the frustration of knowing that we must at last go down in defeat. If we find this absurd, this is only to say that nature has conceived intelligence in us to berate itself for absurdity. Consciousness seems to be nature’s ingenious mode of self-torture.

In other words, if we’re intelligent enough to realize the futility of our plight, we must then be nature’s way of mocking itself! When I read this section about the basic absurdity of humanity’s quest for meaning, seeking pleasure, and avoiding pain, I realized that the best way to think about life is as a Zen koan. There is no answer! And any attempt to arrive at one rationally is bound to fail. Life is a paradox; accept it and move on!

Another passage:

To understand that there is no security is far more than to agree with the theory that all things change, more even than to observe the transitoriness of life. The notion of security is based on the feeling that there is something within us which is permanent, something which endures through all the days and changes of life. We are struggling to make sure of the permanence, continuity, and safety of this enduring core, this center and soul of our being which we call “I”.

What leaps out at me from this section is the absurdity (again) of feeling that one has to prop up or defend something that we’ve defined as eternal and immutable. How ridiculous! If there is some permanent “I” within us, then what need does it have for defense? If such a thing existed, it would persist irrespective of anything we did or did not do.

Watts spends a great deal of time on the importance of living the present moment fully, and not letting desired future states obscure our ability to enjoy and be fully present with what is. The difference between someone who perpetually looks for fulfillment in the future and someone who lives for the present couldn’t be more poignant than in this passage about death:

When each moment becomes an expectation life is deprived of fulfillment, and death is dreaded for it seems that here expectation must come to an end. While there is life there is hope—and if one lives on hope, death is indeed the end. But to the undivided mind, death is another moment, complete like every moment, and cannot yield its secret unless lived to the full.

This passage shows how the fear of death is mostly rooted in the fact that it signals the end of our ability to expect a better, more pleasant future. It shows that by a simple change of mindset, we can begin to leave this fear behind. Imagine having a relationship with death that wasn’t dominated by fear!

Then there’s this little zinger. Compare the following passages:

If it is true that man is necessarily motivated by the pleasure-pain principle, there is no point whatsoever in discussing human conduct. Motivated conduct is determined conduct; it will be what it will be, no matter what anyone has to say about it. There can be no creative morality unless man has the possibility of freedom.

That citation, which says that ethics and morality make no sense if man doesn’t have the freedom to make choices, is from “Wisdom of Insecurity”. Then:

You are deluded to assume that you are reading this of your own free will. My friend, you had no choice but to read this! Will is not the action of a being; it is the end product of a process. […] Whatever you do is just a result of complex programming.

This counterpoint is from Ajahn Brahm’s book on jhana practice, “Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond”, which I reviewed here. Ajahn Brahm subscribes to the view that free will is an illusion, and that our behavior and apparent choices are indeed fully determined by present conditions and our past conditioning. I’d love to get these two in a room and ask them to debate the topic of choice. Or maybe not…

Finally, consider Watts’ description of hell:

Hell, or “everlasting damnation” is not the everlastingness of time going on forever, but of the unbroken circle, the continuity and frustration of going round and round in pursuit of something which can never be attained.

I might clarify this definition of hell as threefold, comprised of seeking for pleasure but remaining unfulfilled, running from pain but never being able to avoid it, and looking to the future for fulfillment without ever being present at that future. As such, I think this is a perfectly apt description of many people’s lives, and a good way to understand why a lot of people find themselves frustrated, angry, self-absorbed, and suffering from existential angst.

In conclusion, I have to once again say how delighted I am with “Wisdom of Insecurity”, and how heartily I recommend it to others. It’s amusing, quotable, succinct, and very deeply profound. It impresses me as much today, after seven years of Buddhist study and practice, as it did on day one.

I am truly amazed that it was written sixty years ago, by someone who was only 36 years old. It contains an amazing amount of wisdom in a very tidy little package. Well, except for the single ugliest cover ever created by man.

Ironically, one final surprise is that all that wisdom didn’t necessarily help its author. In the ’60s, long after this book was published, Alan Watts experimented with mescaline and LSD, and became something of an advocate of marijuana. He became an alcoholic, went through three marriages, and died of heart failure at 58 years of age.

But then it is the nature of all things to change, isn’t it?

I just finished reading Eckhart Tolle’s “A New Earth”.

I’m not a big fan of Eckie. Like Landmark Education, he cherry-picks chosen philosophical points from various and diverse lineages and presents them largely as his own thinking. But more irritating to me is his penchant for making bald, specious assertions without bothering to support them with any argument or evidence. So I’ve got issues with some of his stuff.

The problem is that when he takes the time to explain his thinking, some of it is actually very insightful. His writing tends to be very accessible to people, and he’s gathered a loyal following. And I’m glad if anyone can instill any kind of spiritual change in our modern society.

The new book has more insight and fewer unjustified sweeping conclusions. Taken largely from Buddhism, it delivers one of Buddhism’s more difficult concepts (non-self) in a pretty palatable way.

A New Earth

The book is largely a deconstruction of how the human ego works, and its causal linkage to our inability to find happiness. If that sounds like a tough slog, it can be, but Eckie’s good at taking such stuff and making it real for people, and he does a good job of it here.

Not that I think this is a book for the masses. He assumes a fair level of familiarity with philosophy, meditation, and self-knowledge. In my opinion, this is an awesome book for someone who is partway down the path; it’s definitely too esoteric for a complete neophyte.

I’m not going to summarize the book here, since it’s chock full of subtle but vital points. But here are just a few nuggets that struck home for me.

Here’s one that amused me, because Eckie came to the same conclusion I did about the Existentialists: they got it right, but then wrung their hands over it, rather than figuring out how to live an ethical life based on their beliefs. “Some of the greatest writers of the twentieth century, such as Franz Kafka, Albert Camus, T. S. Eliot, and James Joyce, recognized alienation as the universal dilemma of human existence, probably felt it deeply within themselves and so were able to express it brilliantly in their works. They don’t offer a solution. Their contribution is to show us a reflection of the human predicament so that we can see it more clearly.” Thankfully, at least one group took the next step in human ethical development.

Here’s Eckie’s summary definition of enlightenment. It boils down to pure truth, although it does kinda hide the important implications of achieving that state. “Awakening is a shift in consciousness in which thinking and awareness separate.” As I said in this blog post, your life is not what you *think*.

Tolle’s definition of karma was somewhat interesting. According to him, karma consists of the deeply-ingrained patterns of thought that you developed in the past, combined with unconsciously acting those patterns out through your behavior. In short, karma’s kinda like Socrates’ “The unexamined life is not worth living.” He’s emphasizing the importance of evaluating your thought patterns and behavior in every moment.

“Don’t seek happiness. If you seek it, you won’t find it, because seeking is the antithesis of happiness.” This is definitional; if you’re looking for happiness, that means you haven’t got it, and you never will get it until you stop looking and realize that it’s not something you find or aquire at some other point in time. Happiness is something you *are*, not something you find or acquire.

“When you make the present moment, instead of past and future, the focal point of your life, your ability to enjoy what you do—and with it the quality of your life—increases dramatically. […] On the new earth, enjoyment will replace wanting as the motivating power behind people’s actions.” This is interesting, because it confirms that wanting is the source of suffering, which comes straight out of Buddhism’s Four Noble Truths. And it also points to the powerful joy to be found in enjoying the present moment. These are truths I have long lived by and can attest to.

Here’s a related observation about ego. “For the ego to survive, it must make time—past and future—more important than the present moment. The ego cannot tolerate becoming friendly with the present moment.” We are preoccupied with me, my potential, and my struggle to realize that potential. Every day, today—now—is perpetually viewed as nothing more than an uncomfortable interstitial state, a means to an end. It’s just the ego’s way of minimizing the importance of and distracting us from the all-important present moment.

Here Eckie addresses the question of how you set goals if you only live in the moment. “An enlarged image of yourself or a vision of yourself *having* this or that are all static goals and therefore don’t empower you. Instead, make sure your goals are dynamic, that is to say, point toward an *activity* that you are engaged in and through which you are connected to other human beings as well as to the whole.” In other words, goals should not be things you *become* or *acquire*, but things you *are* or *are doing*. That puts them in the present and also makes them immediately actionable.

Finally, I want to describe something that happened to me as I began to understand Tolle’s explanation of the mechanics of ego. Basically, everything finally clicked for me, and it wasn’t merely a revelation about ego and non-self.

Looking back, I’ve spent much of the past seven years in philosophical inquiry and increasingly-earnest Buddhist practise. I’ve read thousands of pages of both source material and scholarly discourse. I’ve listened to over a thousand Dharma talks. I’ve spent man-months in formal meditation, both in retreats and in daily practise.

Over that time, I’ve become increasingly familiar with the Dharma, and gradually incorporated it more and more into my life. However, the Buddhist concept of non-self never really sunk in until now.

And now that it has, I think I’ve finally reached a turning point. I *know* the Dharma. I may not know every last little detail, but I know a lot of it. I want to say *enough* of it. It suddenly struck me that—in one sense—I’ve come to the end of the path. There’s nothing more I need to learn from written canon or Dharma talks.

I get it.

That’s not to say that I have mastered its application. Knowing the mechanics of surfing doesn’t mean one can go out and do a fins-free snap off the top. Actually living the Dharma is a lifetime’s practise, and much more difficult than merely understanding it. However, I think I can say that I know everything I need to know. Now it’s just a question of applying that knowledge, which, trust me, is challenge enough!

I recently read Rachel Naomi Remen’s book “Kitchen Table Wisdom”, wherein the author relates the story of how she went from her purely intellectual orientation as a physician to a more spiritual place, as well as the stories of other people she came into contact with that inspired her.

Kitchen Table WisdomOverall, the book didn’t really blow me away, but there was one story about the author’s childhood that struck a resonant chord, so I thought I’d record that here, since I think it directly addresses the anxiety that people feel about not knowing the “meaning” of their lives.

The author relates that her family always put together jigsaw puzzles without the aid of the picture on the box, in order to make it more of a challenge and a surprise. As a young girl, she was just learning what jigsaw puzzles were. She was attracted to the colorful pieces, but she intuitively disliked the darker ones, so she took the latter away and hid them, to the consternation of her parents.

As an adult, the author used this as a metaphor for how life’s meaning reveals itself to us. I’d like to share and extend that metaphor a bit.

Our lives are indeed like a jigsaw puzzle whose final image isn’t known until we place the final pieces. Each day we place another piece, but progress is slow and the picture only makes sense as it nears completion.

If you focus solely on what today is like, all you see is one minuscule piece of your life. Today’s piece of the puzzle might be light or dark, colorful or muted, busy or empty, but you really can’t infer anything about your life overall from this one little piece. And even if today is a dark or painful part, you can’t assemble a great picture without the contrast of light and dark pieces, just as you can’t go through life with only mindlessly saccharine-sweet days. You can’t complete a jigsaw puzzle or a meaningful life if you ignore, avoid, or deny the existence of its dark parts.

Our past is the part of the puzzle we have completed. We can step back and look at what our life has been like so far, what kind of image it makes and what meaning it holds. By looking at the past, we can begin to make some sense of our life, or at least our life so far. If you look at the past, you can start to see meaning, but things could—and will—change substantially from here forward.

The future is, of course, unknown. We know the shape and color of the past, but we only have limited knowledge about what our next piece of the puzzle might look like. It could be a carbon copy of today’s, or it might introduce a completely new theme, like the first appearance in a puzzle of a person or the edge of a building. Our lives might have been all ocean as far as we have seen, but the next piece could be the point where the sea meets a beach or a rocky coastline, or it could be the first part of a gorgeous sunset on a distant horizon.

One of the great lessons here is that looking for the “meaning” of your life is futile. Meaning isn’t something that you are handed; it’s not a mandate from family, church, or job. Meaning isn’t an input, but an output; you create that meaning with every decision you make and every action you take. Meaning is the result of living, and thus can only be seen retrospectively.

That’s not to say that we shouldn’t have principles that guide our actions. Just remember that the principles aren’t what gives your life meaning; meaning derives solely from the actions that those principles have promoted. Your principles die with you, and are only made visible to the world through your actions.

While at the same time, each and every action you take contributes to that meaning. Whether you live according to your highest ethics or just spend your time on autopilot, every day you contribute the exact same amount toward the ultimate meaning of your life. So if the meaning of your life matters to you, it’s imperative that you live each day according to the values you cherish most.

This is what I have learned: it takes great presence of mind and strength of will to live according to one’s highest values, and no one is perfect. We make mistakes. None of us are Mother Theresa, but over time we can gradually learn to see our autonomic behavior and then replace our mindless habits with better choices. That’s why Buddhism calls it “practice” and a lifelong path.

This is a continuation of this post, where I brought your attention to the fact that when we focus on the moving things that automatically attract our eyes, we lose sight of the richness of the things around us that aren’t moving.

It’s also true that the same could be said for our sense of hearing. Our ears are attracted by whatever is loudest around us, rather than the things which are quiet. But unlike our vision, which only required us to look at something else, listening may require us to do two different things.

We often intentionally fill our ears with sound in an effort to keep ourselves from hearing anything unpleasant, or just to keep our ears from getting bored. It should be obvious that if you want to hear the breath of the world, the first thing you need to do it turn off the television, hang up the phone, switch off the radio, and put down the iPoo. You need to stop intentionally blocking your ears with aural fluff.

The other thing we need to do is what we did with our vision: stop following your body’s natural impulse to pay attention to what’s loudest. Hear the ventilation equipment and the key-clicks in your office, not the voices around you. Hear the birds and the wind in the trees, rather than passing automobile engines. Hear your cat’s footfalls as he comes to greet you at the door.

If you stop and listen to the silence behind all the noise of our daily lives, you may find those sounds much richer and more satisfying than you’d ever considered before.

Moxie Pond

Of course, this practice can also be extended to the other senses. What would you find if you really paid attention to the subtler scents your nose comes across each day, rather than simply ignoring your nose all day?

On the other hand, we’re pretty well attuned to subtlety of taste and touch. We have our favorite foods and have created a very complex set of meanings for all kinds of human touch. But that’s not to say that there isn’t more depth to experience by focusing on those sensations and taking the time to explore them more fully.

In Buddhist philosophy, thought represents a sixth sense. Thoughts are things that come and go, and we sense their passage. In fact, much of Buddhism and meditation centers around the idea of taking the time to stop and look at the thoughts that arise in our minds, and whether they’re actually beneficial or not. Do you allow your mind to be continually distracted by whatever exerts a momentary attraction, the way you allow you eyes to flicker from thing to thing, without ever staying on one subject long enough to fully experience and appreciate it? Or do you observe your thoughts and consciously direct them in more productive directions?

We spend so much of our lives unconsciously, not seeing deeply, not hearing anything and completely out of touch with one another and the miraculous world around us. Even our thoughts, the thing we most associate with our “self”, usually operate in a purely reactive way. We wander around this world, seeing little, hearing little, tasting little, mostly unconscious except for an overriding sense that we’re not happy.

The Buddha was right about the secret of happiness being found in deeply experiencing the present moment. By activating all our physical senses, as well as thought, we transform the world around us into something wondrous and vivid that we’d never see otherwise.

Now—and everything it encompasses—is truly a holy thing, to be honored and cherished above all else. I invite you to open your eyes to it. Your world will never be the same.

Sorry this one’s late. That’s material for a subsequent post…

What do you most want to be remembered for?
I’d like to be remembered for founding an online community that successfully encouraged and nurtured hundreds of aspiring amateur writers. I’d like to be remembered by everyone associated with that community for my wisdom and leadership in running that group.
 
What quotation best fits your outlook on life?
Honestly, I don’t think there’s any one quote, but there have been plenty of good examples among the philosophical treatises I’ve posted here (friends-only) over the past 18 months.
 
What single achievement are you most proud of in the past year?
I don’t know as there’s one single one. I’m pleased with how I ran the 2003 Dargon Writers’ Summit. I’m naturally pleased with my cycling, which included climbing Evans Notch and doing the 200-mile PMC ride, which also included my fundraising for the Jimmy Fund. I’m also particularly proud of how well I’ve done in graphic design school. But in addition, I’m also pleased with my philosophical investigations and exploration of Zen, my participation in Boston’s war protests, my Web work for Onyx, and my administration of DargonZine’s advertising campaign on Google. And I’m especially pleased when I look back at how successful my social life has been over the past year.
 
What about the past ten years?
Well, again, there’s several things. Ten years is a long time. It would be impossible to overemphasize my return as editor and my leadership of DargonZine. There’s also my work for Sapient, which in addition to being very lucrative, offered me the opportunity to work on some of the most prestigious Web projects on the planet, such as National Geographic’s Web site, online banking, online brokerages, and much more. There’s my move into Boston and then my subsequent condo purchase. There’s my evolution as a person and the gradual increase in “healthiness” of my relationships, which is a particular point of pride.
 
If you were asked to give a child a single piece of advice to guide them through life, what would you say?
I think the most important thing is to be aware that you’re responsible for your own life and your own happiness. Don’t do anything just because other people expect it of you; do it because you know it’s going to make you happier. Enjoy each day, rather than always live for a tomorrow that never comes because there are always more tomorrows to worry about. Make all your decisions based on the criteria of having absolutely nothing to regret when you’re on your deathbed looking back at your life.

So, having just finished William Barrett's "Irrational Man", I was parsing my local Barnes and Noble for other works on Existentialism. I just can't get terribly excited about plowing through the original works of Nietzsche or Heidegger. I'd plowed all the way to the end of the alphabet before I came across a thin trade paperback with an ugly green spine. But what really caught my eye was the title: "The Wisdom of Insecurity". Well, that certainly has an Existential ring to it; I picked it up for a closer look.

The back cover was even more promising. Here are excerpts from the two reviews printed on the back:

"The wisdom of insecurity is not a way of evasion, but of carrying on [...] It is a philosophy not of nihilism but of the reality of the present—always remembering that to be of the present is to be, and candidly know ourselves to be, on the crest of a breaking wave."
"How is man to live in a world in which he can never be secure, deprived, as many are, of the consolations of religious belief? The author shows that this problem contains its own solution—that the highest happiness, the supreme spiritual insight and certitude are found only in our own awareness that impermanence and insecurity are inescapable and inseparable from life."

Well, that corresponds rather stunningly with my own belief that although life has no inherent meaning, that lack of externally-mandated meaning is incredibly empowering, because it gives man the freedom to infuse his life with whatever meaning he chooses. So I picked the book up and blew through it.

One interesting fact is that the book was originally published in 1951, about the time of Existentialism's prominence in postwar Europe, and seven years before Barrett's book. It also was well before the study of eastern religions became fashionable in the US.

Eastern religions? What do they have to do with Existentialism? Well, Barrett's book actually documents that there are some very strong similarities between Existentialism and the eastern philosophies, particularly Zen Buddhism, which accept the finality of death and assert that life is without inherent meaning, while providing us with examples for accepting those facts without lapsing into nihilism.

Beyond that, the author of "The Wisdom of Insecurity", Alan Watts, is widely-known as a master in comparative religions, and as an interpreter of Zen Buddhism in particular. In fact, "The Wisdom of Insecurity" doesn't talk about Existentialism at all. While it's certainly not a book about Buddhism, either, it does focus on a topic which is the foundation of both Existentialism and Zen: how to deal positively and productively with the belief that life is finie and has no inherent meaning.

I have to say, of all the philosophical books that I've read in the past year, this one is by far the most impressive, because it concerns itself less with stating the problem, and more with how to respond to it.

The first chapter does review the conundrum of modern western man.

"Man, as a being of sense, wants his life to make sense, and he has found it hard to believe that it does so unless there is more than what he sees—unless there is an eternal order and an eternal life behind the uncertain and momentary experience of life-and-death. [...] But what are we to do? The alternatives seem to be two. The first is, somehow or other, to discover a new myth, or convincingly resuscitate an old one. [...] The second is to try grimly to face the fact that life is 'a tale told by an idiot', and make of it what we can. [...] From this point of departure there is yet another way of life that requires neither myth nor despair."

The second chapter describes how man's knowledge of the past and future often overpowers our ability to live fully and completely in the present. Worse yet,

"if I am so busy planning how to eat next week that I cannot fully enjoy what I am eating now, I will be in the same predicament when next week's meals become 'now.' [...] To plan for a future which is not going to become present is hardly more absured than to plan for a future which, when it comes to me, will find me 'absent'."

Chapter three introduces the great Platonic schism, the division of man into the theoretically "eternal" conscious seat of thought versus the earthly, temporal seat of passions and infirmity. It also describes the confusion that results from mistaking thought and theory with chaotic, unpredictable reality.

"Part of man's frustration is that he has become accustomed to expect language and thought to offer explanations which they cannot give. To want life to be 'intelligible' in this sense is to want it to be something other than life. [...] To feel that life is meaningless unless 'I' can be permanent is like having fallen desperately in love with an inch."

The logical conclusion of the Platonic separation of mind and body is revealled in chapter four.

"The brain, in its immaterial way, looks into the future and conceives it a good to go on and on and on forever [...] We are perpetually frustrated because the verbal and abstract thinking of the brain gives the false impression of being able to cut loose from all finite limitations. It forgets that an infinity of anything is not a reality but an abstract concept, and persuades us that we desire this fantasy as a real goal of living. [...] The interests and goals of rationality are not those of man as a whole organism."

Chapter five refutes the traditional western preoccupation with security and permanence.

"There is a contradiction in wanting to be perfectly secure in a universe whose very nature momentariness and fluidity. [...] If I want to be secure, that is, protected from the flux of life, I am wanting to be separate from life. [...] What we have to discover is that there is no safety, that seeking it is painful [...] The principal thing is to understand that there is no safety or security. [...] The notion of security is based on the feeling that there is something within us which is permanent, something which endures through all the days and changes of life. We are struggling to make sure of the permanence, continuity, and safety of this enduring core, this center and soul of our being which we call 'I.' [...] Any separate 'I' who thinks thoughts and experiences experience is an illusion."

Chapter six reveals that a positive experience of life depends on fully experiencing the moment that is 'now'.

"It means being aware, alert, and sensitive to the present moment always [...] Once this is understood, it is really absurd to say that there is a choice or an alternative between these two ways of life, between resisting the stream in fruitless panic, and having one's eyes opened to a new world, transformed, and ever new with wonder. [...] There is no rule but 'Look!' [...] By trying to understand everything in terms of memory, the past, and words, we have, as it were, had our noses in the guidebook for most of our lives, and have never looked at the view."

In chapter seven, Watts continues on this theme, but adds to it the Zen concept of the unity of creation.

"When, on the other hand, you realize that you live in, that indeed you are this moment now, and no other, that apart from this there is no past and no future, you must relax and taste to the full [...] The whole problem of justifying nature, of trying to make life mean something in terms of its future, disappears utterly. [...] When each moment becomes an expectation life is deprived of fulfillment, and death is dreaded for it seems that here expectation must come to an end. While there is life there is hope—and if one lives on hope, death is indeed the end."

Chapter eight continues the theme of living 'now' fully.

"If I feel separate from my experience, and from the world, freedom will seem to be the extent to which I can push the world around, and fate the extent to which the world pushes me around. [...] The more my actions are directed towards future pleasures, the more I am incapable of enjoying any pleasures at all. For all pleasures are present, and nothing save complete awareness of the present can even begin to guarantee future happiness."

The final chapter returns to a review of religion and a prospect for a genuine spirituality based on Existential principles, and the futility of basing fulfilllment on some future post-death state.

"It is one thing to have as much time as you want, but quite another to have time without end. [...] We desire it only because the present is empty. [...] To those still feverishly intent upon explaining all things, [...] this confession says nothing and means nothing but defeat. To others, the fact that thought has completed a circle is a revelation of what man has been doing, not only in philosophy, religion, and speculative science, but also in psychology and morals, in everyday feeling and living. His mind has been in a whirl to be away from itself and to catch itself. [...] Discovering this the mind becomes whole [...] In such feeling, seeing, and thinking life requires no future to complete itself nor explanation to justify itself."

Unfortunately, that hardly does justice to the insights described more fully in the book. Still, it will give you a flavor of Watt's thought, some of the commonalities between Zen Buddhism and Existentialism, and how accepting both death and the essential meaninglessness of life need not lead into nihilism nor despair. It certainly hasn't done so in my experience!

Frequent topics