Averting the Severity of Life

I. Who Shall Live

In Unetaneh Tokef, the phrase “who shall live and who shall die,” is followed by this list (copied from the link above, with some edits by me):

Who by water and who by fire, who by sword and who by beast, who by famine and who by thirst, who by upheaval and who by plague, who by strangling and who by stoning.

Conventionally, this list is interpreted as the variety of ways that those “who shall die” might do so in the coming year. But! Then the passage goes on to this list:

Who will rest and who will wander, who will live in harmony and who will be harried, who will enjoy tranquility and who will suffer, who will be impoverished and who will be enriched, who will be degraded and who will be exalted.

This second list is about ways of living, not ways of dying. Looking at the original Hebrew, one list flows right into the other, and is grammatically very similar, with the same repeating formula of “and who… and who….” So, just for the sake of Torah (for generating more wisdom), why assume that the first list is only about death? After all, we know the phrase “live by the sword,” right?

Looking at the first list as ways of life opens up the metaphorical imagination. What could it mean to live by water, by fire, by sword, by beast, by famine, by thirst, by upheaval, by plague, by strangling, by stoning?

Maybe these are lists of ways of making a living (given a lot of metaphorical leeway)? Anyone working in the pressures of a capitalistic market knows what it’s like to live “by thirst.” Anyone trying to make a name for themselves on the internet is trying to live “by plague (virality).” Too much of a stretch?

Maybe we could expand our perspective to see this as a list of ways that individuals or groups include violence in their survival strategies. If you protect yourself by overwhelming those who would attack you, then you live “by water.” If you feel safe due to police or military presence, then you live “by fire.” If you thrive on chaos (see: trolls, whether on the internet or in the White House), then you live “by upheaval.” If your freedom requires the captivation of others, then you live “by strangling.” If your self-justification requires the vilification of others, then you live “by stoning.” Eh??

II. The Severity of Life

Hold on to your hats, because I’m gonna take a big step back and broaden the overall theme/message-- all life thrives on severity, harshness, on something negative. Half of your DNA comes from the victorious sperm that got to the egg first; all of your DNA comes from the coupling of a sperm and egg that then shut out all other applicants. Whether eating meat or not, we destroy life to add to our own. We live in competition for limited resources, whether material or emotional. (If this passage has you coming up with counter-arguments, please wait until section III; for now, just go with this.)

We live not only by love, but also by violence, by severity. Riffing off Sartre’s “We are condemned to be free,” I’d say that we are decreed to make morally questionable choices, to choose a way of life and in doing so choose which beings must ‘take one for the team.’ I’ll eat this, and live instead of it. I’ll take this job, and you’ll have to keep looking. I do not believe that America is currently threatened by immigration, but I can imagine (because I consume dystopian sci-fi) scenarios in which overpopulation becomes an actual problem. At many points in our lives, we are forced to decide what we will and will not accommodate, and this can be a pretty severe choice.

I’ve been meditating on this fact about the severity of life, as I observe and participate in current political debates. I’ve got a friend (just one) who supports the current administration, and when we talk/debate, I heap my righteous indignation on him, asking how can he be so callous towards human life, towards others who don’t share his privileges. And this goes pretty well, until he brings up some counter-example-- some statistically-less-likely-but-still-existing violent criminal migrant, or the similarly-less-likely-but-still-happens victim of a false sexual assault accusation-- at which point I find myself shrugging, and now I’m the callous one.

I’m not bringing this up to make a moral equivalence between the two of us, but to recognize that both of us construct our moral positions by, at some point, drawing a limit to our compassion and willingness to accommodate others.

III. Averting Severity

Re-enter Unetaneh Tokef!

But Repentance, Prayer, and Charity avert the severity of the decree.

We are condemned to be free; how do we avert the severity of our choices? As a secular psychotherapist, I (loosely) translate the triad above to: self-critical analysis, intentionality, and generosity. I believe these practices can mitigate the severity in the (ultimately unavoidable) violence of life.

To respond to my own comment above about competition for limited resources, it’s often the case that we’re driven to compete not by actual scarcity but by the fear of scarcity. I’ll hoard food and keep it from you, not because I’m hungry but because someday I might be hungry. Self-critical analysis may help me distinguish between rational and irrational fear of others. Reflection on intention may help me recognize that I need to find a way of life that serves myself as well as others. And the practice of generosity challenges me to expand my circle of benevolence, and in doing so recognize how I only live by the grace of others.

Self-critical analysis, intentionality, and generosity avert the severity of life.

Passover, as explained through Holes

            Situations can be characterized by the type of hole involved. A hole can appear promising or problematic. A hole can have a bottom or be bottomless. The combinations of those two dimensions produce the following kinds of space: Container, Passage,  Trap, Abyss.

What kind of hole am I encountering?
	Promising	Problematic
Bottom	Container	Trap
Bottomless	Passage	Abyss

            Identifying the kind of hole you are in will help orient you to the possibilities and challenges of your situation. I’d like to illustrate this using the Passover story:

            Egypt = Trap

            Red Sea = Abyss/Passage

            Desert = Passage/Abyss

            Canaan = Container

            *Bonus: The Sinai event as all of the above

Egypt = Trap

A trap is a problematic situation characterized by stuckness, lack of escape. In a trap, there is a space but it’s totally surrounded, unrelentingly contained by rigid boundaries. In a trap, the task is escape, creating holes, pushing and crossing boundaries, or generating freedom through the previously unimagined and unattempted.

There’s a Rabbinic pun about Egypt (Mitzrayim) as Narrow Places (Metzarim). This creates a slightly different space image-- the passage so narrow one becomes trapped in it. This is a beautiful bit of psychological Torah isn’t it; a lot of situations that we think of as traps, in actuality, are just ways we feel stuck while we’re on the way (passage). There’s still a way through, even if we cannot figure how the heck we could squeeze through such a constricted path. Sometimes the path is so narrow we lose all sight of it. Trap situations call for close observation of all apparent boundaries and possible openings. Even if escape is impossible, a hole can serve as a port or vent.

Red Sea = Abyss/Passage

            An abyss is a problematic situation characterized by openness without stability. In an abyss, it’s all space in all directions, unrelenting space, nothing to stabilize or orient oneself against. In an abyss, the task is falling gracefully and/or seeking stability. It’s important to recognize, though, that an encounter with an abyss (especially once you’ve fallen in) is most of the time entirely out of one’s control.

            If you see an abyss up ahead, it’s a pretty good idea to stop first. Do not just enter an abyss! The Israelites are stopped at the Red Sea, facing only problematic options-- a trap behind, an abyss ahead. Then, the miracles happens! God gives them (but not the Egyptians) a passage through the sea. The Midrash on Nachshon ben Aminadav gives us some additional ‘hole’ Torah-- that one might need to jump into an apparent/real abyss, having no other way to discover a passage. Ideally though, when encountering an abyss, one should find a way to explore it while keeping one foot on firm ground.

Desert = Passage/Abyss

            A passage is a promising situation characterized by openness and direction. In a passage, one can press forward, turn back, rest, and get side-tracked. The task is getting through, and all its related challenges-- finding a path, staying on the path, managing obstacles, etc. Because of its similarity with an abyss (because bottomless), passage can also be a very disorienting, distressing, and discouraging situation.

            The desert is passage for the Israelites between Egypt and Canaan. They journey, go astray, make stops, have setbacks, and eventually get somewhere. On the other hand, the wilderness is so disorienting that it can feel more like an abyss. The entire generation leaving Egypt (save two) dies in the desert. For Korah and his ilk, the desert becomes a literal abyss.

Canaan = Container

A container is a promising situation characterized by protective boundaries and flexible openings. In a container, one should feel oriented, safe, stabilized, and free. The task is maintaining good boundaries.

Canaan is the promised container for the Israelites but their time in it will always be fraught with boundary anxiety. Who and what is allowed (or prohibited) in the country/community will be a constant and ever-budding obsession.

Sinai as Container, Abyss, Trap, and Passage

            Sinai appears as a container when the people all arrive and become one nation. Looking back at the Sinai event, it defines the people, creating a division between those who stood at Sinai and those who did not.

            Sinai appears as an abyss when God’s arrival triggers clouds, lightning, and a breakdown of the natural order. God crosses the boundary into the world, and this is threatening to the integrity of the world as a container. This is likely why the people beg Moses to have God speak to him rather than them.

Sinai appears as a trap in the Midrash in which God is said to overturn the mountain on the people “like a barrel.” In this version of the story, the people learn that their ‘freedom’ from Egypt is only for the purpose of serving God; if they don’t ‘choose’ the Torah, then they will remain trapped.

            Is Sinai a passage? Sort of-- it’s a stop along the way, and therefore it is a part of the way. It’s an ordeal for the people to get through, and not everyone (see: Golden calf worshipping) makes it through. The people are challenged to move-- from slavery to freedom, from idolatry to monotheism, from mixed multitude to nation, etc. The story of the Israelites in the desert is one of progress and regress, and Sinai is just one episode in which we see both kinds of movement.

Apil Fool's 2019 - The Folly of Meaning and Nihilism

Welcome to my 14th annual April Fool’s observance! It continues to thrill and delight me that people show up to this, that folks participate by bringing their own paradoxes and listening to mine. I sometimes wonder, are you all just patronizing this old fool? Maybe you just want to save me from embarrassment, so you show up to my party to hear me speak. I would feel pretty foolish if no one came. Although, maybe that’s too charitable a reading of you all-- maybe you actually come because you want to embarrass me, and what better way to do that then show up and listen to me embarrass myself? Dang, now I feel foolish because you did come! Well, thanks a lot-- wait, am I saying that sarcastically?? Man, I don’t even know anymore.

            Oh well! Let’s do this.

            The title of my speech this year is a bit much, but I promise it’ll be worth the trip, if you can believe me. This year’s speech is: The Follies of Meaning and Nihilism. That’s right, you get double the foolishness this year! These twin topics-- meaning and nihilism-- are one way of framing the paradox that fueled my daily writing in 2018.

            I’m using the word “meaning” to represent a certain perspective on life: that life is something we should invest in. We should care! Life is better when we care, when we try, when we do our best, when we aim to explore and plan and optimize and love and commit, when we find meaning in life, when we make meaning in life, when we tell ourselves meaningful stories about ourselves and the world and life. Know what I mean? Like, “Hey all, let’s live meaningful lives because life can be so darn meaningful.” That’s the frame of meaning, and I hope you feel it when I say it. A meaningful life is possible and good to pursue. I could try to answer the question “What’s the meaning of meaning?” but I think it would really make this speech drag. Instead I’m just hoping that some part of you feels it when I say that “meaning” is a good and appropriate pursuit in life. It’s the part of you that loves meaning and wants life to be meaningful and feels good when life feels meaningful. Y’know?

            Now then, the perspective I’m calling “nihilism”-- I could also have called it meaninglessness, but I like how the word “nihilism” brings a lot of attitude into the talk. So, the various things I mean by nihilism-- basically, that all the stuff I said about meaning just now might be lovely but it’s also just bullshit, because life is bullshit. I’ll admit that my atheism makes this perspective easier to feel-- there’s no God, the Universe doesn’t know or care about us, all of our stories about meaning are just stories, there’s no ultimate point to anything, each of us just dies and disappears and gets forgotten, the sun will burn out and everything will be cold and dark, and so whatever we’re doing right now just cannot matter that much, because ultimately it’s all nothing and we’re all nothing.

I think the atheists in the room are already with me, so now lemme try to bum out the more religious folks in the room, with a little help from my biblical friends Kohelet and Job. Both of them might also tell you that life is bullshit because we die and are forgotten, because our safety and comfort and health are fragile and will ultimately desert us, and the fact that a God exists just adds to a sense of injustice in the world rather than saves us from it. Kohelet adds some additional pessimism, letting us know that society will always be unjust, because that’s what humans are like, especially when we gather in large numbers. Of course, in the era of this political administration and the catastrophe of our global stewardship, it’s not too hard to inspire you to feel pessimistic. You bummed yet?

So that’s the basic paradox! We should try to live meaningful lives, and also, life is bullshit. Each approach has its folly. If I try to live a meaningful life, eventually I get hit by the absurdity of it all, or at least with the all-consuming abyss of mortality and eternity. But if I live as if life is bullshit, if I just sink into my pessimism and cynicism, then what a waste, right? I’m a fool if I invest in life, and a fool if I don’t. A fool if I treat life as sacred, a fool if I don’t.

            I’m not going to explore this conceptually. Instead, I want to go straight to talking about what it has looked like, and what it could look like, to live with both of these opposing truths.

            How has this paradox played out in my life so far? I think I go through periods in which the mode of meaning dominates, and other periods in which the mode of nihilism dominates. These might be relatively long periods-- the peak of my religiosity was clearly in the mode of meaning, and my first depressive episode (back in 7th grade) was in the mode of nihilism. The periods can also be much shorter-- I can find that I care deeply about the meaning of my work on Monday but by Thursday or Friday I’d just rather do nothing. Or that right after my coffee at 8am, I’m ready to seize the day, but around 6pm I’d rather the day just leave me alone. If the news is good that day, then maybe life isn’t total bullshit; if the news is bad, well there ya go.

            Two brief examples about how meaning and nihilism can often get a bit mixed up in each other-- these are also ways of showing that what I’m really talking about here is how we frame, how we interpret, our experiences and decisions. The first example is about drugs and alcohol, and the second is about child-raising.

            Drugs and alcohol-- is taking them an act of meaning or nihilism? One could see it either way. At times, I’ve taken drugs or alcohol to facilitate feeling closer to life, closer to others, to make more connections between ideas, and so on-- in that regard, drug-taking is an act of pursuing meaning. Those actions might imply that life without these facilitators lacks meaning; or my actions could just as well imply that life is rife with meaning, and there’s nothing like a good sacrament for revealing the sacred. Right? Sometimes people feel great love for others while on drugs. That could be because they actually hate people but love drugs. Or they might realize on drugs how much they actually love people. So the act of taking a substance could reflect the spirit of meaning or in the spirit of nihilism.

            Moving on to children-- is making one in this day and age an act of meaning or nihilism? One could see it either way. Watch this-- I could choose to have a child because I’m investing in life, because I care about the future, because I want to pass on my values and hopes to the next generation. Or I could choose not have to child because I’m investing in life, and I don’t want my resources to get sucked up by a new life when there are already so many suffering people and institutions I could serve, in order to create a more secure future. In the mode of meaning, I could choose to have a child or not. Now watch this-- I could choose to have a child in a more cynical frame of mind, thinking who cares if it exponentially increases my carbon footprint and takes away time and energy I could have spent fighting for justice, because, hey, I’ll get mine, and we’re all gonna die anyhow. Or I could choose not to have a child because fuck it, that’s time and money I could spend traveling or on myself in some other way, and why care about the future if I’ll be dead in it anyhow. In the mode of nihilism, I could choose to have a child or not.

            Why am I doing this to you? What am I doing to you? I think I’m just trying to show that, at least in my head, life is meaningful and life is bullshit, and my actions keep expressing one or the other or both, and I just keep feeling so foolish about the whole thing. Foolish, but smug also, you can see that part too, right? Smug and glib and sort of right.

            Ok, how are we doing? So far I’ve hopefully demonstrated how I get jerked around by this paradox. I think I owe you some kind of wisdom about how to live this paradox well.

            We should pursue a meaningful life, and also life is bullshit. Can those be brought together?

            My first suggestion is the usual one when I’m dealing with paradox, which is that it’s best to seek rhythm between these modes, and in doing so, achieve some kind of balance. That looks like caring really hard, but then not being surprised by life’s absurdity (the Stoic approach?).. Or caring really hard, but also occasionally giving yourself a break from caring. It could look like staring death and loss and nothingness in the face, and despairing, and then giving yourself a break from that and just living life and enjoying hope. I could treat each mode as a blessing, by taking the attitude that it’s kinda nice to feel really motivated in the morning, and also a relief to care less about all of this later on in the day. Work and play, awake and asleep, solitude and intimacy, meaning and nihilism-- maybe these opposites work best as a pair, each works best when I take them in the right proportions, striking a good rhythm, a good balance.

            That’s my usual suggestion. I’d love to be more ambitious, and to offer a vision of harmony rather than rhythm, right, like some way of gracefully combining the two modes, to stand with one foot in meaning and one foot in nihilism. But I really don’t know how to do that-- in my experience, each just spoils the other. When I’m trying to make something of myself and of this life, a touch of nihilism brings despair and just kills my motivation. When I’m just letting go and not giving a shit, thoughts of meaning can provoke guilt or shame.

            So, do I have a better suggestion? Well, I have this, and this is really why I’m talking about this topic today and always-- the best thing you can do is make sure not to neglect one side of this paradox! And I’ll be honest, I’m saying that because I strongly prefer people who can appreciate and stand in both sides of this dilemma. If you’re too caught up in meaning or too caught up in nihilism, I tend to find you imbalanced and insufferable. I just feel like you’re either missing the point or missing the pointlessness.

            Yup. As always, my solution is the same-- telling you to hold both sides of the paradox. Just because the universe doesn’t care doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. Just because you feel like your life is precious doesn’t mean the universe should. Life is meaningful, and life is bullshit; the deepest wisdom I have about life is to take it seriously and also it’s a big joke. Confused? Feeling foolish? Excellent. Thank you.

Examples of each of the Ten Variations on Void

After writing my initial post and feeling very proud of it, a couple of people asked for examples, which is fair, since the original is pretty abstract.

I’ve also decided to put them into larger categories:

VOIDS THAT CAN BE USED FOR SOMETHING

A Void that Echoes

This is a very interactive space. The space in a conversation for example, which one person fills, prompting the other person to respond. You put sound/meaning into the space, and expect relevant sound/meaning to come back at you in return. Social media is another major void that echoes.

A Void that can Contain

Say I feel an emptiness inside of me, but then I fill it with love or purpose or some other third thing, and feel less empty. The void which I felt was actually (or seemingly) an X-shaped hole, a hole which is now serving its purpose. The void was a particular lack, whether of love or purpose or X.

A Void that is Transparent

The gap between what I said/did and what I meant. The gap between what I said and what you heard. The gap between my current state and my goal. To become aware of these voids is to become aware of distances not yet crossed.

A Void that makes Room for Possibility

A break in the schedule. Creative destruction. Find new work, a new partner, a new hobby.

VOIDS THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED AS VOIDS (and not for some other use)

A Void that does not Contain

Say I feel an emptiness inside of me, and try to fill it with things, but no matter what I still feel empty in that particular spot. It could be that I haven’t found the right thing to put there, or it’s possible that the hole has no bottom, and therefore cannot serve as a container. This could be something like deep, existential insecurity, the kind that exists because I’m mortal. Fear of Death, Fear of Absurdity, etc… they’re much bigger than anything you might put in them to fill them.

A Void that does not Echo

For an atheist (or rather, for someone whose divinity does not take a personal form, or whose god is currently face-hiding), the cosmos is a void that does not echo. Say whatever you want into it, it will not respond. Shout at the stars, shout into the darkness, you’ll only hear your own voice and then silence. This can be peaceful and humbling, or depressing, depending on set and setting.

A Void that is Opaque

Any meaningless event that you wish had meaning. Death. Tragic accidents.

Alternatively, actual darkness or fog.

Or, meaningless events that are fine that way-- a random breeze.

A Void that Crushes the Infinite/Possibility

Pretty much any of the voids in this section fit this description.