The Dynamic Life

Ok, I admit it, the title is a redundancy, in case you picked up on that.  Life, by definition, is dynamic.  In other words, our life is always full of life, active and moving.  Even for the couch potato, the assembly line worker and the elderly in the nursing home.  Of course, these are stereotypes, but a stereotype is a stereotype because it is built on the reality of the picture. 
So the title "The Dynamic Life" does not necessarily mean the "productive life" or "the positive life", but simply that life is ever changing, never static. As we go through our days, we are doing something, both physically and mentally.  We are either growing and improving or growing and diminishing.  There is no such thing as a static human being. 
So the question is, "Which one are you?"  In our day and age, there are so many possibilities for growth and improvement. But at the same time, there are so many opportunities for distraction and loss.  We can put in our eight hours a day of work and then waste the rest of our time in distractions and entertainments.  In this case, we are diminishing, as we are not using the mind and/or body that God has given us.  Or we could be using the rest of our time for the improvement of our minds, our bodies or the improvement of others.  Granted, there is the fourth option of our efforts going toward the diminishing of others, and unfortunately, this is common.
So where are we at?  A slow decline into mediocrity and waste or are we growing and improving.  We only have so much time, considering that most of us have to work and sleep, which is 2/3's of our day.  What do we do with the other eight hours?

The view of ancestral superiority

In a paper that I recently read, "The Perils of Omnisignificance: Language and Reason in Mesopotamian Hermeneutics " by Eckhart Frahm, the concept of appealing to the distant past as the repository of truth is found in first millenium BC Mesopotamia. The question that came to my mind, upon discovering this, is that of "why".  Why did the Mesopotamian philosophers, of that day, come to embrace the concept of ancient superior? Why did they believe that the past held the truth?  For the Orthodox Christian, we look to the first century truth as the fountain of truth, simply because it was the first century believers, who had been taught by Christ, living and learning directly under his leadership.
Of course, the Orthodox church does not limit itself to only what is found in the first century.  As the church has continued to grow and mature, our beliefs have not changed, but have been clarified over the centuries.  As we have come to cultural situations where explanation is necessary, the church has promoted learning and understanding, and giving energy to the clarification of doctrine.
But the original question, "Why did the ancient Mesopotamian philosophers look to the further past for truth?" remains to be understood, at least by me.  What was their thinking and their presuppositions built upon?  What did they know about their ancestors and philosophical/intellectual predecessors, that we do not?  To whom where they appealing?  To whom did they intellectually submit?
The time frame for this paper is first millenium Mesopotamia.  This would make these peoples contemporary with King David in Israel.  This would make these people the descendants, 500 years past, of Abraham, who came from Mesopotamia.  I do not, at this time, have an answer, but the idea of coming to an understanding of what drove ancient philosophers to embrace the hermeneutic they did, is fascinating.  

Speaking in categories

As is obvious, if one watches the news and current events, there are massive categorical disruptions taking place.  Women are beginning to respond to the sexism that has been so prominent in history, different races are beginning to speak out and act out against the horrible abuses that take place based on race.  The category of gender is being questioned, re-defined and re-formed.

It recently occurred to me that the practice we have of categorizing people is really just a form of stereotyping.  One cannot say that all women are weak, that all Asians are computer whizzes, that all Native Americans are alcoholics or that all homosexuals are flamboyant imitations of Liberace. To do this type of categorizing is simply not accurate.  I suspect that much of this practice comes from, of all unexpected places, the idea of “big”. We live in a big country, we live in big houses, we drive big cars, we go to big churches, we go to big malls, etc, etc. But if we look at every single one of these items, they are all malformed and twisted in some sense.  Big, almost always, results in deformation and abuse. The use of big typically results in anonymity and loss of accountability. And this is the root problem.

When anonymity and lack of accountability become the norm, there is a tragic disconnect that takes place in people.  No longer are we dealing with John, Jim, Mary or Sally, we are dealing with nameless faces, nameless numbers and statistics.  We begin dealing and thinking in terms of categories: white, black, Asian, straight, gay, etc., etc. And when our interactions lose personality, we have nothing to love, as one does not love a category, but an individual.  

Because love is what it is all about.  Jesus summed up the entire point of life as love of God and love of neighbor. There is nothing else needed.  

Understanding Perspective

From the moment we are born and every following moment of our existence, our subjective understanding of reality consists of receiving and interpreting sensory input.  The problem is not the hardware, our five senses all work correctly and accurately (with birth defects being the obvious exception). The hardware is fine, but the interpretation process is where the problem lies. 99.9% of the time, we work on the assumption that our five layers of sensory input are the sum total of reality.

But Eastern thought and quantum thought tell us differently. Even within the Christian world, while we do admit to the reality of God, his interaction with mankind and the prospect of eternity, these concepts are still held at arm’s length as “future” or, at best, an emotional accessory.  The immediate reality upon which everyone works, is that of the financial here and now, retirement included. We work to buy things, to invest, to provide for our families, to prepare for retirement, and to enjoy the physical here and now. It simply is the framework within which everyone works and thinks.

So, what do we do when we come to realize that the physical here and now only accounts for 5% of reality?  According to Eastern thought, all mankind is connected, i.e., the sin of anyone person adversely affects the whole of humanity, in a metaphysical way.  We see when we meet someone and get an uneasy feeling, or, adversely, when we immediately “connect” with someone we meet.

The overall question here is responding to reality.  When we move past the shallowness and distractedness of a mere temporal reality and begin to see life holistically, the result is disturbing.  We find ourselves out of sync with the rest of society. The bright and shiny things of pop culture take on a paper cut-out feel. That which so easily distracted us in the past, now only leaves us empty.  Like a child learning to walk, we need to grow up and learn to live as genuine human beings.

Finding happiness

There seems to be a variety of ways that people find personal happiness (definitionally speaking).  Either through substances (food, alcohol, cannabis, etc.), through sex, or through distraction. The odd thing about using distraction is that WHAT that thing is that one is using to distract is irrelevant.  The mere fact that some “thing” is being used for a purpose other than its created purpose, automatically makes it an abuse. It can even be a “good” thing, i.e., exercise, learning, philanthropy. But the mere fact that it, as a tool, is being used to distract our thinking away from those things that are real or valuable, ruins it.

How does one find happiness?  It is even possible? Better yet, is it even valid to make finding happiness a goal for one’s life?  The church teaches us that this life was given for repentance. In other words, we are born, without our consent, into a family we didn’t choose, into a culture we didn’t choose, and into a period of time we did not choose.  We are born with sinful inclinations and with a soul that is a “son of Adam.” The mere fact that we are born human automatically makes us needy. But being blinded by sin, distracted by the bright, shiny things of the culture in which we live, raised by parents who are distracted and sinful as well, our potential for holiness is limited.

We can only find true happiness in holiness.   Sure, we may find titillation and entertainment in the world around us, but this is fleeting and very short lived.  The law of diminishing returns is a painful reality. We see it especially brightly in substance abuse. We will find no true happiness in things, in distractions, or even in people.  There is nothing wrong with any of these things, especially people, as God created man to be in communion. Ultimately with Him, but nearly just as much so, with other men. But our sinfulness, and the sinfulness of others, makes us selfish and mean.  Our fallen nature ruins everything. Especially our ability to see and embrace true happiness.

So finding happiness takes place when we do not seek it.  Finding happiness comes when we think of life as boot camp, a time for training and a time for hard work.  Like the carrot in front of the donkey, we will never reach the carrot if the carrot is what we seek. If we learn to look past those “bright, shiny things” that are constantly in our view, to the true end goal.  We will find true joy during the journey and true happiness at its end.

Don’t confuse the two.

Love for the other

We must not love, simply for the benefit of ourselves but instead we must love for the benefit of the other. The Christian life is defined as love of God and love of neighbor. But why? We love others because God loves us first. God loves us first, not because we were loveable or because we deserved love but because perfection is defined as love. God is love. To love unconditionally is easy when one loves for the other. To love that which is lovely and loveable is easy and intuitive. But to love in order to build up and restore the other is what we should be. This kind of love should define the Christian.

We love for the other because love is the only thing that will restore that which is damaged and distorted. Without love, we are nothing.

Distraction

When you distract yourself enough, it’s easy to stay content.  When you are distracted, you don’t spend time considering eternal life, suffering, or the vanity of life.  I suppose this is why the ascetics speak of the Orthodox life as being one of a “bright sadness.” We are constantly weighed down with grief over sin, grief over failure, grief over suffering (our own and that of others) and the general inability to really do anything about any of it.  But at the same time, we can look forward to an eternity free of sin and suffering.

This is not a selfish perspective.  In most cases, there is very little we can do to relieve suffering.  Certainly, we must do what we can, but there is nothing wrong with recognizing our weakness and inability but at the same time looking forward to a time when that suffering has ceased.