Alexandra Fidyk writes about Socrates’ encounter with
Diotima, in Plato’s Symposium. Socrates, like many in this famous
discussion, is talking about whether an object of love can truly be known and
esteemed when it is not yet possessed or ‘owned’ by the lover. Diotima suggests
to Socrates that there is a middle space between ‘knowing’ and ‘not knowing’,
as in cases where a person can know how to do something without quite having
the words for them. Socrates is humbled by Diotima’s example, and Fidyk
maintains that this humility is also a model for the receptivity of love.
Hence, she remarks, “Eros lives ‘in between’ all the messiness and the
particularities that comprise an embodied human life.” (p.63).
Fidyk’s analysis points to a model of love as enchantment and receptivity,
which are both intriguing possibilities. For one, I believe that this ‘model’
of Eros goes against a notion popularized by M. Scott Peck, among others, that
love is an action and not a feeling. Is it possible that perhaps love is
neither an action nor a feeling, but something quite non-categorizable? Diotima
hints at this when she describes this mysterious middle way between knowing and
not knowing. The other interesting aspect, I find, is that Fidyk finds a space
in her interpretation to explore a contemplative understanding of love. This
idea might sound quite mystical to some, but it avoids viewing love as some
kind of abstract technique of giving. It also suggests that love embodies how
to receive another, not necessarily how to ‘give to’ another as though
they were separate.
The way I relate to this analysis: there are times when I feel that giving can
be an impediment to loving. This is especially true when a person takes on a
giving role in relation to others, and seems to put that role in front of the
other person or the connection one has with that person. It could be that in
that situation, the person values the giving role they create for themselves
more than the actual being with another. But there may be other reasons for
this as well. I believe that when giving becomes a strong habit, there is
sometimes a fear that ‘non-giving’ will sever the bond one has with someone
else. It is as though one needs to be in a giving mode 24/7, non-stop, and it’s
about exerting oneself to achieve a merit with someone else. Not only can that
way of relating to people be exhausting, but it is also failing to consider how
one is experiencing the moment with that person. Soon, the relationship can
become mechanical and full of this hidden expectation or fear of separation
from not giving.
I think that meaningful giving requires a meaningful ability to receive an
experience and to just interact with it. Meditation is perhaps a good example
of this kind of connection. When I meditate, I am asked to focus on a method,
such as watching the breath, reciting a mantra, or observing the body. If I do
this with a mindset of fear (fear of thoughts or ‘intruding’ experience), then
the method becomes a projection of the self. At that point, I start to measure
‘my ability’ to be on the practice by how long I can sustain awareness of the
method. This soon becomes tiring, especially because it emphasizes sustaining
the existence of the subject, the “I”. So in order to sustain the practice, I
have to relax quite a bit and find some way to quiet the mind. This is the
background through which the method starts to have a context. Then the
awareness becomes the experience, and the method is gently referring to that
gentle awareness. At that point, there is simply no need to push or put the
self into the foreground of what is happening. It is just this still awareness
where the breath arises and falls in a cyclic pattern.
I do wonder if this meditative stance of “ just being” and receiving can apply
to a loving relationship. I believe so, but it is like what Fidyk hints at in
the quote above when she describes soulful love. It seems that in order to
truly receive another, one has to go beyond even the images one create of
others.
References,
Fidyk, Alexandra (2009), “A Rehabilitation of
Eros: Cultivating a Conscious Relation with Love” Jung Journal: Culture
& Psyche, Volume 3, Number 4, pp.59-68
No comments:
Post a Comment