The Anguish of Choosing

 Existential therapy seems to have a lot to say about the anguish of having to choose. I would like to share my understanding of the nature of choice, both from existential and Buddhist perspectives.
   Many years ago, I read a book by J.P. Sartre called Nausea. Of all of Sartre's books, this one seemed to speak to me the most as a teenager. Why? One particular scene always stands to mind, and that is the one in which Roquentin, the main character, sees a "tree" stripped away of the label of "tree". Roquentin is horrified by the tree because suddenly there is no label to "hem it in" or to contain it in some way. Why "horrified"? There may be many psychoanalytic interpretations, but I think it's because Roquentin is beholding the fear of annihilation due to the infinite variations of the so-called "things" around him. Without the label of "tree", there is no metaphoric "container" that allows me to see something schematically and reduce it to a type. I start to feel overwhelmed by the infinite possibilities of the Other, and thus start to lose my sense of agency and a bound "sense of self".
   We do something similar in our longer meditation retreats, and this involves being able to hear sounds and see the world around us without prescribing particular labels to them. It's actually not an easy practice to do, and I recognize that the context in which Sartre was writing might have influenced how his character was responding to the situation. The point I want to make is that it's important to address the terrors of "annihilation" that this experience can offer people. I theorize that most of our identities are subconscious responses to the threat of annihilation that comes from infinite proliferation of forms.
   One solution, if there is one, is to simply spend one's life generating new forms or new ways of seeing. This is the path of the artist, where I affirm my ability to create with or alongside the forms around me using my own flexibility to see new designs in the natural world. The other path might be considered more contemplative, akin to what monastics do, and that is to meditate on the source of the infinite variation. Who, or what, is beholding these infinite forms?  Is that "it" a thing that can be defined or reduced to particular forms? I consider this to be a path that Zen Buddhism (or Chan Buddhism) tends to practice: not getting attached to forms but trying to investigate the source of all forms.
     However, I wanted to add that existential philosophy has a lot to say about the consequences of choosing either path (ie. the artist or the mystic contemplative). The consequence is always a sense of anguish of choosing, which cannot be eradicated. For the artist, making a new work of art provides a portal which allows the infinite to be expressed in a form that others can understand and learn from. However, there is never a final end to this expression, and the artist risks insanity (possibly) in trying to express endless proliferation of form. On the other hand, the mystic's way is also fraught with the anguish of refraining from being attached to forms. Even when I detach from forms (emotionally), I am still bound or condemned to living in a world of forms, and am responsible to them. The mystic might experience the pangs of realizing that there are some very desirable forms to pursue, yet she or he is bound to a path that of non-attachment.
   The point is that no matter what path I take, I am still a kind of negation that cannot be defined by the path itself and this is what gives me a sense of infinite responsibility. Every time I choose one way, I accept the consequences of denying the other, and this is an endless source of anguish. I am never "satisfied" in the sense that my whole being can be reduced to an essence or a path. But in acknowledging this anguish, I no longer go on a path of trying to get rid of anguish. Knowing that anguish is part of what it means to be a human with finite life (and infinite choice), I can learn to accept and live with that anguish.