The teenage experience is unmindful of gender; they are still in the process of establishing the nature of the identity. It is instead filled with the possibilities of all things being equal ( see earlier blog ). This explains the mother's preoccupation that eventually all things are viewed as one.
The adage as regards equality is not without some peculiar difficulties in its application. If all things are equal, there is no high and low, no good and bad and no rich and poor. Yet we see these differences everyday. In fact, they are the basis for our views about ourselves; for what is, is often defined by what is not. So how does one create acceptance of such a faith?
One way is to create a special avoidance of anything happening as being true, that it is in the nature of a play and not absolutely true. The Indians rely on the practice of the leelas for this purpose. Others rely on a social decorum that will not overtly admit to differences and plays at not drawing attention to success. It's called a play of manners. Still others, in the fiery force of religion, refer to all physical phenomenon as being false, that only the unseen is true.
Such has been our preoccupation of the issues over the past ages. The Indian practice of darma helps to prepare the society for an acceptance of less, in comparison to others, with the assertion that god is ultimately fair and his wisdom is what governs all actions. This, where it is followed steadfastly and with a stout heart, creates the pillars of our social architecture. But does it endure?
Our literature refers to the passing of seasons in our lives, in which things go up and down. When we have something, we sometimes admire others for their endurance, as observed in the retort ' I may be poor but I am honest.' Those who have, challenge the rights of those who don't, in a declaration of their cherished concerns for the equality of others. Our works of charity and philanthropy are also a big part of this experience.
So while we are engaged in the socially pleasing acts of charity and benevolence, we hide the fact that the issue of inequality exists. It becomes woven into the fabric of life as a challenge to be overcome, a gamble to be won, a measure of self worth and the test of one's faith in god. So is anything wrong with all these? Absolutely nothing or are the facts of our existence being twisted around some sense of the waiting hungry tiger?
James Whistler painted ' Two Peacocks, ' a portrayal of the dance of vanity between two such fowls. The reference is in no doubt to the self reflection we experience with regards to the cold facts in our mind of fair reason. We will not admit to differences, yet we have to constantly work at cultivating the equality always between two opposites. A popular joke refers to the pastor of a church saying that all of god's creation are equal. When confronted by a hunchback in the back row, he replied, ' Why son, you're the most perfect hunchback I've ever seen.'
The aim is to maintain a balance in us, in the deepest seat of our conscience. We all therefore need a way to do this. The young child growing up in the family, in particular, must be schooled in such a perception, not with deceit but with understanding.
To say that something is unequal in the world is to refer to a part of us as being less. This diminishes us. The practice of the balance is to ensure that we keep passion and the facts in proper relation to each other.
The Indian Saivite practice attempts the great task of uniting opposites in the grand accomplishment of Sivan / Sakthi. This is not for the faint-hearted or the immature in mind. It is a bone crunching process that reduces everything to its simplest and creates the acceptance for what is plainly true, without any embellishment. Such lack of embellishment sometimes involves food or the lack of it. The purpose is to convince the aspirant that what they perceive as logical and fair in our lives is not influenced by anything else, certainly not a full belly.
Such then, is the strange and mystical dance between the two peacocks. One lives on the logical and factual nature of experiences. It argues its points and will not give way. The other lives on the love of passion and gives vent to its righteous umbrage. Is it therefore a dance? Such a term was coined by the early Saivite followers, as being the smooth harmony between the opposites. Smooth? Harmonious? ' Why, there has never been a more smooth and harmonious two world wars this last century, not to mention several smaller skirmishes.' Does this suffice?
The peacocks I'm told don't care. Each is aware only of its own perfection and sees the other as the perfect fool. Amazing! Perhaps the fault lies with the observer; he ought to get a life!
Beyond the peacocks however, our character as human is called upon to stage such an act of equality. The one who accomplishes this, to the satisfaction of Sivan/Sakthi, is a father. The ladies do this with a whimsical dismissal of the obvious and pushing into the center, the apparent glamor of their bodies. The men do this with argument and push into the center, their willingness for trial by battle. Foolishness? Perhaps there is a little in both genders. Peacocks?
There, at least, is the semblance of equality we seek; that we are equally foolish. Thereafter, we learn to laugh at ourselves! Surely our laughter says something about ourselves; it completes us, as if to say, there's nothing more preposterous than a foolish man who is also humorous. It's probably the other guy anyway.
But is there a third? Such an individual will be the father. He, has apparently made the transition to the union, but there continues to be a mystery surrounding him. They say he might be god and it appears that he may be having the last laugh.
So what of his perception? It must be like mother's, that all things are ultimately one.
Further Reading:
Zen Buddhism
Zen Buddhism
