Выбрать главу

tears. «Full of blind rage. An untouchable. No one who has

known me has loved me. Ever. No onecould love me.»

Suddenly, Pam rose and walked toward Philip. She

signaled Tony to change seats with her and, sitting down

next to Philip, took his hand in hers, and said in a soft

voice, «Icould have loved you, Philip. You were the most

beautiful, the most magnificent man I had ever seen. I

called and wrote you for weeks after you refused to see me

again. I could have loved you, but you polluted—”

«Shhh.» Julius reached over and touched Pam on the

shoulder to silence her. «No, Pam, don`t go there. Stay with

the first part, say it again.»

«I could have loved you.»

«And you were the...” prompted Julius.

«And you were the most beautiful man I had ever

seen.»

«Again,” whispered Julius.

Still holding Philip`s hand and seeing his tears flow

freely, Pam repeated, «I could have loved you, Philip. You

were the most beautiful man...”

At this Philip, with his hands to his face, rose and

bolted from the room.

Tony immediately headed to the door. «That`s my

cue.»

Julius, grunting as he too rose, stopped Tony. «No,

Tony, this one`s on me.» He strode out and saw Philip at

the end of the hall facing the wall, head resting on his

forearm, sobbing. He put his arm around Philip`s shoulder

and said, «It`s good to let it all out, but we must go back.»

Philip, sobbing more loudly and heaving as he tried

to catch his breath, shook his head vigorously.

«You must go back, my boy. This is what you came

for, this very moment, and you mustn`t squander it. You`ve

worked well today—exactly the way you have to work to

become a therapist. Only a couple of minutes left in the

meeting. Just come back with me and sit in the room with

the others. I`ll watch out for you.»

Philip reached around and briefly, just for a moment,

put his hand atop Julius`s hand, then raised himself erect

and walked alongside Julius back to the group. As Philip

sat down, Pam touched his arm to comfort him, and Gill,

sitting on the other side, clasped his shoulder.

«How areyou doing, Julius?» asked Bonnie. «You

look tired.»

«I`m feeling wonderful in my head, I`m so swept

away, so admiring of the work this group has done—I`m so

glad to have been a part of this. Physically, yes, I have to

admit I am ailing, and weary. But I have more than enough

juice left for our last meeting next week.»

«Julius,” said Bonnie, «okay to bring a ceremonial

cake for our last meeting?»

«Absolutely, bring any kind of carrot cake you

wish.»

But there was to be no formal farewell meeting. The

following day Julius was stricken by searing headaches.

Within a few hours he passed into a coma and died three

days later. At their usual Monday–afternoon time the group

gathered at the coffee shop and shared the ceremonial

carrot cake in silent grief.

41

Death Comes to Arthur Schopenhauer

_________________________

I can bear

the

thought

that in a

short time

worms will

eat away

my body

but the

idea of

philosophy

professors

nibbling

at my

philosophy

makes me

shudder.

_________________________

Schopenhauer faced death as he faced everything

throughout his life—with extreme lucidity. Never flinching

when staring directly at death, never succumbing to the

emollient of supernatural belief, he remained committed to

reason to the very end of his life. It is through reason, he

said, that we first discover our death: we observe the death

of others and, by analogy, realize that death must come to

us. And it is through reason that we reach the self–evident

conclusion that death is the cessation of consciousness and

the irreversible annihilation of the self.

There are two ways to confront death, he said: the

way of reason or the way of illusion and religion with its

hope of persistence of consciousness and cozy afterlife.

Hence, the fact and the fear of death is the progenitor of

deep thought and the mother of both philosophy and

religion.

Throughout his life Schopenhauer struggled with the

omnipresence of death. In his first book, written in his

twenties, he says: «The life of our bodies is only a

constantly prevented dying, an ever deferred death....

Every breath we draw wards off the death that constantly

impinges on us, in this way we struggle with it every

second.»

How did he depict death? Metaphors of death–confrontation abound in his work; we are sheep cavorting

in the pasture, and death is a butcher who capriciously

selects one of us and then another for slaughter. Or we are

like young children in a theater eager for the show to begin

and, fortunately, do not know what is going to happen to

us. Or we are sailors, energetically navigating our ships to

avoid rocks and whirlpools, all the while heading

unerringly to the great final catastrophic shipwreck.

His descriptions of the life cycle always portray an

inexorably despairing voyage.

What a difference there is between our beginning and

our end! The former in the frenzy of desire and the

ecstasy of sensual pleasure; the latter in the destruction

of all the organs and the musty odor of corpses. The

path from birth to death is always downhill as regards

well–being and the enjoyment of life; blissfully

dreaming childhood, lighthearted youth, toilsome

manhood, frail and often pitiable old age, the torture of

the last illness, and finally the agony of death. Does it

not look exactly like existence were a false step whose

consequences gradually become more and more

obvious?

Did he fear his own death? In his later years he

expressed a great calmness about dying. Whence his

tranquillity? If the fear of death is ubiquitous, if it haunts us

all our life, if death is so fearsome that vast numbers of

religions have emerged to contain it, how did the isolated

and secular Schopenhauer quell its terror for himself?

His methods were based on intellectual analysis of

the sources of death–anxiety. Do we dread death because it

is alien and unfamiliar? If so, he insists we are mistaken

because death is far more familiar than we generally think.

Not only have we a taste of death daily in our sleep or in

states of unconsciousness, but we have all passed through

an eternity of nonbeing before we existed.

Do we dread death because it is evil? (Consider the

gruesome iconography commonly depicting death.) Here

too he insists we are mistaken: «It is absurd to consider

nonexistence as an eviclass="underline" for every evil, like every good,

presupposes existence and consciousness.... to have lost

what cannot be missed is obviously no evil.» And he asks

us to keep in mind that life is suffering, that it is an evil in

itself. That being so, how can losing an evil be an evil?

Death, he says, should be considered a blessing, a release

from the inexorable anguish of biped existence. «We

should welcome it as a desirable and happy event instead

of, as is usually the case, with fear and trembling.» Life

should be reviled for interrupting our blissful nonexistence,

and, in this context, he makes his controversial claim: «If

we knocked on the graves and asked the dead if they would