break through language

Sometimes there is a tremendous gulf between the meaning of a word and the quality it is supposed to represent. A simple example is color: “blue.” How is the particular shade of the ocean (which one? at what time of day?) ever representable by language?

A monk once wrote about some of his teachers along his path: « On peut reconnaître la perfection humaine et spirituelle quand on la voit, mais ce n’est guère lui rendre justice que de la limiter aux mots qui viennent ordinairement à l’esprit : sagesse, connaissance, bonté, noblesse, simplicité, rigueur, honnêteté . . . »

One can perhaps recognize human and spiritual perfection when one sees it, however, ordinary words by its limitations fail to do justice in its characterizations. If you did not comprehend some of those French words, that’s good because it would be a good exercise to look them up in a dictionary, « sagesse, connaissance, bonté, noblesse, simplicité, rigueur, honnêteté », like a child learning in school.

There is vast distance between definitions and the ineffable qualities of a person. One might then ask how one becomes characterized as “X.” This quality “X” is not a permanent label affixed to us at birth. What actions need to be demonstrated to qualify as having this quality “X”?

I wondered why I was so moved by that monk’s utterance. They are the very qualities which I hope would describe myself. But yet the words themselves are so inadequate, and I feel I must break through language, and reach the other shore . . .

Discussing the book, THE DA VINCI CODE, my Persian friend tells me of his interest in Gnosticism. Later that night, I read the following:

‘The names of worldly things are utterly deceptive, for they turn the heart from what is real to what is unreal. Whoever hears the word “god” thinks not of what is real but rather of what is unreal. So also with the words: “father, son, holy spirit,” “life,” “light,” “resurrection,” “church,” and all the rest, people do not think of what is real but of what is unreal, though the words refer to what is real. The words that are heard belong to this world. Do not be deceived. If words belonged to the eternal realm, they would never be pronounced in this world, nor would they designate worldly things.’ -Gospel of Philip, Nag Hammadi Codex II, Tractate 3, page 54.

Is this a good example of synchronicity (in the Jungian sense)? Events in life are signs, and if you closely pay attention, they are akin to signs on the freeway giving directions. I am in the driver’s seat, an open convertible, heat-on full blast in the winter, and the white clouds on this radiant day are so beautiful.

The story goes . . . in the beginning was the Word. Okay then, so what about the ending?

This probably sums up the question of a Seeker in a religious context, or even a scientific one. A child begs you to continue telling the story until the ending. Others as adults retreat from the WORLD seeking some sort of answer.

George Steiner, in his book LANGUAGE AND SILENCE (1979, p. 31), addressed the retreat from the WORD:

“The highest, purest reach of the contemplative act is that which has learned to leave language behind it. The ineffable lies beyond the frontiers of the word. It is only by breaking through the walls of language that visionary observance can enter the world of total and immediate understanding. Where such understanding is attained, the truth need no longer suffer the impurities and fragmentation that speech necessarily entails.”

Here is an example of language pointing outside of itself. Anyways, I received several emails asking for an explanation of my N-th thing, “break through language.” Due to my loss of words, let me delegate that task to the above.

The Internet serves at least two survival instincts: the gathering of information, and the expansion of social networks. Interestingly for some individuals, such habits may go in overdrive, resulting in excess time being spent online.

One might argue that excess occurs when the real world is neglected in favor of the virtual. Whenever there is disconnect from the real world there is a case study for psychopathology.

It is worth noting that the primary means of interacting with the Internet is language. The virtual world is principally created by language. And the thoughts constructed by language govern our emotional feelings.

A return to the real world (under any definition) would require not only a break from the Internet (a special case, easy to discern), but more generally from language.

Dedicated to Antonin Artaud (1896-1948): * « briser
la langue » *

My goal is stated in French because its special
meaning elaborated in Artaud’s writing.

My best translation would be “break through
language.” Language seemingly aids our
understanding of the world, but the downside is
that the “world” becomes shaped by it. When we
truly pursue understanding and wisdom, the
biggest obstacle turns out be language itself.

No doubt we need language to be socially
integrated (that is to say, remain free of mental
institutions), but we need to recognize its
limitations. Stop here for second, and listen.
Are you aware of that constant inner chatter
going through your mind? (Silent pause)

Brison là ! —(Enough said!) It’s time to go
beyond language, to break on through to the other
side. (Enjoy the silence.)