responded. «I attended one of Philip`s lectures and gradually
understood that he had constructed it specifically to offer me some
help. He discussed at length a passage from a novel in which a
dying man obtained much consolation from reading a passage by
Schopenhauer.»
«Which novel?» asked Pam.
«Buddenbrooks,” replied Julius.
«And it wasn`t helpful? Why not?» asked Bonnie.
«For several reasons. First Philip`s mode of giving me
comfort was very indirect—much like the way he just presented
the passage by Epictetus...”
«Julius,” said Tony, «I`m not being a smart ass, but wouldn`t
it be better to speak directly to Philip—and guess who I learned
this from?»
«Thanks, Tony—you are one hundred percent right.» Julius
turned to face Philip. «Your mode of offering me counsel in the
course of a lecture was off–putting—so indirect and so public. And
so unexpected because we had just spent an hour in private face–to–face talk in which you seemed utterly indifferent to my condition.
That was one thing. And the other was the actual content. I can`t
repeat the passage here—I don`t have your photographic
memory—but essentially it described a dying patriarch having an
epiphany in which the boundaries dissolved between himself and
others. As a result he was comforted by the unity of all life and the
idea that after death he would return to the life force whence he
came and hence retain his connectedness with all living things.
That about right?» Julius looked at Philip, who nodded.
«Well, as I tried to tell you before, Philip, that idea offers me
no comfort—zero. If my own consciousness is extinguished, then
it matters little to me that my life energy or my bodily molecules or
my DNA persists in deep space. And if connectivity is the quest,
then I`d rather do it in person, in the flesh. So»—he turned and
scanned the group and then faced Pam—«that was the first
consolation Philip offered, and the parable in your hands is the
second.»
After a brief silence Julius added, «I`m feeling I`ve been
doing too much talking today. How are you all responding to
what`s been happening so far?»
«I`m interested,” said Rebecca.
«Yeah,” said Bonnie.
«This is some pretty high–level stuff going on,” said Tony,
«but I`m staying with it.»
«I`m aware,” noted Stuart, «of ongoing tension here.»
«Tension between...?» asked Tony.
«Between Pam and Philip, of course.»
«And lots between Julius and Philip,” added Gill, again
taking up Philip`s cause. «I`m wondering, Philip, do you feel
listened to? Do you feel your contributions get the consideration
they merit?»
«It seems to me, that...that...well...” Philip was unusually
tentative but soon regained his characteristic fluency. «Isn`t it
precipitous to dismiss so quickly—”
«Who are you talking to?» asked Tony.
«Right,” answered Philip. «Julius, isn`t it precipitous to
dismiss so quickly a concept that has offered consolation to much
of humanity for millennia? It is Epictetus`s idea, and
Schopenhauer`s as well, that excessive attachment either to
material goods, to other individuals, or even attachment to the
concept of �I` is the major source of human suffering. And doesn`t
it follow that such suffering can be ameliorated by avoiding the
attachment? Indeed, these ideas are at the very heart of the
Buddha`s teaching as well.»
«That`s a good point, Philip, and I will take it to heart. What
I hear you saying is that you`re giving me good stuff which I
dismiss out of hand—and that leaves you feeling unvalued.
Right?»
«I said nothing about feeling unvalued.»
«Not out loud. I`m intuiting that—it would be such a human
response. I`ve a hunch if you will look inside you`ll find it there.»
«Pam, you`re rolling your eyes,” said Rebecca. «Is this talk
about attachment reminding you of your meditation retreat in
India? Julius, Philip—both of you missed the postgroup coffee
when Pam described her time at the ashram.»
«Yep, exactly,” said Pam. «I had a bellyful of talk about the
relinquishment of all attachments including the inane idea that we
can sever our attachment to our personal ego. I ended up with
strong feelings that it was all so life–negating. And that parable
Philip handed out—what`s the message? I mean, what kind of
voyage, what kind of life, is it if you are so focused on the
departure that you can`t enjoy your surroundings and can`t enjoy
other people? And that`s what I see in you, Philip.» Pam turned to
address him directly. «Your solution to your problems is a
pseudosolution; it`s no solution at all—it`s something else—it`s a
relinquishment of life. You`re not in life; you don`t really listen to
others, and when I hear you speak I don`t feel I`m listening to a
living, breathing person.»
«Pam,” Gill sprang to Philip`s defense, «talk about
listening—I`m not sureyou do much listening. Did you hear that he
was miserable years ago? That he had overwhelming problems and
impulses? That he did not respond tothree full years of therapy
with Julius? That he did what you just did last month—what any of
us would do—seek another method? That he finally got help from
a different approach—one which is no freakish New Age
pseudosolution? And that now he`s trying to offer something to
Julius by using the approach that helped him?»
The group was silenced by Gill`s outburst. After a few
moments Tony said, «Gill, you are something else today! Sticking
it to my girl Pam—I don`t like that, but, man, I sure do like the
way you`re talking here—hope it rubs off on your home life with
