(title is a little nod to the Korean movie “Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance”, with a Korean title of “Vengeance is Mine”)
I’ve been enjoying borrowing books from the library. I know that I’ll get bursts of interest in reading and have the books stay in the bookshelf for weeks. So buying books have been bad for home real estate and my wife’s temper as we keep running out of space. So on one day I decided to visit the local library to borrow some books and boy was that a great decision.
Some books I finish on time and I return it after reviewing it on my YouTube channel. Some books I cannot finish on time and those books I actually buy because they are worth slowly taking time over. I’ve donated a lot of books at home as a result and now I’m a man with a lot of free space AND a lot of knowledge.
But I have to ask you a question. When I borrow Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time, is the book mine?
Anything with a time limit is not really mine, it’s borrowed. So with anything that’s borrowed, while I have temporary ownership do I really have the agency to do whatever with it? Can I use it as a fire starter if I need to do a backyard barbeque? If I have some semblance of conscience I will respect the book and keep it in great condition before I return it.
This writing will now take a wild turn. Today I saw an Instagram reel about some group of guys having a conversation about manhood and how it relates to marriage. I assume this was some kind of a coaching space. The person “asking” says something along the lines of, if I become okay with emotionally relying on my wife, am I not living up to the role of the man of the household, leading the family? Then doesn’t this emasculate me from my wife’s perspective, making her think “why the fuck am I married to this imbecile?”.
You might think I have something to say about this thought, but it’s actually the response from the coach that evoked this writing. The coach goes on to say something along the lines of, “I can’t agree with you on that, there is no way you will get me to think that a marriage needs to be lead by a man. You can talk until your face is blue but I am never going to agree with you on that”.
The can’t needs some examination here. The moment the idea of can’t enters your everyday consciousness, you plant the root of suffering. This sounds like an exaggeration, so let’s dive deeper in to why this might be.
There are things we cannot actually do, like spontaneously float into the air or transform into a dolphin. These things defy the reality of physics. I also cannot consciously command my heart to stop beating or elevate my temperature just by thinking about it. Those things defy the reality of biology.
Outside from those things, the ideas we have and the actions that we take, we have the ability to take full governance of those. But the moment we can’t do something in our head, that means we start living life under a condition. As long as that condition is there, we cannot have full autonomy of our lives because due to that condition there are things we cannot do.
But what does that have to do with suffering? When Buddhists say happiness, we mean the absolute lack of suffering. Suppose I can’t talk about my wife in front of my family because we are having some marriage problems. If I’m not meeting my family then I’m okay; but when they meet me and they start asking me about her, then my freedom is restricted.
Yes, even with the restriction of can’t I have moments of freedom. But is my borrowed library book mine? It’s not. In the same way, my borrowed happiness from the owner of my life — the entity that controls the can’t — cannot be truly mine. As long as there are people who believe in gender roles exist, the person I’m referring to cannot ever escape disagreement.
Again, the disagreement may not always lead to suffering. But the fact of the matter is the entity that controls your can’t has no obligation to meet you at your most convenient timing. You never know when you will be met with a restriction and isn’t that already a reason to suffer?
No matter how right you are, there is no such thing as absolutely right because right is an attribute granted by context. In the past prohibiting women from voting was the right thing to do. In the past enslaving people was the right thing to do. In the past sacrificing people to appease the gods was the right thing to do. In the past converting gay people was the right thing to do.
In other words, no matter how right we are at the moment… We are on borrowed right. We cannot forever own the rightness until the end of time, so the more we insist on the rightness the more we have reasons to suffer because we never know when we have to return the rightness to another societal-cultural context.
Complete happiness, complete lack of suffering ONLY comes from complete freedom. I cannot be controlled by an external entity and be completely happy because I never know when the external entity will claim ownership of something I hold precious; moments of happiness under external control are borrowed happiness. No matter how right I think I am, I am on borrowed right.
Happiness is mine because I am the only owner of my life, until the laws of physics and biology determine my end.