The classic phrase is – “To be or not to be?” - as opposed to, ”To Be or nothing,” or “To be or death.” Billy Shakes hit on a significant western concept with his insecure hero there. Hamlet asks himself this question, with very little irony (and enough melodrama to fuel seventy years of movie making), to remark on his character’s present state of “being,” - attempting to decide whether or not to act in this way or that. More important (than the impotence metaphor we could all draw from this archetype) I think we should focus on the exact semantics of the phrase so oft repeated for dramatic effect.
To be or not to be? I’ll submit that this phrase might be considered as the ultimate western position on life (and by position, of course I mean perception). What we have at stake here is not a question of something (being) or nothing (not being), but a view of life (the world/universe for that matter) as a process of consistent action. Being. Always being. We’re either being being, or not being being. By assuming being, or not being are the only two states of existence (life vs. death) in Hamlet’s mind we might conclude “not being” would be a negative state. Obviously being (living) is preferable to not being (death as we would say). But our language betrays us significantly. To be or not to be? Being is a constant, so is not being a negation of being? What were you before birth? You exist now, so what happened before existing? Does your death precede your life as it will end it? Does your death negate your existence? Does your existence negate your preexistence? I don’t know, but I think I might look at the problem through mathematics.
The zero did not exist in the west until, thru trade, it reached our unrefined minds in that dimly lit era. For the Greeks, the progenitors of what we might consider math, had no use for 0 (or infinity for that matter, but that’s a separate conversation), What do you do with nothing? – Nothing. The Greek mind wanted to establish systems for dealing with stuff, things that might be chronicled and compiled and, 0 had no place. The invention of 0 happened in what today is India. 0 represented the Ostrich egg, the womb, the place from which creation springs (much like the bindu or dot, a single point from which everything expands outward). The vast emptiness, or void, to the eastern mind represented potential. A spark. In the west the conception of 0 was difficult because faith and culture directed folks towards accumulation, improvement, advancement, gaining, gaining, gaining… etc. Nothingness, or emptiness became the villain in the worldview. To be or not to be?
Mathematics appears to deal in the currency of symmetry, but this is not true. Electricity might have positive and negative currents but gravity has no opposite. Gravity as a force is asymmetrical (a far as we know), and dark matter is what exactly? We can prove everything has mass (therefore everything is something, there is no nothing, even black holes have mass) even energy. Can we find the deep answers of our existence in mathematics? Maybe. Mathematics is the most abstract language/system we’ve developed to explain with the world around us. But as we’ve seen through history just because we can create an abstract language to give ourselves the feeling of objectivity those systems are just as susceptible to cultural bias and misunderstanding as anything rooted in tradition. To be or not to be?
No one knows. No one has the answers. Every system man can create is a fragile as the fence beneath an elephant. But we can believe in those systems and languages together and grow them. These things are only a strong as the shoulders that carry ‘em. That’s the point. This Christmas hang a shovel from a coat rack and place gifts beneath it, convince your friends to do the same. That coat rack will carry the same import as that over size bush in the middle of the room if you allow it. We live in a transmutable world. To be or not to be, to brush or wipe, to wax on or wax off, to eat or abandon responsibility? Be or not, we’re always going somewhere.
