Interdependence, Not Independence Part VII

One of the central concerns of early twentieth century Russian religious philosophy was the belief that creation was to be seen as one holistic integral-unity (or pan-unity). It understood, in agreement with Buddhist philosophy, that every element of society, every element of creation, has a relationship with every other element of society and creation. But it stated that in our fallen mode of existence, the bonds which brought us together into this integral unity, though not destroyed, had been weakened. What was once in perfect unity now found itself mixed with chaos. Selfishness and self-will seek to divide creation up into the small, independent entities (such as Leibniz’s monads). But by dividing up creation this way, by means of one’s selfishness, one is cut off from others, and ends up becoming less than what they should be: one hurts oneself by following one’s selfish desires. By trying to become someone great, one becomes something small.

It is interesting to note that C. S. Lewis’s description of hell in The Great Divorce fits this paradigm. In a somewhat dream-like state, the author is given a tour of hell, purgatory, and heaven. As the author makes his journey through hell, he notices that everyone living there wants to be left alone, to be an individual by themselves with no one else near them. Each of them wants to set up their own place, their own home, for themselves, entirely alone, and as far apart from anyone else as they can make it. But wherever they end up being at, they are never satisfied. They feel that they are still too close to others, and so, after establishing themselves at one place, they get up and move, further and further away. The more one is in hell, the more remote they become from others. Ultimately they want to be so far from others, that they can feel completely alone, independent, as if the whole of creation centered upon and existed only for themselves. They want to feel as if they are the prime mover of their own little universe, so that they are the only rational being which exists, and, outside of themselves, the only things which exist are manifestations of their will. Such is the reality of hell: the continuous, failed attempt for independence. Those in hell seek to remove themselves from all influences outside of their own person, and as such, to be outside of the presence of God. Their attempt can never succeed; it is always doomed to failure, because existence itself is always bringing them into contact with God. In this manner, such a goal, such a prospect can only bring pain and suffering to those who follow their desire for total independence, because their desire can never be met. They will always experience the loving presence of God, trying to draw them outside of themselves and back into full communion with the rest of creation. For C.S. Lewis, those going through the motions of hell might, in the end, realize this call of God upon themselves: they might open themselves up out of their shell-like existence and heed God’s will. For them, the pain and suffering they experienced turns not to be the flames of hell, but the fires of purgatory. He left it open as to whether or not anyone would remain in hell in perpetuity, though he had the hope, as did his “teacher” George MacDonald, that God’s love would end up triumphant