The Infinite Nothing
Assume for a moment that we can describe a model wherein existence is represented by the number 1 and non-existence (something even more complete than our linguistic concept of “nothing”) is represented by the “number” 0.
How do you get from 0 to 1? Infinity. There’s an infinite step between nothing and something. This is a psuedo-mathematical representation of Emmanuel Levinas. For Levinas, we exist in the eyes of the Other, in the face-to-face meeting everyday with the Other. It is this connection to existence that creates and reinforces the infinite responsibility to the Other, or more accurately, it describes how the infinite responsibility to the Other creates and reinforces us. Only that infinite responsibility can change our state from 0 (non-existence) to 1 (existence).
Taking this a step further, any constant compared to infinity is zero. Any number—no matter how large—is just dwarfed right out of existence by an incomprehensible and overwhelming infinity. The infinite responsibility to the Other is so relevant and important that our 1 could easily be 0 and not even matter. Our existence (1) or non-existence (0) is completely irrelevant compared with the infinite.
So where does this leave us? What are we? We are nothing. We are just circles. Each of us is just an endless cycle of 1 and 0, existence and non-existence. We’re both I and the Other. We’re neither I nor the Other. We’re both 0 and 1 at the same time. The Zen concept of the no-self is writ large here, and this is exactly the sort of contradiction that would have bothered my metaphysical thinking before.
Such linguistic and systematic failures are only possible because our language completely breaks down when the time comes for expressing truths of the Universe. Our language, by its very nature, is finite. Capturing the infinite in a finite represenation is a quest doomed to abject failure. Often what our logic and linguistic structure doesn’t allow for is precisely the point that we need to make to express an important truth. This is why the first chapter of John’s gospel is so incomprehensible to most people. It is an absolute beautiful attempt to capture the infinite within the language of the finite. For exactly the same reason, most people have trouble reading some of the Zen koans because the paradox inherent within just causes our logic to throw up its hands in frustration.
The concept of the no-self is an important one for any student of Zen, and this model of 0, 1, and infinity reveals a certain truth that explains for me the no-self in a way that I can hopefully share with others. “I” is nothing but an illusion. I am nothing more than one point in an infinite network or array of Others—the alterity network, if you will. From outside the self perspective, I can see the alterity network for what it truly is. As Arthur Rimbaud said, “Je est un autre.” I is an other.
Adding to the model (or perhaps parallel to it), if we are all just points in the alterity network, then we must consider what it means to be a point. What is a mathematical point? Really it’s just a part of space that has been cataloged or refenced by a coordinate system, but as for the point itself, it’s nothing. A point has no mass, no volume, no sides. A point is a catalogue of nothing. The coordinate system is nothing more than a null pointer. What’s the point? Nothing.
This is the no-self. We are a catalog of nothing. The self is an illusion—a necessary illusion to be sure—but an illusion nonetheless. This is not a defeatist notion! The no-self provides one important path toward liberation. The pain and suffering you experience can’t be “your” pain and suffering if you’re not you. If you are the play of the infinite responsibility between Others, then you’re not constant. That point in space where “you” were cataloged might be precisely where “I” am cataloged right now. We are interdependent. You and I are not one, but we’re also not two. I have an infinite responsibility to you. You have infinite responsibility to me. We are interdependent and connected. Let that suffering go. It’s not relevant to you anymore precisely because of the realization that you’re not you. You’re not the self. You’re the no-self. We are the no-self.