Book of Mercy #46-50

Debate on Leonard Cohen's poetry (and novels), both published and unpublished. Song lyrics may also be discussed here.
User avatar
mat james
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 8:06 am
Location: Australia

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by mat james »

Hi all,
Thanks for the new posting Doron.
I interpret this verse as one which discriminates Leonard's preference for his Jewish perspective over his newfound Buddha perspectives.
His argument that unfolds is that for him (Leonard) the Buddha does not offer the final answer. Leonard accepts the idea that "life is suffering" but he wishes to make that suffering an offering to his G~d. Rather than trying to escape that suffering through personal realisation and the awakening into Buddha Enlightenment and the "nothingness" that it leaves the seeker with, (and the understanding that the "joke" is on us and our ignorance) Leonard prefers the Jewish perspective that there is more than Nothingness. There is much more according to his tradition; there is G`d.
And Leonard does not wish to go it alone; he wants god there with him, he wants god's Love and he wants to love god as well. This is what gives his life meaning and it is meaningless without his G~d.
"...do not leave me here where death is forgotten and the new thing (Buddha risen/awakened within me) grins".
The sublimely smiling Buddha is not enough for Leonard. Life, for Leonard is no "joke".
"Do not leave me here".
So where does Leonard wish to go?
He has his own tradition, his One G~d and a mystically satisfying ongoing symbiotic Love affair.
Like the seeker in the Song of Solomon, he goes hunting for his Lover.
Not Nothingness.

Book of Mercy, 11.49

“All my life is broken unto you, and all my glory soiled unto you. Do not let the spark of my soul go out in the even sadness. Let me raise the brokenness to you, to the world where the breaking is for love. Do not let the words be mine, but change them into truth. With these lips instruct my heart, and let fall into the world what is broken in the world. Lift me up to the wrestling of faith. Do not leave me where the sparks go out, and the jokes are told in the dark, and new things are called forth and appraised in the scale of the terror. Face me to the rays of love, O source of light, or face me to the majesty of your darkness, but not here, do not leave me here, where death is forgotten, and the new thing grins.”


And the new thing grins

Life may be suffering, as the Buddha says
But let my suffering be an offering
To You, G~d.

The Buddha may suggest that beyond suffering
Is nothingness
But do not let the spark of my soul
Dissipate
Into that nothingness
("Do not go gentle into that good night,
...Rage, rage against the dying of the light. ")*
For I need to love You
I want You to be there always
Beyond that suffering
Beyond that nothingness
Beyond that Buddha perspective
That ends in a mystic grin.

Let my lips not grin that way
Let my lips speak of You;
Not nothingness.

I no longer wish to escape my suffering
I am broken, but
“Let me raise the brokenness to you.”
Life may be suffering
But let my suffering be an offering
To You.

Do not leave me where the sparks go out
Where all (even You) is illusion.
Do not leave me in that even sadness, of no-thing-ness

I see that scale of terror
Degrees of suffering unto suffering unto suffering
Until the Awakening
Into the joke of existence
And the resultant sublime smile;

But do not leave me here
Where death is forgotten
And the Buddha grins.

Let me still face towards Your rays of love
Or face me to the majesty of your darkness; Your mystery;
Give me Love or give me ignorance !
But do not leave me here!

Here
Where the sparks go out
Where death is forgotten
And my awakened Buddha-nature “grins”.

Do not leave me here!
Be my body
Be my blood
But don’t be Nothingness...


MattryingtointerpretleonardJ

(* Dylan Thomas' poem, "Do not go gentle into that good night").
"Without light or guide, save that which burned in my heart." San Juan de la Cruz.
DBCohen
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:31 am
Location: Kyoto, Japan

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by DBCohen »

Steven,

You are right that there’s nothing new under the sun, so anything new is only relatively so, but still, what does he mean? The tone seems to get darker towards the end of the book. Here he first connects jokes and darkness with the “new things” which are “appraised in the scale of the terror”, and then he ends with the “new thing” that grins just when death is forgotten (for “just” here read davka, the Hebrew word one misses so much when wishing to make a point in English; “just” isn’t really the same. English absorbed chutzpa and some other Hebrew or Yiddish words that didn’t have a true equivalent; I wish it would have adopted davka as well). I’m still confused about the nature of this “new thing”.

Mat,

Great job, mate, thanks! So you think it is the grin of the Buddha? That’s a striking idea, and I’ve been toying with it since reading your post and am still wondering… I’ll take some more time to think about it.

Any other ideas?
Steven
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:32 am

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by Steven »

Hi Doron,

I think he's writing along the same lines as he did in "The Future," where the lyrics read:
"Things are going to slide, slide in all directions..." It's the apocalyptic thing, that has
some historical antecedent and sources in the prophetic biblical writings. Death can
be forgotten (life is so devalued, davka) in the swirl of such upheavals. A societal/individual
cognitive dissonance makes it easier to "forget," sometimes. Consciously, certainly.
Steven
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:32 am

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by Steven »

Hi Mat,

I like your poetic exposition of this passage. I've not arrived at any favoritism, though, expressed in Leonard's
poem, of Judaism over Buddhism. You've nicely/clearly articulated your view that it does. I don't know
what his position is, but as the poem is fair game for discussion, as a stand alone statement, thought it worth
noting that there are, at essence, some reconcilable, very similar themes, with both traditions, when
the language and trapppings are taken out of the picture. The "Void" of Buddhism and the infinite God
of Judaism, are both outside of ability to fully comprehend/apprehend. And, Buddhism has a religious/faith-like
(albeit non-theistic) tendency, like Judaism (though theistic). With the Buddhists, the tendency is imparted
via acceptance of Karmic destiny. And, enlightenment and a holy walk/communion with one's Creator, aren't
necessarily that far apart. I'm still at the possibility that multiple traditions are at play in these passages,
with this particular passage having Jewish elements as the focus. Can't say that Doron won't post another
passage that will show an interplay of Jewish and Buddhist concepts and might have the Buddhist concepts
more at the forefront. It's been awhile since I read the book in its entirety and I don't have a copy at hand.
I'll have to wait and see and will look forward to the possibility of more Mat written poetry emerging as
responses. :) The substance vs. nothingness comes across well in your poem. :) I suspect that
there won't be a final answer that we'll all come to with regards to a preference.
User avatar
mat james
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 8:06 am
Location: Australia

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by mat james »

Any other ideas?....(Doron)
Of course you are right Steven, when you say "I suspect that
there won't be a final answer that we'll all come to with regards to a preference", and
I admit that they are only 'ideas', Doron, but I'm on a roll, so thanks for asking. :razz:


A few more comments on 11.49 and the grinning new thing.

"...do not leave me here where death is forgotten and the new thing (Buddha risen/awakened within me) grins".
“…the new thing”
It is rather a simple definition of the residue of this life but when you consider that Buddhism is a-theistic in essence and the concept of soul does not register on the Nhirvanic scale, then one may have doubts regarding this philosophy if they are G~d oriented.
Nirvana (nirbanna) in Buddhism is the cessation of all desire…even the desire to believe in g~d, let alone the desire for union with g~d.
In Hinduism at least, Nirvana is that union of Atman and Brahma (soul and God) but there is no room for this union perspective in Buddhism. There is only dissolution of the essential “I am”.
So I would venture to suggest that Leonard absorbed the techniques of Buddhist meditation, but at the point of dissolution of desire and cessation of suffering, he turns his face once again to his G~d. He would be happier at this point of consciousness to align with Hinduism’s perspective of the unification of Atman/Brahma or the Jewish “I am Who Am” than the ultimate cessation of personal “I am”….into that “new thing”…no-thing-ness.
Why does he call it a ‘new thing’?
He calls it a ‘new thing’ because it has no name. Even the Buddhists can’t name it; other than void or “no thing”.
So he changes ‘no thing’ to ‘new thing’.

And the ‘new thing grins’ that Buddha smile sublime, at the silliness of Leonard’s desire (Book of Longing) for G~d. Buddha grins at his ‘Longing’.
No! He can’t take up this new perspective. It goes against all he has loved for; all he has sung for; all he has fought for; all he has hoped for.
This is a big moment in the struggle of Leonard. This is a huge moment in his Buddha stroll, path. He is at the brink, on the edge of the precipice of beyond good and evil; and he will not jump…
…rather he says:
“Face me to the rays of love, O source of light, or face me to the majesty of your darkness, but not here, do not leave me here, where death is forgotten, and the new thing grins.”

Mat.
"Without light or guide, save that which burned in my heart." San Juan de la Cruz.
DBCohen
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:31 am
Location: Kyoto, Japan

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by DBCohen »

Mat,

Once again, I appreciate very much what you’ve written. You could be right, although we’ll never know for sure. I’m still confused, but I’ll try to see if I can venture an interpretation.

“All my life is broken unto you, and all my glory soiled unto you. Do not let the spark of my soul go out in the even sadness. Let me raise the brokenness to you, to the world where the breaking is for love.” - The notion of breaking, as I’ve mentioned a few times before, is a basic notion of the Kabbalah. The vessels that were the first stage of creation had broken because they could not sustain the divine light, and some sparks of that light remained sunk and held by the “skins” (klipot) of the vessels, awaiting to be lifted back to their source, a process that when completed will mean redemption for the world.

“Do not let the words be mine, but change them into truth. With these lips instruct my heart, and let fall into the world what is broken in the world.” - This a strange request when coming from a poet; doesn’t he think his words are truthful? Perhaps not enough, when compared with the source of truth.

“Lift me up to the wrestling of faith.” - This brings to mind Jacob’s struggle with the angle (in fact, the text says “man”), in Genesis 32:24-32. Any faith that is not gained through struggle is not worth its name.

“Do not leave me where the sparks go out, and the jokes are told in the dark, and new things are called forth and appraised in the scale of the terror.” - This I still find difficult. It is obviously a reference to the worst place where the forces of evil reign. But why jokes? Perhaps because evil mocks at us?

“Face me to the rays of love, O source of light, or face me to the majesty of your darkness, but not here, do not leave me here, where death is forgotten, and the new thing grins.” - I believe that through the book we see a picture of a reality split in half, often between light and darkness, as in I.10: “you gave me a crown of darkness and light”. These do not come from different sources; both light and darkness have their source in “you”; that’s why here he can speak of “the majesty of your darkness”. Still, this dichotomy can be painful, as he calls himself in II.37 “the man whom you have cut in half”. He can also say: II. 46 “Blessed are you who speaks from the darkness […] Create the world again, and stand us up, as you did before, on the foundation of your light.” He seems to be yearning for a unity that will overcome the dichotomy; even when he is recognizing an option - again: “Face me to the rays of love, O source of light, or face me to the majesty of your darkness,” - he still has a preference: “but not here, do not leave me here, where death is forgotten, and the new thing grins.” - that is the place where he does not wish to be. What is this place? Mat could be right that it alludes to Buddhism, but in that case, why doesn’t he turn his back on it completely? Why does he keep practicing it, in a way? He always said that he was interested in the discipline and not in the teachings, so it can make sense. But still, it feels like he is alluding here to something much worse. Could he mean hedonism? That would be something he despised, but it is not new either. I’m still perplexed by this piece. I’ve always tried to interpret each piece from within, and usually things had clicked together, but this time they don’t. It feels like something is missing here. I’ll post this anyhow, although half-heartedly.
Judy
Posts: 769
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:22 am
Location: France

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by Judy »

Hi Doron, Mat, Steven ... and Diane,

Might the "new thing" which grins be simply THE FUTURE ?

"... and new things are called forth and appraised in the scale of terror". These could be all the things he writes about eight years later in "The Future", and even worse. Apocalyptic things, like you say Steven, which haven't been imagined yet or which have, but aren't taken seriously, hence "jokes told in the dark". He's seen the future.

So maybe he's beseeching his God to stay with him, either facing him to the rays of love or to the majesty of his darkness, but not to abandon him here in the world, to face the new thing, the future, alone.
DBCohen
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:31 am
Location: Kyoto, Japan

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by DBCohen »

Judy,

Thanks for this interpretation. I think it’s a great idea, and fits very well with the context of this piece.

I was thinking the last few days about other places in the book which were hard to interpret, for example “the ape” in I.2, over which we’ve puzzled over for a long time. There could be some very private allusions that would be opaque to others, but when giving it another chance, usually something turns up. So thanks again for viewing it from a different angle.
Last edited by DBCohen on Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Steven
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:32 am

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by Steven »

Hi Judy,

Yes, that this could be "The Future" sounds plausible. That that would include it as grinning is sure
frightening... a perverse expression in the face (no pun intended) of that. Also frightening, are "jokes in the dark,"
which (it now occurs to me) could perhaps be gallows type humor (the dark being the terror, etc.). I'm with you
in seeing that this scenario could make possible sense with taking a sanctuary in the Lord. The circumstances would
be such as to evoke a crying out for that kind of thing.
Steven
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:32 am

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by Steven »

As nobody else bumped the prior post from top yet, thought I would. It's too beautiful a Spring-like day to
leave that one there. And it is the first official day of Spring. :)
User avatar
mat james
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 8:06 am
Location: Australia

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by mat james »

Hi Judy and all,
Your argument seems to fit, Judy.
Because it is a fun thing to do; I will combine your perspective with my Buddha interpretation. :)
The "Future" Buddha is meant to be an incarnation named Maitreya
Looking for the meaning of a verse is a bit like creating a conspiracy theory; everywhere one looks, new evidence unfolds. (my delusional perspectives )
...and "The Future" grins...
http://images.google.com.au/images?um=1 ... i=&start=0

Mat
"Without light or guide, save that which burned in my heart." San Juan de la Cruz.
User avatar
mat james
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 8:06 am
Location: Australia

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by mat james »

"He seems to be yearning for a unity that will overcome the dichotomy;" (Doron)

You are starting to sound more like me, Doron. ;-)

Matreya
"Without light or guide, save that which burned in my heart." San Juan de la Cruz.
DBCohen
Posts: 623
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:31 am
Location: Kyoto, Japan

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by DBCohen »

Well, after more than three years of cohabitation on these pages, what do you expect? 8)

D.
Steven
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 12:32 am

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by Steven »

Hi,

Just finished reading "The Willow Tree," by Hubert Selby Jr. Seemed timely to our discussion here to read this
in the novel: "It is always You that lifts me from the darkness and anguish of my despair, that makes it possible
for me to go so far beyond my human agony and limitations and put the shattered, painful pieces of me back
together, and I am always so much more than I was before the darkness devoured me..." Pretty cool
concurrence of readings. Yes, cohabitation of experience for sure. :)
User avatar
mat james
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 8:06 am
Location: Australia

Re: Book of Mercy #46-

Post by mat james »

Hi all,
a very syncronistic quote, Steven; and a beautiful one also.

The even sadness of verse 11.49

“Do not let the spark of my soul go out in the even sadness. Let me raise the brokenness to you, to the world where the breaking is for love.”
I still can’t help thinking Leonard is referring to Buddhism and the dissolution of the self as the ‘even sadness’. I wonder if he is talking of compassion, as that ‘even sadness’? And if he is then it follows that he is probably referencing Jesus when he talks of ‘love’ in the following sentence; “Let me raise the brokenness to you, to the world where the breaking is for love.”
Leonard, it seems, would prefer an uneven sadness where love for all, including his G~d prevails over the even sadness of compassionate surrender of all things samsaric.

“Do not leave me where the sparks go out, and the jokes are told in the dark, and new things are called forth and appraised in the scale of the terror.” -
This I still find difficult. It is obviously a reference to the worst place where the forces of evil reign. But why jokes? Perhaps because evil mocks at us? (Doron)
‘jokes are told in the dark’: Darkness, up until now, I have interpreted as “ignorance of g~d”, and not simply “ignorance” of say, Buddhistic awakening. I still think ‘dark’ in this verse refers to lack of knowledge of g~d. In fact I could take it further and suggest that he means to say that darkness is worse when it takes on the meaning that g~d is non-existent.
If his G~d goes ‘out’ then, Leonard goes ‘out’ also.
Is this the ‘even sadness’ that he is referring to?
Does Leonard imply that he would rather be ‘broken’ for ‘love’ in the Judae/Christian sense than awakened into some post-samsaric compassion?
Would his soul otherwise lay down and die?
So he says;
“Do not let the spark of my soul go out in the even sadness. Let me raise the brokenness to you, to the world where the breaking is for love.”

The breaking is for love, “If it be your will”.
If it be your will
That a voice be true
From this broken hill
I will sing to you
From this broken hill
All your praises they shall ring
If it be your will
To let me sing
Wouldn't it be very sad if the words and the meaningful prayer of this song simply dissipated into samsaric 'illusion'?

I'm sticking to my guns. ...so, ironically, the Buddha wins! (for me at least) ;-) .


Mattoid Maitreya.
"Without light or guide, save that which burned in my heart." San Juan de la Cruz.
Post Reply

Return to “Leonard Cohen's poetry and novels”