(Excerpts from an essay by Dennis Waite)

Happiness is clearly fundamental in our lives. But we seem to spend most of our efforts pursuing
it and all too little time actually experiencing it. It seems we often indulge in activities which we
think bring happiness but which, under scrutiny, we would have to concede are really only
displacement activities, to avoid having to admit that the lack is still there and that we need to
search in some more fruitful direction. Samuel Johnson quipped "There is nothing which has yet
been contrived by man by which so much happiness is produced as by a good tavern." and this
is clearly as popular now as it has ever been. Arthur Miller suggested an updated equivalent
"The main thing today is shopping. Years ago a person, he was unhappy, didn't know what to
do....he'd go to church, start a revolution - something. Today you're unhappy? Can't figure it
out? .... Go shopping." One might almost be led to conclude from the attitudes of these people
that happiness is an escape from the existential vacuum of the Self in isolation; that if one is left to
one's own devices, with absolutely nothing to do, one comes face to face with the awful
blankness of oneself and true unhappiness. It is amazing how often things are totally the reverse
of the way they seem at first sight!

Much of the problem with our perception of happiness lies in our relating it to our imagined
happiness of others. Montesquieu said "If one only wished to be happy, this could be easily
accomplished; but we wish to be happier than other people, and this is always difficult, for we
believe others to be happier than they are," and Confucius, he say "We take greater pains to
persuade others that we are happy than in endeavouring to think so ourselves."

Popular philosophical and religious views often relate happiness to the heart - an unselfish,
outward love of others - giving and not taking. Here we already have a reversal of the attitudes
expressed above - it is not what I can get which will make me happy but what I can give. No
wonder Christianity has seen a decline in popularity in this century! It is hardly compatible with
the capitalist ethos. Swami Chinmayananda expresses the sentiment tersely: "Happiness depends
on what you can give, not on what you can get"; Emerson poetically: "Happiness is a perfume
which you cannot pour on someone without getting some on yourself".

An interesting first observation, which many will have experienced, is that happiness is elusive.
We cannot just go out and find it, as C. P. Snow points out: "The pursuit of happiness is a most
ridiculous phrase; if you pursue happiness you'll never find it." It does not seem to be possible to
have any certainty with respect to its experience. Just because a particular situation or
experience has been a happy one in the past does not guarantee that its repetition will be equally
so. If we find ourselves in happy circumstances, it is hardly surprising that we should wish this to
continue. Of course it never does. Furthermore, it might have been noticed that any conscious
attempt at the time to prolong the happiness is likely to have the immediate effect of causing it to
go away! John Stuart Mill said "Ask yourself whether you are happy and you cease to be so". It
is as though it creeps up upon you unawares and, as soon as you notice it, it runs away again.

As will be discussed below, happiness cannot be sought and obtained or found in external
objects and, indeed, does not seem to be related to material possessions at all.

Having begun with a brief survey of some popular views on the subject, as expressed by
quotations from those whom we might be persuaded to respect, let us now begin to analyse
more closely some aspects of this thing called 'happiness.'

An initial insight might be gained by noting how we relate happiness to desire and how the
objects of desire change as we mature. As a child, happiness would seem to be easily won. We
see a ball of paper, we want it, acquire it and, for a time are happy to screw it up, tear it and so
on. Then we are introduced to toys and (eventually) come to see these as somehow containing
something extra to give us more lasting happiness. But the novelty wears off and we begin
looking elsewhere - bicycles, television, computer games. And we look to others as a source of
providing happiness; initially our parents and family, then friends and eventually a special friend,
a partner. It is not that we necessarily always drop the earlier sources completely but there is a
sense of progression, a moving on to higher and more sophisticated things. (There is a clear
analogy with Maslow's hierarchy of human needs here, with basic requirements for food and
shelter at the bottom of the ladder and self-actualisation, whatever that means, at the top.)

And unhappiness is not simply the lack of the particular desired object of the moment. If the
attention is directed (or taken away) to other things, so that the supposed lack is temporarily
forgotten, the unhappiness disappears.

Thus we come to see that lasting happiness is not to be found in objects or in relationships with
others; nor in money or status - these are only means to the ends of objects or relationships.
They do bring much apparent enjoyment but this is invariably superseded by its complement,
misery or pain. Taken to its logical conclusion, it can be appreciated that there is, in fact, nothing
outside which can bring us to this state, other than for a short while. And so this yearning for
fulfilment persists, apparently doomed never to be satisfied, like a vacuum waiting to be filled.

But where is this happiness when it occurs anyway? Clearly it is not in any sense contained
within the object or situation. What is a cause of happiness for one may be a source of pain for
another. Each individual nature looks for its satisfaction in widely differing places. No, the
happiness is perceived within, when the desired object is obtained or the hated object is
removed.

One problem is that we do not differentiate between happiness and pleasure. We often naively
equate these two and, for a hierarchy of pleasures, we might suggest that at the lowest level we
have bodily pleasures, then emotional, intellectual and aesthetic and possibly culminating in a
highest level which we consider to be spiritual. But all of these are inherently transient and what
we are searching for is something which is lasting - eternal 'bliss' to differentiate this from
commonplace (!) happiness.

Perhaps the problems arise because, although we do occasionally experience true happiness, we
very quickly start to interfere. We want to analyse it and understand what is happening in order
that we can prolong the experience and subsequently repeat it. The happiness is transformed
into pleasure; desire is born and, this being inevitably thwarted, pain results. And that is a form
of fear; we do not want to lose what we have and we are afraid that we will not be able to get
the things we want. (Indeed fear is simply the obverse of desire - we desire 'A' or we fear 'B'
i.e. desire 'not-B.') Bliss is in the moment and beyond thought. Thinking about it turns it into
pleasure and the moment is lost.

Let's take a closer look at the relationship between happiness and desire, because this is key to
understanding the nature of happiness. The commonly held view is that we desire something and
feel the lack of that desired object. When the desired is fulfilled, we experience happiness
because, we suppose, we have got what we wanted. But perhaps the expression of 'having
satisfied the desire' is not an accidental one. An alternative way of looking at the situation is to
suppose that the desire obscures the happiness which is always naturally present. When the
desire goes away, because it has been temporarily satisfied (like giving a bone to a nagging dog), the happiness is revealed.
 
 
 

Original Site:   http://digital.net/~egodust/fmpagedw.html