In The Brothers Karamazov, Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote, “What is hell?
I maintain that it is the suffering of being unable to love.”
Hell is usually imagined as a world after this one, where someone is punished and made
to suffer, but that vision of hell never really spoke to me.
What Dostoevsky says is much more interesting and relevant to me, and when understood, I
think one learns to see hell and heaven as real entities inside of ourselves, not just
some imagined world.
As usual, I’m gonna explore this idea through a dialogue.
---
After years of reading and believing in the bible, a young student (S) had a sudden crisis
of faith.
He went to the house at the end of his neighbourhood where it was rumoured that a retired priest
lived, one who had walked away from the church.
The retired priest (P) allowed the student into his home, and after a bit of small talk,
the following conversation ensued.
S: Do you believe in any of this?
Do you believe there’s really a heaven or a hell after we die?
P: Does it really matter?
If I say yes, so what?
If I say no, so what?
We’ll never have any proof either way.
But there’s one thing I am certain of: hell and heaven exist inside of us, right now.
S: What do you mean?
P: Surely you know how it feels to suffer.
Well that’s what hell is, isn’t it?
The place where we suffer.
The place where we are full of conflict.
And well, heaven must be that place where we are free of suffering and conflict.
S: I can agree with that.
But how do I free myself of conflict?
P: Well, what is the source of conflict?
Isn’t it frustrated desire?
Isn’t it wanting something but not having it?
Think about it.
Examine your own life.
Is this the source of all your conflict?
S: Hmm… yeah that seems right.
But as long as I’m living, won’t I always want things I don’t have?
And as long as I want things I don’t have, won’t I suffer?
So are you saying my entire life will be suffering?
P: If you spend your life wanting things you don’t have, then yes, your whole life will
be suffering.
But let me show you something: between wanting and having something there is a gap.
This gap is conflict.
The bigger the gap between wanting and having something, the bigger the conflict.
The biggest gap, which is wanting something but never having it, is what we can call hell.
Read any story or myth about hell, whether it’s Tantalus, or Sisyphus, or Satan, and
you’ll hear the same story: someone wants something but can never have it.
Now the smallest gap between wanting and having something, which is to never want because
you always have, is what we can call heaven.
Do you understand all of this?
Do you agree with this?
S: I think I get what you’re saying.
You’re saying the gap between wanting and having something produces conflict.
So if I can shrink the gap between wanting and having something, I shrink the conflict
in my life.
Is that right?
P: That’s right.
S: So how do I shrink the gap?
P: You can’t.
I know why you’re asking that question, but let’s approach this from a different
angle.
Imagine that you had a perfect understanding of the world, that you knew the relationship
between all causes and effects.
There would be nothing you couldn’t do instantly.
You’d know the exact blade of grass to pluck to produce an earthquake on the other side
of the world.
So if you had a perfect understanding of the world, there would be no difference between
what you want and what you have, because you could have anything you want in an instant.
So the gap between what you want and what you have is time, and it’s also conflict.
So time is conflict.
This is very important to understand.
Do you understand this?
S: So you’re saying time is conflict.
I sort of get it, but not quite.
P: Ok.
Let me go back a few steps.
Listen carefully.
If there is a gap between what you want and what you have, there’s conflict in your
life.
Do you agree?
S: Yes.
P: Okay.
Now if what you want takes time to get, that means there’s a gap between what you want
and what you have.
Do you follow?
S: Ohh!
Now I get it.
So you’re saying if I want something that takes time to get, there’s a gap between
what I want and what I have, and that gap is also conflict.
So if I want something that takes time to get, I’ll be in conflict.
So time is conflict.
It makes sense now.
Sorry, go on.
P: No problem!
So if you genuinely want something that takes no time to have, then you eliminate the gap.
You eliminate conflict.
Do you understand?
S: Yeah, but what takes no time to have?
P: As long as you want something from the world, as long as you want to get something
from it, you introduce time into the equation, or in other words, you introduce conflict.
You can only get things from the world that you don’t currently have.
But if you want to give something to the world, time never enters the equation, because you
can only give what you already have.
So if your only desire is to give something to the world, the gap between wanting and
having something collapses, and conflict disappears.
Now I have a little riddle for you.
What can you give that you never have to get?
And even though you give it, you will never lose it.
S: I don’t know.
What?
P: Your complete attention.
It is always yours to give, even though you never have to acquire it.
And even when you give it, you never lose it.
To give something your complete attention is to love it.
S: Love?
How is it love?
P: You’ve been taught to think that love is a feeling or an idea, so what I’m telling
you is confusing.
See, when you completely attend to something, you understand it.
And when you understand something, you know how to relate to it.
For example, when you attend to the tree, you understand it.
And when you understand it, you know how to relate to it.
You see that it needs water, so you water it.
And then what happens?
It bears you a fruit.
Do you understand what I’m saying, that love is the doorway to heaven?
That the man who gives is the one who gets, and the man who gets is the one who really
gives?
Another riddle for you, perhaps.
S: Yeah, I think I’m finally starting to see what you’re saying.
---
In The Brothers Karamazov, Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote, “What is hell?
I maintain that it is the suffering of being unable to love”, and I explored the meaning
behind this idea through a dialogue.
To love something is to give it your complete attention, and when you give something your
complete attention you understand it, and when you understand it, you know how to relate
to it, and when you know how to relate to it, there is no conflict, and when there is
no conflict, internally, that is heaven.
And on the flip side, when you don’t attend to something, you don’t love it, and when
you don’t love it, you don’t understand it, and when you don’t understand it, you
don’t know how to relate to it, and when you don’t know how to relate to it, there’s
conflict, and when there’s conflict, internally, that is hell.
So we can say that love is the doorway to heaven, and as Dostoevsky said, hell is the
suffering that occurs when you’re unable to love.
As always, this is just my opinion and understanding of Dostoevsky’s words, not advice.
Feel free to use this information however you like, and if you have a different take
on Dostoevsky’s words, I’d love to hear your perspective in the comments.
And if you’re interested in reading The Brothers Karamazov, you can find a link to
the book in
the description.