【洪】ILHONG's Words

Too much light,
Too much brightness causes darkness to prevail...




태양에 가려진 빛과 어둠...
태양만큼의 빛이 아니면,
다른 모든 것은 어둠이 되어버린다...

나는 태양이 되고 싶다.
하지만, 어둠을 일으키는 태양은 싫다.



(At Baker Beach)

There is a theorem regarding polynomials, which states:

Let P be a symmetric polynomial in F[X1,X2, ..., Xn]. Then, there exists a unique polynomial T in F[X1,X2, ..., Xn] such that P(X1,X2, ..., Xn)=T(S1(X1,X2, ..., Xn), S2(X1,X2, ..., Xn), ..., Sn(X1,X2, ..., Xn) ), where each Si denotes the elementary symmetric polynomial, for i = 1, 2, ..., n.

When Lagrange first encountered this theorem, he said, "Oh, this is so simple. You don't even need to prove this!"

And believe it or not, the proof of the theorem above goes a lengthy construction of method that converts variables into the elementary symmetric polynomials.

Also, one thing I found so intriguing and astonishing about Buddhism is that it makes components of life look so simple. Yes, those buddhist monks -well, majority of them -are known for their simple lives, but then even the very ground of their ideas make human lives look so simple.

I have been immersed with this book, "the Compass of Zen" by Zen Master Seung Sahn, who died recently. I have been reading this book for almost a year now, over and over again, and whenever I open the book to any page, the astonishing restarts! Things that looked so entangledstartedto lookas if there were no strings attached in the very first place. It looked like living in this world made me difficult to look into the things in the way they were supposed to be seen.

It reminds me of the first time when I encountered Emmanuel Levinas. I could not know a thin book like that (we used Ethics and Infinity) could agonize one person so much. To be honest, I did not understand what he was talking about until the very night right before my final oral exam. However, it is not a shameful thing to me. At least, I was open to theenlightenment and was not acting stubborn as I used to be. The fact that I opened to ideas of Levinas didn't came as a shame but it opened my eyes to look at things differently, correctly.

In reading "the Compass of Zen," Seung Sahn discourses on the complicated lives of these days. However, after all, it's just lives of human beings.

For example, all the unhappines stem out from five (only five!!!) Insights into Impurity: Desire for material wealth, Desire for sex, Desire for fame, Desire for food, and Desire for sleep.

Also, there is so called the Eightfold Path to be true "I" without desires, anger, and ignorance: Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Meditation.

(For a lengthy explanation, read into Hinayana Buddhism)

However, if one can think logically, one cannot disagree with so many "simplified" components of lifemeant by(Hinayana) Buddhism. In the end, this Hinayana Buddhism (the first part of Buddha's teachings)will give enlightenment that thereare no permanent things, there is impurity everywhere, and there is no I.Since there is no I, then it means things are all equal, thus everything is empty. It's where Mahayana Buddhism starts. After all the truth he attained, Buddha was then propelled to share his enlightenment, than keeping it to himself despite of the fact that it might be too difficultfor majority of people to comprehend.

I want to stress on the part that there is no I. It's similar to what David Hume said. He said that one has be empathetic to be moral. One has to put oneself into shoes of the others. That is, one has to be able to detach oneself from oneself.

What makes things so complicated? It's the system of human society, or perhaps this society alone. The system always changes. History is inevitable to changes, and so are all parts of histories. However, one interesting point, once marked by my dear friend Mr. Ezerman, is that despite of the shifts on the surface of the system, what is beneath stays the same. What is beneath the system of this society? Ideology. However the face changes, what is beneath stays the same. Thus, one can say it's right or wrong.

Therefore, Emmanuel Levinas stressed so much of his usual lectures (and parts of his books) on "the Face." The human face is so complicating indeed - eyes, nose, lips, teeth...etc. Not even a single part of this face is simple. However despite of all things, beneath it, there is this person, the Other. There is difference though, because Levinas is dealing with the Other,it's another being, thus it has this infiniteness that I cannot grasp. However, beneath "the face" of system, there's only ideology which it's rooted from, a result of someone's thinking.

Yes, we think therefore we seem to live a very complicated lives, however, after all, we are doign the same thing: living. Thus, when one can see that we are just in BEING, it is perhaps easy to see the BEINGNESS, thus, putting ourselves into situations of other beings should be not that difficult and as reluctant as it might sound (to some people).

학부때, Complex Analysis때 찍은 사진이다.
이때가 유일하게 우리 수학과가 다 같이 한 반이였던 때다.. 뭐, 하는수 없었지만...

왜 느닫없이 이상한 사진이냐...

내일 저녁에 옛날 고등학교때 수학 선생님 (코치라고 불렀지) 과, 다바오에서 제일친한 Stephen 과 Megsy를 만나서 한국 음식을 사주기로 했다.
이 둘은 내가 유일하게 연락을 하는 고등학교 친구들...
나는 Chinese School을 다녀서, 학생수가 무척이나 적었다.
그래도 1학년때 처음들어와서는 우리학년에 한 120명 정도 였는데, 짤리고 짤리고 90명은 졸업했었나? 하여간, 결국에 지금 고등학교 졸업 4년후에 기억도 안나는 사람들도 많다.
내 기억력은 어떤 부분에서는 Photographic Memory이지만, 어떤부분에서는 최악이란 말야.
그 90명중에 이제 2명만 연락한다. 뭐, 가끔 안부 묻는 Exgirlfriend가 있지만, 뭐 다시는 얼굴 보지도 않을 텐데...

하여간, 나는 antisocial이다...
오늘 하도 심심해서 Megsy한테 전화를 했더니, Jaja를 만난더라군. 3년전에 우연히 지나치다 만난이후로 만난 적이 없다. 다바오 말고 세부에서 일을 한다던데... 내가 고등학교때 친하게 지냈지만, 일어나는 거부감을 어쩔수는 없었다... 그래서, 결국에는 안나갔지...
Jaja보다 더 친했던 Jaja의 단짝 Eric도 나왔었다더군.. 그녀석도 안 본지 몇년 됬지... 그녀석은 만나고 싶은데... 사실, 에릭도...우리집에서 한 350미터 거리에 사나?
그녀석 맨날 출근을 내 집 앞으로 지나갈텐데...내가 새벽까지 책읽다가 자면 9시에나 일어나고, 또 일어난다고 집밖을 나가는 것도 아니고...

하여간, 내가 이렇다.
사람을 피한다. 내가 재미삼아 생각한 것이,
I cannot handle meeting 1.5 people at a time...
Stephen이나 Megsy는 정말 아무 숨김 없이 얘기 하는 친구들이고
(친구 몇 없는데, 친구라면 정말 그런 놈일 수 밖에 없지 않는가?)
나를 아니까, 하지만, The Other is Infinite (According to Emmanuel Levinas)하니,
둘다 나에게는 각각 7.5의 the other란 말이지...
그래서 만약에 집에 와서 사람 2명을 만난다고 나간다면 저 두사람 두명이상의 사람이 나올 수가 없다.
뭐, 수학 선생은 나한테 특별한 사람이고
그리고, 또 1년 넘게 안 본 사람이고 하니,
내일만나서 밥 한끼 먹는다고 뭐 이상할 것도 없겠지.

하지만, 정말 그렇다.
사람을 만나면 관계를 망칠 것 같은 기분이 든다.
그래도 사람 만나는건 좋은데...

위에 12명 중에서, 벌써 몇 명하고는 연락을 안한다.
그나마 내가 Super-active member로 egroup을 하고는 있지만은, Reply하는 놈들도 결국에는 나랑 친한 녀석들뿐이지...

내가 대학 생활 하면서 사귄 친구들 (물론 진짜로 친한 친구들)이 역시 손가락으로 셀 수 가 있다...

3년후에, 대학 졸업 4년후에, 내가 과연 몇명하고 연락을 하고 있을지...