Similarities Between The Strange And Curious Tale Of The Last True Hermit
Annomeka Nesadurai Word Count: 1593
260633427
RELG 252 001
Teaching Assistant Julia Stenzel
Section: 004
The Question of Self and Dharma for a Hermit
At the mere age of 20, Christopher Knight parked his brand new 1985 Subaru Brat car and he walked away from the rest of society. For nearly 30 years, Knight lived in the North Pond forest in Central Maine, in isolation and seclusion from the rest of society. In Finkel’s “The Strange & Curious Tale of the Last True Hermit,” through a Hindu perspective, one can see that by excluding himself from society, Christopher Thomas Knight is able to focus on his self through isolation. By living by himself in the forest, he is able to gain insight into the concept of non-duality. As a forest renunciant, …show more content…
Knight’s actions demonstrate how his universal and situational dharmas are called into conflict.
Also known as the “North Pond Hermit” (Finkel 2), in 1986, Christopher Knight entered the North Pond forest and he did not leave for about three decades until he was caught by a police offer on account of theft and burglary. Before he left the forest, Knight had lived in isolation from society for exactly 27 years. Through the time he spent in the forest, he was able to focus on himself. Away from the loud noises and the fast-paced community, Knight was accustomed to the silence the forest offered.
In India, there are people who are known as sadhus who dedicate their life to spirituality (Pinkney 7 October 2014). There are various similarities between Knight and the sadhus living in India that will be further discussed in this paper. At night when no one would be at home, he would steal various items from people who lived near his camp. After being spotted through a motion detector, Knight was arrested by the police and was sentenced to seven months in jail, on account of 13 burglary and theft cases.
In Hinduism, one of the concepts of this religion includes non-duality, which is a term referred to in the Advaita Vedanta, which is one of Shakara’s Three Major Schools of Vedanta (Pinkney 18 September 2014). Non-duality is established by the atman and brahman being identical. The term brahman refers to absolute reality, while atman means the individual soul (Heehs 58). Through the Advaita perspective, liberation, which is also known as moksha, is attained through jnana yoga, also known as the discipline of knowledge (Pinkney Spetmber 18). In jnana yoga, liberation is achieved through the realization that atman and brahman are one
Although Knight does not claim to be a Hindu, it could be viewed from the Hindu perspective that he is in the stage of sannyasa, which is the fourth and final stage of asrama, meaning stage of life. In this stage, one is considered “socially dead” (Narayanan 186). In this stage one becomes an ascetic. As an ascetic they will focus on self-discipline and they will only try to “pursu[e] salvific knowledge” (186). This is also the stage where one will focus on moksha. Ascetics own nothing, and only “liv[e] off food given as alms.” There is a detachment from life at this stage and in this stage, one must disassociate themselves from any relationships and live life as a renunciant (186).
Many of the renunciants in India get charity from people around them and they usually live in temples (Pinkney 7 October 2014. People will offer them food, water and the main essentials for them to survive. However, they will not take part in having lavish and wealthy objects. One of the most renowned sadhus in India is named Lotan Babu (7 October 2014). He is viewed as a saint to many because of the amount of suffering he goes through for a pilgrimage. He is an example of how a sadhu will dedicate their life to spirituality. They are not materialistic and a sadhus main purpose is to focus on attaining moksha.
While reading the article by Finkel, one may recognize that Knight does not have any connection to his past relationships while he lives in the forest and this is shown when he does not even know whether or not his parents are dead or alive (Finkel 3). By living as a renunciant, Knight owned nothing of his own, other than his eye glasses. Similarly to the sadhus, Knight also mentions how he mediated. However, he “didn't meditate every day, month, season in the woods.” (Finkel 5). Through the Hindu perspective, by meditating, Knight focuses on attainment of spiritual knowledge. Thus, we can see how Knight may be recognizing his spiritual side by meditating on his own. Meditation is a key element in trying to gain liberation.
Knight also mentions that while he was in the forest, he never documented his experience. This demonstrates how he wanted to live his life in absolute isolation. For example, writing in a journal would have been a distraction and, it could be seen as though he was only living in the forest to gain experience and tell his experiences to everyone else. Writing would also mean he focuses on how he endures living in the forest, rather than focusing on himself.
In the forest, Knight is able to focus on himself. In the cities, there are many distractions and we are never truly alone if we are with our families and friends. But when he leaves the people he knows behind, he is able to be completely by himself. His isolation from society demonstrates how having insight in non-dualism may be facilitated. Knight mentions how he felt as though he “lost [his] identity” (Finkel 15). This can be viewed as Knight being able able to separate the atman from the body. He describes how he felt irrelevant and without people surrounding him, he could just be by himself. This leads to Knight feeling “completely free” (15). This can be viewed as Knight attain liberation since achieving moksha would mean being free. Knight’s insight into non-duality demonstrates how living in isolation can aid one to gain insight into non-duality.
He also makes a goal for himself to spend the rest of his life in the forest unless he would be “forcibly removed” (Finkel 13). Knight mentions how he doesn’t like the society is about to enter because he feels as though he won’t fit in. He also felt some sort of peace and calmness in the forest. But, in jail, he felt as though he was going insane. He is now used to the silence and the stillness he has experienced and now the society is too loud and colourful for him. Thus, in the forest, Knight is able to focus on himself since he is alone and isolated from society.
In English, the Indic word dharma can be translated as ethics, although there are many others meanings for this word (Pinkney 16 September 2014). There are two types of dharma which include samanya dharma and visesa dharma. Samanya dharma is seen as a universal rule, while visesea dharma is more specific. Visesea dharma is an individual’s dharma which it categorized by the individual’s gender, caste and so forth. The samanya dharma is the rules which every person, no matter who they are or where they come from must follow. This can include universal laws such as non-violence.
For Knight, according to the universal dharma, Knight’s actions are completly wrong but according to his situational dharma, his actions may not be as wrong. Through the universal perspective, what Finkel did was completely wrong because it goes against the social norms and rules for a person not to steal. Stealing is an act that is forbidden for everyone. No matter the situation, it is wrong to steal. Also, through the universal perspective, we can see how his actions are wrong because he was not forced to steal. If he wanted food, he still had the option to leave the forest and return to his home. According to the universal dharma, Knight should be a member of the community since he has duties and obligations to fulfil as a person.
Although it may seem wrong through the universal perspective, according to the situational perspective, Knight’s actions may not be as wrong because he only stole to survive.
Through visesea dharma, we could see it as Knight was trying to live as a renunciant in the forest like the sadus and he only stole basic items so he could survive. Sadhus in India would be able to get charity though food, water and other necessities (Pinkney 7 October 2014). But, there was no one in the forest who could offer him food. Asking the people he stole from would mean that he would have to return as a regular member of a society since people could report a man living in the forest, in which he would have to return to society. Also, he did not steal riches or materialistic objects. He stole objects which could help him survive such as clothing and food. Furthermore, Knight also did not have any desire to steal. He mentions that he “[k]new it was wrong, [and] felt guilty about it every time” (Finkel 5). Although he felt guilty, he still continued to do because it became sort of like a routine. He describes how stealing was “not a comfortable act” (9) for him. Thus, the fact that he actually did not want to steal and also feels like he deserves to be punished may justify his
actions. It should not be mistaken that Knight was trying to fulfil his dharma. He mentions that he wouldn’t “claim a belief system” (Finkel, 12). He does not claim to be a Hindu. However, in one of the worst winters, he “pray[ed] for warmth” (12) and he mentions “[t]hat's when you do have religion.” Thus, he views religion as a way to find another solution to pain. In conclusion, although Christopher Knight does not claim to be a Hindu. By living as a renunciant in the forest, Knight demonstrates the aspects of self and dharma through his actions. By living outside of society in isolation, Christopher Knight is able to focus on his self by living completely on his own. The actions he does to survive in the forest bring the universal dharma and situational dharma into conflict.
260633427
RELG 252 001
Teaching Assistant Julia Stenzel
Section: 004
The Question of Self and Dharma for a Hermit
At the mere age of 20, Christopher Knight parked his brand new 1985 Subaru Brat car and he walked away from the rest of society. For nearly 30 years, Knight lived in the North Pond forest in Central Maine, in isolation and seclusion from the rest of society. In Finkel’s “The Strange & Curious Tale of the Last True Hermit,” through a Hindu perspective, one can see that by excluding himself from society, Christopher Thomas Knight is able to focus on his self through isolation. By living by himself in the forest, he is able to gain insight into the concept of non-duality. As a forest renunciant, …show more content…
Knight’s actions demonstrate how his universal and situational dharmas are called into conflict.
Also known as the “North Pond Hermit” (Finkel 2), in 1986, Christopher Knight entered the North Pond forest and he did not leave for about three decades until he was caught by a police offer on account of theft and burglary. Before he left the forest, Knight had lived in isolation from society for exactly 27 years. Through the time he spent in the forest, he was able to focus on himself. Away from the loud noises and the fast-paced community, Knight was accustomed to the silence the forest offered.
In India, there are people who are known as sadhus who dedicate their life to spirituality (Pinkney 7 October 2014). There are various similarities between Knight and the sadhus living in India that will be further discussed in this paper. At night when no one would be at home, he would steal various items from people who lived near his camp. After being spotted through a motion detector, Knight was arrested by the police and was sentenced to seven months in jail, on account of 13 burglary and theft cases.
In Hinduism, one of the concepts of this religion includes non-duality, which is a term referred to in the Advaita Vedanta, which is one of Shakara’s Three Major Schools of Vedanta (Pinkney 18 September 2014). Non-duality is established by the atman and brahman being identical. The term brahman refers to absolute reality, while atman means the individual soul (Heehs 58). Through the Advaita perspective, liberation, which is also known as moksha, is attained through jnana yoga, also known as the discipline of knowledge (Pinkney Spetmber 18). In jnana yoga, liberation is achieved through the realization that atman and brahman are one
Although Knight does not claim to be a Hindu, it could be viewed from the Hindu perspective that he is in the stage of sannyasa, which is the fourth and final stage of asrama, meaning stage of life. In this stage, one is considered “socially dead” (Narayanan 186). In this stage one becomes an ascetic. As an ascetic they will focus on self-discipline and they will only try to “pursu[e] salvific knowledge” (186). This is also the stage where one will focus on moksha. Ascetics own nothing, and only “liv[e] off food given as alms.” There is a detachment from life at this stage and in this stage, one must disassociate themselves from any relationships and live life as a renunciant (186).
Many of the renunciants in India get charity from people around them and they usually live in temples (Pinkney 7 October 2014. People will offer them food, water and the main essentials for them to survive. However, they will not take part in having lavish and wealthy objects. One of the most renowned sadhus in India is named Lotan Babu (7 October 2014). He is viewed as a saint to many because of the amount of suffering he goes through for a pilgrimage. He is an example of how a sadhu will dedicate their life to spirituality. They are not materialistic and a sadhus main purpose is to focus on attaining moksha.
While reading the article by Finkel, one may recognize that Knight does not have any connection to his past relationships while he lives in the forest and this is shown when he does not even know whether or not his parents are dead or alive (Finkel 3). By living as a renunciant, Knight owned nothing of his own, other than his eye glasses. Similarly to the sadhus, Knight also mentions how he mediated. However, he “didn't meditate every day, month, season in the woods.” (Finkel 5). Through the Hindu perspective, by meditating, Knight focuses on attainment of spiritual knowledge. Thus, we can see how Knight may be recognizing his spiritual side by meditating on his own. Meditation is a key element in trying to gain liberation.
Knight also mentions that while he was in the forest, he never documented his experience. This demonstrates how he wanted to live his life in absolute isolation. For example, writing in a journal would have been a distraction and, it could be seen as though he was only living in the forest to gain experience and tell his experiences to everyone else. Writing would also mean he focuses on how he endures living in the forest, rather than focusing on himself.
In the forest, Knight is able to focus on himself. In the cities, there are many distractions and we are never truly alone if we are with our families and friends. But when he leaves the people he knows behind, he is able to be completely by himself. His isolation from society demonstrates how having insight in non-dualism may be facilitated. Knight mentions how he felt as though he “lost [his] identity” (Finkel 15). This can be viewed as Knight being able able to separate the atman from the body. He describes how he felt irrelevant and without people surrounding him, he could just be by himself. This leads to Knight feeling “completely free” (15). This can be viewed as Knight attain liberation since achieving moksha would mean being free. Knight’s insight into non-duality demonstrates how living in isolation can aid one to gain insight into non-duality.
He also makes a goal for himself to spend the rest of his life in the forest unless he would be “forcibly removed” (Finkel 13). Knight mentions how he doesn’t like the society is about to enter because he feels as though he won’t fit in. He also felt some sort of peace and calmness in the forest. But, in jail, he felt as though he was going insane. He is now used to the silence and the stillness he has experienced and now the society is too loud and colourful for him. Thus, in the forest, Knight is able to focus on himself since he is alone and isolated from society.
In English, the Indic word dharma can be translated as ethics, although there are many others meanings for this word (Pinkney 16 September 2014). There are two types of dharma which include samanya dharma and visesa dharma. Samanya dharma is seen as a universal rule, while visesea dharma is more specific. Visesea dharma is an individual’s dharma which it categorized by the individual’s gender, caste and so forth. The samanya dharma is the rules which every person, no matter who they are or where they come from must follow. This can include universal laws such as non-violence.
For Knight, according to the universal dharma, Knight’s actions are completly wrong but according to his situational dharma, his actions may not be as wrong. Through the universal perspective, what Finkel did was completely wrong because it goes against the social norms and rules for a person not to steal. Stealing is an act that is forbidden for everyone. No matter the situation, it is wrong to steal. Also, through the universal perspective, we can see how his actions are wrong because he was not forced to steal. If he wanted food, he still had the option to leave the forest and return to his home. According to the universal dharma, Knight should be a member of the community since he has duties and obligations to fulfil as a person.
Although it may seem wrong through the universal perspective, according to the situational perspective, Knight’s actions may not be as wrong because he only stole to survive.
Through visesea dharma, we could see it as Knight was trying to live as a renunciant in the forest like the sadus and he only stole basic items so he could survive. Sadhus in India would be able to get charity though food, water and other necessities (Pinkney 7 October 2014). But, there was no one in the forest who could offer him food. Asking the people he stole from would mean that he would have to return as a regular member of a society since people could report a man living in the forest, in which he would have to return to society. Also, he did not steal riches or materialistic objects. He stole objects which could help him survive such as clothing and food. Furthermore, Knight also did not have any desire to steal. He mentions that he “[k]new it was wrong, [and] felt guilty about it every time” (Finkel 5). Although he felt guilty, he still continued to do because it became sort of like a routine. He describes how stealing was “not a comfortable act” (9) for him. Thus, the fact that he actually did not want to steal and also feels like he deserves to be punished may justify his
actions. It should not be mistaken that Knight was trying to fulfil his dharma. He mentions that he wouldn’t “claim a belief system” (Finkel, 12). He does not claim to be a Hindu. However, in one of the worst winters, he “pray[ed] for warmth” (12) and he mentions “[t]hat's when you do have religion.” Thus, he views religion as a way to find another solution to pain. In conclusion, although Christopher Knight does not claim to be a Hindu. By living as a renunciant in the forest, Knight demonstrates the aspects of self and dharma through his actions. By living outside of society in isolation, Christopher Knight is able to focus on his self by living completely on his own. The actions he does to survive in the forest bring the universal dharma and situational dharma into conflict.