gnumatt.org

Temptation and Self-Sacrifice

Posted by Matt M. on June 21, 2007 at 07:52 AM

I picked up a copy of W. Somerset Maugham's book The Razor's Edge from the library this weekend. I really enjoyed it but this quote stood out as particularly wicked and clever:

D'you remember how Jesus was led into the wilderness and fasted forty days? Then, when he was a-hungered, the devil came to him and said: If thou be the son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But Jesus resisted the temptation. Then the devil set him on a pinnacle of the temple and said to him: If thou be the son of God, cast thyself down. For angels had charge of him and would bear him up. But again Jesus resisted. Then the devil took him into a high mountain and showed him the kingdoms of the world and said that he would give them to him if he would fall down and worship him. But Jesus said: Get thee hence, Satan. That's the end of the story according to the good simple Matthew. But it wasn't. The devil was sly and he came to Jesus once more and said: If thou wilt accept shame and disgrace, scourging, a crown of thorns and death on the cross thou shalt save the human race, for greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Jesus fell. The devil laughed till his sides ached, for he knew the evil men would commit in the name of their redeemer.

The author/narrator follows it up later with this explanation of why self-sacrifice is such a powerful temptation:

I only wanted to suggest to you that self-sacrifice is a passion so overwhelming that beside it even lust and hunger are trifling. It whirls its victim to destruction in the highest affirmation of his personality. The object doesn't matter; it may be worth while or it may be worthless. When he sacrifices himself man for a moment is greater than God, for how can God, infinite and omnipotent, sacrifice himself? At best he can only sacrifice his only begotten son.

I have to wonder if Ayn Rand ever summed up this idea as cleverly since it was one of her shibboleths.

Tags: Books
Hierarchy: previous, next

Comments

There is 1 comment on this post. Post yours →

Tom Terrific

Rand was against the idea that one is obligated to sacrifice oneself. This idea is what was anathema to her, whether the one ordaining the obligation was God, the state or oneself.

I don't know whether she recognized the distinction between self-sacrifice as fulfillment of an obligation and self-sacrifice as an act of love. There is one.

Speaking more deeply, what is popularly considered "self-sacrifice," when a free-will gift of love rather than fulfillment of an obligation, is not so much a sacrifice of self as it is a gift of self. There is a subtle but profound distinction. Sacrifice focuses upon oneself, while gift focuses on the one to whom the gift is given. A gift of love is not given with any thought for oneself—not because one denigrates oneself, but because one's heart is full of the other.

This is the nature of the gift of God in Christ, in the Christian religion. Christ was God, God-made-flesh; and in the incarnation God gives himself to his beloved, his creation, for their redemption.

I am not a Christian. But I recognize this distinction, between giving as an act of sacrifice and giving as an act of love. I think Rand speaks to the former, not the latter, whether she herself knew it or not.

Post a comment

Required fields in bold.