A LETTER TO MY PARENTS
An Explanation of the Choices of my Life
July 1996
ANIL MITRA, COPYRIGHT © 1996 – 2008
|
June 10 - July 20, 1996 |
Posted: August 15, 1996 |
PART I: MY LIFE AND YOUR PERCEPTIONS OF IT
Issue of Pain | The pain your father feels because you have not got the work, for which your intelligence… | The issue of failure | My fundamental commitment | Work at mental health… and alternatives | Human being and nature: the normal and the singular | The disvalue of professional positions: needs for original work | The greatest works were done outside universities | Great work by fifty and sixty year old persons | Parent’s problems of perception | Evolution, Design and the Absolute | Worry and perception | What am I? My evaluation of my life. | The problem | On Being | In my life I am the actor | My daughter Carissa | My relationship with my parents; reasons to explain my life | Conclusion of an explanation of why I try to understand your feelings; and sharing my reactions | I am doing the highest that I can do | My special relationship to you | Self-doubt | Self-respect | The self-affirmation in this letter is of value | Issue of self-deception; and of the distortions of my parents perceptions | Review of the purposes of this letter: communication; the whole that is my life; my life as positive and good | Relation of individual and the institutions of society; contribution within the institution and growth beyond | My achievements; I have achieved much of what I want | Why my work would not have been accomplished at a university: practical reasons | Why my work would not have been accomplished at a university: my work requires a full range of experience | My development | Academic development | Evolution and Design and the path to Being and the Elements of Being
Dynamics of relationships and art of self-observation | Academic experience is flat | My work on consciousness: an example of the dynamics | Adjustment to loss: a second example of the dynamics | The effect of other’s judgment on my behavior; my attempt to remain real and true | The dynamics of being; sources for the dynamics | Dynamics of perception and intuition; dynamics of healing – another example | Social delusions that diminish the potential and dimensionality of the individual | A catalog: 21 examples of the dynamics of the real | An evaluation: status of work on dynamics; my abilities and preparation | Products of the work | Why it is unnecessary to see my life as painful; my reaction to that view | Changes that I request | Your contribution
Experience of the ultimate | A catalog of peak experiences | A life and its end in suicide: affirming the individual | Final comments
My dear Parents,
Thanks for the letter of June 5… I want to address some of the issues raised in the letter. If I disagree with some of your perceptions, it is not to prove someone right and someone wrong, but because I think that our perceptions of others are important and therefore it is also important for these perceptions to be faithful and true.
Please know that the salutation “My dear Parents” at the head of this letter is intended as a formal acknowledgement of an aspect of reality; but does not in any way, either in fact or in intention, imply a lack of love, caring or respect. In fact I find the formal form fitting and my intention is to emphasize respect, caring and love.
I should add that this letter includes a statement of some of my attitudes towards life… and that not everything is in response - either direct or indirect - to what you may have said.
First, in response to your letter, there is the issue of pain. I mentioned, and want to repeat, that I have had throughout much of my life and continue to have a very large share of happiness, satisfaction and beauty. I think, at this time in my life, my normal state is generally one of contentment - with who I am, where I am, with the here and now, and with my ambitions and goals. I report to others that I am “happy” only when I am unusually pleased - and unusual pleasure is an occasional occurrence.
I believe that I have learned - perhaps always known - the art of enjoying life. In fact I have cultivated and learned how to cultivate an enjoyment of the basic elements of life including my own thoughts, feelings. Fear and pain are, of course, adaptive. However, not every feeling of fear or pain is adaptive or useful. Much, though not all, of the occurrence of negative emotions is as a result of faulty perception, faulty thinking and anticipation, what we are told in society. It would be improbable for all social and cultural “messages” to be maladaptive but I believe that many are and that yet others can be misinterpreted. In part, as a result of my thinking about all aspects of society, I have also thought about the common social values regarding what is pleasurable and what is painful and of the human and personal validity of these values. And, although the process was and is intellectual, the result is emotional, existential. This is one way in which - perhaps at first inadvertently or as the result of unconscious motives - I have cultivated the positive… As a result I find it ironic when you focus on the supposed lacks in my life and on pain.
I do believe that truth and authenticity are at least as important as happiness (etc.). However, truth and positive emotion are not at all incompatible. Later in this letter you will see how truth and feeling have an intimate relation in my life. I wish that, in addition to feeling, you would also appreciate and express such appreciation of the elements of truth in my life. Of course this cannot be expected if you do not see a presence of truth.
Yes, I have also had a share of pain but this is not something to be dwelt on as if it were some kind of burden or anything unusual in the realm of human experience. Nor do I dwell on it except that it is good to have a complete perspective of the sum of one's experience, to see how and how much it results in the present and what one may learn from all of this. I think it is precisely this circumstance together with other developments that have made me stronger, more resilient, wiser in the face of “loss”. Resilient in that I am able to recover (and forgive) more rapidly - in my estimation - than most people, stronger in not being fundamentally needy, and wiser in understanding the nature of loss and its transience. This understanding is not merely intellectual but is part of a basic emotional (existential) attitude toward life. Many people have problems understanding this because it is not part of their experience, and perhaps to accept it would point out or heighten their relative inadequacy. Four sources of this aspect of myself that I can identify are (1) love of the elements of nature where I live and am - wherever that happens to be. Time in the mountains is an aspect of this experience and is also valuable as a source of inspiration and occasion for extended reflection; (2) having supportive, loving parents, who helped instill values of joy, perseverance, discipline and truth… and who have encouraged and been interested in my health, life, education and future - which is all positive despite disagreements over these issues; (3) my studies and exploration into the nature of all being and knowing… initially an exciting adventure but with the result of an emotional (existential) awareness every day of the meaning of my life (and ultimate death) in relation to all being, (4) perhaps some factors innate to me.
I mentioned - in a recent phone conversation - what I believe to be two fundamental human problems (A) death, and (B) pain. As I stated, I feel that I have, for myself, resolved the problem of death: the source of this is, perhaps items (1)-(4) above. The problem of pain is more of the attitude toward pain, of fear of pain. One might have an accident and an arm or a leg could be sliced off… or one could suffer brain damage and forever after be a confused emotional mess without the ability to do anything about the situation…one would be alive and yet dead. The list of what could happen, physical and emotional, is endless. I believe I have also resolved this problem more recently. The fundamental problems could be reformulated as a triad: death - fear - pain. The resolution: do not hide from or avoid the idea of pain. I have learned that sorrow is not suffering, that suffering is feeling pain to be a burden - resistance to and denial of pain. Sorrow is not suffering - and being open to both sorrow and joy without excessive seeking or resistance is akin to enjoyment. The ability to feel pain is adaptive (even though specific manifestations may be neurotic) and the resolution is to openly accept and acknowledge the potential for pain along with joy and so on. An ability to accept limitations and death, to know and understand the meaning of limits is related to an ability to know joy and enjoyment. The next paragraphs expand on these ideas.
A wonderful experience that I had in 1979 was reading Peter Matthiessen's The Snow Leopard first published in August 1978. It is the story of the trek by a wildlife biologist George Schaller (now well known) that the author made in the Tibetan Plateau “seeking”, as the cover says, “a glimpse of the near-mythical leopard.” For Mathiessen the trek was natural and beautiful as well as spiritual. It describes the environment, the snow, the passes, the mountains, the ravines, the swift flowing clear cold streams, the villages, the monasteries, the Tibetan-Buddhist traditions and legends. I have probably written of this book to you before. One of the legends recounted is about the tenth century (AD) Tibetan poet saint Milarepa, whose mother was “the White Garland of the Nyang”.
Returning to his village after many years (he was born about fifty miles north of Katmandu, on the Tibetan side of the present-day frontier), Mila discovers the decayed corpse of his mother, no more than a mound of dirt and rags in her fallen hut; shaken by grief and horror, he remembers the instruction of his guru, the Lama Marpa, to embrace all that he most fears or finds repugnant, the better to realize that everything in the Universe, being inseparably related, is therefore holy. And so he makes a headrest of the sad remains of the erstwhile White Garland of the Nyang and lies upon them for seven days, in a deep, clear state of samadhi. This Tantric discipline to overcome ideas of “horror”, often performed while sitting on a corpse or in the graveyard in the dark of night, is known as chöd…
This approach to overcoming (neurotic) fear, to embracing life, is also at the root of some modern psychotherapeutic techniques. The feared object may be “held” mentally. Or, to improve the quality of my life - the wholeness of my psychic structure - I could seek out, “hold”, examine whatever I fear most.
Pleasure and ecstasy are identical to pain…for all are contact with the real. All are elements of contact, opportunity, becoming…and growth from part to whole, from atom to universe, from appearance to reality…
I will now consider the issue of “the pain he (Your father) feels because you have not got the work, for which your intelligence…” and “I too have a share of this…” It would be untrue to say that this is never an issue for me, but it seems to be (much) more of an issue for you than for me. I feel that this pain is unnecessary, not to the point, and is based on assumptions about my situation, on attitudes which are mistaken even if natural - in some ways - in your circumstance. I will explain below. But what is or has been puzzling to me is that these assumptions and attitudes appear to be unshakable and unshaken despite many protestations and explanations by me, and despite the fact that the assumptions are about me and my feelings.
I am saying that your perceptions of me and my situation are in error. What follows is an explanation. I am also going to explain why I think this explanation is important and useful. I don't know whether it will change anything because my attempts at persuasion, explanation have not been successful in the past.
This letter is long in part because of the importance. It is also long because it has gone through six or seven versions in which I have added material without any significant revision. Therefore there is repetition.
Some good reasons for the explanation are as follows. Assume that I am not in any pain over my life. Assume instead that I am happy. Assume further that these feelings are based neither in ignorance, nor in courage but in intelligent recognition that my life and situation is the best, the highest it can be and also based in intelligent choices made knowingly by me. Then it does not make sense for anyone else to feel pain over my life. (And, as I shall explain, all of this is true.) For another reason, start with the consideration that you feel some pain at some times over my life. If this is reasonable for you to do, it must follow that you think that I too feel this pain or should feel it. It then follows that this probably colors your interpretation of much of what I say. If I say, “I am happy” you think “brave chap”, and if I say, “I love the deep blue sky” you may think, “He finds solace. Wonderful of course but solace nonetheless”. This is the way in which the interpretations are colored and the color is gray. There is a certain gloom which, if it is misplaced, should be cleared up. Further, this Grey gloomy interpretation serves to confirm to you your original assumption that I feel the alleged pain. These are good reasons to provide explanations of why I think your perceptions are erroneous.
Here is another example that also shows again how expectations can affect what one sees. Suppose a person A writes to B saying (1): “I do not believe in happiness. I believe in a higher thing called duty.” Suppose, also that B is predisposed to a pessimistic interpretation. Pessimism is not an expectation regarding A; it is an expectation regarding the world that includes A. Perhaps B is predisposed, only, to seeing A as having hard times and, say, seeing A as facing this with courage, perhaps as rationalizing his feelings. In any case, B might then think “A is unhappy, has pain but faces life as duty.” B might add, “How noble”… Later A says (2): “I do think happiness and joy are significant after all.” A also writes about all the things that he enjoys. Now B thinks something like: “Now A wants happiness after all and again faces his life through courage and optimism”, but nothing as simple as: “A is happy and content.”
There is another interpretation and it is that A has always had happiness - along with pain and frustration - and has something of a predisposition to joy and contentment. Perhaps most of A's friends agree to this as well. [Predisposition to joy means that the joy flows naturally and may be enhanced by but is not created through courage or some philosophical reinterpretation of life, its meaning, etc.] Earlier in his life A thought: “My commitment to this beautiful world is important” and so wrote in praise of duty - (1) above.
Then A continues to seek his duty - “what is it, how can I do it,” he thinks and then acts accordingly. A has life experiences. The concept of “his duty” continues to grow. This is important to him. He, to some extent, disregards the “trodden path”. But he does not forget the original point to the idea of duty: the earth, the world, the universe are beautiful - he will know and understand this beauty; people live in the world, in societies, and everywhere people want their lives to be positive. A wants to contribute, to be an agent. He realizes: “Duty is knowing and doing and being the highest thing possible.” But he also realizes a point to his psychology that he thinks may also apply to all people: “Joy flows from doing and being the highest that one can… “ And so he now writes - in what may be or seem to be a partial reversal of his earlier position - about the importance of joy - (2) above.
I, Anil, know that I am A. I do not know whether you are B. Certainly I am not saying that you have had B's specific thoughts in this example or that you are completely like B. I do think that you are and have been something like B in that you have sometimes misinterpreted what I have said, sometimes incorrectly assessed my feelings; and underestimated my ability to live fully, the nature of my commitments, the extents of my choice, awareness and control over my life.
In this example we see that muddled communication, through mismatch of time scales, leads to misperception and therefore that matching of scales may lead to improved communication and vision.
I may have quoted these line by Rabi Thakur to you in the past: “I slept and dreamt that life was joy/ I woke and found that life is duty/ I acted and found that duty is joy.” This has been a favorite quote for many years.
In my case the sleep is the dreaming sleep of youth and the waking is the experience of my life. In truth, I am still sleeping and dreaming and am yet awake.
As another famous example of the sleep/wake metaphor, when Buddha was asked what set him apart from others, he said, “I am awake.”
Need I add that my selection of famous persons as examples is not to compare myself with them? Rather it may be to illustrate an idea. More importantly, we all live in, contribute meaning to and take meaning from the same world which must also have meaning - at least potentially - because it also resulted in us; the examples, then, add significance and understanding to the world and its nature and so, also, to my own life which is a synthesis of external and internal sources, experience, action and learning.
This is also a good point to address the issue of failure which may be and or may have been in your mind, and may be “hanging over my head”. Let me discuss, as the most important case, the situations of my past university faculty positions. As I have pointed out before, my leaving Humboldt State University was largely a political issue. I should also point out that reviews of my academic abilities at Humboldt State (and at the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Delaware) were uniformly excellent. I also received excellent reviews for technical papers, one of which was published in the Journal of Applied Mechanics - one of the most prestigious of mechanical engineering journals. Regarding this paper, I received requests for further information from within and outside America. Reviews of my teaching at Texas and Humboldt were also excellent except for a small group of students at Humboldt whose complaint was “the grading was too hard and unfair”. I agree and agreed that the grading was hard, but not that it was too hard or unfair. I point out all this in relation to the question of whether my performance was a failure. I should also point out that I had begun, even as a graduate student at the University of Delaware, to think about leaving engineering and universities to do other things. Not that engineering and universities were or are boring or unimportant. Rather the other things - ideas, truth, contact with nature, with reality - were more important, more whole, more exciting. It is tempting to rewrite history and difficult to avoid this, but I am attempting to recount my personal history without devaluing the views of others or overvaluing my own opinions. I believe that my inclinations affected the emphasis but not quality or even quantity of my work. I do not know whether others were intimidated by me but that may have been the case. I do know that some objected to or resented my “outside” interests (philosophy, etc.) and independence. In brief summary: the situation was political, and universities and engineering were clearly not my fundamental interest or commitment. Therefore, after significant debate with the faculty at Humboldt, I decided to cease to contest the negative judgment, despite the existence of what I believe and believed to have been good reasons for contest, and to seek my fundamental interest. A question arises whether this was the right thing to do, since the “good reasons” included performance and reasons to believe other persons were being unfair. Details are unimportant, but I believed at the time that my choice was right because it was right for me - as explained - and because although the unfairness was significant, I believed the number of persons involved to be small. It is at this point that the real question of failure begins.
I will first mention an incidental issue. The balance between pursuing some “right” and letting go of the pursuit in favor of “the good and the true” as perceived by me has, to some extent, pervaded my life. Important situations where this issue arose include my relationships with Beverly and with Carissa.
I now take up the question of failure. The question is not whether the situation at Humboldt in particular or university positions in general were failures. It is whether the experience so affected me that I became hesitant to try again - whether engineering or teaching - whether I became discouraged, whether I failed to follow up on my true potential.
Initially, of course, I did not know what my fundamental interest was. It was the real and the true and so on, of course, but these were vague and undefined - but potent - ideas. As a practical point, I decided to look at what was most important in mechanical engineering. After two weeks or so I came up with design. As I began to look into design and to understand the nature of the process, I saw parallels with the entire human process…and then parallels with the universal processes of evolution. This went on for some months. A number of preliminary studies, ultimately important, were performed for somewhat intuitive reasons. Finally, during two weeks in September 1986 in the Trinity Alps Wilderness Area, I conceived of Evolution & Design and of its outline.
I decided to do two weeks of study into the topics in the outline. Two weeks turned into five months - and study and perhaps writing down a few points turned into Evolution & Design.
At this point I knew what my most fundamental commitment was. There was really no turning back. However, the process had required courage and perseverance, even though it was also exciting, an adventure. Sitting up at night shivering and studying and writing. Worrying about money. Should I look for work? What will happen to my career? These issues had to be faced during each step or phase of the process and required to be overcome again and again especially at the transitions between the steps. Therefore, the result of my experience cannot be regarded as one of discouragement or failure. That is, my actions were based on intelligently seeking, discovering, and creating the positive - initially by courage and in the dark - rather than avoiding anything negative - or even blindly plodding on.
Interesting questions to me: What is or was the nature of the courage and the dark. Where did the courage come from, how long had it been there, was it cultivated? How black was the dark? To what degree was it softened by preparation, intuition, intelligence and vision, or lack of these elements? Something to answer at another time…
At the end of the process described above, courage was no longer necessary. I knew. In a sense what had been latent became distinct, compelling and potent. Of course this “knowledge” continued and continues to grow. The new element of this knowledge: a more connected, explicit, universal view of being at rational and existential levels, that was relatively independent of the views of others and more directly derived from “reality” itself. Truth began to take over from courage; and light began to replace the dark.
What is the nature of this truth and this light? A further reason for providing explanations. In the explanations that follow I will show why I believe, without hesitation or reservation, that I am following the highest path open to me. There will be an explanation of what I am doing; why I occasionally but not persistently seek alternatives; why there is no need for pain; why pain can and should, in light of what the situation truly is, be replaced by positive feeling. Further reasons for the explanation will be provided. I now turn to the explanation itself which, of course, is already begun in the description of the process by which knowledge of my fundamental commitment was established.
The situation is that I work at Mental Health for money. This is why I originally took the position. I had also contemplated a need to experience a situation without privilege…to experience reality…And I have learned much that is not detailed in this letter - life, empathy, grounding that is useful and good and will be so in whatever I do. This is, in part, what has made the work intrinsically valuable.
When I see the world as being fundamentally made up of the realms of (1) nature, (2) society, (3) the mind and spirit, and (4) the universal - the unknown - and the unconsciousness…then I pattern my experience accordingly. It is not a case of pure design but of iterative learning and design that is sometimes difficult and which is not other than my life. In other words while there is design and perspective, there is also immersion and living. This work is an aspect of experience in the realm of the social…
The work is often rewarding but that is incidental - I am not doing it for the reward. I have also learned many things about human behavior, human minds, human relationships, and the nature of personality including its adaptability. This is and very likely will be useful in my future work and life, but again this learning is incidental: I am not primarily working at Mental Health for the learning; although the rewards and the learning - and friendship with coworkers - result in work that is enjoyable and even exciting. And, although reward and learning are not the main purpose of my position at Mental Health, I do believe that your “pain” is based, in part, on inaccurate and negative assumptions as to the nature of the work and my reasons for doing it. The main advantage, however, of the work is that there is no homework - studying, grading papers, preparing for lectures, meetings, etc. This leaves me free to do what I want with the rest of my time: read, think, learn, have ideas, experience and experiences, and write. A primary goal is to write the next version of Evolution & Design (you have a copy of the first version). Excellent progress towards the second version has been made. Although I occasionally seek some other position, that would not be an end in itself, the end is the work: evolution and design, the knowledge, the understanding, etc. [Of course evolution and design is part of a larger process, but it is not my purpose here to describe that process. I have done this for you on many occasions.]
I seek such positions as alternate and perhaps more efficient ways to further my fundamental commitment and to maintain awareness of alternatives and how to seek them, and because this process is good and enjoyable; I seek them occasionally and not persistently because it is the commitment that is important and not the position.
How might alternate positions be more “efficient”? Before explaining this, the following question arises: efficient with respect to what? As I have explained in detail in this letter, this must be with respect to my fundamental commitment, which is: understanding - and knowing, and using such understanding and knowing. More efficient, therefore, means (i) I will have more time and energy to devote to the fundamental commitment and/or (ii) I would earn so much more money that I would be able to save enough so as to also be able to have time and energy later - this is actually not different than item i. However I would need to be careful about ii since the promise might be misleading. This is especially true since I have realized since October last year that the time to work on what is important (and fundamental) is now and not at some “ideal” comfortable time in the future. I have begun this and, though my work at Mental Health does take time and energy, I am finding ways of compensating: maintaining focus; improving efficiency of the time I do have; cutting out waste, including avoiding and resisting my own “temptations” and the temptations from others to “waste” time; being more healthy by a program of exercise, not eating or drinking to excess, eating healthy food, and so on; finding time at work - it is in the nature of the work that we are sometimes extremely active with many things happening at once, while there are times when there is no work to be done, and the amount of such time can be increased by efficiency and focus - to do things that do not need great or extended concentration.
The issue of position and influence is similar to the issue of money: position and influence can be deployed towards the fundamental commitment, but I should be careful because the possibility of such deployment may be deceptive and because I am not immune to the “appeal” of position of influence - and of money.
There may come a time, an opportunity, a change within me, and an insight that will make a change seem proper or necessary or imperative. Therefore, while I seek alternatives occasionally, I am always scanning for then, even scanning for and thinking about ways to create such positions - America is still the land of opportunity, still a place where - at least in some quarters - such seeking is considered to be a primary value… and at the same time I am seeking ways to be more focused and productive in my present situation… and also keeping both approaches and their elements and details in balance.
What will happen if, when the time comes, I do not have the energy to seek such positions? As a practical matter, modern computer and communications technology, together with the American emphasis on individual initiative, are permitting individuals to do what may not have been possible before - to find and to create such positions from a situation of limited mobility and energy. Realistically, of course, regardless of technology, I will age, perhaps become infirm, and die. Of course the transition from a productive life to death is not always marked by infirmity. Of course the future is unknown. One should not cling to old hopes and ambitions at all costs. We are essentially talking about intertwined problems of death and pain I discussed earlier. In the present issue the proper attitude is, I believe, to maintain the best relationship between oneself and all of being which includes self, family, others, world and universe.
More practically, however, I am aware of the normal stages of life and death and probable variations in my case.
This is an important point to consider. It relates to the question of the use of statistics and the idea of normality and of normal variations. I am not a critic of the idea of the normal - it is intuitive, in place and predates statistics and science as we know it. My hypothesis is that the dimensionality of the space of human potential is so large, the structure so intricate, the measure of the space so small compared to the space of descriptive parameters, and the response to the circumstances and opportunity so fine…that statistics, probabilities and what is normally considered to be normality do not define the singular but essential nature of the edge of human endeavor and potential, of “genius” and “leadership” and of the ultimate in connection between being and Being . And, this applies to individuals in search of their own potential as well as to human potential in general.
Actual variations are unpredictable and to plan and prepare for or to unnecessarily dwell on all possibilities - this is not to suggest avoiding acceptance and awareness of such possibilities, of the random and the unpredictable - is a form of submission in the face of the problems of death and pain… And my actual plans and intentions account for the normal stages and probable variations noted above.
And, as already noted, I am not sure that alternative positions would actually be better (I do think it important, as explained above, to continue to explore options). Here is one point of view. Suppose, for example, that I were hired at the University of California at Berkeley. There would be pressure to think in certain ways. There would be pressure to effect an essential narrowing and distortion of focus. These would not be overt or stated pressures, but when one is paid to teach or do research one is paid to teach and research certain topics and certain styles… and not other topics or other styles. And in any such position I would undoubtedly be spending many hours outside of the work itself, devoted to the work. My knowledge of all of this is not based on imagination or speculation: as you know I was a university student for eleven years and a faculty member for nine years, twenty years or so in all. All throughout this period I “knew” something was missing - and while I worked hard, though of course not “perfectly”, there is no question that I resisted the pressures, followed directions I thought to be important. Now that I know better what was missing, I am glad that I chose and followed my own direction. And, in consequence of the above, I need to be careful about energy devoted to seeking positions and the type of position, and very careful that any position I accept will enhance my fundamental commitment.
In my present situation my own time is my own. Any work with more “prestige” and more money means - as a rule - your time is not your own. And, relative to personal reward, the value of prestige, power, money, position is - it is well known - illusory. This means that, although money, recognition and so on are useful and somewhat necessary, they are not in themselves productive of enduring happiness, satisfaction, and self-worth. And it is true that to do the kind of work I am doing, time and freedom from constraint and schedule are important. By way of illustration of my point, the work of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates was not done in institutions. Socrates was allegedly sentenced to death for his work and his adherence to his truth. The comparison here is of how or where the work is done, and not of the individuals. The work of Isaac Newton and of Albert Einstein was done outside the walls of the university, as was much of the founding work of modern mathematics, philosophy, biology, medicine, psychology, and even engineering. This includes the work of C. F. Gauss, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Bertrand Russell, Charles Darwin, and Sigmund Freud… Some of the finest mathematicians and philosophers of Europe had some kind of employment or independent means, but pursued their fundamental interest in addition to work. There are reasons for this. Truth, which requires openness, is powerful and fragile - the most powerful being, perhaps, the most fragile. As institutions, universities provide too much security and in some ways alienation from what is real.
Institutions are subject to the following tension: (1) social functions exist and develop, (2) the functions become formalized and perpetuated in institutions, (3) this isolates the institution from the real needs of understanding, liberation and contact. As a trivial example, this applies to recognition… therefore, most of the most original and essential work, including the creation of useful institutions, happens, to a significant degree, outside the institution.
Of course, good work is being done in institutions but nowhere do I see truly fundamental work being done in universities. Then there is also the fact that my life is open to struggle, to change… and this brings a certain fundamental truth to it. The freedom of the university brings a certain intellectual freedom as well as certain constraints as noted above, but misses certain fundamental openness to all of life and being… Considerations of this nature were present in 1988-1989 when I needed work and contemplated what I might learn from a position without privilege and prestige… If you could see into my soul you would see progress that is slow and halting at times, but also rightness and great reward from my life and a great sense of promise. You would also see the large extent to which my life is an act of choice rather than something buffeted by the winds of fate.
The examples of Newton, Einstein and others are intended to show that much of the fundamental work in the development of the tradition of knowledge was done outside of universities and traditional institutions. This does not prove that what I am doing in my life is right, but it does show that an emphasis on position as a measure of success or as something that would result in achievement is mistaken.
Having lived and worked within a number of institutions - and for four to five years 1985-1990 without the context and support of any institution, and this, combined with understanding, has given me a detachment from and understanding of the roles and uses and limitations of institutions.
There is also an extended history of examples - including the lives of a number of the individuals named above - which shows that despite the modern emphasis on publishing as much as possible as soon as possible, it is right to wait until the work is mature before publication. Again, this history is not why I wait to publish. Rather, I wait because I judge that it would at present be premature to do so.
As examples I note that Immanuel Kant published his best work when he was over fifty, and the British mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead published his major work in philosophy when he was sixty-six. As before, the examples are not intended as some kind of proof but as a framework from which others may effectively understand the issues I am discussing.
I add that the sense of what is right for me, although enhanced by my knowledge of the history of the development of knowledge, comes primarily from my judgment of my work and its potential.
Regarding this work: the machine is working, the gears are meshed, and the pieces are falling into place: a program has been outlined… Parts have been written towards the final product -- the next version of Evolution & Design, tentatively named Evolution, Design and The Absolute (Evolution, Design and the Absolute). This despite my father's statement that he didn't think I'd be able to do so… and in the spirit of truth, I am more concerned about producing the best possible work than with recognition… not that recognition would not be at all rewarding, but the internal sense of truth and self-direction is a higher and more enduring reward, with recognition being a partial external token of truth and accomplishment. And, again, in the spirit of truth, one recognizes that the process, the effort is as important as the product because it is in the nature of the process to be one of trial and error with many trials by many people and few successes by few people… The ultimate failure would be for me to accept these negative valuations of my situation, the “pain” at the supposed lack of recognition and position… and so on… and to stop the effort and the process as I see most fit… I hope at the end of my life, if that end be natural, to be able to say that I did the best thing I could… which is how I currently view my life. And I believe that I have made essentially the same statement to you many times before.
I frequently look out at the world, see how beautiful it is, look at my own place in it, and feel alive and powerful. This does not stem from courage and security, but from understanding and that uncertainty which is the true nature of any life lived at the boundary between the known and the unknown.
Perhaps one of the problems of perception comes from my father's having put much effort into working within institutions, whereas for me the institution is not as important. Even at times when I was doing “well” academically etc., there was always a certain detachment, a certain feeling of something missing with inner truth (even if immature in earlier years) serving as compass. This does not mean that the two approaches are opposite, that one is right and one wrong: both are necessary and are mutually complementary. And of course it is not the situation that one seeks - the situation is a means to an end… Now, it might be thought that I am merely trying to rationalize or justify my situation after the events, but with this I must simply disagree. Further, ample explanation of this basis for this disagreement has been provided in this letter.
Another problem of perception may be the result of being parents, of being protective, of perceiving the adult as he was when a child. The old perception that persists is one of the immature, somewhat helpless, child. And this could well be occurring at a level that is not explicitly conscious and therefore the perception is elusive, difficult to acknowledge and correct. And, as I have said or alluded elsewhere, all adults contain in their psyche - at varying degrees of manifestation and synthesis - the kernel of the child; this, too, affects the perceptions and feelings of parents (or any other adult, for that matter), resulting in a confusion between objectivity and the feelings that one feels or might feel if one were in what one perceives based on one's own range of experience, integration, acceptance (and on what one hears) to be the (life) situation of the other. Parents are frequently like this. It is not unusual. However, this explains some parental perceptions but does not make them correct.
Other reasons for differences in perception and maintaining old perception are some kind of competition between parent and adult child, and pressure on the adult child to modify behavior and life style. These are frequent themes in human relationships. Although I do not overtly speculate on the theme of “pressure”, my father has on occasion stated this to be one of his motives… In any case, my position is to act and conduct my life neither in conformity with nor in reaction against such kinds of competition or pressure - parental or otherwise - but to base actions and conduct on internal imperatives. This is not to say that the views and opinions and motives of others are improper [even if incorrect] or are ignored or viewed as worthless.
We could also be having different perceptions and feelings because our views of the world and what is important may be different. Perhaps you wish that when talking to others or when thinking about me you could say “Our son is…” Of course, I am not immune from such feelings. But, for reasons I am explaining in this letter, such thoughts and feelings are a small part of my total experience. They are transient, occasionally irritating, but at other times something to be contemplated as part of reality without any particular attached feeling. And, also for reasons explained here, to give in, to yield to such feelings would be destructive in terms of what I stand for and am trying to do.
Regarding the question of differences in worldviews, I will insert the following quote from C. G. Jung which is somewhat illustrative of my point. I do not agree with his emphases, especially the complete isolation of the individual from the rest of humanity. However, the alleged isolation does point to difficulties of communication which include both differences-limitations of perspective and resistance. Further, while I do think cultivation of one's personal truth is important, I think it is also important to make this truth as universal and as reality-based as one's powers permit and to communicate and learn together with others and with experience. And while I do also think that individual realization is meaningful, I do not think that this is the only meaningful life and I would be careful about the meanings to be attached to the phrase “absolute and unconditional” in the quote, which now follows:
The fact that many a man who goes his own way ends in ruin means nothing… He must obey his own law, as if it were a daemon whispering to him of new and wonderful paths… There are not a few who are called awake by the summons of the voice, whereupon they are at once set apart from the others, feeling themselves confronted with a problem about which the others know nothing. In most cases it is impossible to explain to the others what has happened, for any understanding is walled off by impenetrable prejudices. “You are no different from anybody else,” they will chorus, or, “there's no such thing,” and even if there is such a thing, it is immediately branded as “morbid”… He is at once set apart and isolated, as he has resolved to obey the law that commands him from within. “His own law!” everybody will cry. But he knows better: it is the law… The only meaningful life is a life that strives for the individual realization - absolute and unconditional - of its own particular law… To the extent that a man is untrue to the law of his being… he has failed to realize his life's meaning.
The undiscovered vein within us is a living part of the psyche; classical Chinese philosophy names this interior way “Tao”, and likens it to a flow of water that moves irresistibly towards its goal. To rest in Tao means fulfillment, wholeness, one's destination reached, one's mission done; the beginning, end, and perfect realization of the meaning of existence innate in all things.
What I take from this passage is the importance and beauty of fulfillment from “obeying one's own law”. The resistance of others must be resisted. But one must go beyond this from “one's own law” to the universal law, and from resistance and isolation to communion and communication. And it is the communion with others and with being that transforms the initial solipsism of “one's own law” and any arrogance to universality and equanimity.
Yet the communication is difficult. As an example, after Buddha had discovered enlightenment he almost abandoned the sharing of his knowledge because he despaired of being understood.
2001 note: this is replaced by Being and the Elements of Being or the Potential and Elements of Being
One of the purposes of Evolution, Design and the Absolute is to communicate. Science is science largely because it is communicable, it is common property. You will see, later, of my ongoing discovery of new (to me at least) ways to speak to others.
I sometimes wonder whether investment is too large a part of your relationship with me. Not that investment is bad, but it is ideally kept in balance with detachment. I think this balance is good for all relations including one's relation with oneself and with life. Imbalance in the direction of investment leads to perception being distorted by desires. Perhaps I'm not intelligent or not quite intelligent enough. Perhaps I just do not quite know how to use my intelligence. Perhaps I'm unlucky. Perhaps God does not like me… what then? Are we going to be condemned to be forever unhappy? Not necessarily, for if we are sufficiently detached we can look out of the window and see that the sky is still deep blue and the grass brilliant green.
Detachment in proper and dynamic balance with investment is also ideal for the realization of potential abilities, for developing and maintaining both conscious and other modes - in balance - or contact with and knowledge of what is real.
Perhaps you are too much prone to worrying and (as my father has said) negative judgment - at least in certain ways and in certain situations. “Too much” in the sense that the worry is counterproductive of right actions and satisfaction. Being too prone to worry is itself a form of or a result and cause of incorrect perception. The world is large and complex, and there is a place and perhaps even “function” for all kinds of people including “worriers”, but I see no essential reason to change my statement regarding the effect of excessive worry on perception.
Finally, incorrect perceptions result from not being perceptive - that is, from not being open to what is being perceived, from wanting to know before one has seen. I am talking, here, of your perceptions of me and the attendant feelings. Perhaps these feelings are based on how you think you would feel if you were in what you perceive to be my situation. What I am talking about is, in part, perception of an individual's inner life based on external features. There are many errors possible. First, which external features do we focus on? Second, what is the nature of the individual's inner processing - the relation between the external and the inner or the whole. I have friends who deduce that my inner life is positive and who feel very positive about my life and situation. I think, however, that listening to me would be an important part of knowing me and my feelings and whether my situation is one of choice and whether it is positive… just as listening and looking are an important part of knowing in general. When one truly listens one can hear…and then it is not necessary to make assumptions or deductions. That is, if you listen to what I say, if you wait for me to finish what I say, then you will have an opportunity to know how and what I feel - it will not be necessary to deduce or wonder. Yet I do not think you have listened to or do listen to what I say. I think this is true - even in our most recent phone conversations. I can think of reasons - including the issues of perception I mentioned above, but I do not truly know the reasons, and the extent of the “not-listening”, as I see it, to what is said and to hearing what is not said, has been large and puzzling.
An additional note on perception but not on incorrect perception. This is about the complexities of perception. The system of details of the inner life of most persons is so complex that seeing the details and how they stand in relation to one another, requires openness, time. This is true - perhaps especially true - for members of the same family. It is true even in the case of self-perception. All this is at least implicit in what has already been said. Additionally, considering: the variety and quantity of my experience, endeavor, work and product; that much of this has been pursued in detail and depth - and with great enjoyment of the process; that - at least loosely in the beginning - these elements have stood and stand together as stemming from fundamental perspectives and as the experiences, work and so on of one individual; that the unity of the perspectives and the coherence of the individual is something that has grown and is growing, not only by scanning, seeking, and accumulation, but also by excision, consolidation, and organization of both details and principles and their relationship… it is understandable that all this might be difficult to see in its entirety, its balance, its completeness and its organic unity.
What lies behind all this? An individual who is part of the world: myself. I see the world - and universe - as beautiful, to be experienced and known. The relationship between individual and society is such that society and its values are important and loom large in the life of the individual. Yet I see that I, humanity, societies, civilization are a part - an incomplete part - of the whole, which therefore also has a primary importance. When I look at the following relationships: my inner relations, myself with society and the whole, society with the whole, I see incompleteness and process. That process - rather, those processes - include “becoming whole”. I am most happy and it is most excellent for me to be part of and involved in this.
I think: to be alive is to be part of the process. But: one does not always know or realize this. Such knowledge can come from thinking and experience, but more immediately - if not immediately - from feeling and seeing.
I have tried to understand your feelings about and perceptions of me, in part to show that they are unnecessary and somewhat misplaced in that they are not based in my feelings or perceptions of my self. This is not to say that I expect or am dedicated to changes based in what I say, although I would like such changes. Nor am I saying that the making of judgments is an invalid thing to do, is wrong; but I would prefer favorable judgment and encouragement in what I am doing. Further, there is no implication that I do not listen to or consider what you say or write; rather, it is that, having considered and reflected upon all sources including my own awareness and knowledge, I conclude and have concluded that what I am doing and trying to do is good and the manner of accomplishment is right. As I have said - it is the highest endeavor.
I wish to add that what I have said is not intended as criticism, but as solution - or part of an attempt at solution - to what is something of a problem to me. There are differences in perception, which result in negative judgment by you. By negative judgment I do not mean that I perceive you as saying that my situation and I are “good” or “bad”. I refer instead to your evaluation that, as you say, “you have not got the work, the life, for which, in your intelligence, he (we) wanted and wants you to have”. I have wanted such work, such positions in the past - and have had such. There may also come a time when my work will justify, and I may want and seek - for the work itself and for personal reasons - what would then be a more appropriate position. However, as I have explained, I view alternative - say academic - situations as counterproductive and I see my present situation - though not devoid of problem and challenge - as necessary, having many positive attributes; and, regarding my life work - my fundamental commitment - I view my present life and situation as being “most excellent”.
But let me suppose, for argument's sake, that my life is not excellent, that it is merely “so-so” with some enjoyment, some work, some sleep, some love, some pain… An average life. What then? Would we then be required to burden ourselves with negative judgments with what should have been? I should assure you that I cannot imagine my acquiescing in “averageness”, but if circumstances resulted in an average life with clearly no way out, I would be busy enjoying that average life as much as I could. What would your position then be? Would you be reminding me of the supposed lacks in that life, or would you be encouraging and joining me in the enjoyment?
The problem for me, then, is threefold: difference in perception instead of concurrence and understanding; negative evaluation instead of encouragement; pain instead of joy and appreciation. The problem, in general, is polarization and self focus - I mean our focusing on our different situations and each individual focusing on his or her self - instead of unity of vision and focus on our place, path, and even destiny in the midst of Being.
If the foregoing - the use of the word “Being” - seems abstract or indefinite, there is a reason for this. In this case Being signifies all of creation, all of existence as it is and not necessarily as we see it here and now. The indefiniteness is the difference between our present perception and the reality; and: this permits us to talk about something that we don't know fully - like the “x” of algebra - while remaining aware of the fact of our partial ignorance. The abstraction is the use of a single word “Being” which is devoid of most particulars and details. The idea of “Being”, however, emphasizes, perhaps, the organic unity of the whole. When we begin to use the word, however, we do so in relation to the world, which includes details and particulars. This enables us to modify and refine our ideas regarding the whole - “Being” - and the details - the “world”. Thus abstraction is a powerful tool of understanding; and of action - because understanding conditions and improves action and its quality. Thus abstraction is a powerful tool for both practical persons who live in the everyday world of “10,000 things” and for idealistic persons for whom unifying ideas - the whole - are important. Of course, the two worlds - the world of “10,000 things” and the world as “Being” are the same world and acknowledgement of this improves the quality of our understanding, our actions, and our lives.
Earlier I mentioned “each individual focusing on his or her feelings”. I did not imply or mean to imply that your feelings are unimportant. My reactions to them, including this letter, should be clear evidence of that. I did imply, however, that the proper focus in not only of each of us on our own feelings, nor is it of all of us on all of our feelings and thoughts; but it is on all of us as a unity in relation to the whole - in relation to and as part of Being. In my life, therefore, the proper focus is not what is the world doing for me (important though that may be), but what am I doing in the world - which includes me. This is the focus of my feelings and thoughts. Of course, the fact that this is my focus is not because it should be so, but because that is what or how I am or have become. And regardless or whether I focus on myself or on myself-in-the-world, my attitude and feelings and thoughts and reward are, as I have emphasized, very positive.
And since the issue about which I (we) have been talking is my life, since I am at present the actor, the person seeking to live in and know all of Being, the world, and act in - that is, “use the understanding and knowledge for” - all of Being, the world, it seems to me that, while your feelings are important as such, my feelings and perceptions are primary - that, significantly, your feelings (in this case) would depend on mine. Stated simply, if I am happy (and I am) about my life and choices, there is no reason for you to feel unhappy or pain for me.
Certainly, what I have been saying describes my attitude regardless of whether I am thinking about you, about Robin, about Susan, about Robin-and-Susan, about mental health patients, about Carissa, about myself, or about Carissa-and-myself… or the world.
Regarding Carissa, as an important example in my life, there are two important factors: (1) I do not know much of her, her attitudes, what is happening in her life and (2) I have little power in relation to her. In fact, seeking such power would likely be counterproductive, not to mention being a violation of what I see as right. My attitude, therefore, is to acknowledge and let her be aware of my feelings - love and concern - and to maintain an openness to her and an alertness regarding her life, situation, thoughts, feelings, and so on. While it is true that I have missed her and would like a fuller relationship, I also know that this might never happen; and I have never felt anxiety, pain or suffering in these regards.
I want to reflect a little on my relationship with you, your relationship with me - another important relationship in my life. We have both tried to influence each other. Of course it is the nature of our relationship that there will be significant effect and influence with or without trying. I am thinking of the intended influence and the attempt to influence and more specifically of such attempts since August 1970 when I left India for America. I would have to say that these attempts at influence - both yours and mine - have been somewhat ineffectual. From the point of view of being effectual, the attempts have been insufficient; but considering the results, the attempts have been too much. We have been dancing around each other without looking out upon the larger whole of which we form a part. I am not saying at all that this is all there is to our relationship. This is, however, a frequent theme in human relationships. Turning around without moving forward. It is the way personalities meet and then their different parts lock into a pattern which turns and rotates but does not move forward, which is focused inward and not out upon reality.
From the point of view of explanation, I should redouble my efforts and intelligence - hence this letter. Or, instead, I should stop explaining altogether (and simply enjoy the relationship) and hence, as I will say again later in this letter - “further explanation would be repetition. Of course, I will answer questions… “ “Redoubling my efforts” does not mean try harder or more. It means not allowing doubt or hesitation, regarding either myself or you, to impede a full exposition. And the objective is not to change anyone without regard to principles, but to show and explain my self, my life, to provide the information that would be the foundation of change. And the change in question is primarily one of focus outward upon the world and secondarily a new understanding of me.
This concludes what has been - in part - an explanation of why I have tried to understand your feelings. For the same and similar reasons and in the interest of openness I will also share my reaction to your views.
From the present letter it is most probably evident that I have a reaction. The whole letter is a statement of my perceptions and feelings regarding my own life. Although the present occasion is reflection upon what you have said, the statement itself is a whole and relatively complete statement. What follows immediately, however, is a statement of my specific feelings about, perceptions of, and reactions to what you have said.
As I have said, the continued differences in our perceptions have been puzzling to me. Additionally I have felt both pain and disappointment. Explanations and reasons follow.
First, as I have said, I believe that what I am doing and the manner of its accomplishment are good - the highest I can imagine. However, my system of ideals and objectives is not and cannot be static, is not and should not be imperturbable - fortress like. “Highest” does not mean “perfect”. The ideals and objectives are part of a process, a search; they require renewal, openness to doubt and question. Doubt regarding the goals and doubt regarding myself because I am part of the process. This is sometimes difficult if necessary. Criticism is sometimes difficult to deal with - especially criticism from those I would like to respect, and criticism which does not respect my intelligence, awareness and ability to criticize and review myself and work, and ongoing self-criticism and review. However, such criticism - regardless of its nature and motives and whether of the ideas or of my goals, or of the process or of me - is useful, especially when difficult - because it results in reexamination and, as a consequence, it also results - frequently - in change and improvement or revaluation and reaffirmation of my basic position.
Real and true “criticism” is of the following type. One understands the other person and their ideas. The person is not, of course, completely distinct from his or her ideas. So criticism must involve person “and” ideas. But understanding comes first. The critic identifies, then begins his or her reasoning process, and the processes of “critic” and “criticized” interact. In fact, there is no criticized or critic. Rather, one individual initiates a process and others join in. This of course is an ideal version of the real process involving real persons.
And so, walls (defenses) against pain and criticism turn out to also be walls surrounding the spirit, cutting it off from truth and joy. As a result, when this is understood, accepted and absorbed, pain is not suffering - it is transformed into understanding; and transient feelings of doubt are replaced by enduring appreciation of my own life. As a result I understand myself and my fundamental commitment better. I become clearer, more focused, and more open to the commitment and the process. I do not say that this development is complete, but I have learned and absorbed its principle through exposure, reflection, experience, and use.
The writing of and thinking about this letter is, itself, an occasion for revaluation and reaffirmation and, to some extent, reformulation and restatement regarding the questions of my life: what I am trying to do - what are my ambitions and goals, why are they my ambitions and goals, and how should I attempt to achieve them.
A second source of my feelings is my special relationship to you. Due to respect and caring, your feelings and opinions are especially important to me. Regarding feelings, I certainly wish you would not feel pain. This is one reason why I have been attempting to show why pain is unnecessary in connection with me. Of course, even though I think I have made a good case that such pain is unnecessary, the pain may stay. This is something that I will accept even though I do not want it. I have said this before and reasons follow.
Regarding your opinions, approval is an issue. Approval breaks down into a number of factors. I will take up three of these. First, to function in society some approval from others is necessary. Second, approval is good because it is positive for people to act according to the same values and towards the same ends. This is especially true in close relationships. To put it another way, I believe that there is meaning in the world, that we bring and contribute some meaning, that we are actors and agents, not mere spectators or puppets. It is good therefore to act together rather than in opposition. However this is not always possible. In fact, although unity is good, it is not always good since alternative approaches are also good. It remains true, in this connection, that it would be positive to hear that your pain has become joy and that your judgment has become one of approval and encouragement. The lack of this has been disappointing.
Third, approval is a form of affirmation and lack of approval or disapproval can result in self-doubt and uncertainty. This has been a source of pain - self-doubt is not always comfortable. However, approval and agreement are not always possible or even good. Out of the same respect and caring that I mentioned above, that is especially due to you but is also due to all persons and, despite my puzzlement and feelings, I must and do accept that you have your own judgment and feelings which are yours, not mine, which are your right.
As I said earlier, self-doubt promotes self-questioning, a process of self-examination and finally self-affirmation. One modifies what was mistaken, one reaffirms what was right. Thus pain transforms into affirmation and understanding. And through experience pain ceases to be suffering and self-doubt ceases to be pain and becomes openness. The accumulation of doubts and self-doubts and their resolution becomes, not a burden, but awareness.
The same process of the transformation of pain also follows from the principle of respect, which also implies self-respect. This is necessary and per