Enigmas

One of my favorite poems. Ironic that I like it, in spite of being naive enough to try to make sense of things, and intervene to change them, to take them closer to ever changing normative visions. To have a vision, we first need to have a perspective. Must focus more on building the perspective. The vision, if at all, will emerge and evolve, like life.

Enigmas – Pablo Neruda

You've asked me what the lobster is weaving there with his golden feet?
I reply, the ocean knows this.
You say, what is the ascidia waiting for in its transparent bell? What is it waiting for?
I tell you it is waiting for time, like you.
You ask me whom the Macrocystis alga hugs in its arms?
Study, study it, at a certain hour, in a certain sea I know.
You question me about the wicked tusk of the narwhal,

and I reply by describing how the sea unicorn with the harpoon in it dies.
You enquire about the kingfisher's feathers,

which tremble in the pure springs of the southern tides?
Or you've found in the cards a new question touching on
the crystal architecture of the sea anemone,

and you'll deal that to me now?

You want to understand the electric nature of the ocean
spines?
The armored stalactite that breaks as it walks?

The hook of the angler fish,

the music stretched out in the deep places like a thread in the water?

I want to tell you the ocean knows this, that life in its jewel boxes
is endless as the sand, impossible to count, pure,
and among the blood-colored grapes time has made the
petal hard and shiny, made the jellyfish full of light
and untied its knot, letting its musical threads fall
from a horn of plenty made of infinite mother-of-pearl.

I am nothing but the empty net which has gone on ahead
of human eyes, dead in those darknesses,
of fingers accustomed to the triangle, longitudes
on the timid globe of an orange.

I walked around as you do, investigating
the endless star,
and in my net, during the night, I woke up naked,
the only thing caught, a fish trapped inside the wind.

Why write?

I think writing is not an act that can be performed satisfactorily without some motivation. For me, then, the lack of motivation is a greater problem than the lack of skill. There may not be any basic skill of a writer as testified by the fact that there are all kinds of writers who have impressed and affected me, from Coetzee’s austere prose to the flowery narratives of Marquez. Even the diary of a young girl like Anne Frank left an imprint, because it had a sense of genuineness about its description of human tragedy in face of evil embodied in another human. So, I should need some inspiration to stay true to the writing. Right now I am writing because I don’t feel like doing anything else to fill the void within. This has made me sit and do what I am doing right now. So, what I usually write here or elsewhere has no particular, narrow theme, and sometimes even appears schizophrenic to me. What does tie it all together is a general motivation to stay interested in simple things in life while trying to address some basic issues is life, mostly to deal with an existential emptiness, which I want to face squarely, instead of looking instead for escapes in pseudo-religion, shallow acquaintanceship, mediocre art, inconsistent ideologies, and of course, consumerism. When this existential angst is not suppressed it turns into breeding grounds for this feeling to address it. I want to face it, and through it, accept and deal with my freedom as a human, by bringing myself to express myself to myself in a way that makes me stronger and vulnerable at the same time.

Writing without persisting inspiration is like trying to fly without proper wings; one can stay in the air for a while, but then bound to come down and feel miserable. Still, once we get into the process, it’s amazing how one starts feeling when one lets oneself truly feel and express, without trying to suppress the emotions that surge within, even if it is for a short spell of time. Perhaps these emotional upheavals oblige us to understand and to tame them, and written words could assist us in this seemingly arduous task. But, why write? Why not just think? The written word has a certain peculiar permanence about it, which in some ways is there with the spoken word, because it stays in the mind of others, but this permanence is not quite there with the thought word. Though our thoughts build on each other, there is a great deal of attrition in the process, some due to the natural limitations of memory, and others, and these are the crucial ones, due to the brutal excerption by the assumptions that may have taken strong roots in our mind. Some thoughts, due to their old, deep roots, take superiority over others, which is almost arbitrary, unless this superiority is due to a reasoned choice, but even then they need to be revisited. In any case, this kind of attrition and entropy separate the thought word from the written or the spoken word. Writing also helps one realize the flawed logic that may be implicit in some thought. These advantages are crucial when one is basically aiming to understand the true nature of things.

So, is writing an escape, or an easier alternative to the more difficult enterprise of bringing the same rigor to thought, by dealing with games that the mind plays, by actually trying to face reality as it is, in its rawness, without the pollution of mind or language? And what about language? Doesn’t that constrain things further? Certain things cannot be written within the constraints of language, while the boundaries of thoughts are wider. Even though they are also restricted by language, I think the language of thoughts has a wider scope than that of the written word. The written word begets a certain structure, which is not necessary for the thought, which requires a different kind of structure. So, which way is better? Or are there other ways? I am not sure, and I don’t think I can be sure of such things in the foreseeable future. But, I can keep looking for answers. In the meanwhile, I just make do, using a solution that I think is the best and the most useful, knowing very well that there is a possibility that this so-called solution may be destroying something important in my life. That's why life appears to be a long series of efforts to find heuristic solutions to ill-structured problems. I see writing of this type as one such heuristic solution.

Since the written word has a sense of permanence about it, writing is a bold act, and therefore the act of writing is also an expression of faith in the possibility of the risk, if any, being worthwhile, because of a hope of succeeding in making oneself understand what is behind the words, the hope of discovering oneself in the process of turning the feelings (and the analysis that gets inextricably linked to them in a mind condemned to be a slave of reason) into bare words. This sense of permanence is not just related to other people reading these words. Even if no one else were to ever see the words written, the sense of permanence plays itself out during the act of writing. One is conscious of the words being written, continuously considering and reconsidering. I wonder if pure spontaneity is possible, except of course in poetry, especially the Haiku-type poetry.

In writing, I do try to stay true to myself because most of all I want to make sense of things, ease my suffering, embrace my existence, and survive as an individual.

Some thoughts on moral entrepreneurship

Whenever one sees what one thinks is decadence, ignorance or injustice, there is likely to be a conflict within. There is a temptation to become a moral entrepreneur, wear a Socratic hat and subject the ‘guilty’ to an interrogation, a public or private questioning/challenge of the acts and their repercussions. This presumes a certain contextual superiority, which is a discomforting assumption because we are also flawed individuals, and we have to know that quite, as goes the delphic suggestion (know thyself). The other alternative, which in some ways is an easy one when one is not being personally hurt, is to ignore the problem. This is an important choice because both options have their implications for inner peace. One can allow the choice to be affected by one's ‘power’ in a given situation. So, if I hold some influence over the person or group in question, it seems easier to get Socratic, while if the influence is ambiguous, absent or opposite, it poses difficulties.

Considering the choice in its totality, one has to consider one's role and power in the situation, constructed subjectively but informed by signals from others. If one sees a situation wherein is clear the responsibility to effect change or stem a decline and one has some power, direct influence or even the sheer hope of triggering the process of change, one could decide to intervene. This may be an easy choice, but most real life situations are not that clear; there is significant ambiguity about power and responsibility. So, how do we proceed? I think the only clear thing is that as such there can be no clear and final ‘rules of conduct’, because situations are unique and we need to keep updating our ‘actuality’ in a situation, in terms of our understanding of: the truth in the situation, our accepted and acknowledged obligation to the improvement being imagined, and our power in the situation. We may not actually ‘know’ if something is truly decadent or wrong, we may be exaggerating our obligations under the circumstances, or we may be utterly powerless in the situation. Since an attempt to subject others to a Socratic interrogation or to put a fight for change can have significant implications for us, in both personal and professional contexts, it makes sense to try to be somewhat clear about the truth of the need for change, to be convinced about our self-imposed and acknowledged obligation towards change, and to have a realistic sense of the possibilities of our power in the situation.

It is also important for us to do a bit of a self-interrogation to understand and face the ‘real’ motivations behind the discomfort with a situation and the resulting will to change things. Sometimes, what I see wrong with the world is but a reflection of my own flaws. All the perspectives of the world aside, it is the ‘I’ that may turn out to be actually quite mysterious and perhaps mischievous. I may not be seeing things as they are; I may be seeing them as I am. Self-knowledge is crucial for a ‘real’ understanding of the world; otherwise the mind plays its games, and of course there is language which in the garb of providing one with thoughts and means for communication, carries countless biases and intentions. Thus, a renewed attempt for self-knowledge should accompany, preferably precede, an effort to understand the situation with an intention of choosing between action and inaction. Better to make change wait, than take an action that makes things worse. But, it is also important to act before it is too late. The balance has to be maintained.

On expectations and disappointments

Our perception of separateness or otherness from the rest of the world is a crucial aspect of our existence. This means that we must interact with one another as separate beings. This interaction could be in terms of some expectations from each other, and with something to offer in return (like love, friendship and work). The expectations, in some way, help us interact and unite with others by defining the terms of engagement with them. Expectations are central to our attempt to project ourselves into the future (immediate or distant), which is a fundamental tendency of the way we usually live, a little ahead of the present moment, always anticipating, hoping, planning, and of course, dreaming. We expect people to be non-violent, so we dare to step out of our homes. We expect people to fear punishment, so we make rules and back them up with the power to punish. In general, we expect the world to be something, and we either behave accordingly or, in some cases, try to change the world to meet the expectations. But our expectations are one-sided terms of engagement, bound to be met with some disappointments, the frequency of which is dependent on how realistic the expectations were to begin with.

Expectations can be negative or positive. In either case if they are not realistic, they can lead to pain and anxiety for us. Unrealistic negative expectations lead to needless anxiety due to their very existence, while unrealistic positive expectations lead to such anxiety because of their non-fulfillment. The underlying problem is the same. Some are very basic expectations that may not be disappointed often, but others may have greater chances of being rejected (by nature or other humans). Thus, expectations can be a source of great pain and anxiety.

What does one do when met with repeated disappointment of expectations? Does one continue with the same expectations, and keep suffering? I don't think that is a good idea, because instead of leading to a fulfilling life, this approach could turn our disappointments into anger and other emotions whose manifestations can create trouble for ourselves and for others. We don't enjoy disappointments and these disappointments have a way of turning into emotional reactions.

So, we have to either let our expectations evolve to match the reality, or try and change the reality to match the expectations. Many of our expectations are rooted in an incomplete understanding of the 'otherness' of the other and our 'separation' from the nature, and an unwillingness to accept these basic aspects of existence. I have often found it disturbingly difficult to accept that there are forces at work that are completely indifferent to me and my desires and expectations, and that these forces have a right to be there. My own existence is just one of the forces constituting this world and though it has great potential to change the world, it also has its limits. Even if we can change the world around us, doing so just to fit our expectations can sometimes be very violent and unfair to the world around us. So, though there are many battles worth fighting to change the world, I think there are many occasions when one should just change one's assumptions about the world around, and adapt the expectations accordingly. Many of these occasions arise in our day-to-day interactions with people around us. For instance, if we continue to expect goodness and honesty everywhere, we will be tragic figures forever, eternally disappointed and ever so pained, or will create tragedy elsewhere, or both. But, the process of revisiting expectations is complicated by a few factors.

Firstly, to know and understand what are 'realistic' expectations is one of the greatest challenges for us. The world can present itself in fairly complex and perplexing ways, deceiving us into believing the unrealistic. I am yet to arrive at a general principle, except that one should try and keep one's expectations as low as possible, especially when the outcomes of our expectations are expected to have major effects on our mental and physical well-being i.e. if we are sensitive. In other words, playing safe may be a good thing. At the same time, we must do our best to improve things, so that the world presents some pleasant surprises to us.

Secondly, even if we do understand what are realistic expectations, to mold our inner selves to this new found understanding is an excruciatingly painful task. This pain may be somewhat mitigated by expectation of the fruitful end it might lead to, as Buddha said: Truth is bitter in the beginning, sweet in the end, and lie is sweet in the beginning, bitter in the end. But things are made worse by the seemingly perennial need to keep revising the expectations. So, thought it may seem that it would be an endless struggle, once we get used to this way of living, things should be easier.

Thirdly, there is no one 'self' in any situation. I constitute myself, as a composite of multiple selves all of which are interrelated and yet separated in the nuances of their self-definition. These selves can also be understood through the prism of identity. We invoke our multiple identities all the time, depending on the situation, what has happened recently, and how we feel due to our own inner reflection. My expectations from a fellow being are shaped by my multiple selves. Certain characteristics are underlying all these selves. Like, if we are very sensitive by nature, it would usually show in each one of our selves. For a man who cares too much for what he is working on, his expectation from others in the organisation may be higher.

Lastly, our expectations are shaped by, and may in turn shape who we think we are, and how we think we behave, basically our own self-image. If I think I am a pleasant person, I may usually expect pleasantness from others, mainly because I may feel it is my 'right' to get niceness, because of a tendency to see symmetry between actions and consequences. It is difficult to stay 'nice' when one expects the others not to be 'nice'. So, changing expectations may mean changing oneself. It could mean that there has been a change in our worldview, and it is bound to affect the way we treat the world. If we expect bitterness, it is it difficult to stay sweet for long. Should we try and be good without expecting goodness, be fair without expecting fairness? Research in game theory shows that in the long run, reciprocity and 'tit for tat' are the best (and most stable) strategies. But to me this is not always obvious Results from game theory notwithstanding, often it is not about what would make us 'win' against the others, but about what we should be doing, even though we may have low chances of winning through that route. Sometime even a loss in the conventional, worldly sense may be a great victory in the personal and spiritual sense. So, even though being gracious in face of arrogance may not be easy, we can make the choice because we believe that is the way we should be. As Gandhi said: Be the change you want to see in the world. I still want to examine this space further and find ways to retain the good things about my self, while toning down my expectations from the rest of the world. Still, one thing is clear: The world is what it is, but I have to decide who I want to be, what kind of life I want to live.

Letting hope float

There are times when we come across dubious actions, with little doubt about the act being unacceptable. These acts are what they are. They may arise from evil or from ignorance. In either case, the acts should be opposed. Still, more often than not, I have ended up taking things personally, getting stressed and disliking those who commit the acts. I now realise that this is counter-productive, both for our inner peace and also for mitigating the effect of such bad actions. We don't need to hate those who commit them, because then we will need to start by hating and tormenting ourselves, flawed as we are. But justice should happen, and it is our collective responsibility. There should be no time to hate, when we are pursuing the cause of justice. Hatred and animosity lead to a wastage of time and emotional energies, both of which could be productively channelised towards solving the real problems. We should have the spiritual maturity to not enter an endless process of interrogation and decimation of those around us. Of course justice should be meted out to the 'perpetrator' of the act, but this should be done with the understanding that the person is being punished for the choices s/he has made, and not for who s/he is. There is a difference here. This nuance of carefully separating doer from the act is possible if we are willing to believe in something that may appear to be counter-intuitive. As the African-American intellectual Cornel West says, it is crucial to have a belief in the humanity of the people who might be doing dehumanising things, even though the immediate evidence may lead to pessimism. Though, there may not be optimism, which is usually based on evidence from the immediate reality, but there can be hope, which is deeper and can be more stable. This hope comes from something more fundamental than the frustrations and disappointments from what we experience around us. Think about all the evil most societies have perpetrated at one time or another, and how they have managed to redeem themselves. The solution is not to annihilate the oppressors, be it the European colonists, or the neo-imperialists. Most of these societies have a basic humanity that could redeem itself, cleanse itself of the dehumanising elements that had invaded its own blood streams. This could be true at a micro level as well.

There is no point in demonising people or, worse, generalising criticisms by putting people in reductionist, essentialist categories or pigeonholes. What is required is to work towards what is right, what is just, by truly believing in the possibility of change, and by never giving up one's concern and love for those we are seeking to 'change'. This should be any reformer's aspiration, and I don't use the word 'reformer' in any grandiose sense, but for a more regular day-to-day mundane agenda for change. There is little value in being a short-term fighter, who is mainly trying to appease the ego, satisfy the urges, or express the anger for immediate relief, rather than intending to change things for the long run. Otherwise, essentially I would be making a mistake similar to the perpetrator of the act. A great deal of damage can be done by hating and preaching hatred, even if you are on the right side. Hatred as well as ignorant and unconsidered expressions of hatred could catapult me to the wrong side faster than we can imagine. It can make me the oppressor, the villain. Very often, the right and wrong sides are not divided by clear boundaries, and in fact they may be coinciding in the same group or even the same person. I need to understand that people can make choices, and they can also change their choices. I should have the courage to think critically about what needs to change and how, I should also have the courage to see what is good and love it. It is not about an immediate and absolute victory in the battles I fight, but about what kind of battles I want to choose. Particularly in these kind of battles, there is never ever any guarantee of victory in life. But, still it is important to fight some of these battles, without hatred or animosity. These choices determine who we are and who we want to be.

The curious case of examining one's own thoughts and conscience

In any examination of one's own thoughts and conscience, the self is the judge, the prosecutor, as well as the defendant. The self that presides over this 'juridical' process is the same as the self that prosecutes, and the self that is being accused and examined is also not different. This creates a curious kind of empathy among the involved parties. Unless checked by a sincere intention to use the trial to get to the 'truth', this empathy could result in an acquital of the self being examined. A lot of evil has its roots in this lack of critical examination of one's thoughts and conscience. One could even say that more often it is 'ignorance' rather than 'inherent viciousness' that causes evil actions, because self-awareness and sincere critical examination of one'e own thoughts (which significantly shape our actions) would certainly prevent us from doing many things we end up doing because of our ignorance about 'what is right'. So, this self-examination is important for us as individuals and as members of society.

Staying with the 'trial' analogy, what rules should guide such a trial? In my limited experience, if one is somewhat indepedent, this kind of trial may be quite oblivious to 'laws of the land', or even in contradiction to them. The true self-trial of our thoughts is done with rules that we really agree with. These are rules that are developed from our innate sense of right and wrong, as well as conditioning and self-reflection over a period of time. 'Reason' and 'compassion' are important tools in the definition of these ever-evolving rules. In fact, many a times, the act of the trial itself helps redefine these rules. The 'law' as such has limited role here. It is important to nuance this by saying that law is important for upholding the collectively defined sense of justice in a society, and should usually guide our actions. But, our thoughts should be independent, guided by our deep inner rules. Our sense of right and wrong may not match the law's sense of the same. So, if we see glaring gaps between law and reality, and in a manner that seems to be hurting the society, we must try and get the law itself changed, while trying not to break it. We may even need to break the law, but not for selfish interest, but for larger common good, as many have done. It is important to understand the legitimacy of the process by which law is defined. For instance, human freedom should not be made subservient to arbitrariness of a autocratic regime. Law loses its meaning in such a context.

Coming back to the question concerning examination of thoughts and conscience, if faults are found what should be the punishment of these faults? How should we approach this post-discovery phase? The natural empathy for oneself that may sometimes lead to a perverse acquittal of the defendant self is important here. It does help us live with ourselves, see our faces in the mirror everyday. So, the challenge is to try and treat the defendant self with as much objectivity as possible, while continuing a deeper empathy and an intention to understand and help. I think there should primarily be a renewal intentionality in this trial. The self that examines should do so to renew the self that is being examined, to make it better, to improve it. Having found faults, the idea should be to change one's thoughts in a manner that we think in the 'right' way from the next moment onwards, while acknowledging the impermanence of this definition of 'right'. The past is to be left unsaid, the guilt of the past thoughts to be overcome or overwritten by the fresh thoughts and actions. So, in some sense, the examining sense should be like a benevolent judge trying to 'help' the defendant self, more like a friend. The judge and prosecutor will gain if the guilty one improves, because they are it, and it is them.

This empathetic process of improvement still leaves space for repenting and apologising, which should be done, but only to the extent that our thoughts have created actions that have hurt others. Otherwise, just having thought something, which now appears 'bad' or 'wrong', shouldn't lead us to start and keep cursing ourselves. Suffering, in this case, doesn't necessarily lead to betterment. Rather, sincere understanding and acceptance of renewal is of key importance. There is no point in getting into the kind of self-criticism that borders on a destructive kind of masochism. It is more helpful to consciously focus on the evolution of our thoughts and conscience. We need to 'move on'.

spontaneous emotions, considered responses

I am sad. It is that intensely personal, sinking feeling that hurts in unusually deep and lonely ways. It is not a fleeting sensation. I am trying to fully understand the cause(s), and find ways to change the feeling, and be happy (or at least not be sad). I want to deal with the emotion directly, and not suppress it, ignore it, or drown it in liquor. There should be more direct and aware ways. I have come to believe that these ways reveal themselves after long, sincere self-reflection. I am young; recently started discovering some of these more 'mature' ways. Books have been of help but to a very limited extent. Some things don't occur to us till they actually occur with us. Reading Kafka and others at nineteen was interesting, but I understood them better when I went through certain things. The words that I read then have taken new meanings now. Conversations with wiser people are also good, but they can lead us to the pond, but not make us drink the water of wisdom. That choice is ours. Also, there are limitations that accompany being the other.

I am finding ways, but the search may never end. It would probably be an unending journey, ending with life itself. The idea is to keep going, and keep looking, while building on what has been found. This has to be done with the realisation that what I found yesterday may deserve discarding today. Though deeply unsettling, I feel this realisation, this creative destruction of sorts, is crucial if we want to gain wisdom.

An emotion is a deeply personal, subjective phenomenon, but its existence is universal. I feel what I feel, but many others have felt something similar at some point. That's what makes us all humans, sharing the very nature of our existence. Most of us find it difficult to deal with emotions, particularly when they come in a rapid gush. While dealing with them, it is important to see that there may be nothing inherently 'bad' in an emotion, because even the so-called 'negative' emotions help us identify and move away from hurtful states, or nuance our understanding of these states we are destined to be in, at least once in while. But some emotions can leave scars if they lead to destructive expressions, or if they affect us too much, destroying the harmony and balance in our lives. Also, for all emotions there are causes and consequences. Often, if we are not aware and careful, the consequences of emotions like anger can be disproportionate to their causes. To maintain balance and harmony in life, this sense of proportions should be maintained. How should we deal with these emotions?

I have found it useful to realise that no emotion stays in its original form for long. It transforms into other emotions and into emotional expressions. Depending on circumstances and how we deal with them, unrequited love often turns into sadness, which can transform into anger, which can motivate violent expression (towards oneself or others), leading to remorse and guilt, and it goes on. Emotions are like the magical entities that can take many forms. Understanding this non-rigid character of emotions gives us an opportunity to do something. I feel that it helps to acknowledge the emotion, understand its nature and cause, reflect on it in a considered manner, and find ways that help us not just to regain our inner peace and well-being, but also to gain new wisdom and fresh insights into life. I have tried some things.

Introducing humor to sadness and letting them be friends for a while. I have been surprised by finding how often they can get along well, if only for some time.

Suspending anger to give way to calm reflection, and then giving a measured response or if possible, forgiving and forgetting, and then enjoying the calm pleasures of restored inner peace.

Turning jealousy to thoughtful reflections on the nature of my expectations, the gaps in their fulfillment, the constructive ways to realise the expectations, the role of fate in what we and the others have and lack, the universality of human suffering, the ever-present possibility of pain hiding behind smiles, and also the right of others to live 'different' lives.

Responding to disappointment, frustration, and irritation by thinking about my place in a world with a billions stars, the workings of forces completely indifferent to my desires, the great potential and (still) the helplessness of human flesh, the location of my existence and my enterprise in the larger scheme of things, limitations of my plans and hopes, the need to discern between the co-existing meaningful and meaningless in life, and the nice and interesting joke this existence is.

Fears and anxieties have lately engendered a desire to discover their true causes and to become more aware of my past and more conscious of my present, to acknowledge and understand my desires, aspirations and concerns, so that I can carefully and permanently overcome some of my fears. Also, acknowledging that my fears, in their own ways, help reaffirm my humanity, and prevent me from going down the dangerous path of arrogant certitude.

Trying to resolve confusions by looking for deeper and wider knowledge and understanding of issues of concern with the hope that, with much labor and some luck, I will get clarity, while also acknowledging that I may not get all the answers, because some things may not be resolvable (or even knowable) due the inadequacy of my mind or the divergent nature of the answers, or both.

Letting the feeling of disgust or sense of outrage force me to take considered action to mitigate its causes.

In many of these, I haven't had much success in terms of bringing about a desired transformation in the emotion, but I am learning all the time, because I am aware and keen. I find new, more fruitful and direct ways of dealing with my emotions, and I learn more about myself. Each time I discover, to my disappointment, how little I really knew about myself. This disappointment is soon overwhelmed by the joy of enhanced self-awareness. Then my mind feels like dancing with abandon.

But right now, I am sad.