Letters Between Enemies
David Quinn & Kevin Solway
There are three kinds of succession:
The inferior man succeeds the man of power.
The mediocre man succeeds his benefactor.
The superior man succeeds his enemy.
Foreword
This is a collection of the letters exchanged between Kevin Solway and myself during the period from 1988 to 1992. They represent a record of our struggles to live a philosophic life, along with a good deal of philosophy. We feel that if others can find some inspiration from what we have written in these letters then it is our duty to make them publicly available. This foreword ends with a short extract from Nietzsche's Thus Spake Zarathustra.
David Quinn
Of The Friend
taken from
Thus Spake Zarathustra
by Friedrich Nietzsche
"
One is always one too many around me" - thus speaks the hermit. "Always once one - in the long run that makes two!" I and Me are always too earnestly in conversation with one another: how could it be endured, if there were not a friend?For the hermits there are too many depths. That is why they long so much for a friend and for his heights. Our faith in others betrays wherein we would dearly like to have faith in ourselves. Our longing for a friend is our betrayer.
And often with our love we only want to leap over envy. And often we attack and make an enemy in order to conceal that we are vulnerable to attack. "At least be my enemy!" - thus speaks the true reverence, that does not venture to ask for friendship.
If you want a friend, you must also be willing to wage war for him: and to wage war, you must be capable of being an enemy. You should honour even the enemy in your friend. Can you go near to your friend without going over to him?
In your friend you should possess your best enemy. Your heart should feel closest to him when you oppose him. Do you wish to go naked before your friend? Is it in honour of your friend that you show yourself to him as you are? But he wishes you to the Devil for it!
He who makes no secret of himself excites anger in others: that is how much reason you have to fear nakedness! If you were gods you could then be ashamed of your clothes! You cannot adorn yourself too well for your friend: for you should be to him an arrow and a longing for the Superman.
Have you ever watched your friend asleep - to discover what he looked like? Yet your friend's face is something else beside. It is your own face, in a rough and imperfect mirror.
Have you ever watched your friend asleep? Were you not startled to see what he looked like? O my friend, man is something that must be overcome. The friend should be a master in conjecture and in keeping silence: you must not want to see everything. Your dream should tell you what your friend does when awake. May your pity be your conjecture: that you may first know if your friend wants pity.
Perhaps what he loves in you is the undimmed eye and the glance of eternity. Let your pity for your friend conceal itself under a hard shell; you should break a tooth biting upon it. Thus it will have a delicacy and a sweetness.
Are you pure air and solitude and bread and medicine to your friend? Many a one cannot deliver himself from his own chains and yet he is his friend's deliverer.
Are you a slave? If so, you cannot be a friend. Are you a tyrant? If so, you cannot
have friends.In woman, a slave and a tyrant have all too long been concealed. For that reason, woman is not yet capable of friendship: she knows only love. In a woman's love is injustice and blindness towards all that she does not love. And in the enlightened love of a woman, too, there is still the unexpected attack and lightning and night, along with the light.
Woman is not yet capable of friendship: women are still cats and birds. Or, at best, cows.
Woman is not yet capable of friendship. But tell me, you men, which of you is yet capable of friendship?
Oh your poverty, you men, and your avarice of soul! As much as you give to your friend I will give even to my enemy, and will not have grown poorer in doing so.
There is comradeship: may there be friendship!
Thus spake Zarathustra.
January 21, 1988
from:
David Quinn
1 Godfrey St
Toowoomba 4350Dear Kevin
The sounds of suburbia greet my ears - for I no longer live at Tallowood, but in Toowoomba. Tracey and I live in the upper class section where there are beautiful European trees growing out of the road, embracing comfortable old houses. Extreme weather governs the place ranging from misty storms to green sunlight.
I write to tell you this plus to obtain Trevor's address. A suggestion has popped into my mind that may be of some use to him, if he continues with his plans of quitting and thinking. I think the emptiness and restlessness that he will feel upon leaving his job can be at least lessened if he adopts a set routine. That is, he should work out a strict discipline to fill the day including thinking, reading, exercise, eating periods etc. His main effort, in the beginning, should be to stick to this routine above all else, even at the expense of his thinking. For when he is adapted to it he will find everything easier. Also I would even suggest that he should insert formal meditation periods into his program, complete with the correct posture and the works.
By practicing sitting absolutely still and concentrating on the infinite for half an hour every day, he will not only improve his concentrative and meditative powers, but he will overcome his restlessness quickly. Trevor has been ruled by routine for the last several years and so I think it wise for him to adopt a similar strategy for the months ahead.
My own thoughts are still on this problem of awareness. I feel that reality is ultimately beyond awareness, for who exists that can be aware?, yet a stone cannot realize its true nature because of its lack of awareness, among other things. Through the concept of cause and effect I am understanding the world more and more clearly every day. I can also see that cause and effect is merely a concept, that the history of the world does not exist except in our memories, which ultimately are electronic impulses.
Now, cause and effect applies to the physical world, however, this physical world is ultimately immaterial for it is projected out by the brain. But since the brain is part of the physical world it too must be a projection, that is, immaterial. "Immaterial" is also just a concept, that the world is as it is, that calling it physical or non-physical or neither doesn't change it. I am not making sense!
Let me put the problem another way: I was born into this world and ever since, I have received input through the senses concerning this world. Consequently, I assume that other people exist, that the past once existed, that a tremendous amount of activity occurs outside my field of awareness. This page, I assume, was created by humans out of wood. I assume that this occurred even though I was never aware of it. But on the other hand, I feel that events that do not occur in my consciousness really do not exist, that whatever information enters through my senses is the only reality, that, although I assume there are starving people in Ethiopia, they really don't exist until I become aware of them. I am not viewing things from an egotistical point of view, I can really see that this person called David just doesn't exist. I know that I am God. I feel that if I truly believe that other people are real, that their suffering is real, then I am losing faith in the Father.
Therefore, you see, awareness is the key. Brunton compares the waking state with the dream state, saying that ultimately both are made from the same stuff. So I study dreams, and see how nothing exists unless it enters my field of awareness, and apply this to waking life. I look at evolution and see how we've developed. I see that the way I see the world around me is dependent upon the way my brain has developed plus conditioning. But then I see that these are just thoughts. So awareness is the basis of everything.
I sort of know the answer to this problem but clarity keeps escaping me. I look forward to your reply.
David
January 24, 1988
from:
Kevin Solway
2/117 Macquarie St
St Lucia, Qld 4067Dear Dave,
Toowoomba sounds the ideal place; far enough away, and practically close enough. What is the rent like?
I thought your advice for Trevor was good, I saw him yesterday and showed him your letter. I think he gained some encouragement, though he still seems in two minds. His job simply offers him too much security, too much money, too many women, too much success, too much future, too many distractions. I am sure he would appreciate you writing to him.
I think a part of his fear is that he will be seen to be following me if he gives up his job for a philosophic life. So some encouragement from a different source would probably have some effect.
I thoroughly agree that you cannot jump straight into Faith immediately. A daily routine, an egotistical routine, as long as it is ultimately directed towards Truth, is a necessity until such time as your conviction and power of mind is strong enough. Such a routine will eventually destroy all routines.
My mind has been really crook these last few weeks. I think I have reached the dreaded "three year stage". This is the stage at which, after three years of thinking about the infinite, you become bored with it. Or rather, your ego does. It no longer excites, and you can't get enthusiastic about it, firstly because you know too much to get excited, and secondly because even though you know the Truth you find it difficult to practice.
After three years of failing to have good Faith it is easy to lose confidence, and to lose conviction. You may wake in the morning determined to centre your mind upon God alone, then you walk out onto the street and find yourself being captivated by a girls legs. What a joke!
How weak I must be! When this happens again and again you begin to fear failure, or at least your ego does. You sometimes choose not to think of God, so that you cannot be distracted from Him by a pair of legs and then feel foolish. You can't lose if you don't try.
But of course, it is my ego that says all this, after three years of being abused by reason. Three years is nothing considering the deluded way I have been brought up in this society. "How should ye rise high, if your fathers wills rise not with you?" "Be not virtuous beyond your powers! And ask not of yourselves improbabilities". All patience and impatience comes from the ego. Sometimes one must step down from an overly high relationship to God, and settle at a lower level for a while. And later on, begin again where you left off.
I have tried to live without any routine, without excitement, motivation, positive thinking and joy. It worked for a while, but when it stops working you're in trouble. The ego then takes over and you become overrun with distractions - unhelpful distractions, rather than helpful ones.
It is hard to step down to a lower level relationship with God, to routine, because you know better and have a conscience about it. But with God's permission, and this alone, you must take a rest and regain your energy. Otherwise you will be trying to maintain a pace you cannot live with, and you will soon deteriorate. You must tell a few lies to yourself for a while, with God's permission, to give the soul another chance to regroup and push forwards again at a later date. The lie of having a lower level relationship with God is less of a lie than trying to maintain a high level relationship that is beyond one's powers.
So, I'm going to adopt more of a routine for a while; writing, reading, walking and exercising, until I feel better. You really must feel like a lion in your motivation. Without this power nothing is achieved. With a normal motivation delusions can linger and take hold, but with a lion-like motivation they are destroyed in an instant, with no second thoughts.
Your discussion of awareness was very clear. Other names for it could also be "Mind", or Brunton's "Thought", or "Consciousness". There is no self who has Mind, nor is Mind possessed by anything, nor is Mind perceived by anyone. It just is - nothing.
Dreams and the wakeful state compare on many levels. Dreams appear to be real, but are merely creations of the mind. Similarly, wakeful experience appears real, but again is only a creation of the mind. Both are really dreams. We can never wake up from the dreams because we have physically evolved to have them. However, we can wake up from the dream that these dreams are not dreams.
Yes, awareness is the basis of everything. But as you say, it is just electrical impulses in the brain - it is nothing. So nothing is the basis of everything, which is everything!
You say that clarity escapes you. This is the age old problem. You seem to have a good intellectual understanding of it, but there has yet to be a leap of Faith. You have already made many of these to come this far, but the next one is important, as it brings a clarity you can never forget. It is a life-affirming clarity that dispels all doubts and alternate wills. It is the nothing that is everything. It is not the understanding of it, nor the accurate mental picture of it, but the experience of it.
This is no big deal. It happens effortlessly when the time comes - just as, say, Pat Cash wins Wimbledon once he has enough experience. It is a quantum leap, but it has to be made gradually. It only comes about through this lion-like confidence I was talking about, which is a kind of killer instinct. It is a mind that says "I am sure this is all nothing. I am absolutely certain. I am completely sure, so I will be Truthful NOW, and STOP! all this building . . .".
We build on top of what is already perfect, corrupting it. We must put the builder to rest.
All the best
Kevin
February, 1988
from:
David Quinn
1 Godfrey St
Toowoomba, 4350Dear Kevin,
Yes, the builder must rest. The builder, who remains inconspicuous in the background, trying to mould me according to its idea of perfection. It obtains this idea of perfection from books, experience, friends, society and so on - all of which is contradictory. Thus we get the absurd situation where the idea (of perfection) changes with time, according to the environment. And me, who has little faith, who forgets that perfection or imperfection does not exist, allows the builder to continue to try and change me so that in the future I will be a Buddha!
I must let go of everything - even my loftiest thoughts and memories of the infinite. This is not easy for one feels one is betraying God by not directing thought towards Him. But if I desire realization then that is my ego desiring, which merely perpetuates the illusion. Faith, then, is seeing there is nothing to strive for in any way for all is perfect. Faith is to live each moment totally without motive, or purpose, not caring for enlightenment.
But then, isn't trying to live without purpose merely a disguise hiding the desire for realization? So, the trick is to live without trying anything at all - living effortlessly.
I have been trying to sort out the problem before me, that is, should I keep thinking of the infinite and all that goes with it? or should I let all that go and live fully each moment? I feel more comfortable with the former, for when I am thinking well I receive unmistakable hints from the infinite and I also get "intuitive" flashes of insight into the various fundamental problems of psychology.
However, I can foresee the limitations of this path. I can only go so far before coming up against an impenetrable barrier. I see that the builder must be put to rest and to do so requires the "complete relinquishment". I guess it is my lack of faith that gives rise to doubts about this latter path and that if I decide to abandon all my "progress" I fear I could lose God forever.
This following statement of Jesus haunts me: "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door". Letting go seems to be the complete opposite!
But there are other factors which indicate to me that letting go is the right "step" to take. One is the fact, through reading some science and philosophy books, I see that many very intelligent people who continually think about cause and effect and evolution, or the limitations of reason, or the psychology of fear, have no clue whatsoever of the infinite. I find this astonishing and wonder why
I have come in contact with it.I read one philosopher's article who impressed me with the clarity of his thinking dealing with nihilism, the limitations of
reason etc, but ended it with (in essence) "Well, since there is not certainty in anything, I like to believe that something transcendent does exist". He obviously has had no experience of the infinite even though he, no doubt, thinks about deep problems quite a lot.
The second factor is that I have read that many people who are very hungry for realization become choked with their own desire which prevents them from realizing.
Thirdly, I look back at my own experiences and see that they have all occurred when I wasn't trying, at times when I couldn't have cared less about anything.
Fourthly, I see in drug experiences that their big attraction is that they allow you to live fully in the present moment, that past and future are seen clearly for what they are - ideas.
But the biggest factor is the reasoning behind letting go. By trying to change me, I am trying to change what is already perfect. I am trying to change according to values picked up in the past. These values change with time and so the futility of it all is obvious. By being completely aware of each moment I accept my faults without resistance. Thus I obtain a quiet, relaxed mind in which spontaneity is achieved.
You, no doubt, have experienced this dilemma I'm going through and can perhaps shed some light on the matter.
Toowoomba is proving to be a nice place. It shall be very cold in winter with plenty of fog. Rent seems to be a little cheaper than Brisbane. Tracey and I were searching for flats and houses under ninety dollars per week and nearly all we saw were dingy. However, we were fortunate to obtain a nice little brick flat for seventy five dollars per week (with a fire place!). I have been trying to find work but, fortunately or unfortunately work prospects are poor here.
I have been rather distracted myself since moving here. We hired a TV for a month and have been watching lots of videos. Television is too nauseating for words.
I haven't written to Trevor yet. What's he doing? If he is still deliberating perhaps I will write, but it seems rather pretentious.
Anyway, I look forward to your reply.
David
March 6, 1988
from:
Kevin Solway
2/117 Macquarie St
St Lucia, Qld 4067Dear David,
Your letter brought up some interesting points. You pose the question: "Should I keep thinking of the infinite and all that goes with it? Or should I let all that go and live fully in the moment?".
The former path holds many problems, interesting problems, with much scope for achievement - like understanding psychology (past and future lives). But it doesn't escape suffering as well as living in the moment does, which seems much more powerful and natural. This question is one of the most important, if not the most important question in all spiritual life.
I tackle the problem as follows: If ever one has a "problem", like trying to understand why a person behaves as they do, then something is lacking - a solution, and one is therefore living is samsara, the cycle of duality. As soon as you solve one problem, and rejoice in your achievement, the sooner you are faced by another, more perplexing problem. It is a circular process, and you find yourself repeatedly trying to solve the same old puzzles. This is O.K for lower levels of the path, still in the intellectual sphere, but it must be abandoned eventually.
And here is where the danger arises, for in the abandoning of such problems, one can so very easily abandon reason! The fact is, that problems are important, and have to be dealt with. And so, I say "First the Kingdom of God, then thinking". First attain direct experience of emptiness (a kind of experiencing the moment), then use that divine clarity of mind to turn over all the great problems of mankind.
This will not be easy, because the problems you will wish to consider will be problems deep in the human psyche, and your own! They will tend to arouse the ego again, and when it does arise one is again overcome with a plethora of problems.
The sage meditates on a thousand problems, for which he lacks an answer - but he desires no answer, needs no answer. He simply seeks answers.
Kierkegaard says: I go fishing for a thousand monsters in the depths of my own soul.
The enjoyment of "the moment" can be experienced as a pleasure by the ego. It can so easily ignore all those monsters. And eventually one forgets that the monsters exist at all!
All this is not easy. Persevere!
Keep an eye on your mind. Is the experience merely one of the heavenly god realms, or is it that of God? It is not difficult to attain the heavens through concentration or by accident, but such powerful experiences are dangerous without wisdom, as the ego will only gain strength through the encouragement.
Your story of the philosopher who resorts to superstition when it comes to the crunch is a familiar one to me. Over the years people build-up a solid base of security for the ego, through admirable planning ahead, courage, perseverance, and so on. People then sit inside the fortress they have created and think proud and comfortable thoughts. Thinking of how wretched their condition would be without all their securities helps to increase their satisfaction and contentedness - making them more thankful for what they've got. They would never even consider giving-up all what they have worked so hard for.
And it all comes down to age. Someone less than about 25 hasn't had time to build-up a lot of securities. They are not so content, not so scared of change, and have the potential of taking on the burden of Truth.
I was talking to an intelligent person at Chenrezig last week. He is about 28, living in a de facto relationship, and is very good with electronics and computers. He is content. He easily has the brains to understand the infinite conceptually, but simply doesn't want to think about it too much! He shows me that he understands one to two things about the infinite, but only one or two things, not thousands.
His thinking is very narrow, which it has to be if he is to preserve his ego. He doesn't follow up all the logical consequences of the infinite being Truth. For example, he sees clearly how all things have neither a beginning nor an end, but he cannot understand why there is no life nor death, and he cannot understand why we have no need of attachments. He simply selects what he wants, and rejects what doesn't seem to suit his purposes.
Even though he is more rational than most, he is not really on a spiritual path, having reached a dead-end. His reasoning has led him to contentedness and stagnation, rather than to a burning desire for the Truth. His aim in life is not to discover Truth, but to avoid pain. Or rather, he has chosen to rely on attachments other than reason to avoid pain.
A spiritual path is where one initially places all one's faith in reason. But, at his age, he feels he has too much to lose. When you talk with him he is bright and enthusiastic, but when you reach a certain point he simply turns off, starts mumbling, changing the subject, looking away and daydreaming. There is nothing you can do for these people, and even these are much more rational than most.
Such people have no potential, they are not in the human realm. Better is a person of less developed rationality, but with a desire for truth.
Now I'll leave you with a couple of things to ponder. Firstly, and you'll come up against this again and again, is the argument for the existence of God. I'll write the problem, let you think about it, and then write my comments at the end of the letter:
All things must have causes - true. Now imagine the whole of Nature as a sphere. As it is a thing, then it must have been caused. The only thing that could have caused it would have to be other than Nature . . . God. This is called the "necessary being" argument, it being necessary for Nature to have been caused, therefore a God is necessary. What do you make of this?
The second thing to ponder concerns genetics. Our purpose in life is the continuation of the genetic line - true? Then what if at some future date we replace some of our genetic material with that from another species? This would still be continuation of the genetic line, but rather than a small change being made to our genes, as in mutation, there would be a large change. Then what if we replaced a very large amount of our genetic material with that of another species? Surely this would mean the end of the genetic line!
So then, what is the purpose of preserving the genetic line? Such a "line" doesn't really exist - our purpose would be irrational!
Thoughts on the existence of God: The necessary being argument has a fundamental flaw. Sure, our experience and inductive reasoning tells us that all things must have causes - but only those things within Nature, within the dualistic world of our experience. This is a law, but there is no such law saying that Nature must be caused, which is not a thing and cannot be a subject of our dualistic thinking about cause and effect.
In reality, Nature is neither caused nor not caused. Nature itself is the only "necessary being", as it is the root cause of all things within Nature (which are itself). It is a necessary being, because Truth is necessary.
Thoughts on genetics: Our definition of "species" (as identified by the genetic code) has to break down at some point, as it is only a concept, meant for practical use only. It cannot stand up to reality itself. Perhaps a more practical definition of species would be "all lifeforms in the universe capable of self-awareness, reasoning and knowledge". This definition would enable us to completely change our physical bodies (and genetic code), but retain our culture, wisdom etc. The body, and hence the genetic material, being only a tool for our use.
However, for present purposes, the former definition and "purpose to life" may be sufficient, it being one stage in spiritual development. But as knowledge grows then one concept seems more reasonable than another. Then, when we slice all false thoughts off the top of our brain, and observe the thing which is left, an imprint, it will tell us different things, and give us a different purpose. A spiritual man's purpose may change, as he comes to see the Truth more and more clearly.
What do you think of all that?
By the way, I have been giving more thought to Trevor. I now think that he needs no help at all. He knows what he should do, he just doesn't want to do it! I don't think he's really deliberating, he just does what his mind tells him. He really has to get used to making these big decisions by himself, as it will stand him in good stead later on.
P.S How is Tracey progressing in her thinking.
Bye for now
Kevin
July 14, 1988
from:
Kevin Solway
2/117 Macquarie St
St Lucia 4067Dear Dave,
Are you still in Toowoomba? Have you found a job yet? I guess the statistics say you will find a job after having completed the hospitality course.
I am still plodding along. Life is not becoming any easier. In fact it seems to be becoming harder the more I realize that it won't be getting easier for a very long while - if ever (in this life).
A few years ago, when I was about twenty four I had dreams that by the time I was thirty I would have gone through the worst of it. Now I realize that thirty is only the beginning. The older you get, and the more you think, the more you see how your deluded past sticks with you and exists within you.
I want to grow old and wise, leaving my past behind me; but Nature doesn't work like that. Because I don't let myself get addicted to adult attachments I find that my old childish one's continue. For example, while most people my age are absorbed in their work and their families I find myself being tempted by sport or the techno wiz-bang of computers. It is a horrible feeling, like you're caught in a time loop where you're doomed to continually repeat yourself. It is like having a continuous and repetitive dream, which you know is a dream, but from which you cannot awake.
However, I'm sure I'm improving overall. My reaction to most worldly things is now a complete and automatic revulsion, no matter what company I'm in. Years ago I would have had to consider it first - before being revolted.
Being revolted at all things in the world, all pleasures, is a very important strength. If you find you're not revolted, then you've been taken-in by it all, and you've died.
Being revolted is by no means the answer, but from this standpoint at least you will look for Truth. And if you look for Truth you are bound to find it. But if you get taken-in by the world then your mind becomes dead, and Truth will be beyond reach.
Being taken-in by the world feels to me like I've been dragged out of my mind, out through the senses, and I can't get back in again. I get trapped out in the world, where I get tossed about, by memories, hopes, desires, fears, and life becomes timeless.
That's the problem, I'd much rather I experienced the true passage of time, seeing myself grow older at each moment, from the true vantage point within my own mind. From here, behind the eyes, I can look out and see everything in its place, untouched by anything. From here I even observe memories, and they will have no power over me. But before you know it your self has donned wings and flown out the doors of the senses where you cannot catch it again.
Once it is finally back under wraps it has to be continually alert of itself, and that it is not taken-in or absorbed by anything again for even a moment. It must reject everything, all love, beauty, ugliness, all tiredness, boredom, happiness, all thought of success or failure.
I don't ever think my life will become easy, not if I put honest pressure on myself and remain uncompromising. Even if I develop my mind only a little, I can continue the process in future lives. That is, other people will learn from my life, no matter how little they learn. Every action has an effect and there are no exceptions.
My ego had unrealistic hopes for me, perhaps thinking that by the time I'm sixty I might be a recognized sage, and will be largely beyond desire, and supported by students. My, how the ego can dream! The Truth is, only a sage can recognize a sage. So if I ever become a great sage virtually no one in the world would be able to truly recognize me.
What is more, I wouldn't be able to accept followers anyway, not if they have only blind faith in my wisdom, as they certainly wouldn't be able to recognize wisdom themselves. Too many recognized "sages" have compromised along the way, if not at the very beginning, and are therefore not sages at all. They live their lifestyle, with all their followers, with the aim of making their own lives more comfortable, and so that their own weaknesses will never come to the surface, and come to light.
Nietzsche says "Be not virtuous beyond your powers, and ask not of yourselves improbabilities! Walk in the footsteps of your fathers virtue! How should ye rise high, if your fathers wills rise not with you?"
Our "fathers" have not given us much of a start. In my life I have never personally known a spiritual person. However, we are fathers to others, and they may well rise higher than us.
I can hear a voice in my ear saying "Don't be so negative, be positive, think about how much you have achieved, that is far more than others have ever dreamed of!" . . . And it had an American accent.
I'd much rather be realistic. Achieving "far more" than others is such a low level of achievement it is nothing to rejoice about. But it is all I can realistically do, which is neither great nor small nor middling. It is nothing, and is everything.
Kevin
P.S. If you're still in Toowoomba and wouldn't mind having me for a day or two let me know what days are O.K.
20th July, 1988
from:
David Quinn
1 Godfrey St,
Toowoomba 4350Dear Kevin,
Thanks for your letter. It touched on many points that I can relate to. For I am also in a low period; truly am I in the hells. I am beginning to realize more and more what it requires to lead a spiritual life and the idea is scary. After a year of intense thinking and making great ground, intellectually at least, I am in a period of backlash. My ego is rebelling and at the moment I don't have the strength to fight. I seemed to have lost all enthusiasm, all faith in the path, in truth. The hospitality course is overwhelming me. I have begun smoking again and my mind is truly floundering on the surface of things.
I hate society, hate the emptiness and falsity of most human relations, hate kidding myself but my desire for comfort is very powerful and blanks out all those things. And so I am in limbo. The path that society takes with their ambitions, and their petty trivia revolts me to the core of my being. I have no ambitions whatsoever. Succeeding in this world would make me nauseous.
The alternative is the spiritual life. In principle, that is what I want to do. I have come in contact with the truth and I love it. I really feel I have potential in it and I have the mind for it. But my one obstacle is my upbringing - an upbringing of comfort, of being sheltered from life's hard realities. I know nothing of pain, of coldness, of true loneliness. When I have periods, where I am thinking well, and get hints of Emptiness, of the game of life, I can't seem to advance further as my concentration breaks, and I just have to distract myself. I know I can overcome that, but I just don't have any time doing this fucking course!
My cluttered life is preventing me in progressing in thought. I feel: why should I bother to think when I am not doing what needs to be done - ie giving up attachments. I see clearly that it is action that counts in spirituality. Having wonderful thoughts of emptiness is virtually useless if you don't accompany that with the process of emptying yourself.
So my mind is dying. I am becoming a zombie - one who hates attachments and hates emptiness.
I think the only way to search for truth is in desperation. You have to feel the need to depend on God only, and in this way you will search with intensity. But if you are comfortable you depend instead on the attachments that give you this comfort and so you forget about God.
But do I have the strength to live in physical and mental discomfort? Do I have the faith required? I do have a certain strength but I feel it only exists in bursts. Can I live in emptiness year in and year out? This is my dilemma.
You say that only a sage can recognize a sage. This may be so but sensitive people can glimpse the nature of one who is somewhat more advanced. When I am in your company I feel the presence of emptiness very strongly. I recognize the fact that you are a special breed of person, a person who is on a completely different level to everyone else I've ever met. I realize the timelessness of your endeavour, that you are no different whatsoever to Jesus, Kierkegaard, and many others who have lived a spiritual life. It is as if society and everyone in it is travelling in one direction and these rare people are proceeding in the opposite direction. So I question your statement about students being able to follow a teachers wisdom on blind faith only.
I can really relate to Kierkegaard's statement about: as you advance no-one but no-one understands you and that is the beginning of true loneliness. Who can possibly begin to understand the struggles of a spiritual man? To all else he is either a chronic depressant or a useless dreamer.
My wish is to live a simple life dedicated to truth, but can I live a completely empty existence? Until I have the concentration some distractions are going to be necessary.
But why are you worrying about being recognized or not? Is this the ego considering future security? You know these are deluded thoughts so why bother with them?
I question my own motives. My own search is not pure. Am I searching for reality for its own sake, because I know my own self is reality, or is it just another one of my schemes for pleasure and comfort? Most probably a mixture of both. For the infinite reality is not something you wish to attain in order to have a good time, is it? There is no reason whatsoever to search for truth - it just has to be done. It is one of your powers, as it were. It is the soul (which seems to be yourself but then isn't) - pleasing God.
Isn't your Tibetan book a strange one. Never have I seen so much good stuff and so much rubbish mixed into one package. It has excellent sections on death awareness and non-existence of self, but then tells you to prepare yourself for emptiness by doing 35 Buddhas a day!
Please feel free to come up. We have a mattress here. A week-end is probably more suitable but weekdays are fine also - I will not be at home during the weekdays being the only problem with that. Greg may be visiting us this weekend so if you decide on this weekend one of you will sleep on the floor.
See you soon
David
August 16, 1988
from:
Kevin Solway
2/117 Macquarie St
St Lucia, 4067Dear David,
I'd like to come up on the week-end of the 27th if that's O.K with you. Where are you working now? Will it be possible for you to pick me up if you are going through Brisbane? If I haven't heard from you by then, I'll assume it's O.K for me to come up, and I'll make my own way, probably arriving late afternoon.
I've broken through a dull period and my mind has been clear and bright now for a few weeks. Perseverance pays off! The Truth can bring so much suffering, but O the joy it brings as well! Only with faith can one break through the Barrier. It is said: going forward seems like retreat, the easy way seems hard, the bright path seems dim, a wealth of Virtue seems inadequate, great talents ripen late.
I'm sure there is nothing really important left that you can learn from me, but I can still implore you to never forget all the people who depend on you to continue to develop your wisdom so that you can teach them. There are people out there, a few, in the human realm. But they are young, and will not remain in the human realm for long. Once they fall into the animal realms they will have no hope of escaping.
It is essential to contact those people before it is too late, and your wisdom must be so bright as to instantly melt their ego and dissipate all their doubts the moment they see you.
Those people may never meet me, or any other person of wisdom, and meeting that person may be all they need to just tip them over the brink - and the rest they can do for themselves.
It is far easier to live a truly spiritual life than to partake of this world. Living a spiritual life you can sleep all your hours away and be totally carefree, but when you live in this world you have to take part in all the games and responsibilities. Is this not madness?
Right now all I can do is just avoid making clouds - clouds that will block the sun and take its light from me. I can't keep it up forever, but even clouds dissipate under the warmth of the suns rays.
Yours,
Kevin
15th June, 1989
from:
David Quinn
20 Glebe St,
Glebe, Hobart 7000Hello Kevin!
Glebe, Glebe, I'm living in Glebe! The train didn't derail, the ship didn't sink, the bus didn't crash, and I didn't get mugged in Melbourne!
Melbourne is very threatening. There is lots of tension. People are more closed-up. Crime is high. Peoples' irrationality is stretched to its limits. Truly, it must be what life is like in an American city.
In Melbourne I met one of Samantha's academic friends, David. He is one of those academics who will be successful in life. A biologist, he already has a reputation - assisted with the filming of "Life on Earth" and "The Living }lanet", articles in the "National Geographic", and swims easily among the big names of biology. Already, he has perfected the airs and pompousness of academia.
I asked him what his concept of evolution was. Is it a random or nonrandom process?
Dutifully, he cited the scientific spiel, saying that natural selection was essentially non-random whereas genetic mutation was random! And so we had an interesting discussion about natural selection. He maintained that natural selection and genetic mutation were independent of each other! Impossible! said I. The formation of the genes, that is, the coming together of the sperm and the ovary depended on millions of things. For one thing, the animal has to survive in its environment long enough to reproduce. And when you look at all the millions of sperm that are potential mates, and that perhaps only a handful are capable of major genetic change, you will see that a major factor in genetic mutation will be what particular sperm meets the ovary. And that in turn depends on the angle of the penis in the vagina, the thrust power of the male, the availability of males and females in a particular area, the distribution of hormones and other chemicals in bodies of the male and female, which, in turn, depends on the environment. And so on.
I was at a disadvantage here because he knew the details of genetic mutation far better that I, but I knew in principle that I was right. He seemed to accept my argument but then went on the say that I was dealing purely in semantics.
Yes, said I, because it is the scientists who are fooled by words and concepts. Beautifully constructed theories are built on those concepts without thought to whether those concepts actually refer to something that exists or not. Genetic mutation, for example - how in the galaxy does a random process exist?
But he was very rigid in his thinking. His concepts are precious to him. He can't play with them, swap them around, add new meaning to them. He soon left as he felt the argument was going around in circles - which it was. Still, he proved to me that although biology was his field of work, he didn't have a clue about evolution.
When he left I told Samantha that he didn't have a clue about evolution. I said to her that my understanding of evolution was perfect, that I see clearly where he goes off the track. She was shocked, "You can't say that, that your understanding is perfect!" No, Sam, I can't say that - it would destroy the whole spirit of science.
Hobart is cold, quiet, and yes, isolated. Existence is dreamy here. Majestic snow-capped mountain, interesting architectured buildings, blue river and bay - all conspire to give the place an enchanted fairy tale setting. It is all very European in feel. I haven't met anyone of interest yet but there is a Mahayana Buddhist club which meets regularly, which I'll soon attend.
Meanwhile I'm just quietly going my way. I live in an almost self-contained room in an old building which houses a dozen or so similar rooms. I live by myself and pay $46 per week which includes electricity. Electricity is hydro, thus fairly environmentally safe.
I've been working with a few ideas mainly in the fields of artificial intelligence and genetic engineering. I want to discuss them with you but I'll wait a bit more and present them in my next letter.
Included here are some of your material, and what! a reply from Miss Caroline Jones! I had a laugh at her letter. What did I do wrong for her to like the ideas so much? Or perhaps she is merely patronizing me! Perhaps you should move down to Sydney - and surprise her! The ideas I presented to her did not include your ideas on women or Christianity, but were strong enough to indicate your personality, namely someone totally unlike her usual guests.
Perhaps the exuberance of her reply lies in her relief at the "logistics" of the situation?
Hear from you soon,
David.
June 28, 1989
from:
Kevin Solway
4/69 Sandford St
St Lucia, Qld 4067Good to hear from you. It sounds like an interesting experience you had with David the scientist. Its quite incredible isn't it. Genetic mutation independent of natural selection indeed!
I read your discussion with David out to my flatmate David, David. He was equally perturbed. He said, yes, that's all true, but where does it get you? He says you can't say that things are interdependent because its been mathematically proven that cause and effect doesn't exist. True enough I told him, you don't need to be a mathematician to prove that cause and effect/determinism is a fallacy. My point is that things are not interdependent also!
Scientists desperately cling from one to the other, like a monkey grasping from one branch to another. They swing from causation to non-causation, not believing in either, and yet believing in both at the same time. I guess that's what people these days call "tolerance". And being unable to penetrate the illusory nature of the branch they are on, they cannot see the illusory nature of all such branches - all the opposites. Such creatures will never come down from the trees.
Someone said that people are the missing link between animals and humans. I think they were being too generous.
I didn't hold out much hope of getting on the Caroline Jones show, but you have to ask. As time goes by we'll make a mark - it's inevitable. As inevitable as fate. I must admit, "logistics" seemed a strange explanation. I thought that was to do with providing supplies to armies during battle! But the word also has something to do with "logic" - so she must have thought it was not logical to interview me.
I am still typing a few ideas out every now and then. Perhaps I will entitle the collection "Poison words from the heart". I enclose a few more writings of Kierkegaard, and a letter from Trevor, who seems to be making progress.
Kevin.
September 7, 1989
from:
David QuinnKevin - how are you going?
I've been spending the last three months doing a bit of "soul-searching" myself. Being in Hobart here has given me the opportunity to examine my life closely, in order to see exactly what I want to do with it. Away from home and hatchery, away from the influences of you, Greg and Tracey, etc - has enabled me to view my life from the outside to a degree.
It is so difficult to be honest with oneself - honesty leads one to very frightening places. The burning question is: Do I want to practice philosophy? Why do I want to go though all this suffering, when the lazy life of convention seems so attractive? Have I got the strength for philosophy? Do I have any sort of love of truth?
When I read Kierkegaard I get dizzy and gloomy when I compare my apparently incurable weaknesses with the loftiness of a life of truth. I have to say that Kierkegaard is not for me at this stage of my life. Although I love his genuineness, his picture of the true life only discourages me. It is one of my biggest weaknesses - that of despairing over my weaknesses. Nietzsche, on the other hand, resonates well with me in that he inspires me - I love his approach to things. One gets inspired to climb onto the bottom rung whereas Kierkegaard keeps me gaping at the sheer height of the ladder!
I doubt whether I have any sort of love of truth - I seem to have no passion. I can't seem to take myself seriously. I have seriously considered giving the whole thing up and running back to cover. Just recently I received a letter from Tracey imploring me to come back to her as she really loved me, etc, etc. I was in a very low point at the time, and I seriously entertained the prospect. But I can't. Philosophy has wounded me too deeply - I can't possibly take a love affair seriously any more. I can truly say, with Kierkegaard, that such things would only serve to increase my melancholy and depression.
I've also thought of alternative ways of life, for example, working for Greenpeace etc. But again, I can't. I just wouldn't be able to take it seriously enough. I cannot escape philosophy - it has got me by the balls.
But this does not mean I am progressing in it. There is no concerted effort in weeding out delusion here - more of a tense game played out in a sort of pressurized
emptiness, which involves real difficulties in stringing three consecutive thoughts together.But I know the path, the pathless path - at least an inkling of it.
I wonder if ever a day will go by when I won't entertain the thought of quitting. I think: why, this is madness! - all this effort for little return! I get tired of "glimpses", as though God is intent on getting his kicks in teasing me, who delights in watering my mouth with exotic smells, but never gives me something of substance.
It's as if everything about me is heavy, too heavy to breathe spiritual air.
There seems nothing extraordinary about me - I just don't have that mark of greatness, that I sense in you. So it seems silly for me to adopt your way of life and your values if I cannot live by them. Though I do feel that I am drifting further and further from mankind as I grow older, as my repulsion for convention grows stronger and stronger, and so I cannot rule out the "apostles life" as a possibility in the future. But for now, it would be absurd for me to even pretend that I am anywhere near it at present.
For example, I cannot rule out the possibility of some sort of relation with women in the future, though without doubt with 99% of women I don't want to get within ten feet of. Still, an absolute total rejection of woman would be too dreadful for me to contemplate - and here lies my lack of faith, for I know full well their detrimental effects upon the philosopher.
There is still one type of woman that interests me, one that would be rare to meet, perhaps one that doesn't exist at all except in my imagination, one that is able to confront me on the emotional level (for it would be impossible for one to confront me on an intellectual level). Oh egotism! - at the root of it all is that desire for acceptance of the herd - life would somehow be more bearable in the knowledge that at least not all women (and hence men) view me with disgust.
Yes, nothing would kindle passion more than the total rejection of woman. Oh but can I do it?
There is this giant desire to submit. My ego would like nothing more than to submit, whether it be into madness, or into comfort, or into woman, or whatever. One must have a strong nature not only to "see" the truth, but also to bear it as well.
I guess there is an analogy which can be drawn regarding my situation in life. In nature I've always wondered about the biologists assertion that a particular animal is perfectly suited to it's environment because of natural selection. Why should this be so? Surely, many of the animals are ill-suited to their environment, living very uncomfortable lives, but still managing to survive to pass on their genes. Especially when the environment changes
, animals become very uncomfortable with their lot until either they "evolve" better equipment or they become too uncomfortable to survive and they die out.For example, when wolves were forced to move into the hotter climates of the desert, it would have been many generations before the necessary mutation of a thinner coat of hair started to appear. As a result, many generations of wolves would have suffered unbearably under the heat, many of them would have perished because of it.
Similarly, for the evolution of man's mind to occur there must be pushes into unknown territory by "generations" whose equipment is not very useful for the task. This is what Nietzsche must mean in Zarathustra. My upbringing developed certain characteristics in me for the purpose of surviving in the conventional world, but then my environment changed - I've been forced into unknown territory with equipment ill-suited for the task. No doubt both Kierkegaard and Nietzsche realized this; that their lives were to be spent for the purpose of surviving as best they could in the new environment, so that eventually the mutations may occur, creating the conditions for the better-suited individuals to arise.
Thus, this is where I stand. For my own particular individuality, total perfection is the remotest of remote possibilities, given my mental equipment. The best I can do is to survive one moment at a time gradually edging out into the unknown, maybe perishing because of it, to help create the effects enabling an individual in the future to achieve perfection.
Of course, all this is fairly obvious - but there is a difference between understanding it and
understanding it. In any case, may myself be victorious!How's Trevor going? Are you in contact with him? I think I'll write to him but I have misplaced his letter - can you send me his address? He sounds quite down doesn't he - in a sort of no-man's land. He quit his job more out of guilt than a desire to explore truth - he hasn't encountered that invigorating enthusiasm yet, it seems to me. I wonder what it's like in Germany - hard to imagine from this desolate paradise called Tasmania where nothing happens except the newspapers. I like it here though - it suits my hyper-sensitivity.
Still going to Chenrezig and giving the smiles a shake with your "ugly face"?
What have you been thinking lately?
Hope to hear from you soon,
Regards,
David
September 9, 1989
from:
Kevin Solway
4/69 Sandford St
St Lucia Q 4067Greetings,
It sounds like your stay in Tasmania is doing you good, though I'm sure at times it doesn't feel like it. It is always difficult coming to terms with one's own limitations - and we all have them. Such is our karma; it's nothing to be unhappy about.
You may be right in saying I have a kind of passion that you find difficult to generate just now; but passion will only come of itself. I do not believe it can be whipped-up whenever one desires - one has to be pushed into it. Only when there is no alternative will you feel a strong passion for God and a overwhelming love of Truth. It is like being surrounded be a blazing bushfire, and then, bravely?, deciding to swim across the river to the other shore. You see, there is no real courage in this, only necessity.
You observed this fact yourself when you said that "nothing would kindle passion more than the total rejection of woman"; but more accurately, an allconsuming passion must arise for one to be able to reject women in the first place. And what is this passion? - nothing grand - it is just the passion to be dignified and to avoid hellish sufferings . . . at least, dignified in one's own eyes if not in the eyes of others.
Believe me, the only reason I can reject women as completely as I do is because I know how much suffering they would cause me - just the fact that I would become a slave, and that I would lose my freedom of thought and action - my soul. I know full well that I could lay back in the loving arms of a woman for a day or two, and then my ideals would return to mock me.
You may remember the time I told you about an old girlfriend of mine in Perth. We had little in common, but I am sure we were totally compatible on an emotional basis. She could give me lee-way where she did not understand me intellectually, and I could give her lee-way where she did not understand me. We lived in separate worlds, yet were able to share on an emotional level.
So, I could get the benefit of the intellectual life, and have my emotional side satisfied too - right? Wrong! I found I was sacrificing some of my thought to make room for some warm emotional pleasures, and through these emotional pleasures, yes, love, a poison was being injected into my system. Hints of jealousy would make their way into my consciousness if I noticed her enjoying the company of another man. Could I stop her? Could I go on like this for the rest of my life? There are so many jokes about relationships, and we all laugh at them - was I going to be the brunt of all these jokes for the rest of my life? - I just couldn't do it.
So, my life may not be all that happy. A smile does not often come easily to my face. But for me, it is far better than the alternative. Here I have suffering, maybe a shortened life, but here I have freedom!
Think of your future lives! Stepping stones are we for greater players. Man without a woman suffers for this life, but is rewarded in eternity. Perhaps you have not generated complete disgust with all womankind - what matter! You, and I, can just do our best.
I have often thought that even if I were to get married, I wouldn't be doing anything wrong. I would have a weakness perhaps, but God gave me the weakness. You are the machine and God is the operator. You do as he makes you do. It is for this reason we should never be disgusted with our weaknesses, for we are not responsible.
Only last week I was feeling a bit down and needing a bit of emotional stroking. I thought of dear "Carolyn" in Perth, who loves me, whatever that means, and it made me feel better for a moment. I thought I'd sit down and jot her a line for the first time in several years. I started to write the letter but couldn't think of anything to say! I said that I was still alive, and was she, and not much more. I put the one page letter in an envelope, put a stamp on it, and promptly went to the river, ripped it up and threw it in the water. All I really wanted was the thought in my mind that someone loved me, namely a woman I could respect. Tis all illusion. To me the whole fantasy was like a T.V show, I knew it wasn't real, but I could enjoy it for 30 minutes.
So, I'm not perfect - God still plays his games with me. But he tells me other things also: what can be remembered eternally? Only one thing: to have suffered for the truth.
So he makes me suffer. He makes me respect a woman and then he makes lose respect for all humanity, the girl included. How could He be so cruel? Such is his game.
We are like kites that God keeps on a string. He keeps us bound to the world despite all our attempts to break free. But then one breaks loose - and what joy there is watching it!
P.S.
Perhaps you should go back to Tracey. Then at least you will know for sure one way or the other.
September 23, 1989
from:
Kevin Solway
4/69 Sandford St
St Lucia, Qld, 4067Hello again,
A few thoughts occurred to me recently that I thought might interest you. I think the greatest barrier is as you say in last letter "despair". Enlightenment is so high, and we are so low. I am not immune to such thinking myself, but it really is making hard work of it all.
If you think of yourself as lacking anything to begin with, then you are bound to despair. You mention that you are too weak even to weed out delusion - and who could blame you! The trick is not to think of yourself as lacking, nor having any delusions to weed out, nor in fact having any work to do at all. The thing to convince yourself of is that you are already perfect. If you continually tell yourself, from the minute you awake, that Nature is absolutely perfect, and that you are therefore lacking nothing, then there will be no desire, no boredom, and therefore no despair.
You must really believe this. You are Nature. How can Nature be anything other than perfect?
You see, it is not a matter of destroying delusions - get such ideas out of your mind - just think of Truth. Get rid of all the ideas of "Enlightenment" and "ignorance"; they would make anyone despair! Fighting against desires is like fighting against a phantom - you just can't win. But when you realize the non-existence of the phantom then all the nightmares are over.
This is what Nietzsche means when he says "If thou be fortunate, thou hast but one virtue and no more: thus mayst thou go more easily over the bridge". The more of these virtues you have, the more you will have a need for them. For example, if you train yourself to shoot a gun for selfprotection, then you will see the enemy wherever you go. But in perfection/Reality there are neither friends nor enemies.
Do not be continually convincing yourself why all desires and suffering are not real. This is like fighting with an enemy, and the more you fight with them, the stronger they will become. Just fill your mind with the perfection of Nature, then there will be no place for either ignorance or Enlightenment.
I found an interesting book in the library the other day entitled "Freud and Women" or the like - written by a woman. Inevitably she argues in favour of the feelings (note, she doesn't call them emotions), saying that rationality has failed us as it has failed to answer the important questions of life. I must admit that men have set themselves up for such criticism as they have failed to use reason in fullness, and are consequently inconsistent and hypocritical. Women are intelligent enough to see this. I enclose some photocopies, which I'd like to get back off you sometime.
Kevin
September 30, 1989
from:
David QuinnGlebe
Yes! I've come to the same conclusions as you have. No matter which direction you turn, no matter which path of reason you take, you inevitably arrive at the simplest of all thoughts - that of nihilism. You must be getting bored of saying the same things over and over to me! How dull-witted I must be, to take well over two years of quite earnest thought merely to make the three or four logical steps to the door of Truth!
I guess the last year has been, for me, one of clearing up doubts, refining my intellectual understanding, so that now I have very few gross delusions and can now recognize many of the more subtle ones. It is the subtle ones that keep you busy - you can detect then in everything you do, think, or say!
I am becoming more and more fascinated with this idea of "Natures perfection", of "constancy", "non-action", "the middle way", "nihilism", or whatever else it can be called. Just a few moments attention directed along these lines, this way that is neither easy nor difficult, effortlessly produces a clear mind which can illuminate delusions with ease. One must constantly apply it to everything, or else one does fall into the delusions of "seeking", "effort", "enlightenment", "despair", "self", "path", "guilt" etc etc. One even can see through "holy actions" with ease. "Love of Truth", "passion" - what sort of nonsense is this?
But to perform this path, one must be solitary in the deepest sense - or else one will be overwhelmed by praise/blame, success/failure, pride/guilt, worthiness/worthlessness: categories which are the stupid childish fairytales that have been brain-washed into us since Day 1.
There is still one main doubt in me though. We've spoken about it in the past but maybe you can shed more light on it for me. It is this matter of changes of consciousness.
The other day I listened to a tape of a psychologist whose work consists of exploring these changes of consciousness using both drug and non-drug related techniques - a female psychologist by the way. She outlined four categories of deepening altered consciousness, ones which I can easily relate to. They are:
1. Altered sense perception - here colours become more vivid, sounds
become sharper, sounds become colours, forms are perceived "differently" etc.2. The next, a deeper state, in which one gains insights into one's own psychology. One gets an overall picture of one's development since childhood, so that one sees the deeper causes of why one's personality/character is the way it is. One begins to know where one is at, in relation to reality. One sees one's own soul, so to speak.
3. Going deeper again, into the world of religious symbolism. One begins to grasp what a spiritual person is. For example, one sees Jesus in a new light. One also enters the myths and legends of one's culture - talking birds, snakes which seduce, Kings and Queens and castles and lions etc.
Here, it seems to me, it is a case of remembering the very early childhood perceptions of things. The child effortlessly lives in a magically rich world of depth and colour. He attaches no significance to his world - he just exists happily. However, as he begins to develop an understanding in language and adult-conceptions, and begins to develop the adult way of perception, he begins to associate the adult religious and mythical concepts with this magic world.
For example, in my case, I must have associated the concept of an old man with a beard as being God (for this is what we were taught) and related this with the world of "spiritual" perception which was rapidly vanishing as time went on.
For, nowadays this image occasionally comes to me amongst a flood of a poetic, joyful atmosphere.
It also may explain why children love fairytales - not because there is anything special about the stories themselves, but because it simply reminds them of a world now lost to them.
In any case, here we perceive a more expanded perception into the meaning of these symbols.
4. And lastly - the religious experience - where one's mind dissolves into a blissful unifying nothingness. Here, the psychologist talks of one's consciousness entering the ground of one's being. And here lies my problem, for whenever I hear such a description of such a situation, my mind inevitably dissolves into a blissful unifying nothingness.
But I ask: what has this got to do with Truth? Has this anything to do with Nirvana? Reason tells me - no! - because of the fact that distractions arise and one immediately falls into the truth/false, enlightenment/ignorance categories. Besides, I am beginning to suspect that Truth is not an experience, nor a state of being, nor have anything to do with a "change of consciousness".
Yet, what is this experience? Is it purely an effect of the processes of the brain?, that is to say, because, even though one spontaneously enters into it, and thus before one has time to think about it, a moment later it is gone, leaving
vague imagery behind.My question is: should I attach value on it, or should I ignore it, leaving it to come and go as it pleases, regarding it as being merely a freak of nature. My inclination is to the latter, exploring it when the opportunity arises, but to not worry too much about it.
You might be interested in the Journals of Anais Nin, especially the earlier ones written in the 1930's. She is one of these psycho-analytical types, who is suspicious of intellectualism, and prefers to look at her own mind in a more "poetic" way. One thing going for her is that she writes simply, minus all the academic diatribe that swamps the photo-copies you sent me. Aghh! I am astounded how anyone can live in such an academic mental world without going insane with confusion! How ironic! She writes about man's overfascination with intellectualism, in a beautifully intellectual way! She should write a poem instead - but then I suppose she would be dismissed as a sentimental female . . .!
Woman really is an incredible creature - she is so confident in her ignorance! She is such a "fantastic" being - one part biological, 99 parts fiction. I've become fascinated with the concept "she"; "she" is such a transcendental entity, and cannot be integrated with the world of things.
Consider the following passage:
"It moved gracefully over to me and smiled. I watched it entranced - it lit up the room wherever it went! As it drew closer to me, it's energy overwhelmed and melted me, and leaning over, with it's lips brushing my cheeks, a musky scent wafted, tantalizing, dancing, causing shivers to run up and down my body. Then it drew back, and with a twinkle in it's eye, it began to unbutton its blouse." How sexy!
What an extreme contradiction she is - this is beautifully expressed in sex. Oh, woman of my dreams, she is so pure, innocent, angelic, queen of the goddesses - and then there is the actuality! Oh, my petal, sweetness of my life - surely it isn't true? Are you really this quivering, sweating, panting animal beneath me?
Who can possibly enjoy sex under these conditions - unless a new fantasy is created, one that is based far more closely on the actuality, one involving the emotions of dominance. So really, woman is a trinity, a three-in-one entity involving the actuality and two very different types of fiction.
All my life I've been fooled by woman, believing her to be pure, innocent, and heavenly - I reacted accordingly, only to be continually astounded as to
how animal they really are - in their being and in their desires. Woman never has to face this contradiction, as her image of man is always firmly grounded in man the animal.I'm continually at odds with the adult world - or should I say, the woman's world! Psycho-analysts - those female psychologists - would say that I am neurotic. They would be partly right because there are emotional hang-ups involved, but it is only a case of not wanting to solve my neurosis through the "adultizing" of my personality. The psycho-analysts would then say: yes, you have convinced yourself that you don't want to change, so that you can ease your sufferings through pride.
No, simply, the adult world is fake and pretentious. Consequently, I am still twelve years old. When I was physically twelve, I had, up to then, quite happily played with my friends, but then, upon entering the teens, they all changed. My friends grew into adults in their quest for females - whereas I stopped growing. The only thing that kept me in contact with others was sport. But when I gave up sport, the last contact was broken, and I now exist in this never-never world of immaturity!
I am depth and melancholy and unspontaneity personified - and no-one knows how to treat me as such. I fail to entertain them, and they grow quiet and want to move on.
I am no longer a member of the species homo sapiens. Their spontaneity and laughter are worlds away from my introversion. The only similarity between me and them is the shape of our bodies.
But then, as Nietzsche says: you are different to the herd, but not different enough - for it is the herd in you which speaks of the suffering of your differentness.
All this was brought out painfully clear, when I recently did a bit of voluntary work for an arts festival. It had been three years since I was last involved in the art world - and this came as a shock. It was a nightmare, where I was wondering whether I was on my home planet or not! Anyway, I made some observations:
- Definition of Art: The death throes of a disintegrating soul.
- Opening night of an Arts festival: Where dying souls can come together to laugh away the emptiness.
- Alcohol: Used to excite the death throes, to squeeze as much out of the remains as possible.
- The artist: One who deceives himself into believing that he is an individual.
- Opening night: A gathering of people who deceive themselves into believing they are individuals.
. . . All the while, the mad Van Gogh is ignored or spat upon.
To conclude, I will give you a problem to answer for me: Let us pretend that the Japanese decide to invade tomorrow. They destroy all the cities and throw all us Australians into concentration camps. You are thrown into a particularly harsh camp where there are beatings, food rationing, filth, torture etc. You are all given some uniforms and have your hair shaved. All this is designed to break the spirit of the prisoners so that they become unresisting sheep. As it happens, the prisoners in your camp are managing to hold onto their strength of will, because they have all become Christians - they believe that the sufferings they are now enduring are nothing compared to the eternal happiness that will most assuredly be theirs when they die. Thus, there is this community spirit based firmly upon their belief in the Christian God - a spirit that enables them to endure their sufferings so much so, that if it were taken away, then everyone will be crushed, become crazy, violent, destroyed. Then sooner or later, one of them says to you "Kevin, you look like an intelligent chap - do you believe in Jesus Christ?"
How would you answer?
David
P.S Have you heard that scientists are now starting to grow plastics? Through genetic engineering, they are developing a type of bacteria that will display all the properties that we normally associate with "synthetic".
October 3, 1989
from:
Kevin Solway
4/69 Sandford St
St Lucia, Qld, 4067Nietzsche said that if a person with wisdom doesn't write books, then its guaranteed they'll be a good letter writer. Your last letter was a joy to read: it would sap the life out of a stone.
Your thinking on altered states seems reasonable to me. Our aim should be to go beyond consciousness, not to an altered state of it.
If there is consciousness of having a particular type of consciousness then this in not ultimate consciousness. Likewise, if there is a conscious lack of a particular consciousness this too is not ultimate consciousness.
If you just keep your mind fixed on never being in error, then who could possibly fault you? - regardless of what consciousnesses you may or may not attain. If we concern ourselves only with living in accord with reason, letting Nature carry us along, then all states of consciousness are immaterial.
You might remember the Zen student who asked whether the Buddha was the ordinary mind or the enlightened mind. The Zen Master replied "How many minds have you got? Where on earth do you keep them all?"
I have said at times how the "Trance of Truth" is essential to empower further progress. Hakuin calls this experience "satori". But he also goes on a lot about "kensho", or "seeing into your own nature".
The fad in religion these days is to stress the difference between "mere intellectual speculation" and the vastly superior "experience". Well, if their experience is not entirely reasoned then I for one don't want anything to do with it!
Hakuin's "kensho" stresses the intellectual aspect (which is not without its experiential element) of the Truthful mind, whilst "satori" stresses the aspect of pure experience, or the fruition of reason. Hakuin was greatly impressed by a chap called Daie who apparently experienced 18 great satoris and countless smaller ones. Now, if this isn't something to get the desires going and make us anxious then nothing is!
You notice the "and countless smaller ones" - so you see, it is all a matter of degree. If you like, satoris are differing degrees of supreme clarity of mind combined with a perfect intellectual understanding of Truth plus an unfailing Faith.
Satoris of various degrees happen by accident, but only after you have developed your knowledge and faith in Truth (ie, wisdom) to a high degree. It is simple enough to attain a clear mind, it is the understanding of Reality that's the hard bit - enough understanding to be able to stand in Reality, sacrificing one's being to it, rather than to grope and grapple with it, in which case there are only "glimpses". These glimpses constitute experiences, whilst the person who can give himself over entirely to his reason conceives of no such experience, and has no call to do so.
The degrees of satori are not unlike degrees of the fourth stage you mentioned, except for the obvious fact that the degrees of satori involve wisdom, which is no small difference.
The types of consciousness you mentioned really made me laugh. For example, the third stage - understanding religious symbolism - really! I wonder whether one understands the true meaning of the Christian cross also? I'll have to repeat what I've said many times before regarding this, so bear with me. The psychologist is actually describing the stages of shamatha (a blissful, onepointed concentration) and mistaking them for shunyata (direct experience of ultimate Reality). She is confusing God with the god-realms; which is not surprising seeing as she knows nothing of God. She is confusing childhood spontaneity and immediacy with spirituality.
The "ground of her being" she mentions is in fact her childhood. She is trying to go back to the womb rather than to go forth and conquer death. Enlightenment is immediacy or spontaneity after reflection; but she cannot bear reflection, so tries to turn back to the immediacy of childhood - just as a dog which is impelled to walk on two feet has every instant a tendency to go again on all fours.
Her understanding of symbols, etc, in the third stage is an indication of a reversion to childhood fairy tales rather than a progression to the liberated mind. And I sincerely doubt whether her "blissful unifying nothingness" in the fourth stage gives her the strength to give up all her attachments and stand up for the Truth in the face of all adversity!
Shunyata comes about through a combination of Shamatha and Vipashyana (insight into the nature of reality). There can be Shamatha without Vipashyana, but there can be no real Vipashyana without Shamatha. Knowledge without meditation is foolish, but meditation without knowledge is dangerous. Knowledge corresponds to Vipashyana and meditation corresponds to Shamatha.
The reason for this is obvious: with meditation you can so easily attain the blissful heights of the god-realms, and then stagnate there, only to spend your future lives in hell. Also, knowledge without concentration and clarity is foolish as knowledge is hindered when there is no clarity and power of thought.
But here we have even more concepts to confuse us and arouse our anxiety. You musn't try to attain shamathic states, just keep life simple, just believe in the perfection of reality and you will blend everything into the one. All things will drop away when they are good and ready to do so, leaving you with your clear mind and your reason. Again, you need neither accumulate virtues nor drop delusions, but simply direct your mind towards reality.
Also, keep in mind that despite Daie's numerous great satoris it is still possible for another who has had no such great experiences to be more wise. Such a person may have a more developed intellectual knowledge, be more consistent with his truth, and be a more effective teacher of that truth. Even so, great satoris are nothing to be scoffed at.
The arts festival sounded just how I imagine them to be. I have always regarded art as "egotism on canvass" that reveals the ugliest and darkest parts of the human mind, and glorifies in it.
Regarding the Japanese invasion: remember the discussion I had with Losang the monk about Hitler and reincarnation; would Hitler be reborn in hell? "Yes" I said, "many times". "How" was the reply, "seeing as you don't believe in reincarnation". "He reincarnated in those whom he tortured, and in their families who suffered" I said.
And here is another reincarnation story. Our brothers the Japanese, our past lives, have deluded themselves with fantasies and want to conquer Australia. We then suffer hellish torture in their hands because we are their future lives - it is inevitable. The law of karma will have its way.
Now, if we were to escape from hell, using fantasy (religion) as a means, then we will be making the same mistake as the Japanese, and only creating the causes for our own future reimprisonment and torture. Perhaps one day we will fight back against the Japanese and torture them in return, in the name of God of course, and thus our future lives will be in hell, as we will be reborn as the suffering Japanese. And so the cycle goes on, the cycle of repeated birth and death, repeated rebirth as conquerers, then victims, then conquerers . . . and so on for ever.
So when asked "Kevin, you look like an intelligent chap - do you believe in Jesus Christ?". I will answer "God is all powerful. Christ is behind the Japanese invasion: now do you believe in Jesus Christ?" I will speak as though I am speaking to my own child . . . or my own self at a younger age.
Kevin
January 1, 1990
from:
Kevin Solway
4/69 Sandford St
St. Lucia, Qld, 4067Hello Dave,
I haven't heard from you for a while. Are you still at the same address?
I have typed up our previous letters, and they make interesting reading when seen as a whole. However, I am missing a few of the letters I wrote to you before 16-8-88 as I wasn't taking copies before then. Do you still have them?
They would help to improve the continuity of the dialogue. I will send you a copy of them in my next letter for you to make any adjustments to your letters if you wish, if you want to clarify certain points.
I thought the exchange might be helpful for someone who is on the path as the letters have the impact of being personalized. This form of writing seems to penetrate more deeply than impersonal philosophizing. It's up to you if you want others to read your letters. If you change them, it would be best not to do so too much as it might dilute their raw flavour, which is the greatest value of them, uncontrived.
I turn twenty nine this month, and I can feel myself losing some of that energy of youth. I am so scared about becoming complacent and starting to enjoy life. I have to continually read Kierkegaard and Nietzsche to generate appropriate disgust. It is so easy to forget how disgusting beauty and love really are.
The man of knowledge desires neither life nor happiness, how much less does he desire woman! I am Nature, how is it possible for me to receive either praise or blame? How could I possibly experience either life or death? How on earth could I be happy or suffer, succeed or fail?
If I am kicked off unemployment benefit, contract cancer and die a lingering and painful death . . . what is all this but the Heavenly bliss of Nature?
Kevin
Feburary 1, 1990
from:
David Quinn
50 Adelaide St
South Hobart, 7004Hello Kevin,
It sounds like an interesting idea, that of bringing our correspondence together into one package. It will be interesting to see how the dialogue developed, though I'm sure much of what I thought and wrote back then, I would now regard as foolish. No matter.
Though my intellectual understanding of things is ever developing, I am still sitting on the fence in regards to the nitty-gritty of it all. Procrastination is such a powerful delusion, even though it seems as though much of my putting off is seemingly against my will. I think the delusion is rooted in this idea of "merit" - a hang-over from my Christian upbringing. One does enough to soothe one's conscience, and one's conscience is soothed when one feels that enough merit has been accumulated - one is back in God's favour, until guilt indicates that one has fallen from grace, and so-on. Oh samsara!
I have become interested in this science of chaos, and hence would be interested in any pictures of fractals you might have, that I may borrow for a while.
In any case, I look forward to your next letter.
David.
Feburary 11, 1990
from:
Kevin Solway
38 Girraween Grove
Ashgrove, Qld 4067Dear Dave,
I may be moving shortly, so I've given you my parents address above. I have typed out all the letters but I haven't been able to get a printout yet, so I've enclosed an incomplete set.
Last night I went to a talk by the leader of the Ramakrishna movement; a "Mataji" something or other, or "Great Mother". A lot of what she said was reasonable enough. She believes in evolution, and that each one of us is God, and therefore beyond life and death. However, she also believes in literal reincarnation, planes of consciousness and so on.
I asked her which interpretation of reincarnation she believed in, the literal or the esoteric.
She didn't have any idea what I was talking about.
I said that consciousness was a part of the body, and therefore could not be separated from it.
She almost choked.
Later on I overheard her speaking to others in a tolerant tone of voice, saying "he has a different interpretation, that's O.K, it's just a different interpretation". This is the subject I wish to deal with in this letter: interpretation, and when interpretation is not interpretation.
Interpretations can be either true or false. And if an interpretation is false, then it is not really an interpretation at all, but a false construct. If a person were to make a false translation from another language, we would not say, "it's O.K, it's just a translation". No, we would say it is a piece of shoddy work!
However, modern man has banished true and false from his vocabulary. All he is interested in is his interpretation, which of course can never be wrong.
Their interpretation really means imagination. They build up a mental construct that seems to work, and they call it an "interpretation" or "a model of reality". But it is not a model of reality, nor does it comprise tools for dealing with reality; they have constructed an actual reality for themselves, independent of truth. Their interpretation is more than mere words, labels and concepts to provide a handle on reality; they have turned their back on reality and have fashioned their own private world out of those words and concepts.
To them, imagination is everything, their all. To them, it is what you see that is important, not what is actually there. If what you see is peace and love, then what you see is justified. They strive for purity and tranquillity, not truth. They are like the eccentric carpenter, who became obsessed with the beauty, precision and functionality of his tools, and completely forgot about the workpiece, in which was his livelihood.
Christians say there is a God. Buddhists say there is no God. Let's not beat around the bush, these positions are completely opposed to each other. Yet the wise men of today, who have gone beyond reason, or should I say who have abandoned reason, believe these two to be in harmony with each other. There is no limit to foolish imaginings. Not only do they imagine a false reality, but also imagine their reality to be harmonious with others!
I have more respect for a stone than I do for these people. A stone sits quietly where it is in reality and imagines nothing. Yet these fools have removed themselves so far from reality that not even a shard of light could penetrate their darkness. You could place a blazing sun before their eyes and they would claim innocence, so remote are they. I feel more comfortable sitting at a computer keyboard than talking to the men of today. At least the computer is receptive and has potential to learn.
I did a little programming last week, and had to do something called "typecasting". A real number (eg, 1.24) takes up six bytes of computer storage. However, I can refer to this same six bytes by a different name. I can call it an array of six bytes, and I can then get at each byte individually. A real number is not an array of six bytes, but what the real number refers to is the same as what the array refers to. Reals and arrays are called "types", and I have thus "cast" a different type onto the memory area referred to by the real. It is like pouring molten metal into one mould, and then pouring it into a different one. The metal remains the same, how it interacts with us changes.
This is how we should operate in all matters. "Types" or categories exist only for convenience, and we cast them onto the underlying substance in order to deal with it. However, the men of today are under the control of types, and are cast around by them. This is the opposite of typecasting and could be called "castingtype"? They know nothing of any underlying substance, only their God - types.
It is amusing to see the outcome of those whose lives are controlled by types. For example, our Mataji believes in The One and also in individual self-existence and reincarnation. She can see no contradiction! This is because while her mind is full of one construct there is no room for any other, so she is unaware of anything but the world she is in. Then, at a moments notice, she replaces this construct for another one, and again can only see this new world she is in, and not the contradiction with the one she has just left.
This is indeed entertaining for an observer. I am reminded of the child, who when asked what he wanted to be when he grew up, said "Either a soldier or a priest". He likewise saw no contradiction.
I had a short discussion with our Mataji, which revolved around 2 differences. She said that consciousness is infinite and immortal, whilst the body dies. I said that the body is infinite and immortal, and consciousness doesn't exist. One sign of wisdom is a freedom to swap terms around, and do a little typecasting: she couldn't do it.
We also differed regarding matter. She said that matter was really energy, but that matter can be seen, while energy cannot. I said that if matter was energy, and I can see matter, then I can see energy. She said no, how can you see kinetic energy? For example, when I lift this cup it gains potential, or kinetic energy. I said that if we couldn't see energy then we would never know of its existence. We can see energy through our conceptual (sixth) sense, if not by the other five. She was completely stumped.
Once again, she had no freedom with her terms, so came to grief. There is no problem with her words; the problem lies entirely with what she means by them. Her words do not refer to the underlying substance, but are caught up in a rigid mental construct that cannot accommodate the natural world.
Then she went on to say that the body is like a layer, inside which is the soul, but that the soul is not separate from the body. For example, an onion has many layers, and the outer layer is part of the same onion as the inner parts. This is her construct for trying to reconcile her idea of "The two" with "The One".
I said I agreed, and continued saying that as the outer and inner layers are interdependent, then when the outer layers die, so too will the inner layers, no longer having protection from the elements. Therefore I said when the body dies, consciousness dies also.
Now, having had her idea of "The two" undermined, she automatically switched back to again assert the immortality of consciousness, and the mortality of the body, and even appealed to the authority of scripture!
I despise these wretched clever ones, who run before you can pin them down. My argument is of no service to her, so she blatantly ignores it. This proves to me once again that they value utility alone, and truth means nothing to them. Or rather, to them, utility means truth. When I disproved the idea that consciousness was separate from the body she saw it as being of no use, and therefore untrue. Utility in this case means matching with the scriptures. If they can match their ideas with what they perceive in the scriptures they feel they have the support of God. My words find no match in the scriptures, so they are of no use, and therefore not true.
I once described Christian priests as cannibals, for they live by eating the man who died for them. So do all these clever wise ones make a slovenly meal of spiritual offerings. A precious gift was left for their children, yet they greedily took it as their own, and left the young bereft.
Excuse me, but I feel eloquent today.
Hear from you soon,
Kevin
P.S.
I have just listened to the Sunday night religious program on ABC radio, which you may have also heard. They had representatives of Siddhi yoga, Transcendental meditation and Zen Buddhism, and what a load of tripe it was!
There was much talk of "the centre", "the inner self", "the source", happiness, stress, peace and contentment. But not once did I hear of truth and wisdom. And they all agreed with one another! What a marvelous world we live in, when we can all agree on the same deception.
They all made the same mistake that the psychologist made which you mentioned in a previous letter. They have confused the stillness and magic of samadhi with spirituality. They have confused mental clarity and dexterity with goodness.
The woman representing TM said that this mental clarity can be used to discover ultimate reality. Sure, it can be, but who would risk losing their new found peace in search of an unnecessary and possibly unreachable thing? Nobody desires truth, this is what is lacking - bodhicitta.
They do not even have an intellectual understanding of reality. They have some starting concepts perhaps, but without bodhicitta to pick them up and run with them, they are going nowhere.
March, 1990
from:
David Quinn
15 Clarke Ave
Battery Pt,Hobart Tas 7004
Hello Kevin
Have you moved yet? I've moved to Battery Point and live in a small bathroom. It is literally a bathroom, or perhaps, it is a tiny flat with a shower in the middle of the living room! In any case, the rent is cheap.
Each time I pick up the pen to write you a letter, I run out of things to say. Or, should I say, most of the things that come to mind would be superfluous to discuss with you. I've barely done any writing over the last couple of months and so am out of practice. This is just a short note to maintain an unbroken contact. I have many ideas to discuss, but at present I'd prefer to let them revolve around my head for a while. When my pen starts flowing perhaps you will get a rather long letter!
David
P.S. Yes, the letters make great reading. I think they indicate very well what it actually means to live a philosophic life. Like Kierkegaard's writings, they present the true scale of things, or at least, they indicate the strength of seriousness required to make philosophic progress.
2nd April, 1990
from:
Kevin Solway
71 Gladstone Rd
Highgate HillQLD 4101
It is said that if you have not yet reached the level of the irreversible bodhisattva (8th bhumi) then you should avoid women, as they can still fall in love with you. How well I know it!
All it takes is a glance, a glint of the eye, and you are found out. This is why I have always said: never look at a woman, because she might look back!
The problem is not so much the looking, but the mode of the looking, the looking too long, the intention of the looking. The ego has its unresolved attachments, or emotions, and is always on the look-out to attend to them.
The irreversible bodhisattva still has delusions, but he can control them the very instant they arise, before they grow, so he stops himself before looking to a woman's face for signs of affection, and for signs of his impact. No woman could love such a man, so he is doubly safe!
Not so I! By now you have gathered my plight. I am safe from most women, but there is always that one . . . that one whom you hope never to meet . . . that one who seems not to be human at all, but your own self, yes, out there!, beckoning, appealing to you. Moreover, you are plunged into doubt as to whether she is a wayward part of yourself, or you of she.
I went to Chenrezig last week, and there was this apparition, a woman I believe, whom I glanced at one moment too long. Over the next few days, before I departed, her face went through the phases of struggle, then love, and then torture. And how did I notice? How wretched I am, I looked!
How I pray I will soon reach the stage of the irreversible bodhisattva! How I pray!, if not in this life, then in the next. Then, having reached a place of safety, I can halt the growth of my own attachments, as well as her's, effectively controlling my future lives.
And while I departed Chenrezig I did not depart from her, for she pains me even now, as a burning ember in my mind. It is not enough to be unmoved by a lovely woman; one must be safe from that exceptional one. It is she alone who offers paradise and the illusion of perfection, so it is from she alone one must guard.
It is a matter of arranging one's priorities correctly, so as to avoid the dilemma of being able to resist everything except temptation. Mere sun lotion will not save you from a bullet, but armour will stop bullets and the sun also. Better still, become a ghost!
This woman is my own daughter and responsibility - how can I be an example to her if I look into her eyes with searching emotional need in my own? How will she become a Buddha if I behave in such a way? Where is my faith? What happened to my purpose? How can I, with a true mind, see such a woman as any different to a tree or a rock, reflected in all perfection as in a mirror.
And quite apart from her physical form, how can I see her thoughts and feelings as objects of value, and of desire, when their roots, and their being, pervade All. How can I even dream of love and satisfaction when All is love and satisfaction.
What must the bodhisattva surmount? He must surmount love. Most of all he must surmount love of himself, lest he see himself in others!
What could possibly have caused me to fall into this pit? Just a few romantic thoughts over the previous weeks, an ear bent to a song of love, a few dreams of love - and we all know dreams come true.
So I still have much work to do, and I'll just continue doing my best - what matter if I fail? Better to have fought and lost than to have never fought at all.
What is on your mind? Have you met anyone with potential?
Kevin
8th May, 1990
from:
David Quinn
15 Clarke Ave
Battery PtHobart 7004
Hello Kevin,
Your last letter was the best of your writings I've seen thus far. Bodhicitta shone forth in all its terrifying glory - you are going all the way, you madman!
But alas, your warning has fallen on deaf ears. Beware of woman you said - and I've gone out and involved myself with a woman!
The apostle Paul says it is better to marry than to burn. In my case it is: better to marry than to cave in inwardly! Violence, self-deception, ignorance, and bullshit - these are the characteristics of much of my last three years. Some things that I attempted were not only unnatural, but were harmful to my development. It was a case of trying to do things in the wrong order.
How my intellect got hooked to your ideas! And how I danced to your tune! It was only a matter of imitation, I told myself - I can change. Formerly I was this; by habit I can change into that! And how true this still is; but not by force - my past lives will not allow a conformity to another's way, even if this otherhappens to be a witness to the Truth.
Intellectually speaking, I am going from strength to strength. But, as usual, it is my emotions which are slower to catch up. Thus, when I rejected woman in the past, it was done purely from the distance of logic. Tracey was easy to renounce. Her feminine delusions were strong enough to enable me to break away on the raft of disgust alone - at least my new woman has the decency to conceal her's. Logic however, is but fluff to the tide of emotions, and when I stepped out into the cold I got engulfed in a glacier!
My disgust with woman was not complete, I didn't understand them properly, too many doubts stole my reason. Pah! I'd never even began to think through the consequences of rejecting woman. No wonder I collapsed immediately - I hadn't realized that the rejection of her meant her society's rejection of me!
And so I've stepped back inside for a while, so that my emotions can prepare themselves properly for the next attempt - what am I saying? - for the first attempt!
Please note: in no way in the world have I admitted defeat!
The reason for my slow reply is not only shame, but also I've waited to send some essays I'm working on, in response to your enquiry about what's on my mind, but they are not finished yet. I'm doing a trilogy of essays on women:
"An Examination of Woman", "Woman, Religion, and Mother", and "A Critique of the Independent Woman". They should all tie together under one essential theme: the role of woman in the preservation of society. As it is all coming together, they either have the potential for greatness or fizzleness. In any case, I hope to send you a copy shortly.
My anti-social ways do not permit me to meet many people, and those I do meet are generally women (of both sexes). I have had the displeasure of meeting this "new" breed of independent woman - and so have first-hand knowledge of them.
What strikes me is the influence these women have over men, and consequently the enormous amount of woman that exists in the thinking of men.
It seems that wherever I go, seemingly widely differing disciplines - physics, philosophy, and Christianity, for instance - are in some sort of hidden conspiracy: for the promotion of the New Age (woops! woman's) philosophy!
Hasn't academic philosophy done enough damage! - Christianity would have died out decades ago if this incessant mental masturbation of philosophy hadn't kept on reviving it!
How's this for example: The universe must have had a First Cause. And why? Because otherwise there would have to have been an infinite series of events for the present to be reached. But since the present is here, and since an infinite series of events can never be gotten through, the universe must have had a First Cause! Marvelous! Whilst these learned men are busy attacking the fictitious concept of infinity, Christianity breathes a hearty sigh of relief!
Or look at the way academic philosophy restricts itself, nay, imprisons itself, in the meanderings of determinism and free-will! It can't conceive of any alternatives - namely, the logical implications of hard determinism, that is, Truth - but instead gives substance to each of these opposites, declares the whole problem unsolvable, and retires to the more fruitful discussion of who will get the next chair!
When I compare my thoughts with theirs, and see that my reason is superior to both the philosophers and the scientists, my immediate reaction is not one of pride, but rather the observation of how well these brilliant men disguise their dishonesty! - for I well know how much I conceal my own.
David
P.S.
Can you give me another discussion on altered states? - but this time without the Buddhist terminology. I have no idea what a "still mind" is, for example, - or "one-pointed concentration". How does the altered state relate to our brain? Is it related to infant consciousness? My feeling is that altered states will be something to speak out against in the future, especially as the New Age seems to be replacing Christianity.
14th May, 1990
from:
Kevin Solway
71 Gladstone Rd
Highgate HillQld 4101
Dear Dave,
Your taking refuge within the familiarity of the emotions is not so much a lapse from Truth, as an inevitability. You mentioned in a previous letter that your ego still held out hope for a worldly heaven, in the shape of one special kind of woman. The rest is history.
I remember you once told me that you had never really suffered in life. Well, you can't say that now! You say that some of what you attempted was harmful; but I wonder if in the end it will have done you more good than harm. Sometimes the best way to learn is the hard way.
Logic is indeed but fluff to the tide of emotions; but faith in logic evaporates emotions into nothingness. My own faith is not perfect, and I too burn because of woman. But for me, the burning is not too unbearable to live with (or die with more probably). I bless my past lives that although I still struggle, my love of Truth seems more central to me than my love of woman. Thus my solitude expresses a love of Truth rather than a disgust with delusion. And while disgust is a great virtue, love is greater still, for it comes when disgust has run its full course.
Even more than this, I find myself without any love at all. I become like an infant, who is ignorant of the whole gamut of man, woman, love and sex. My face becomes like the moon, still, cool, and reflective. Not giving out, but not holding back either. I see the world around me as a mystery. At such times a woman may pour her love onto and into me, but I can do nothing but watch it run off me as if it were water.
This is not to say I do not suffer from memories! - ghosts seem to weigh more heavily on consciousness than do living people.
A young boy cannot grow a beard, no matter how he tries. But in his late teens the beard grows of its own accord. It is just a matter of hanging-in there.
Something too can be learned from what new agers call "creative visualization". If you can genuinely see, or visualize yourself, in your mind's eye, doing something you wish to do, then it will very likely come to pass. I would add that if on the other hand you can't for the life of you visualize yourself doing a particular thing, it will definitely not come to pass.
In your case, you could see yourself falling for a particular kind of woman - and lo and behold - it materialized! And you couldn't see yourself in the position of being hated by all society - again, lo and behold! Such is our karma.
In response to your request, I will try to rephrase my thoughts regarding altered states of consciousness.
I must make it absolutely clear that the only thing of any importance at all is truth. All else is useless. If a person speaks the truth they earn my praise; otherwise I scorn them.
The mind that speaks the truth is definitely an altered state. In fact, all states of mind are altered states, though some are more altered than others. The kind of states we are concerned with here are the still, clean-clear, reflective, powerful mind states. In such a state the mind is like a candle flame when there is not the smallest breath of wind - motionless and smooth.
The new agers know all about this - but what do they know of truth?
There is no denying the powers of these altered states as far as confidence, mental sharpness, intuition and physical health are concerned. But again, what of truth? If our friends of the new age used such a mind as a stepping stone to truth, then well and good, but to them the altered state is a destination.
To develop a deep love of truth is not an easy task. One can only love truth in fullness and purity when one sees the truth in all its fullness and purity. And how does one see the truth in all its fullness and purity? One does so by freeing the mind of agitations (which buffet it) and dullness (which takes the edge off it), and then directing the mind, with all its (now) unrestrained power, towards truth.
The mental vision of the eternal is a great joy; but even this is paled by the feeling of eternity. And a great joy indeed is needed to out-joy the joy of woman.
New agers attain the clean-clear-still mind by merely concentrating their thoughts away from disturbing ideas and feelings. In contrast, the sage attains it by going directly for truth. The one is spiritual, the other is pitiful.
But how can one strive for truth, if one has an untruthful mind?: One sets out in the direction of truth, with a sure stride and never a backwards glance. This leads to mental clarity. Mental clarity illuminates more truth, which in turn forces more mental clarity, and so on. It is like loves flood-tide sweeping over the banks in surging waves.
Hope to hear from you soon,
Kevin
May 29, 1990
from:
Kevin Solway
71 Gladstone Rd
Highgate Hill, 4101Further to your questions regarding altered states of consciousness:
How does it relate to our brain?:
I find it useful to picture the mind as a jungle of mental pathways. When many concerns and fears are playing on the mind all these pathways get clogged-up with traffic - none of which knows where it is going. The mind is as good as useless in such a state, as it is not able to make the free and easy mental associations which constitute 90% of its illuminating power. Thus the jumbled mind has no creativity, no imagery, no lateral thinking, no intuition, and no memory.
But if the countless concerns can be layed to rest, all the unnecessary traffic disappears. The roads of the mind are left free and wide for the specialized traffic which should be using them.
There are two ways of clearing away all the unwanted traffic: either one can concentrate the mind away from unpleasant subjects, or one can destroy all delusions outright.
Is the altered state related to infant consciousness?
An infant experiences the unhindered clean-clear mind because the jamming traffic is still under construction. So, you could say there are three different forms of the clean-clear altered state of consciousness. Only one of which concerns us.
Over the next couple of months I will try to complete "Poison words from the heart". Well, as complete as it's going to be for now. If you have any gems of wisdom, or powerful images that alter the mind, or crystallized thoughts on the new age, then send them up and I'll try to incorporate them.
Overall the book has shaped-up as a condemnation of the feminine. Modern science and the theory of relativity have shot man's (feeble) faith in rationality to provide absolute truths. Reality has imposed on his dreams and undermined the ideals which sustained him. Thus he has fallen back on his feminine resources. This is where women step in, for they know all about being women, and are all too keen to lend a helping hand - or a well placed boot.
But I have not written against the feminine just because the new age (the woman's age) is upon us. The feminine is the eternal enemy of reason, and this woman's age only highlights the fact.
All for now,
Kevin
P.S. Looking forward to receiving your essays.
June 15, 1990
from:
David Quinn
15 Clarke Ave
Battery PtTas, 7004
Hell