Bus rides, the mind, rationality and sustainability

Here is a thread about sustainability from an email conversation.
Although some of it is a re-write of earlier posts, in retrospect, I find it to be a good summary.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Aalhad Saraf wrote:
Dear G. san,

Here are some thoughts on the sustainability thread -

Words are vehicles. So is rationality. So is thought. It is possible to never see the map but just keep going from one place to another. It is possible to never know where to board and where to get off. Skill is needed. (just what this skill means is another big discussion)

A few years ago - when I first hit upon the concept of un-sustainability while trying to define wealth http://aalhadsaraf.blogspot.com/2008/05/story-of-one-rupee-coin-true-cost-and.html I happened to meet a 90 year old ayurvedacarya from the varkari sampradaaya http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varkari, in a RSS meeting that I was invited to - and we were discussing careers that kids should' pursue. I talked about the story of the one rupee coin then ... and the 90 year old was infuriated at my casual view of 'economics' - (which did not surprise me, I have often found RSS people to have an unusual fondness for picking fights and being angered by things.) However, his last remark stayed with me for some time - he said 'You are clever, and you have interesting ideas ... I quite like them ... however, almost everything you know, you will discover ... is wrong.'

The next year showed me just how far the vehicle of thought and rationality and words can take us ... and the magnitude to which I was mistaken when I was thinking about sustainability, wealth and the world in general. Think cosmic makeover :)

Most of what we can comprehend / see using the senses/rationality cannot be really verified 'objectively'. (we are a bit like sprites in Doom II not being able to get the architecture of processor or the OS.)

The earth as we see it, 'is not'. It is a principle. sookshma. what we see is a sthoola roopa.

I remember the RSS ayurvedacarya saying - 'You overestimate human role without understanding the architecture of what is'. I have since gradually come to comprehend what that might mean. Another thing he said was 'What do you know of the power of mother earth, beyond what your books have taught you ... and you know not where they come from ... or from what your senses tell you ... She has the power to nurture you infinitely, no matter what you do ... 'you' - if such a thing is there, are inconsequential, yet this you cannot comprehend. If you 'think' you are 'hurting' her, you are 'hurting' your'self' ... and make no mistake, you will cause pain ... but please do not talk confidently about what you do not understand.'

God as we 'know' or 'talk' or write about ... even in the sacred scriptures 'is not'. The Yoga Vasishtha (which is perhaps the last book I studied seriously before I hit the end of 'words') also has an incident where Vasistha tells Rama ... 'What are the Gods that you talk about but a mental construct ... ' (I highly recommend this to you if you haven't read it yet - you will even come across discussions about the non-linearity of time) This is one version I found on amazon - http://www.amazon.com/Concise-Yoga-Vasistha-Swami-Venkatesananda/dp/087395954X

My model of the mind was radically altered in the months that followed.
I am perhaps like a ripple in a field. Without any individual existence. (many scriptures mention this - but I had no experience, nor any concrete context) Like a node of a massively parallel machine (that is how you and I can see the same things in the same room) or perhaps even just the bits of code running on the node (DNA, other less 'sustainable' memes...) or perhaps not even that.

This is a snippet from a mail I sent to aai, dada and some close friends ...

I have seen the Mind.
Imagine an ocean ... massive, without end, on a dark night with a full moon.

The wind still. The silence perfect.
Now see the entire ocean turning up, vertical, into a massive wall ...
like a tsunami ...
you are surfing a foot away from this wall, and the wall stretches out up to infinity.
dark roaring water. massive.
And this is only an approximation of what it feels like.
It is this force that creates everything you see around you now.

The sun. The moon. Your Gods.

The very screen you are now reading this on.

If I die soon, I will have died after seeing the greatest spectacle possible on earth. The mind. There is nothing else left for me to see ... even if I climb on top of Mount Everest, I will be unstirred. Everything ordinary around me IS the freakin miracle.

Okay ... now, again, about sustainability ... it is one of those dual-memes. http://aalhadsaraf.blogspot.com/2008/12/dual-meme-transcendence.html

Everything has a time-stamp. A yogi can see it - and perhaps alter it.
(A good engineer is a yogi to some extent that he creates some memes that sustain for a certain amount of time.)

Some provocations - why do you want things to be sustainable? Isn't unsustainability a natural phenomenon? Everything perishes, right? So, just why did our race become enamored with this particular dual-meme? Why not enjoy the unsustainability? (it is easy to see beyond these questions) What is the DESIRE that drives the NECESSITY of sustainability? and where the hell does that DESIRE come from?

Dual-memes are interesting ... all religions are based upon strong dual memes. Right-wrong, pure-impure ... and so on. religion = thing that holds together. A study of the principles of religion-creation is very relevant to having a deep understanding of sustainability. For sustainability is a side-effect of religion.
http://aalhadsaraf.blogspot.com/2008/06/you-may-think-that-im-im-religious.html

Deep exploration of any meme associated closely with religion is likely to yield significant insights into sustainability. Take desire for instance. In 2004 or so, I found myself asking myself - what is the point in studying electronics or math ... some other fancy models of reality ... if one were to study Desire Engineering ... learn to focus desire to a laser sharp point in oneself and later in others, it would be possible to achieve ANYTHING (or even otherwise, that it is much more 'important' than physics or algo analysis ... I noticed this once again in 2006 during a thought-session, when I was given the responsibility for maintaining the 'technical vitality' of a group of people in IBM, i.e. ensuring that they maintain a state where they file patents and write papers ... and again in 2007 when I saw that everything visible... every single thing is a manifestation
of a desire. There is nothing necessary. NOTHING IS NECESSARY. Necessity is ALWAYS predicated upon desire. (I tried some experiments with minimal living in 2004 to try and figure out just what is the minimum 'necessity' for existence - independent of desire. outcome - existence itself is based on desire, the desire to exist. (who has that desire, or where it comes from - is next step in the architecture series :-D but that is not very easily expressible in words or thought - for these tools are then useless.)


Now - dual-memes are necessary for motion, or for anything to happen at all. (+ -)

Un-sustainability is one side of a dual-meme.
To create sustainability - one must transcend this dual-meme.
People who are bothered by sustainability (rajas-tamas?) or are ignorant of it (tamas) will perhaps not be able to effect such/much change.(even if they want to/is 'necessary')

(This brings to mind something I read somewhere - an advert. for a class on yoga by an Indian teacher in the US - had a picture of a jaTaa-dhaari orange-clad hermit standing in a one-legged pose on a surfboard in the sea. The caption read - we can't stop the waves, but we can sure teach you to surf!)

This is where yoga comes in - and the reason why I urged you to read the Sutras. (Even the Yoga-sutras, their outermost form being clad in words, have their limits, but the words are where I had to begin.)

PaanDitya or the pursuit of knowledge has a limit, easily reached.It is not very effective. It seems easier for a yogi to do something about sustainability than a pandit.

Standard disclaimer applies:
Caveat Lector. All Words are Lies to some extent of the other on the
Index of Reality.
:-D

Mail reply from G. san,
Interesting what happens when you cross the boundaries of reason and logic and get into the domain of faith?? Are our senses limiting us in the number of dimensions we can perceive around us? Is the method of reason and logic self limiting? Interesting proposition by Aalhad...is going to take time, if ever to sift through...
The eternal conundrum.... Great job...
I am sure Laurie the acerbic lawyer has a lot to say on this...
That the method of reason and logic limits many a mind from going beyond .. Or is it the argument of those who cannot cast their thoughts in the logical framework.. The eternal conundrum...

Cheers G.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Aalhad Saraf wrote:
Dear G. san,
thanks for the reply.

no no ... no faith required ;)
is reason and logic self-limiting ... :-P the moment you 'define' something, you have laid down the limits to what it is 'not'.

see ... words are perhaps fairly useless (or useful (same thing!) - i.e. they may be used towards achieving an end - given an end). they may be used to do anything you want - like a tool. but they are inefficient at modeling reality. (the mind has tried in other parts to create other languages like math - but that again is a model.) A model has limits. Because it is 'defined'.

What I have experienced is that 'argument' is a fairly inefficient method for the discovery of reality or truth. (what those methods are ... is another long story :) )

Words are like a fairly utilitarian tool. Great for altering mental data structures - but even then deeper levels of language exist -
http://kanjinotes.blogspot.com/2009/01/words-leaves-of-thought.html

Do not blindly have FAITH in the methods of reason or the church of Words, test them. ;) but you cannot test them - for your methods for testing them are defined by the beliefs and systems themselves. Modeling reality - rather modeling reality completely is a wicked problem to crack.

The logical framework (THE logical framework?) (the language guys... the pandits ... 'philosophy'... the upanishads...) is a vehicle. A tool. A yogi will have the skill to know where to get on and get off each vehicle - for otherwise - the 'conundrum' is eternal - hell, you have designed it to be so. The 'Why' has no final answer - it's a language feature very well suited for showing you the limits of the tool :-D
http://aalhadsaraf.blogspot.com/2008/07/unanswerable-why-and-mistaking.html

A body of thought that talks about 'knowability' must also perhaps define these entry and exit points - without which you are being taken for a ride - without knowing where to, for an unknown fee ;) And maybe you could pick a quarrel or get into all kinds of trouble for insisting that your ticket IS not a ticket, not the map, but the design document for this world. ;)

So would the 'conundrum' between logic-faith seem to be a 'conundrum' only to the people who are confusing their tickets for the design documents of the World(TM).

Philosophy as expressed through words has easily visible limits - axioms, and the methods for defining those axioms. I mean, come on - if you define the limits of what is knowable and how you add to your 'body of knowledge' ... there is 'limit' written all over the place :)

So even if modelng reality is a wicked problem - meanwhile, we humble humans have several utilitarian models and modeling strategies and vehicles ... the entry and exit points if known, one may skilfully travel towards addressing and then transcending a given dual-meme (rich-poor, terrorism-peace, sustainable-unsustainable). IMHO ... yoga is the most pragmatic vehicle I have seen so far. Wherever I see sustainability, I also see a yogi. (no faith required.)
:-D

Who's the beggar?

There was a discussion somewhere some months ago about beggars ....

here is some ugly hip hop I made up ;) .....


The world is a perpetual beggar.
the stomach when fed,
does not stop,
nor do the ears, the eyes or that
mind on top
MORE MORE MORE till the fella goes POP
reached a high, beg for a taller ladder, don't DROP
have enough, want more,
got it, then store!
work for love? that's a bore.
you're POOR, you beggar
salary raise, more money, more marks
you're not just any beggar
okay don't be sore,
but ... you... you don't just beg,
you whore.

not pretty. but the next time you see a beggar on the street look at yourself carefully to see how much of your own self, mind and body constantly begs for more. And who is the greater beggar.



Yeah, this was about the time when I used to really dislike words then.
Because they can be used to any effect. (Law and Lawyers)
However they are very, very bad at modeling reality.

the story of a one rupee coin ... true cost ... and why I am not a financial analyst.

True cost.
What is the true cost of me working in a large company ?
My salary ? My time ? My health ?

Suppose I earn just one rupee a day. Just one coin.
Now I spend that coin on buying what I like, or on a cause that I think is worthwhile - say I feel that people who write and search for knowledge and truth should be supported. So I buy good books. With that one rupee coin. That same one rupee coin now goes to the fellow who wrote that book. What does he do - he does a similar thing. Say, he likes music - he buys a CD with that one
rupee. The same coin - the same one rupee coin moves a million times. Everybody gets what they want. And thus wealth is created. So says economics. Money moves. People get what they want. Everybody is rich. WAIT. One coin moves a million times.

One million things are made. consumed. production and consumption. A million times - the raw material is .... the earth?

energy that comes from the sun? The earth is a largely sustainable meme complex by itself. But one coin moving around a million times introduces changes a million times in that meme complex .... changes which people like you and me, people who

create technology and consume it can only begin to faintly comprehend ... the earth is not INTEREST. It is CAPITAL. (If at all it can be talked about in such simple words.) So ... do we SPEND CAPITAL in order to become wealthy, or do we re-invest a part of the interest (if there is such a thing) back into the capital and consume the rest, and in this case - CAN WE ? wicked loop ? yes?
just one rupee moving around a million times!
For a moment ... forget the ecological implications and the wealth creation aspect.
Say ... I spend one rupee on buying books (or something that you currently deem worthwhile) and then, say the next one million minus one people use that coin to gamble, smoke, drink ... or basically on destroying sustainable memes
(because I CURRENTLY feel that one of the best ways to be human is to participate in and create sustainable meme patterns and complexes - fight entropy (and a new child is just the default apex of what we are hard coded to 'create' ... an anti-entropy genetic construct, a family is the social anti-entropy construct ... and so on) ... but my mental model seems to be constantly refined and altered. And the edge ... the END of what thought as a system is capable of doing, as a tool is capable of creating is almost visible... that is another story)
so ... then what is the true ethical cost of moving one rupee through the 'market' a million times ?

It is possible to consider this as an academic question, and it is possible to be HIT IN THE CEREBRAL GUT by it.

In my case it was the latter.
And ... I closed my CFA books.

A subconscious understanding of the above was the reason I asked girls who wanted to marry me in the year 2005 - 'Will you be okay with the idea of us living only on say a couple of thousand rupees a month?' Most of them gave me funny looks - if this fellow can and probably is earning close to 30 or 40 times that amount ... why would he think of this! :)

We truly no longer know the true cost of anything. And neither do we really know what we really need. :) So ... shinier, stronger, bigger, faster ? more, more, more ? WHAT ? WHY ? The greatest of corporations, the best of our scientists don't seem to have an answer to what we SHOULD need. In the absence of that answer, they just compromise and seem to accept the easier convergent problems. Dangerous. Even more dangerous - they persuade everyone that the problems that they work on - the convergent ones - amenable to the tools of technology and science and rationality are the MOST IMPORTANT problems, and people who don't become scientists or engineers are generally not intelligent (this at least, seems to be the case in my hometown in Pune, India ... and all the most refined brains are sucked in by the Engineering profession)

This post is history. Last year. I have some answers to the difficult questions posed now. Not very easily expressible through words. Words are too mechanical.

If you don't 'get' me - you will call my words 'psychobabble'.

(ever wonder WHY many things speak louder than words? MUSIC ? and silence ? and silence backed with LOVE - even louder? Actually there are even more powerful methods of meme transfer than words and direct action. Parable that comes to mind -
when Ramana Maharshi was asked by a person - 'Why do you live here in the Arunachala mountains - when you could be down in the villages DOING SOMETHING!' - and he replied something to the effect of 'What in HEAVENS name makes you think that direct action is the most effective method of creating change, and what makes you think it is necessary!!!!')

the (near) end of my reading habit ...

A couple of years ago ... a question occurred to me ... is any of my thoughts an entirely original thought, or is it primarily a result of everything that I have read from childhood ? Is anything I think my own ? Can it ever be ? If the human mind is a system that is programmed by what the senses are exposed to i.e. DATA, and that in turn plays a major role not only in determining the limits of perception in the future, but also what actions are undertaken by the human body - i.e. if DATA is interpreted as CODE ... then what degree of security do we have. And should one allow oneself to be programmed by -any- book (or experience!) at all, even the Bhagvad Geeta or the Patanjali Yoga Sutras for that matter! If 'buddhi' is also programmed or colored if you will, by sensory input then we are not just full of buffers waiting to be overflowed but we are a system with a completely exposed code area that anyone can write to. (I have since discovered that it IS possible to find a mechanism that is not affected by I/O ... but that is another story)

Seemed scary.

This led me to seek answers to fundamental questions about the nature of information, and the human mind.

When I hit the limits of language as we know it - I needed to work then at another level and saw that I had nothing more to read!

Why I lost my belief in words ... and how I (almost) ended my reading habit

God. When I talk with you and use the word 'God' - I have many different memes associated with that word in my mind. And -- you -- probably have a set of other, different memes in your mind. And both of us probably are not in sync with what we 'think' is 'real'. Forget what 'IS' real. Why God - even plain words like, say -- 'western culture', when used by enough people, result in a large amount of what can best be called verbal delusion or 'vikalpa' (shabda-dnyaanaanupaati vastushoonyo vikalpahaa - Patanjali yoga sutras, Samadhi paada.)

Examine any language closely, and you will slowly realize that all words are mere pointers to reality. No wonder that ancient sanskrit grammarians recognized and studied languages and grammars -- nay, not just that but whole levels or media of communication more powerful than written and spoken language. For instance - 'paraa', 'pashyanti', 'madhyamaa' ...

Examine any language you know closely, and you will also see laws analogous to Newtons laws of motion or the laws of thermodynamics ... hell, meaning seems subject to entropy as well.

When I realized this, the first thing that struck me was, it is impossible to follow the 'yama' or rule of 'satya' or truth; if I speak or use 'common' language, so to speak. If the very nature of the language I know is untruth, how can I ever claim to be truthful!

All words are lies (and so are these! ... see the loop... beautiful, but a limitation in a tool that attempts to describe reality accurately.) So words seem to me now like シャボン玉　－soap bubbles blown by children. Beautiful, ethereal, temporal ... but not very good as tools for accurately describing reality - a use case most often attributed to languages.

So ... the end of language as I knew it.
This is from my notebook - from about a year ago.