The letter between Everett & Christopher Ruess. Everett asks questions and his father reply back in a letter.
1. Is service the true end of life? No, but rather happiness through service. Only as we play our part, as a part of the whole, aware of the interrelationedness, do we really and fully live. You and I are like the right hand or the right eye or the big toe-we are grotesque when living apart.
2. Can a strong mind maintain independence and strength if it is not rooted in material independence?
Yes, as many great souls prove. They were not independent. Dependence and independence are alike harmful to the best life. No dependent or independent man can play a high part in life-but only the interdependent man. Great souls today have issued a Declaration of Human Interdependence.
3. Do all things follow the attainment of Truth? No, not unless you create a new definition of the truth. It takes all three "ideas of the reason" to define the whole of culture or to define God. He whose life is exclusively devoted to Truth, or to Goodness, or to Beauty, is a very fractional man. This age is in trouble because it has exaggerated truth-it is lopsided. There is no ultimate conflict when all three are stressed and, as Aristotle says, we "...see life sanely and see it whole."
4. Is bodily love empty or to be forgotten? No, it is a part of life. It is not all of life. I don't see that it should ever be outgrown, but it changes form; it begins animal and always remains healthily animal, but it's refined and sublimated.
5. Can one ask too much of life? Yes, many do. We should have faith in life, in cause and effect, in action and reaction. We owe much more to the past than any one of us can give to the present or to the future. It is not for us to play highway robber and hold up life. The great souls probably never ask such a question. But the greatest givers have got most from life, whether Jesus or Edison.
6. Does life have infinite potentialities? Yes, so far as we can conceive infinity. Certainly incalculable, immeasurable is the contribution and joy open to you or to me. As Tagore says, Life is immense.
7. Must pain spring from pleasure? Not always. Not equal pain from equal pleasure. Psychologically, we seem to know pleasure largely by contrast and contrast seems necessary for our minds to make distinctions. No black, no white. No high, no low.
8. Are pain and pleasure equally desirable and necessary? They are both good for us if we have the will to extract the sweet from the bitter. NO one need seek pain, he will get plenty without searching. He need not seek pleasure, he will get more if he gets it indirectly. He needs rather to go his way regardless of both pain and pleasure. Pleasure is perhaps the wrong word-joy or ecstacy may be better. Ecstacy is the highest of this family of words. IT means such happiness that we literally seem to stand outside of ourselves in exaltation.
9. Is pleasure right for all, but selfish for one? There is no sin or wrong in pleasure except it be at the cost of another soul or life, to aggrandize ourselves by the degradation of another. Selfishness is not evil, it is good, but it must be the larger and not the narrower selfishness. A man's real self includes his parents, his wife, and children, his friends, and neighbors, his countrymen, all his fellowmen. He should be selfish both at the center and at the circumference, selfish for all. I doubt that there is a real conflict, but there is a harmony. It is not beautiful for a man to sacrifice himself for his child and thus spoil his child. Parents who do not practice give and take, fairness, in this relation make pigs and tyrants out of their children. These children are not being brought up to face reality, are they?
10.Can one be happy while others are miserable? Yes, a callous man can have a callous happiness. But a noble man cannot be nobly happy while others are miserable. In that sense a man like Jesus never except for moments of rest and retreat can be happy, for he had compassion upon the multitude. Great lovers have a happiness higher than our ordinary happiness. There is a happiness in identification of oneself with others, in bearing their burdens, even their sins. Great souls are not worried much about happiness. "Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?" Jesus and Socrates and Lincoln were not constantly concerned about heir pleasure or their happiness.
11. Can one be fine without great sacrifice? Not the finest. For such a one has been spared great experience. Such a one has not really lived. He has just played at life. Yet he need not be maimed by sacrifice to know reality. Sacrifice is in quality as well as quantity. Sacrifice may be so great as to amputate life and may be silly or futile. There is sacrifice and sacrifice. One need not be sadist or masochist; neither are sound persons.
12. Can one make great sacrifices without submerging oneself? yes, wives of many great men, mothers of great sons, teachers of leaders, have found their lives by losing their lives. "He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it," says Jesus. You would now begin to find great things for your opening soul in a good modern version of the Gospels. Get one and read it slowly like any other book, and receptively. A seed fulfills itself by losing itself in the ground. So did the men at Thermopylae.
13. Should one submerge oneself in sacrifice? That depends. Not for the sake of sacrifice, that would be masochism. He that loseth his life for my sake, said Jesus, shall find it. So says the Great Idea or the Grand Old Cause at any time. A man should follow the gleam. He should be wise, not a fool, but a mam must sometimes be a fool for the glory of God. There are no better words in which to express the thought.
14.Does not one serve most by doing what one does best? Yes, if the world needs that or can use that service. On the other hand, it may be selfish, where it is done to please oneself solely, without regard to the needs of one's time or one's fellows. As to art, beauty, the world always needs that, but it flourishes best when one is part of a world that has found itself and is going somewhere, when art is the expression of the time.
15. Is it possible to be truly unselfish? No, because even Jesus fed his ego: a man who dies for a cause does express himself,achieve his goal, perhaps. God does not ask unselfishness in an absurd sense. Asceticism and self-mortification, and all that sort of thing, are abnormal attitudes. A man must be first a healthy animal. Then he must be more than an animal, too. He must be a human.
16. Is there any fulfillment that endures as such, besides death? I doubt if death fulfills. It seems to end but I doubt that it ends much. Not one's influence or the influence of one's work. Perhaps even the echoes of your voice may go on forever. Some instrument might pick them up years or ages hence. beauty is an ultimate fulfillment, as is Goodness, as is Truth. These are ends in themselves, and are for the sake of life. Many things are worthwhile that are not enduring. Eternity is just made of todays. Glorify the hour.
17. Is there anything perpetual besides change? Yes, the tendency to change, to unroll or evolve, and possibly the direction of change. The fact, is so, that things hold together, make sense, is perpetual. Why should we object to change? Maybe it is the essence of life.
18. Is passage from the sensual to the intellectual to the spiritual a correct progression of growth, and if so, should that growth be hastened? Why not live in all three at the same time? Why such sharp demarcations? A house has a foundation, a first story, and a second story. Why not all three at the same time? "Nor flesh helps spirit more now than spirit flesh," or the like, is a saying of Browning's. The Greeks separated flesh and spirit. We moderns tend not to do so, but to respect all parts of creation, each in its place.
ow you tell me, where did you get all these mind-twisters anyway? Love, Father (Dec. 1933)