I waited a long time before showing the letter to Meghan. I never really concealed it from her, for I thought such a thing was dishonest. However, as such did not ask me the meaning of the pages which I kept with my few personal belongings, I did not explain them. The very fact that the creative act is such an encounter between two poles is what makes it so hard to study. It is easy enough to find the subjective pole, the person, but it is much harder to define the objective pole, the “World” or “reality.” Since my emphasis, here is on the encounter itself, I shall not worry too much at the moment about such definitions. In his Poetry and Experience, Archibald MacLeish uses the most universal terms possible for the two poles of the encounters: “Being and Non-being.” He quotes a Chinese poet: “We poets struggle with Non-being to force it to yield Being. We knock upon silence for an answering music.” “Consider what this means,” MacLeish ruminates. The ‘Being’ which the poem is to contain derive from ‘Non-being,’ not from the poet. And the ‘music’ which the poem is to own comes not from us who make the poem but from the silence; comes in answer to out knock. The verbs are eloquent: ‘struggle.’ ‘force,’ ‘knock.’ #RandolphHarris 1 of 8

The poet’s labor is to struggle with the meaninglessness and silence of the World until one can force it to mean; until one can make the silence answer and the Non-being be. It is a labor which undertakes to ‘know’ the World not by exegesis or demonstration or proofs but directly, as a being knows apple in the mouth. This is beautifully expressed antidote to our common assumption that the subjective projection is all that occurs in the creative act, and a reminder of the inescapable mystery that surrounds the creative process. The vision of the artist or the poet is the intermediate determinant between the subject (the person) and the objective pole (the World-waiting-to-be). It will be non-being until the poet’s struggle brings forth an answering meaning. The greatness of a poem or a painting is not that it portrays the thing observed or experienced, but that it portrays the artist’s or the poet’s vision cued off by his encounter with the reality. Hence the poem or the painting is unique, original, never to be duplicated. No matter how many times Monet returned to paint the cathedral at Rouen, each canvas was a new painting expressing a new vision. Here we must guard against one of the most serious errors in the psychoanalytic interpretation of creativity. #RandolphHarris 2 of 8

This is the attempt to find something within the individual which is then projected onto the work of art, or some early experience which is transferred to the canvas or written into the poem. Obviously, early experiences play exceedingly important roles in determining how artists will encounter their World. However, these subjective data can never explain the encounter itself. Even in the cases of abstract artists, where the process of painting seems most subjective, the relationship between being and non-being is certainly present and may be sparked by the artist’s encountering the brilliant colors n the palette or the inviting rough whiteness of the canvas. Painters have described the excitement of this moment: it seems like a re-enactment of the creation story, with being suddenly becoming alive and possessing a vitality of its own. Mark Tobey fills his canvases with elliptical, calligraphic lines, beautiful whirls that seem at first glance to be completely abstract and to come from nowhere at all except his own subjective musing. However, I shall never forget how struck I was, on visiting Tobey’s studio one day, to see strewn around books on astronomy and photographs of the Milky Way. I knew them that Tobey experiences the movement of the stars and the solar constellations as the external pole of his encounter. #RandolphHarris 3 of 8

The receptivity of the artist must never be confused with passivity. Receptivity is the artist’s holding him- or herself alive and open to hear what being may speak. Such receptivity requires a nimbleness, a find-honed sensitivity in order to let one’s self be the vehicle of whatever vision may emerge. It is the opposite of the authoritarian demands impelled by will power. I am quite aware of all the jokes that appear in The New Yorker and elsewhere showing the artist sitting disconsolately in front of the easel, brush in passive hand, waiting for the inspiration to come. However, an artist’s waiting, funny as it may look in cartoons, is not to be confused with laziness or passivity. It requires a high degree of attention, as when a diver is poised on the end of the springboard, not jumping but holding one’s muscles in sensitive balance for the right second. It is an active listening, keyed to hear the answer, alert to see whatever can be glimpsed when the vision or the words do come. It is a waiting for the birthing process to begin to move in its own organic time. It is necessary that the artist have this sense of timing, that he or she respect these periods of receptivity as part of the mystery of creativity and creation. Pythagoras divided his students into two classes, the probationers and the mathematicians. However, the latter term signified more to him than it means to us. For him it meant those devoted to advanced thinking and it embraced those who studied philosophy and science as well as mathematics. #RandolphHarris 4 of 8

For Pythagoras regarded the rational disciple as essential to the higher quests. We are told that Jesus was a man of sorrows. However, he was not also a man of joys? The joy of bearing a divine message, the joy of brining light into a darkened World, and the joy of helping beings find their own soul. If Jesus wept over the folly of cities, he was also glad over the Presence and Providence of God. If he was a man of sorrow at some times, he was also a man of joy at all times. For the sorrow was merely transient, outward, superficial, and for others whereas the joy was everlasting, inward, deep, and one’s own. No being can come into the Father’s kingdom, as he came, without feeling its happiness and enjoying ecstasy. Sokrates used to listen to an inner voice, his daimon, warning him against false decisions. While so doing, he would sink into deep prayer where he would commune with the divine in order to receive the power to instruct beings in Truth. Sokrates possessed an absolutely original intellect; he took nothing for granted but probed and penetrated into every subject which came under discussion. He struck out a new path in the philosophy of his time and so well was it made that it can still be trodden today with profit. It is a fact that Jesus wrote nothing and that he never asked his apostles to write anything. Why? #RandolphHarris 5 of 8

What Jesus has to give directly or through his apostles was no message to or argument with the intellect. It was an evocation of the intuition. It has to be transferred to each being physically. The benign figure and still meditative face of Gautama, sitting in one’s thrice-folded yellow garment and penetrating into the deep secret chambers of mind, offers an inspiring spectable. The solid strength and paradisiac stabilized in one’s person have helped millions of people in the Asiatic lands. Yet there were fateful moments when Gautama refused to appear in public to tell others what he knew, when the peaceful life of utter anonymity was his reasoned preference. The path to illumination—the longer the road, the loftier is the attainment, and only those who take the time and trouble to traverse the whole length of the way may expect to gain all the fruits. One who stops part of the way may only expect to gain part of the result. Jesus inspired his immediate disciples with something of his own spiritual vitality. We are all built by Nature in different ways: no two palms, no two thumbprints, no two persons are exactly alike. He seekers are to be found at different levels and are attracted by different approaches according to their different intellectual development, emotional temperaments, moral capacities, and intuitional sensitivity. #RandolphHarris 6 of 8

The uniqueness of each person is emphasized by the differences which separate one from one’s fellows. In one’s search for Truth one may have progressed through orthodox Christianity, Christian Science, and Spiritualism—but, eventually, the Quest will lead one away from limited, organized public approaches, and bring one to the unrestricted freedom of the Presence of the Overself Other movements, such as those mentioned, may be useful to beginners; but when some progress has been made, the path necessarily opens onto the Quest where it becomes unlimited, individual, and private. All of us have to travel in the same board direction If we would rise from the lower to the higher grades of being. However, the way in which we shall travel the Way is essentially a personal one. All of us must obey its general rules, but no two seekers can apply them precisely alike. Again and again one observes that the technique, exercise, method, or rule which brings good results for one person fails to do so for another. It is absurd to make a single uniform prescription and expect all persons to get a single uniform result from it. What has been done here is to give some of the best ones and let each reader find out what suits one most, not what suits one’s friend or another reader most. “And God also declared unto prophets, by his own mouth, that Christ should come,” reports Moroni 7.23. #RandolphHarris 7 of 8

Each being is unique so each must be unique too. Everyone must find, in the end, one’s own path through one’s own life. All attempts to copy someone else, however reputed will fail to lead one to self-realization although they may advance one to a certain point. Each seeker must find out one’s own path, one’s own technique for one’ self. Who else has the right or the capacity to do it for one? We prefer to follow the creative rather than the compulsive way, to help beings find their own way rather than force them to travel our way. And this can only be done by starting with the roots, with the idea they hold, and the attitudes which dominate them. There are too many differences in individual aspirants to follow a broad general technique to suit them all. A guide who can give a personal prescription is helpful, but even in one’s absence the aspirant can intelligently put together the fragments which will best help one. Let one walk forward slowly or quickly, as suits one best, and also in one’s own way, again as suits one’s individuality which one has fashioned through the reincarnations to its present image and from which one has to begin and proceed father. There are not only widely different stages of evolutionary growth for every human being but also widely different types of human beings within each stage. Hence a single technique cannot possibly cover the spiritual needs of all humanity. The seeker should find the one that suits one’s natural aptitude as one should find the teacher who is most in inward affinity with them. #RandolphHarris 8 of 8