(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

If you’re reading this, you are likely in your 20s, or remember them — or maybe a friend or loved one is going through these trying years (in which you try this, then you try that).  Every decade has its challenges, of course: the childhood illnesses and dependence of the first decade; then the teenage years . . .

Here, I offer some thoughts on those post-college years from 21 to 30, because few people are given a map or instruction booklet to navigate this important time of life.

Many of us in our mid-20s look back on college (or high school) with a certain nostalgia. Because the School Years provide clearly defined (academic) goals: we go to class and study, play some, get decent grades and life is pretty good (except for relationship issues). Outside of classes (and maybe sports), it’s all flex time. We have rights, privileges, options, and relatively few responsibilities. The realities of finances (income and expenditures) are handled (with parental help, loans, and/or part-time work).

After college, those of us who planned ahead (I didn’t) postponed their confrontation with the Real World by travel and/or going to graduate or professional school, then sliding (hopefully) into good-paying work in medicine, law, business, or even staying in the academic world.

But most of us — once we leave campus — we run headlong into the Big Question of the 20s: NOW WHAT? We confront the challenge of the 20s like those who learn to swim by jumping into the deep end and flailing for a while through temp jobs and internships. Maybe we settle into something safe and not-too-challenging — if only it paid well enough. . .

This is all part of the process. LIFE IS AN EXPERIMENT. Just as you have to “kiss some frogs before you find your prince/ss,” 20-somethings often have to discover what you don’t want to do before you find what you do want to do (at least for a while). It’s called learning from experience.

Maybe you’re one of the lucky ones who sit in deep meditation and voila! You have a vision and see your life-plan. For most of us, that isn’t the case. Even those of us who go straight to grad school and end up a doctor or lawyer may later make a change. (I know one lawyer who later became a top chiropractor, and another who became a university swimming coach.)

Which brings me to the primary message of this piece: The 20s represent an extremely useful and positive opportunity for self-discovery. Because in order to find a form of service - call it job, career or calling - most suitable to your interests, talents and values, you have to discover who you are and what you want. You have to confront self-doubt and to challenge yourself. It may involve going back to school, or learning to live on a frugal budget for a while, or taking on loans, dealing with credit card debt.

This is the entry decade, a foundation-building decade — a time of moving from the blind optimism and “I can do anything” to a more thoughtful and reflective, “I can do some things better than others - let me explore myself and my potential in this area.”

Lily Tomlin once said, “I always wanted to be somebody . . . maybe I should have been more specific.” It takes time to find out who we are and what we want. Meantime - explore and experiment. You’re not supposed to know it all just yet. Gain insight and experience and wisdom; learn as you go. And on this foundation you will build your life.

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

Most bloggers and op-ed pundits comment about current events that capture our attention before passing into memory. I experienced an urge to do the same, after someone asked if I would express my views on the tragedy at Virginia Tech.

There are many excellent articles exploring what happened and why: The Sunday, April 22 New York Times front page article is a good summary and commentary. On page 76 of Time Magazine (April 30 issue) the writer offers an insightful, provocative “why.”

In order to express a “peaceful warrior’s perspective” about this event, I don’t need a microscope or X-ray machine, but rather, a mountain top - that place I go to gain perspective, and see any event in a larger context. Whether we are discussing the shock, grief, and reactions to the events around 9/11, or the most recent tragedy that has captured our collective attention, it may be helpful to consider the bigger picture.

Even as the friends, classmates, an loved ones grieve and reel from this gaping wound in their lives, we can and must view this tragedy as one of many occurring worldwide, even now - along with other acts of kindness, altruism and heroism. Even as some people die, other lives begin as newborns take their first breath and cry out, “I am!”

Thus, the cycles of grieving and celebration that are human life go on and on.

There is an old Chinese curse that goes, “May you be born in interesting times.” I grieve and celebrate with you. In America and around the world we continue our schooling and our evolution. This is neither a time for blind idealism or depressive cynicism. Rather, events of the day call us to wake up, pay attention, roll up our sleeves and do what we can in our own lives, in our families, cities, and nations, as we continue up the mountain path (stumbling and falling and rising again).

For those who tend toward paranoia and conspiracy theories, I offer a favorite (and I think prophetic) quotation by Mark Twain (or it may have been H L Mencken): “Never attribute to malice what can best be explained by stupidity.”

We need to understand that most politicians and public servants have more knowledge than wisdom, and are in many ways as lost and struggling as the rest of us, trying to solve issues of the day and make things better (however they define ‘better’).

Our power to influence the world is limited, but the power to change ourselves and be a positive influence among family, friends, colleagues is within us even now. That power resides in this moment, in the actions we take, in the question, “What will I do now?” Let’s continue to think globally, and act locally, doing good where we can.

In the face of all the news that compels me to do otherwise, I do my best to maintain both my sense of perspective and sense of compassion. I encourage you to do the same.

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

In the political arena, we meet both idealists and realists (as well as idealogs and cynics). Some people enthusiastically engage the political process, with hope-springing eternal (like a new baseball season) that the next Democrat, or Republican, or Independent, or woman, or person of color, or “bold new visionary” will finally turn the tide toward a wiser, more enlightened leadership and new priorities (that is, more like our own).

It is always possible, and important to engage the best process we have at present. However, a part of me views it as arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. That’s why I’m a short-term pessimist, but long-term optimist. Eventually, we will get the message. But what is that message?

Einstein once said, “Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them.” Changing politicians works at that same level of awareness. I’d like to suggest a warrior’s way to peace:

When humanity (or a sufficient portion of people) recognizes that we are all in this together; that we are in a real sense one human family; cells on a living creature we call “Planet Earth” — when that vision becomes obvious truth, we will realize that we are all the same body, and one religion or nation or tribe or gang or family fighting one another is like the heart fighting the brain or the arm at war with the leg. It is not only “unenlightened,” it is INSANE.

Within this currently-insane theater of life, with its twisted priorities, spending billions on weapons of destruction and a pittance for our own children (and their teachers), we have soldiers sent by theorists and power-players to fight for “truth, justice, freedom, and national interest.” Like our tongue destroying our eyes for “liberty.” We have a ways to evolve before this vision of One Humanity prevails.

Meanwhile, in the real world, predators and sociopaths (like Hussein and his sons) do exist — criminal elements to destroy and control (using religion or whatever rationale they chose). And we must, in this real world, stop and remove such destructive elements. (I am not a complete idealist.) Head in the clouds, feet on the ground. Peaceful heart, warrior spirit.

It has been said that there are only two kinds of people: the decent and the indecent. There are millions of good and decent Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, men and women of every culture and nation. We need to take a stand together. Let us divide people not by religion or cultural or ethnic identity, but whether they are decent or indecent.

Meantime, let us turn our priorities (and money) to supporting, helping, healing rather than more weapons of destruction. It has to start somewhere — with that vision of oneness. The best way to get rid of an enemy is to make them our friend. This is not always possible, but we can try.

We will know when we are awakening to this vision of Humanity as One Body when we shift from competitive to collaborative thinking. But that’s a topic for a future time.

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

Try the following creative and whimsical activity, because creativity and whimsy can relax your minds and uplift your spirit. The following link allows you, for a few minutes, to become a creative painter in the mode of Jackson Pollock.

At the link below, each time you click your mouse you’ll paint a different color. After you finish your creative session, you may notice how your busy, discursive mind slipped away as you go into the “zone,” an artistic trance-state enjoyed by artists, athletes, and performers of every kind, immersed in the act of creation, in the moment. There is no pass or fail here, no right or wrong. Do it your way.

Maybe what you paint will be like a Rorschach ink blot and come to represent something meaningful to you; or your creation may be a visual image of your current emotions.

I have no further philosophical commentary or opinion. I just want to share something with you that I found worthwhile and fun — the same impulse that led to my writing and teaching work.

Enjoy!

http://www.jacksonpollock.org/

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

Dick Hoyt is be a name, and a father, I will long remember. And he may well deserve the title: Strongest Dad in the World . . .

Rick Reilly wrote the following piece In Sports Illustrated:

“I try to be a good father. Give my kids mulligans. Work nights to pay for their text messaging. Take them to swimsuit shoots. But compared with Dick Hoyt, I suck,” he said.

Whether or not you choose to read the entire piece below, check the following video on YouTube:

“Eighty-five times Hoyt has pushed his disabled son, Rick, 26.2 miles in marathons. Eight times he’s not only pushed him 26.2 miles in a wheelchair but also towed him 2.4 miles in a dinghy while swimming and pedaled him 112 miles in a seat on the handlebars — all in the same day.

“Dick has also pulled him cross-country skiing, taken him on his back mountain climbing and once hauled him across the U.S. on a bike.

“And what has Rick done for his father? Not much — except save his life.”

This love story began in Winchester , Mass. , 43 years ago, when Rick was strangled by the umbilical cord during birth, leaving him brain-damaged and unable to control his limbs. “He’ll be a vegetable the rest of his life,” Dick says doctors told him and his wife, Judy, when Rick was nine months old. “Put him in an institution.” But the Hoyts weren’t buying it. They noticed the way Rick’s eyes followed them around the room. When Rick was 11 they took him to the engineering department at Tufts University and asked if there was anything to help the boy communicate. “No way,” Dick says he was told. “There’s nothing going on in his brain.”

“Tell him a joke,” Dick countered. They did. Rick laughed. Turns out a lot was going on in his brain.

Rigged up with a computer that allowed him to control the cursor by touching a switch with the side of his head, Rick was finally able to communicate. First words? “Go Bruins!” And after a high school classmate was paralyzed in an accident and the school organized a charity run for him, Rick pecked out, “Dad, I want to do that.”

Yeah, right. How was Dick, a self-described “porker” who never ran more than a mile at a time, going to push his son five miles?

Still, he tried. “Then it was me who was handicapped,” Dick says. “I was sore for two weeks.”

That day changed Rick’s life. “Dad,” he typed, “when we were running, it felt like I wasn’t disabled anymore!”

And that sentence changed Dick’s life. He became obsessed with giving Rick that feeling as often as he could. He got into such hard-belly shape that he and Rick were ready to try the 1979 Boston Marathon.

“No way,” Dick was told by a race official. The Hoyts weren’t quite a single runner, and they weren’t quite a wheelchair competitor.

For a few years Dick and Rick just joined the massive field and ran anyway, then they found a way to get into the race officially:

In 1983 they ran another marathon so fast they made the qualifying time for Boston the following year.

Then somebody said, “Hey, Dick, why not a triathlon?”

How’s a guy who never learned to swim and hadn’t ridden a bike since he was six going to haul his 110-pound kid through a triathlon?

Still, Dick tried. Now they’ve done 212 triathlons, including four grueling 15-hour Ironmans in Hawaii . It must be a buzzkill to be a 25-year-old stud getting passed by an old guy towing a grown man in a dinghy, don’t you think? Hey, Dick, why not see how you’d do on your own?

“No way,” he says. Dick does it purely for “the awesome feeling” he gets seeing Rick with a cantaloupe smile as they run, swim and ride together.

This year, at ages 65 and 43, Dick and Rick finished their 24th Boston Marathon , in 5,083rd place out of more than 20,000 starters.

Their best time? Two hours, 40 minutes in 1992 — only 35 minutes off the world record, which, in case you don’t keep track of these things, happens to be held by a guy who was not pushing another man in a wheelchair at the time.

“No question about it,” Rick types. “My dad is the Father of the Century.”

And Dick got something else out of all this too. Two years ago he had a mild heart attack during a race. Doctors found that one of his arteries was 95% clogged. “If you hadn’t been in such great shape,” one doctor told him, “you probably would’ve died 15 years ago.”

So, in a way, Dick and Rick saved each other’s life.

Rick, who has his own apartment (he gets home care) and works in Boston, and Dick, retired from the military and living in Holland , Mass., always find ways to be together. They give speeches around the country and compete in some backbreaking race every weekend, including this Father’s Day. That night, Rick will buy his dad dinner, but the thing he really wants to give him is a gift he can never buy.

“The thing I’d most like,” Rick types, “is that my dad sit in the chair and I push him once.”

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

Recently, a quotation by G.K. Chesterton caught my eye: The thing I hate about an argument is that it always interrupts a discussion.

I got to thinking about the difference between an argument and a discussion. I know the two are quite different, because Joy and I have gotten into some of both. (How about you?)

In a discussion, we carry on an objective dialogue about a subject — we explore a topic from different angles to learn or clarify something about it.

When we have an argument, we tend to identify with a particular position and proceed to defend that point of view and to attack or belittle someone else’s view.

When we identify with “our” position, we feel personally attacked by someone with a different opinion, and feel a need to defend ourselves. Such an approach inevitably ruffles feathers—people and groups may even resort to violence.

Opinions are like belly-buttons; everyone has them. They are like pies thrown by clowns in a food fight. No one owns ideas; they are just ideas. Perhaps you’ve seen the bumper sticker, “Everyone is entitled to my opinion.”

Maybe you remember the story about the wise Mullah Nasrudin, a Sufi sage and something of a rascal:

Nasrudin came upon a crowd of people gathered around two men who were arguing fiercely, each with his opposing view. Stepping into the center of the crowd, Nasrudin said to one combatant, “What’s your side of the story?” Whereupon the man told him. “Well you’re quite right,” said Nasrudin. “Wait a minute!” said the other combatant. “You haven’t heard my side yet!” So Nasrudin heard him out as well, and responded, “Hmmm – I’d have to say that you’re right.” “But Mullah,” cried one of the spectators. “They can’t both be right!” Mullah considered this for a moment, before scratching his head and saying, “Well, I suppose you’re right.”

We’re all “right” from our own perspectives, and few of us have much success convincing someone else that they are wrong.

When we discuss we are working together to clarify an issue, and to learn and to share. It is a cooperative, collaborative venture, and draws us closer. It’s a win-win.

When we argue, we are competing, jockying for position, to be “right.” It is a competitive venture, and pulls us apart.

When we argue with one another, we have become like fundamentalists, who mistake our belief for Truth. We view ourselves as separate — self and other — we compete and fight for our own interests over the “other.” Such arguments happen in families, among neighbors, groups, and nations. Wars are arguments gone mad.

When we are aware of our common humanity, there is only “us.” We can then collaborate to find mutually-beneficial solutions.

Some years ago, I learned that if I avoid the “diety mode” of language. For example, when I make a pronouncement like, “That movie is great” I’m playing God. And someone else can do the same by stating, “No it isn’t!” However, if I just say, “I loved that movie,” no one is going to argue, “No you didn’t!”

Often, using the verb “is” leads to argument. In contrast, “I” statements, in terms of “I believe,” or “I value” leads to discussions.

One of the most memorable quotation of the last century was uttered by media figure Rodney King, who said, “Can’t we all just learn to get along?”

A good question, indeed. For when we – as individuals and nations – begin to see others as part of our larger family, or even part of the same body of humanity, we will have more discussions (and fewer arguments) as we realize that it is fine and natural to have different views, beliefs, and ways — and that we’re all living and learning, all in this together. But perhaps I am an idealist. What do you think?

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

In some of my workshops I give participants the opportunity to break a board with their hand, karate style. It’s not an easy thing to do. As with much of life, it requres proper technique and a clear intention. It can be uncomfortable, smashing through limited self-concept, doubt and fear. Facing that board, people learn the meaning of commitment, which means no matter what.

And they learn other things, too, like how painful it is to almost succeed, to hit the board 99% hard enough to break . . . when just a little more force, commitment, focus would have made the difference.

Some aspiring authors submit their manuscript one draft too soon; some students take a test when just one more review of their notes – 15 minutes more — would have made a critical difference.

Directly below you’ll find a web link to a three-minute video that offers some reminders about giving it that little bit more, that extra degree . . .

http://www.212movie.com

Little things can make a big difference. So don’t worry about giving it “110 percent” or making heroic efforts. Just give one more push-up, one more try, moment, degree.

Life is not about success or winning . . . it’s about excellence — about doing our best no matter what the activity. That, and one small step beyond. Maybe that extra effort takes the form of a kind word or act when we’re not feeling like it. That small act that may turn around someone’s life, or make their day, or at least change the quality of the moment.

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

While still a youth, some years ago, I avoided hugging whenever possible, even at obligatory family gatherings, preferring a firm handshake. I wasn’t yet old enough to even think about what circumstance might transpire before I would hug a . . . girl. And hugging other boys? Forget about it!

It wasn’t until some years later that I learned to enjoy the openness of embracing loved ones and friends (male or female).

There are certainly different kinds of hugs – as many as there are kinds of kisses. It’s all about intention. From culture to culture, the hug is a form of connection, affirmation, affection, greeting, farewell. There are hugs and kisses, hot clinches and just friendly pats on the back. There are melding hugs and A-Frames, quick hugs and hugs that linger long enough to take a deep sigh… and some of us hug trees.

I quite enjoy hugging, these days – except for certain occasions, as when I’m sitting at a table and signing books, because one hug leads to another and there are still books to sign and people waiting, so huggers have to wait at the end of the line.

Hugs are, most of the time, a non-sexual way of joining, of becoming one, of giving and receiving, if only for a few moments.

Some among us, for reasons of their own, remain uncomfortable with hugging — especially with members of the opposite (or same) gender, and are quick to reach out and offer a handshake ranging from the tepid fingertip hold to iron grasp (at a distance).

To hug or not to hug? Each of us has the right to define our own boundaries in this arena. For some, hugging requires a leap of faith, and act of courage.

Not long ago, someone conducted a daring experiment with hugs, offering them for free. Click here to see a short YouTube video to find out what happened. Then go out and hug someone.

(Crossposted from www.danmillman.com)

Some weeks ago, a young man wrote to us, declaring, “In six months I’m going to have three million dollars, the woman of my dreams, and a beautiful house – because I’ve seen . . . The Secret!

The Secret, for those of you who haven’t yet heard, has become an internet phenomenon. It began as an Australian television production featuring a number of well-known authors and pundits, speaking about the “Law of Attraction.” This law says that we attract or manifest into our lives what we think about or focus on or earnestly desire.

As fate would have it, the producers, in a stroke of foresight, ended up delivering this 90-minute program via internet. One can go to the web site, watch a dramatic teaser, sign up, pay a mere $4.95, and download the program to watch to one’s heart’s content — to learn “The Secret.”

I’m not surprised by the popularity of this program. Magical thinking has huge appeal for many – especially when it intersects with ideas from quantum physics and metaphysical science.

In this respectful critique, I’m going to first express what I genuinely like about the program:

I find much of the program up-beat, good hearted, encouraging. It also has excellent production values, cinematography, effects, and sound. And the editing is excellent. I’m especially impressed by the cutting-edge method of delivery — internet streaming — ushering in a new era of movies on demand with the click of a mouse.

I also like the message that what we bring into our lives begins with a vision, a longed-for aspiration — a good reminder for those of us who haven’t yet stretched the wings of possibility and allowed ourselves to embrace higher possibilities. If The Secret opens the way to expanded dreams, it serves a useful purpose.

What concerns me, however, are the program’s primary suppositions. The message, repeated in different words by the various guests, is that if we simply intend and visualize and dream big enough, we can “manifest” all our dreams — effortlessly, magically, mystically.

However, this “Law of Attraction” does not, in my view, qualify as a law at all. In my book, The Laws of Spirit, I present twelve spiritual laws (including, to name a few, the laws of balance, choices, process, faith . . . action, surrender, and unity) — laws which apply consistently and universally to everyday life. This quality of consistency is essential to any law, and differentiates it from proverbs, principles, or aphorisms, which may or may not apply. In other words, a law works every time here on Earth, much like the law of gravity.

In any case, this “Law of Attraction,” as taught many decades ago by metaphysicians like Catherine Ponder and others, is certainly a positive and expansive idea. But dreams, desires and visions are only the beginning — they must be followed by focused effort over time – something barely mentioned in the “Secret” production.

Thomas Edison wrote, “We often miss opportunity because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.” It has the ring of truth, doesn’t it? But suggesting that we need to work hard over time to achieve our goals doesn’t sell well. It isn’t sexy or fascinating, or sound much like a “Secret.” Common sense rarely does.

In “The Secret,” we personally witness a little boy who wishes and hopes for a bicycle—he thinks about it, visualizes a bike, cuts out pictures from a magazine. And lo and behold, one day he opens a door and there is his new bike! Personally, I would have been more drawn to see him walking a paper route, or doing chores to earn some money, or at least asking his parents directly for a special Christmas gift. Which reminds me of a story I relate in Living on Purpose:

Louie goes to church every Sunday and prays to God, “Dear Lord, I’ve been a good and devout man for many years, living according to your Laws, doing acts of charity, serving the poor, supporting my family. So please, please, let me win the lottery just once!” He repeats this plea every week for years, but his entreaties go unanswered. So Louie starts to pray to win the lottery every night and every day. Until one day, he hears a voice thunder down from the heavens: “Louie, will you at least go half-way with me and buy a ticket?”

That’s all I’m suggesting — a simple point ignored by “The Secret” — go to the effort to buy a ticket. Or as an Arabic sage once said, “Trust in God . . . but tie your camel.”

So if you wish to be successful, dream big, but start small — then connect the dots. In other words, start with a vision, then take baby steps. Neither dreaming nor wishing nor magical secrets get the laundry done.

The biggest issue I have with programs like The Secret (or other idealistic notions such as learning “positive thinking”) is that when their magical methods don’t work, we end up believing that it’s our fault, our lack, our fault. We believe that if we had truly deserved it, or really applied ourselves, or focused more intently, or visualized more clearly with a sincere heart, surely it would have worked.

The Secret, then, with its lovely and uplifting promise, is a foolproof supposition: If we don’t heal, manifest, get what we want, it’s due to our own lack of faith.

Or maybe it’s because we forgot the “taking action” part . . .

There are some successful people who claim to have mastered “The Secret” and who have manifested their dreams and desires. Few of them tell us about their years of struggle and labor and preparation.

By all means strive in the direction of your dreams! Visualize a grand life! Then get to work. While we cannot control the outcomes, we can control our efforts. And by making the effort, we increase the odds of creating a larger life.

I close with my warmest wishes, and with a reminder from Henry David Thoreau: “If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost. Now put foundations under them.”

You might also enjoy the following link to a short You Tube commentary on “The Secret” from an Advaita Vedanta perspective:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXdsDxYnGkI

As a post-script, both for those who mistakenly believe that I support the message of “The Secret,” and also for those who believe I’m being unjustly critical, I offer another articulate blogger’s comments about “The Secret”.