limits of freedom

EKKENTROS FORUM

The Matter: Report of the proceedings of the discussion held on 23-10-07(Tuesday)
Venue: Residence of Prof. Mohanan Nair, ‘Sobhanam’, Thiruvangad, Tellicherry.
Coram: Seven members present. Dr.Thomas (on tour to Bangalore) and Sri T.Bhaskaran, (On visit to Gulf) could not attend.
Subject: Limits of Freedom
The report of the last discussion was accepted unanimously after a few corrections. After the Forum’s invocation the discussion on Limits of Freedom was initiated by Dr. Babu Ravindran. After fellowship and a sumptuous dinner hosted by Dr. Mrs Sobhana Mohanan Nair, the meeting dispersed at 10-30 PM

Dr. Babu Ravindran: What do you mean by freedom? It literally means being free of any sort of restraints. It is the liberty of the person from slavery, oppression or incarceration. It can also be political independence, enjoyment of civil rights, and exemption from any unpleasant or even onerous conditions.
All living beings are free to grow within the laws of nature. Any restriction of its activities would amount to limitation of freedom. That is why it is said that liberty is immortality; freedom is life itself; and slavery for Man is more terrifying than death.
Freedom can be classified into three categories, viz., 1.Physical 2. Mental and 3. Internal or spiritual.
Physical freedom is the absence of physical boundaries to move about, to eat, to talk, to dress, and to stay according one’s comforts. From early childhood children are brought up with guided/limited freedom. They are required to follow social customs, religious rituals and worship, although they are free to do so without interfering with the freedom of others.
Similarly mental freedom is the absence of mental boundaries. That would mean the absence of any sort of restrictions on one’s thoughts and emotions. But here too, it has to be without interfering with the freedom of others in their expressions.
These are the two concepts of freedom which are external and which are used in taking decisions in one’s journey through everyday life. But the question is whether such freedom is really available to us to chart out one’s own life. Is man free to do whatever he wants to do? Or is he simply a puppet in the hands of an unknown puppeteer? This question was once asked to a great master by his disciple. The master shouted at him, ‘raise up your one leg!’ he raised his right leg standing on his left. The master said, ‘that is not enough raise the left leg too.’ The man was perplexed. He was at a loss to understand and angry too. He said, sir, you must be mad. Instead of answering a philosophical question, you seem to be making fun of me. You first asked me to raise one leg, and I raised my right. Now you ask me to raise the other leg too. How can I raise both the legs together? The Master replied, ‘that is exactly the point. When I asked you to raise one leg, you had the choice to raise the right or the left leg. It was your choice to raise the right leg. Having chosen the right leg, you have no choice to choose the left. It was your freedom to choose that determined the fact of your bondage. Now your left leg is in bondage.
This is to show that Man is half free and half in bondage. The element of freedom and choice exist even within the concept of destiny. Will acts within the boundaries of destiny.
The freedoms that we discussed above are external. In the external freedom, although we seem to make our own choices, in reality, the decisions are all influenced by our sentiments, desires, and attachments, keeping us within bondage. All decisions are made at the behest of the ego. It is like the man who says that he is completely free to do anything so long as his wife approves of it.
True freedom, however, is internal. It is enlightenment, and is complete, the total absence of ego or false self. Wayne Dyer says, “Freedom is the ability to leave the single room of awareness you were born in. in that room you learned the limits of your life. Outside of that room you learn that your life has unlimited possibilities.
True freedom lets our individuality bloom, and helps us shed the personality. Personality is a created entity while individuality is in the internal realm, and inborn.
When a part of a machine is well lubricated or oiled, the engineer refers to it as being ‘free’, meaning that it has now little or no friction in movement. Similarly in true freedom, once the ego that causes friction is removed, the conscious mind becomes free and effortless. But such a freedom does not come to everybody, nor does it come easily. It requires a perfect and intense inclination.
But why should one need such freedom at all? Are we not happy and satisfied to be the sole proprietor of all that we have and all that we do? Therefore the question that we are confronted with is, whether it is an absolute freedom, a limited physical freedom, or a true freedom, unlimited and spiritual, that we actually need? I leave it for discussion.

Prof. Sankarankutty: When we talk about freedom, the first thing that comes to the mind is the political turmoil and political freedom. While freedom is synonymous with liberty, ‘freedom’ as such is a more general word. Liberty is clearly political. Freedom is an all-encompassing word covering freedom from all sorts of restrictions and limitations.
To some extent, nature has inbuilt freedom, a state of being in which something blooms spontaneously. When freedom is restricted, the blooming stops. As regards the freedom of the mind what comes to my memory are the words of Shakespeare uttered through Kent in his play, King Lear, “Freedom lives hence, and banishment is here”. Kent was banished, not for a right cause. Although banished physically, he was mentally free, and that was his real freedom.
Freedom in everyday life has its limitations. One can speak one’s mind freely, but one has to bear the consequences. One cannot use the freedom of speech without its restrictions. There are social norms to be followed. If a child does something wrong, he can be scolded by his parents. But if an adult does something wrong, one has to think twice before opening one’s mouth. In intimate moments especially we are not able to exercise our freedom of expression due to several other considerations. When you find somebody talking foolishly, you cannot tell him, ‘you are a fool’. It is not socially correct.
Prof. Mohanan Nair: Is it not cowardice not to say so?
Dr. Sadanandan: A patient is, say, terminally ill. Can you tell him, ‘you will die’?
Dr. Babu Ravindran: One is, of course, free to say, but circumstances restrict that freedom. What is at that time necessary to maintain harmony has to be done taking into account the feelings of the patient as well as that of others.
Prof.Sankarankutty: And sometimes your own interest is affected in exercising the freedom to tell the truth. Freedom is thus affected by self-interest, and therefore is a misnomer. When there is no self interest, and therefore there is nothing more to hide, one drinks hemlock like Socrates. We then face the darker areas of human behavior.
Dr. Babu Ravindran: Is absolute freedom necessary?
Prof. Sankarankutty: If you want harmony with life you need real freedom, not necessarily of the physical variety. In Christianity the concept of free will is there. It is the exercise of free will that created the fall of man. Use of free will in eating the forbidden apple did the damage. Without the consequences of one’s action, one cannot do anything.
Dr. Abdulla: You cannot define freedom as it is. Some feel freedom in the jail also. They are even more happy in jail than outside.
Prof.Sankarankutty: it is a mental condition, an attitude. Existentialists have examined the nature of freedom. The question is, ‘are you really free even when you feel free?’
Dr.Babu Ravindran: If you have more freedom, you have more responsibility. More the freedom, higher the responsibility in exercising it.
Prof. Sankarankutty: Consequences are on the other side of freedom. Philosophically speaking, the saying is apt here, ‘your freedom ends where my nose begins!’
Kunhikrishnan: Bertrand Russell said that a smoker and a non-smoker cannot have freedom in the same railway compartment.
Dr.Babu Ravindran: When there are two people, freedom is an adjustment in understanding.
Prof.Sankarankutty: Freedom is a profound relationship. But even that refers to physical freedom. The real philosophical dimension of freedom is spiritual, starting with the freedom from desires.
Prof. Mohanan Nair: If there are no laws to restrict freedom, society will collapse. Therefore there must be reasonable limits to freedom.
Prof.Richard Hay: The concepts on freedom change very fast. We have all seen the hippie movement. Their concept of freedom differed from that of society. I shall elaborate on this and other matters in my talk next time.
Prof.Sankarankutty: Society’s ideas on freedom and the restrictions to be imposed change rapidly. Democratic norms change. We find that socially gay marriages are allowed in some advanced countries. American culture is not only changing fast but also spreading fast.

Dr.Sadanandan: For the human being freedom is already limited from the time he is born. His body itself is his limitation. Man is in his prison comprised of his equipments, namely his body, his brain and his mind. Of course, he has his faculties; he has his brain cells giving him sensitivity, imagination and the whole consciousness, although all these are very limited. If he must have more freedom, his faculties, his consciousness has to expand. Naturally he is wondering whether it is possible for the consciousness to expand. The wondering man, therefore, desirous of more freedom, tries to correlate between the internal and external, his inside and outside, probing and understanding both in order to find out the means of expansion.
Can he expand and go above the limitations? But it is the very same brain which asks the question and tries to go beyond itself, beyond the restrictions. He finds that he cannot find more freedom with the same limited equipments, the limited faculties. And there is no external faculty which will take him away from this process, this movement. Therefore, in trying to move away from the limitation of the prison, there is no point outside of itself from where one can perceive the limitation. How can we then go beyond the limitation? To answer the question one has go beyond the process itself, beyond the process of thought...