One of the most cliched phrases is that failure teaches you a lot. One characteristic quality of cliches, apart from their obviousness (not to be misinterpreted with truism) is that though they are somewhat universal (both temporally and spatially), at an experiential level they are not universal and mold into the distinctness each person carries. Most of the stories which carry a lesson have very cliched endings – good beats evil, the sweetened fruit of patience etc. However, a similar ending/message does not make the story less ingenious.

Recently, I had one of the bigger failures I have ever been through. I am confused as to how to feel about it. My natural disposition does not allow me to instantaneously react to emotions. This is not about being able to express them or not but about getting a feel of them. What I feel right now is not grief or regret or disappointment, but a sense of disorientation with regards to the future course of action.

After my experience of Vipassana, I have come to believe feelings and emotions are a stupendous gateway to a better understanding of the self and by extension to a lot of universal phenomenon. These days, I always try and observe how a particular emotion or a blend of emotions traverse reactions in my head and affects my body. What happens when you are feeling ecstatic, how do you behave to it, what are the changes, how does your breathing respond to it. The same goes with feelings on the other side of the spectrum - sadness, grief, gloom etc. I try and take myself out and try and look for a third person view (intentionally not using second person) of all the transitions which come along with any experience.

In a conversation with a friend, I was asked how I cope with disappointments. Now, this was a subject I had given a thought earlier as well. I said I follow a two-fold method. I try and keep my expectations down when it comes to an external source turning out to be the reason of disappointment. The external source could be a person you were depending upon, a place you visited, a book you picked up etc. This has nothing to do with disbelieving people or not trusting them or not giving value to the book/place. It is more of understanding the real nature of things. It is about knowing that like it happens with you, people, places and objects too work on a spectrum. Sometimes it turns out be good, and sometimes bad. When it turns out to be bad, it shouldn’t be a reason for feeling hopeless. The second part of the deal is about disappointments with self, when you seek to achieve something and fall short. There I try and look at the big picture and remind myself of the reason and purpose for which I picked it up in the first place. If you still believe in the reason, you give it another chance. The big picture approach also helps you to realise the inconsequential nature of petty successes and failures with respect to the larger scheme of things.

In an article, on how artificial emotional intelligence works with inputs like “I feel sad”, two AI platforms were examined. The English-speaking US-developed Google Assistant responds by saying - I wish I had arms to give you a hug. The Russian-speaking Alisa developed by Russian search engine Yandex responds by saying - no one said life was about having fun all the time. This points to the two different ways emotions are responded to. One is, as the article mentions, emotional capitalism. Here, it is believed that sad feelings are rationally manageable and you deserve an emancipation out of them. It tells you, you are special and hence you deserve to be comforted. The other side, the Russian version of the account, which is termed as emotional socialism, believes suffering as unavoidable, and thus better taken with a clenched jaw rather than with a soft embrace. This, of what I know shares a lot with the Buddhist idea of an equanimous treatment of our emotions. I use this example because I don’t think any of the approach to human grief is wrong. Yes, for a period of time we need specialised comfort – a warm hug, a ear to thoughtfully listen to us venting out our frustration etc. But after that, you also need to hit reality and an understanding that you are not specifically wronged, rather its the nature of certain things with a higher ratio of risk involved.

In a recent discussion with another friend, we were conversing about what decides who/what you become. My friend told me, it was our choices and not our abilities or talents which decide our future course. When you want to choose something enthusiastically, abilities can be acquired or atleast managed with through hard work. I agreed. Although, on thinking on it more, I have come to realise that it is not just limited to the choices we make, it subsequently extends to how we decide to live with these choices that we make. Making difficult choices is not very brave, living with them is. Right choices never guarantee the deserved ends. They need living through them. And in living through them, there is an additional entity involved: you. The process of justifying a choice is not as unidimensional and straightforward as it seems in the beginning. The primary reason for that is the multidimensional nature of your personality – your fears, insecurities, ambitions – all piggyback you on your journey.

I will end with the story of a man who takes up a very idealistic cause. He puts in all that he could, doesn’t leave a stone unturned. However, it doesn’t end well and he fails miserably. Despondent and confused, he goes and sits besides his grandmother’s bed and says “kuch ho nahi paya” (nothing could come out of it). His grandmother, a woman who had given all her life fighting for justice, smiles, holds his hand and tells him “itna hi hota hai” (that is as good as it gets).

Addendum -

Marcus Aurelius is said to be always accompanied by a slave he had appointed for a very specific role. The role of this slave was to whisper in his ear “You’re just a man… just a man,” everytime Aurelius received a compliment. The idea was to keep Aurelius humble and in tune with reality.