Smart adults sometimes picture the world of a child  like
something  different,  full  of  a  lot    of    colors    and
interconnections to the extent of perception of reality as the
beyond,  lost  in  the  following  adult  life.  The  orthodox
pedagogic practice, on the contrary, considers a child  as  an
undeveloped adult, gaining more and  more  new  abilities  and
problems of life in a society.  Both points of view  are  more
than single angled.  I have kept in my memory the completeness
of a  child  perception,  thinking  and  conscious  and  often
noticed the existence of the same feelings both  for  children
and some adults with a good and complete memory
     The whole picture looks like this:
     Thinking in a childhood age is not developed strongly  as
a fact.
     By thinking I mean the ability  of  the  induct  and  the
deduct, the ability to create logic constructions and  attract
multifactor information from the memory -  this  is  all  that
characterizes the intellect.  In  my  opinion  even  the  most
developed  intellect  does  not  necessarily  mean   developed
conscious,  it  is  only  "numeric  abilities  and    skills",
something that can be modeled by computer.
     The child's perception is more whole and at the same time
variable, than what  it  becomes  further  on.  Besides,  from
looming images, more familiar to the  adults,  the  child  can
catch a number of alien  happenings  (the  phenomenon  of  the
beyond).  It is emphasized by stress factors, when fear in the
dark room appears.  Even not too sensitive child can  use  the
telepath very well, not by guessing concrete thoughts  but  by
intuitive forecast, that almost can't be noticed for the  lack
of distracted motivations.
     It's not difficult for me to revive now all  my  feelings
"photographed at the certain moment of  childhood  and  really
amazing things come up like complexes of colors-smells-sounds,
spaces filled with "auras" of nature,  streets,  psychological
states of people, relations between them and their attitude to
me.  At the same time in the very "focus" of child's  thinking
only a small schematic picture stays and this  scheme  reminds
of unstructured "framework" which draws through the perception
of an adult and ranges from weakly balanced between each other
"spots" and "ideas", which is so clearly visible on children's
drawings.
     I would like to draw two examples. I was 5 years old when
some time  in  the  evening  I  was  drawing  the  complex  of
figurines off a bronze ash tray. It was a wonderful process of
creative work, in my view I  made  a  perfect  copy  of  these
figurines, took some time  to  reach  perfection  and  then  I
decided  that  this  clarity  of  an    image    was    almost
photographical (I could see it without any "buts"), it  was  a
rare experience for me. My parents had guests at this time and
I went to show them my drawing. I was very happy with it and I
was filled with a feeling of  creative  harmony  and  at  that
particular moment I consciously was feeling  through  all  the
peculiarities  of  the  state  of  people  who  were   getting
acquainted to my drawing.  And I felt that they were seeing in
it something else, they didn't admire my  achievement  to  the
same extent, and that I was stroke by it.  My  perception  was
vaguely covered with something different, that didn't  distort
it and it wasn't wrong - just different.
     I've been relishing this drawing afterwards  through  and
through but each time I showed it to the adults sometimes  the
strange mix was appearing. When I finished my album and put it
off in the table under other ones, the  effect  was  forgotten
and I stumbled across  this  album  when  I  was  16  when  my
perception "matured".  The effect was amazing!  Instantly  the
same feeling that I had when I was 5 years  old  was  revived,
the ash tray with figurines was resting not far from the shelf
- and...  This was the most regular child's  drawing,  clumsy,
with terrible distortions.  But this  present  perception  was
mixed with my child's feeling, the seeing of the  drawing  and
that of the model. But it felt right too.
     Another example.  I  was  6  years  old  and  we  had  an
assignment in the kindergarten to draw a tree.  I had a  clear
idea of how  the  tree  was  created:  a  stem  with  branches
sprouting off it with  leaves  on  them.  I  was  consistently
drawing it - not the summit, but many, many leaves on branches
and clearly see that nonsense coming out of it, some sort of a
tree on  its  stem  but  definitely  not  the  way  it  looks.
Moreover, I was bedazzled by my failure  to  draw  that  piece
from the stem to the branches on the summit: the  stem  looked
like a stick on top and branches stick out in two  directions.
But I knew that in reality it was not this way (I already  had
my inclinations to realism).  And then a struggle between  the
poor thinking which doesn't want to let go  the  advantage  of
taking the object apart and perception that  is  not  able  to
differentiate between needed and not needed, doesn't know what
criteria it should use to perform abstraction,  because  there
is a lot of details and each one from the view  of  perception
is exceptional and meaningful for the harmony  of  the  whole.
Back  then  I  couldn't  solve  the  problem;   however    the
realization of it for that particular moment was stuck  in  my
head. Moreover, after it I found in a pile of drawings made by
classmates a drawing with a tree with a summit which was drawn
by some girl and then I had realized my mistake and what I had
to do.
     Smart adults  can  say  that  you  can  clearly  see  the
aberration of a child's  perception  in  these  examples,  its
instability, and inaccordance in parts.  However, but I  would
have disliked the "photographical copy" in several  days  that
would have  fallen  apart  -  inconsistence  means  accidental
inaccordance, randomly changing.  One more interesting detail:
the drawings of some children seemed to me  as  wonderful  and
others' ones really rough, but on the latter  ones  there  was
logical dominating effect just like in that drawing of a  girl
that I have learned from to abstract the perception.
     So, though children  have  different  perception,  it  is
based on one fundament and this fundament is the  completeness
of such a versatile vision.  The other thing is  that  child's
meanings of reality are randomly which is different from those
ones of an adult who stereotypes the reality.  An adult  knows
which dimensions all objects have -  a  child  comes  up  with
these dimensions on his or her  own  and  they  stay  as  such
during some time.  With socialization this quality gets  lost.
But memory fully confirms the availability of this  phenomenon
(just like the research of archaic cultures, in  which  social
stereotypes hadn't been strengthened).
     But in the reality does a child choose  these  dimensions
from the perceived world by him or herself? Yes, to draw  what
the child sees is complicated - there are no technical skills.
But sometimes in the drawings - and also stories in children's
reminiscences - loom out the contours and dimensions  of  some
different reality than those, perceived  by  the  adults,  who
already formed their civilization.
     I would say that a known perception is based on  FORMS  -
not the dimensions, let alone  the  contents  and  substances.
Each person  is  educated,  taught,  trained  -  to  perceive,
memorize, know - how and what  looks  like  what  and  how  it
SHOULD interrelate, what contents are contained, which essence
should there be.  Those who are familiar with the concepts  of
phenomenology and specifically developed idea of perception in
the works of K.Kastaneda, know how to complement  this  thesis
diversely.
     The civilization has  invented  its  own  world  and  has
memorized  it  by  heart.  The  contact  with    substantially
different  cultures  emphasizes  this  fact.  And   everything
extraordinary  in  those  cultures  is  called  "mystic"    or
"primitive".  Hundreds  of  researches  and  thick  books  are
dedicated to this theme.  But the civilization is stubborn  in
its perception of the world and every one who has  entered  it
becomes its fighter for its view and perception.
     This once more is easier for control and  adaptation.  To
come out of this control  is  more  than  difficult  -  it  is
implanted near the very core of conscious. If you try to break
perception you will break the conscious  and  end  up  in  the
mental institution.  I am not going to make an allegation that
schizophrenics are people  with  "different  perception".  No,
these are the victims of a tough  control  and  domination  of
existing points of view, which crashed their conscious against
it.
     But let's get back to my memories.
     My thoughts in the early childhood constantly hung around
one question: why should I do something that makes me  one  of
the links of an existing system, even for the sake of material
or mental goods? I was only  4-5  years  old  and  my  parents
raised me teaching to make  certain  acts  for  "carrots"  and
rewards and then they would take these  rewards  away.  I  saw
bluffing behind this very soon.  I didn't have any possibility
to call it somehow and I still had to get some sort of  energy
- but I considered it extremely foolish to waste it on earning
the similar energy (analogy with "business for  business")  it
was far more interesting to spend  it  on  "catching  myself";
burning it off and I constantly lacked  it.  And  I  was  very
reluctant to return back to where I'd started and  live  among
my regular "leftovers of myself".
     Then I started to "catch myself".  During my daytime rest
hour in the kindergarten and in the summertime at  our  summer
house when I as 6, I started to make two sorts of experiments.
One was exploring the abilities of my system as some sort of a
device, which provides me with information. When I was looking
with one eye at the blanket and  the  other  one  was  focused
above it I was getting two simultaneous images and  trying  to
keep my concentration on both.  As a result of this I realized
that not everything that we see with our eyes is what  we  can
see, perceive at this moment.  I didn't have an idea about the
category of "the organs of senses" but I have included  brains
that processes these received incomplete information.
     I didn't call this state "false" but I have accepted  it,
gave it a place and was very surprised why people blindly obey
their feelings or (that was later on) consider the environment
as a mix of illusions.  I remember the case when at  the  same
kindergarten a boy was telling a  story  about  a  person  who
found a mine in a river and thought that it was something very
interesting, picked it up and it blew up.  I tried to  explain
to the boy that nobody can know what  the  person  thought  at
that particular moment when he instantly blew  up  -  but  the
storyteller was unable to unbundle this mix of imagination and
lack of the reality facts.
     My second experience at that age was just forming  and  I
was working on it when I was already 12-14 - this was the very
process of "catching myself".  It was an obvious thing: if you
have a thinking observer  who  projects  the  outlook  at  the
thinking processes, then you can find even a deeper point that
will be also observing.  When  I  caught  this  point,  I  was
catching the next one looking at this one and  I  was  keeping
the whole system of coordinates simultaneously.  This way  the
structure of several levels was appearing - 4-5 levels  higher
from a regular visual perception and  then  something  special
loomed out.
     This was a core that felt like zero, but at the same time
it was a portal into something boundless to something that was
the very "me", a small absolute of my conscious.  Even  now  I
lack  adequate  notions  for  this  description,  whereas  the
catching of this state was giving me the effect of  some  sort
of  over  completeness  and  peace  of  perfection.  The  most
important back  then  and  always  the  realization  of  micro
absolute feeling gave the feeling of a complete absence of any
fear, something that was close to danger.  It was obvious  for
me that nothing can happen to this core, this real  "me".  The
rest was psycho, emotions, state  of  health,  body,  nice  or
uncomfortable  feelings,  thoughts  and  ideas,  wishes    and
actions, my name and other people's attitude towards me - this
all will always stay something exterior, important  only  with
regards to something similar to this exterior, short  lasting,
and not mine.  This was given to me for a period of time under
certain conditions.
     I have to admit that I constantly lacked energy for these
regular experiments (I even lack it now) because most of it is
spent on developing the micro absolute.  In the  beginning  it
was not so conscious, I was a child, at the surface  a  rather
passive one, who didn't want to make any  effort  without  any
invisible benefit, an interest not understandable for others.
     In my childhood I had a struggle of understanding that it
was impossible to  get  energy  without  deserving  it  and  a
reluctance to spend what I have and a wish  to  get  more  for
free.  This way, the principle of physical strength  initially
fell out; even in physical things with other kids (I had  only
few of them) my tactics was to grab the rival  as  hard  as  I
could, and possibly block the movement and then wait until  he
would get completely wasted  trying  to  detach  from  me  and
somehow punch me.  But it never came down to kicks or punches;
as I understand right now this was  the  spider  tactics  with
draining the energy (I even still remember the feeling of this
draining channel) and afterwards nobody wanted  to  deal  with
me, taking me for some strange, ugly, not sociable weird kid.
     If I go on remembering about the  street  fights  then  I
used more psychological  tactics.  Then  there  was  a  really
obscene case when we were straightening things out in the yard
(I was 17) when a boy broke my nose in blood, and I spread  my
blood on his hand and face.  This  completely  shook  him  off
track.  To put it short, for my "higher goals" I had to  solve
my energetic tasks in an unpredictable and extraordinary way.
     At the age of 4-5 I subconsciously  tried  to  understand
some global sense of life of the adults.  Behind the notion of
life for me there was  a  very  complicated  notion  of  WORK,
performed by the adults.  At first it  really  was  "work"  as
means of making a living; for almost 6 years this  started  to
develop some sort of political hint to it.  I was  aware  that
for people some kind  of  expansion  of  their  lifestyle  was
important; that's why we have wars, there are different states
and countries - in a form of realized expansions.  Inside  the
state people make a living on a very high standard,  expressed
by the majority; this is done  by  fair  or  unfair  ways.  By
saying fair I mean the conquest for the  status,  at  which  a
person can fully perform his/her role.
     Well, I never explained it to myself in such a consistent
way, but this particular point of view  was  reflected  in  my
games,  where  I  consciously  realized  the  motivations   of
everything  imaginary.  I  would  emphasize  that  I   divided
characters on "good" and "bad" according to  the  criteria  of
their relevance in place, a competence so to say. "Bad"  could
have even more power but having this or that status in society
they could only enjoy existing benefits, suppress, they  could
not create or rule  by  means  of  multiplying  the  benefits.
"Good" spent their energy on creating (even with the  help  of
miracles) and that's why sometimes they  experienced  lack  of
energy to confront their destructive conquerors.  However,  by
struggling for their place  back  off  the  "bad"  ones,  they
destroyed  their  defense  systems.  I  would  admit  that  my
educational background in the atmosphere of class concepts  of
the USSR had a steady imprint  on  the  logical  cover  of  my
fantasies.
     The ability to self-consciousness of a child  is  limited
by the abilities to abstract and is connected with the forming
system of values.  At 6-7 years of age  a  stable  meaning  of
benefits for the body system and personality is being  formed:
to live for things and  possess  something  material,  to  get
satisfaction from energy fluctuations between people  and  the
system itself, to  control  the  organization  of  events  and
actions  around  or  far  away,  to  sense  yourself   as    a
concentration of contacts and trajectories of  reasons.  These
are the worlds: the material, energetic, informative. Or maybe
the sense of being is in realizing yourself as a  core  of  an
absolute, that came to this world and should skip  through  it
... to where and for what?
     Maybe I still don't understand something, but it seems to
me, that to use some higher possibility  and  perfect  quality
for fulfilling functions,  which  are  more  than  effectively
performed by creatures-substances of a more simple structure -
is nonsense, similar to hammering a nail with a fragile  glass
appliance.  That is why people (and it is very understandable)
have  to  cover  their  "glass"  with  proof  cases,  and   to
primitively sustain their fragility.  However,  for  the  real
harmony everything should be in its own place.
     I remember one of my earliest observations were about the
funerals. It was remarkable, because ever since then I'd never
got to observe it, and back then it  didn't  have  any  direct
connection to me.  Of course I've seen some funerals and  many
of my friends and relatives died but I have never  taken  part
in the ceremonies and never joined the process.
     I was about 4 years old, to be precise I was a  bit  over
three and I could see the process  of  the  funeral  from  the
windows of the flat where we lived.  At first I heard  strange
music, sounds, came closer to the window and asked  my  mother
what was happening.  Mother answered a bit confused as if  she
was drifting away from the question and I distinctly  remember
the feeling how scared she was  to  traumatize  me  with  such
picture (although I had no idea about all notions,  used  here
).  But I kept on developing the interest towards the process,
I already knew that people died and were buried, and  I  asked
how they'd do that and mother said that "a dead man  would  be
brought to the cemetery and will be buried in  the  earth".  I
asked my mom who that man was.  She pointed at the coffin that
was placed at the back of the truck and I for some reason kept
on asking where the man was.  She said that was the green  man
and he was brought to the car".  And I started to look through
the people, the distance  wasn't  great  and  really  in  some
strange way I saw a totally green man, who was seen off to the
car and being sort of carried to the cabin of  the  truck,  to
the driver's side.  In my memory I distinctly kept  this  "off
vision" feeling.  And now when I am reviving  it  I  see  some
non-material image - is it related to the dead one  I  am  not
sure but I don't have  the  slightest  doubt  about  it  being
related to my mom's comment of "some green man".
     Concerning death itself, the  explanation  that  a  human
being disappears was beyond my  understanding.  For  a  rather
long period of time I haven't had the slightest  idea,  and  I
was raised in  a  very  materialistic  way,  my  parents  were
atheists, especially my father, who worked in  the  system  of
soviet science and sometimes he would make scandals  over  any
religious moments.  I was initially  very  interested  in  any
myths, conjectures, and fantasies.
     I  didn't  have  any  doubts  that  I  wouldn't  die,  or
disappear with the death of my body.  And how could I possibly
imagine all this to myself, if I already sensed that the  very
"I" is connected to the body as it is to clothes, at 5-6 years
of age I already found out that body elements got renewed  all
the time and reflecting on it I felt that every other minute I
was different.  While I had some fear of death, imposed on  me
by the adults, who cried and suffered talking about the  death
of their relatives; but the fear of  death  associated  in  my
mind  completely  with  the  fear  of  pain  that  could    be
realistically sensed, this was the physical pain and that  one
of the soul. I've been afraid of the physical pain for quite a
while.  The disappearance of conscious was impossible for me -
it was almost like it was breaking  all  laws,  even  physical
ones.  At that time I didn't have the slightest idea about the
Soul and God.
     Although, God appeared very soon.  I don't remember  when
exactly but since 8-10 years of age I had a clear  idea  about
Alien Gods that co-existed with my perception of some incoming
from above Mind - more of an Observer  than  a  Creator.  (The
latter was a second priority because I thought I could  create
anything I wanted if I had a gift of super magic).
     Indeed, it was exactly the Observer - even when I was 6-7
I used to tell  him  something,  especially  my  fantasies  or
sorrows just as much as children talk to themselves.  At  that
age I already knew about the duality of personality but when I
analyzed my senses I realized that I was addressing  something
external in one-way  only  (I  never  heard  any  voices)  and
because nobody was "there" I used to justify  myself  that  it
was comfortable to cope with my problems "through the mirror".
     What was important is that I sensed the presence  of  the
Observer and I sensed that the  Observer  was  absolutely  the
same  as  I  and  He  had  "technical   possibilities"    that
substantially prevailed mine: those of the  mind,  perception,
memory, magic (this "magic" for was back then  absolutely  the
inalienable possibility of  Mind's  influence  on  the  world,
maybe super natural, but surprise  as  it  may  seem  material
possibility was just like space technologies to the  human  of
ancient times.
     And when I first found out about  the  existence  of  the
irrational, I heard "The Lord's ways are unknown" - for me  it
was quite natural and reasonable.  And the real-micro absolute
mind can have the internal independent and  unexplainable  for
others irrationality, logic, a special  character  of  reasons
and results which it sets before  itself.  And  this  Observer
differs from my own micro-absolute with  advanced  development
and scale of abilities.
     When I connected the  comprehension  of  the  reason  and
result, reality with the presence  of  the  Super  Mind  which
obviously doesn't play the last role in the existence of  this
world, I realized, that maybe it made sense to address it. One
important detail: the Observer impartiality was related to the
fact that it affects the world not in some  material  way  but
through direct human addressing it (this was  exactly  what  I
sensed before but read a  lot  later  on).  And  now  in  some
critical situations I started to address it spontaneously even
"pray" and search for "compromises" like "a  vow  and  praise"
with this Observer.
     Being  always  interested  in  history  and  history   of
culture, especially ancient one, I used to  look  for  one  or
another image of my Super Natural Interlocutor always  knowing
that it was just a beautiful and impressing conditional image;
I addressed them like Zeus, Buddha, Osiris, Christ and  Allah.
I used  to  come  with  some  sort  of  sacrifice  ceremonies,
miniature but very decoratively performed I  used  to  perform
invocations and ceremonies where I was the priest and  praying
person at the same time; I knew for 100 % that all my requests
would fulfill only if they were really meant to happen but all
these short and ecstatic ceremonies gave me strength  and  the
spirit of participation in  some  big  fate  especially  if  I
couldn't realize any of my wishes.
     And most importantly: behind all these symbols I  clearly
perceived one Essence and even all these different Aliens  who
were the missioners of the Common Reason (Mind).  I remember I
even used  the  following  argument  in  my  requests  to  the
Observer: nobody respects you  like  me  in  all  your  forms;
nobody knows that you are Zeus, Christ and Allah!
     I don't know if this was all the  manifestation  of  some
psychic effect, like an analytical division of "I" "Super  me"
and "It" or role division of a "child", "parent" and  "adult".
I used to ask myself this question long before I  heard  about
science of "psychology" or some sort of "psychoanalysis" and I
couldn't relate to myself as a religious person - "maybe  this
was only an internal effect"?
     It was quite a strange feeling: realizing  the  existence
of the Observer  -  and  skepticism  related  to  the  surface
agreement with any  sort  of  religion.  I  could  easily  get
confused in this kind of state if it wasn't for my  separation
of "me-the micro absolute" from the rest of  the  human  world
and my "psychological" one.  This was  almost  like  something
irrational, indescribable but it was a pure material fact;  it
would be easier to doubt the being of things and all the world
(something I never did by the way), rather than this.
     As for death...  All the scary words  connected  with  it
such as "murder", "death", "persecution",  "agony"  -  weren't
related to death but more to life, a very painful life, bloody
and hellish although not to my own life  I  hoped.  The  scary
image of the Scull with empty holes and a scythe  was  nothing
but a myth like an anti-  Santa  Clause  -and  the  most  real
non-being after the vain life had the most vivid and the  most
filled with feeling of freedom -  that  limitless  full  being
just like a very  familiar  core  of  the  micro-absolute  "I"
hiding at the backstage (in the corners) of the mind state.
     So, I didn't have enough energy for a regular exchange of
conversation.  Up till 8 years of age  while  we  (me  and  my
parents) lived far from Moscow, I never had any depressions on
the basis of lack of energy because I had  an  opportunity  to
gain strength without any physical moves. I used to do it with
the management methods - I was pushing  the  situation  ahead,
triggering it off to find myself in the middle of  it  without
being the very center of it, which had to  give  something  in
its turn.  I called that back then to be  an  "adviser"  (even
better to use the term a secret  adviser)  of  a  "commander".
(Later on I came across the image of a  "grey  cardinal"  that
corresponds to the image of the best, but for  some  reason  I
didn't like it.)
     It worked this particular way  in  all  groups  from  the
kindergarten, then in our  house  yard  (it  was  a  bit  more
difficult, there was no constant  circle  there,  at  school).
This effect reached its peak when I was staying in the pioneer
camp (the analog of American  "boy  scouts  camp").  I  had  a
complete power out there,  being  invisible  and  independent.
While becoming  an  irreplaceable  assistant  or  at  least  a
myrmidon for a leader - I gave out the  information  about  my
control and took the energy of the leader who always had it in
abundance; I never communicated  with  other  kids  because  I
wasn't interested in the forms of regular  communication  with
others. Moreover, when I found myself on a common level I used
to get scrutinized because, I never gave back enough.
     I used to spend the part of common  "exchanged  fund"  of
energy on conscious that I was happy to offer for  business  -
but it turned out that nobody needed it. Nobody was interested
in conscious, they were only interested in the action for  the
sake of action but this was senseless to me.
     Recommendation: If you wish to raise a  highly  conscious
person, don't teach him or her even don't let him  or  her  to
act actively.  But you also can't give  your  child  too  much
information - actions with some alternative  information  will
replace the external life.  You  need  a  spontaneous  control
development on situations. The recipe is almost that of a monk
- but without separation from the world, the society.
     So it worked out this way that I used to close up  and  I
was an "unsocial kid" with "complexes" (I am  using  quotation
marks with everything that is said in  these  cases,  although
sometimes I could see better than others what and  how  things
should be done but I couldn't  do  it  based  on  the  "ground
zero"). It was rarely that people asked me a piece of advice -
and  here  was  I  sitting  on  top  of  the  world,  everyone
recognized my  talent  of  solving  situations  but  when  the
situation ended, my pressure was  getting  everyone  confused,
almost scared.  And after these  cases  people  subconsciously
avoided me for any type of business.
     Thus at the younger age I already had a reputation  of  a
strange    talented    unsociable    person    and     selfish
"knows-it-everything".  Till  some  certain  point  in   these
situations I was very offended that people  didn't  understand
me - especially when I had  the  most  sincere  intentions  to
help.  But back then I didn't realize  that  to  help  without
people asking for it was impossible - "the  road  to  hell  is
paved with best intentions".
     In this sense I had some bad luck with my  parents.  They
loved to boast away my achievements and they used to feed  and
relish the cases of my exclusiveness everywhere they liked it.
Along with this all, they constantly tried to  squeeze  me  in
the regular social frames, sort of train me and educate me.
     The attempt to train me was my  major  torture  (both  on
mental and physical levels) which  led  in  its  turn  to  the
physical  super  sensitivity.  This  is  understandable:   the
control developed the anticipation of danger and  naturally  I
had to include my integrity in the whole environment.  By  the
way,  for  that  same  reason  I  never  liked  any  sorts  of
traveling, trips - it was all unknown there, uncontrolled  and
sensitivity stayed on a very high level.
     So I couldn't fit in these ethics of conditional notions,
it was very painful for me like tearing away my piece of flesh
to say hello to a person I knew or to say  "thank  you"  if  I
didn't get an appropriate portion of energy beforehand. And in
the presence of parents all this energy was going away to them
(especially  to  my  mother),  they  took  it  away  from   me
instantly, because I was their property (they used to tell  me
all the time).  It was more or less ok in  the  ethical  sense
with guys that I had informal relations  with,  but  with  the
adults I was becoming very unsociable and ignorant.  I used to
get all these punishments in  the  form  of  restrictions  and
threats,  and  my  sensitivity  was  growing   and    physical
punishments transferred it to the physiological level.
     My bad health was an additional factor  of  self-defense.
First of all it appeared (when I was  8  years  old)  with  my
growing sensitivity, secondly it justified  my  reluctance  to
make any physical moves, which caused  instead  of  fatigue  a
state of depression and irritation. And my maladies, aches and
pains gave me an excuse to distance myself from  everyone,  to
be not like "others", even sometimes in a negative  sense  but
there was more harmony to this.
     Because  of  insufficient  ability  to  summarize  in  my
childhood  I  never  made    any    conclusions    about    my
"exceptionality" - I had  enough  contacts  and  most  of  the
energy was given to me by parents even though I had  to  fight
for it very often.
     I suffered from the fear of loneliness only till the  age
of 6 and I used to have it only when parents didn't show up in
scheduled time.  I could sit at home before the scheduled hour
of my parents' return day long.  This could  be  explained  by
control of conscious: instability was  growing  inside  of  me
with some unknown.  I also didn't have any energy or  strength
to bring in some new people the control zone, I needed a  well
known stable situation - this is related  to  my  parents,  my
attachment to them even, the painful one.
     So I didn't have any feelings of  exclusiveness  so  far.
Everything  was   happening    unconsciously    (besides    my
psychological  experiments,  where  I  didn't  see    anything
special). When talking of self conscious in my early childhood
I can clearly see the border  between  what  was  natural  for
everyone and a range of my senses and feelings.  Just  because
nobody was talking about these feelings, nobody implied them -
they were falling out of any conversational  context  although
they played a direct role in my life.  And of course, at  that
time it seemed to me, that everyone had it happening this way.
     I'd had this opinion up until the age of 10-11.