She loves me, she loves me not;
The dilemma runs wild in my heart;
I used flower, I used pendulum and many more;
Still about her heart could not be sure! 1
Days followed evenings and followed other days;
On and on I waited for the faintest of her says;
I told my friends, and I told her pals;
If anything or anyone can help me win that gal! 2
Months followed months and some more months did went;
One day I could really see her looking at me!
My heart thumbed and my palms perspired;
Finally she came and confirmed that she loved me! 3
I was in seventh heaven,
My mind was blank, and noisy and overflowing with joy!
I told my friends and I told her pals;
It was party-n-park time for next few weekends! 4
Then suddenly I felt an ache,
A vacuum, a strange stagnating coldness in my heart;
Would gaze at her lovely face and
Knew nothing to tell or talk or sing! 5
She loves me, she does love me;
The dilemma did dissolve long back;
I used no flower, nor pendulum nor nothing more,
Yet about my own heart could not be sure! 6
May be she is not the one,
May be this is not really true love!
May e this is just infatuation;
I knew not how to tell this to her. 7
I knew not what love was;
This much I could be sure;
I told so to her and she wept;
And I was free again to put for sale my heart! 8
Girls followed girls and more girls did come;
Each one's entry extravagant, yet exit equally damp!
Each time I was sure it was true love and true joy!
Still it broke, and again came the dilemma of a playboy!! 9
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
"Free to fall in love"
The day broke,
May be a bit early today!
"Alas" told the dew drop,
And fell down in silence! 1||
May be it was the tempest,
That broke havoc last night;
That made the twigs so weak;
The green leaf fell with no sound! 2||
May be the throbbing heart missed a pace,
Or, it was lost in some contemplation;
Or, was it broken beyond repair?
Yet, it could dare to love again! 3||
The bleeding heart waited earnestly,
Till the blood drops traversed their course;
And touched did they with no sound,
Then there fell the blanket of silence! 4||
The lost heart waited...
And waited...in case it could bleed more;
Ah! there was no blood left to bleed off!
Then befell a wonderful solace on it. 5||
The most wonderful symphony of silence,
Emerged from the blood-less heart;
The broken and empty heart which was so light,
And glad that it is free to fall in love again! 6||
May be a bit early today!
"Alas" told the dew drop,
And fell down in silence! 1||
May be it was the tempest,
That broke havoc last night;
That made the twigs so weak;
The green leaf fell with no sound! 2||
May be the throbbing heart missed a pace,
Or, it was lost in some contemplation;
Or, was it broken beyond repair?
Yet, it could dare to love again! 3||
The bleeding heart waited earnestly,
Till the blood drops traversed their course;
And touched did they with no sound,
Then there fell the blanket of silence! 4||
The lost heart waited...
And waited...in case it could bleed more;
Ah! there was no blood left to bleed off!
Then befell a wonderful solace on it. 5||
The most wonderful symphony of silence,
Emerged from the blood-less heart;
The broken and empty heart which was so light,
And glad that it is free to fall in love again! 6||
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Gandhi jayanti special I: Sach ki rahon me chalta chal (satya)
One of my old time favourite song is "madhuvan khusvu deta he", a song glorifying the idea of self-sacrifice for the purpose of others. It was a sweet melody because it sang Utopian stuffs. And anything Utopian, including communism, however infeasible it may be, always sounds so sweet! In that one line it said: come whatever keep on walking on the path of truth. I have never thought of this deeply. But contemplating on it now, I am wonder-struck at the deeper meanings it can bear. What is "truth" or "satya" (as Mahatma Gandhi will coin it)? Is it the bare unpleasant fact about things or is it the Utopian idealistic notions that we think are the best? Talking about the life Gandhijee himself, what was satya? Was it satya that he got craving for sex and went to a brothel or was it satya that he thought of morals and left it? Was it truth that he wanted to have meat or was it satya that he thought of his religion and "successfully suppressed" this craving? I think we are confusing here between "satya" and "morality"! Satya is the barest fact about nature. And my mind my dear friend nothing about nature is utopian! Nothing here is idealistic.Let's say I feel like having alcohol or spirit. Is this craving not "true" or satya? Do you think I will be called truthful if I think of religion and tradition and morality and suppress this feeling? Or let us imagine that my neighbour is a too much irritating for me. It happens sometimes. Some people just stand on your toes anyway! Is it not true that I feel angry when talking to him? Will I become more truthful or satyavan if I control my anger and try to appear calm even though I am really really angry in the heart of my hearts? Is not bigotry or self-deception the worst kind of crime against "satya"? Is not self-control the greatest mockery of the oath taken to keep on walking on the path of truth? Gandhijee himself has told again and again that non-violence in mind is much more important than the same in external actions. And this can never be thrust upon oneself! Then this thrust action simply becomes non-truth! Let's be bold and stand up to face our own selves! If I have short-temper let me accept it first. Everything else and all other lofty feats come after this simple acceptance of truth. If I have some cravings which the society calls taboos or evil, do the hell with society! Let me accept my very own self first, my own self as it is, not the utopian scripture-prescribed self! Let me not try to cremate my own self. Self-acceptance and self-glorification is the first and only step towards a mature society and mental peace. And this is certainly the first and firmest step on the path of truth or "sach ki raah"!
Gandhi jayanti special II: "make love not war" (ahimsa)
Funny though it may sound, this line which I read in a make-shift shop in Hamburg, gave me an instant food for thought. From my limited experience, I am pretty sure that you speak this in India or any developing or undeveloped country, you will get angry and puzzled stares. Why? Why are we scared of "making love"? Why the very word "sex" makes us hyper? So much so that we lose sight of the second part of the line, i.e. "not war". May be because we have not seen a proper war for long? May be because we have lost sight of the importance of living and enjoying life? May be we have had just too much of this culture and customs! May be...
This brings my flow of thought to the next step: what is more dangerous or undesirable: a so called unchaste society or a society in war? And may be we can expand the paradigm of war to mental and psychological war as well, including the war between our own split personalities. I have seen many a so called good and decent family guys, who down their heart of heart still cherish some hidden desires!And our society is full of such people, who are at war with their own selves, who are in the so called morale dilemma. Virtually our society is in deep war internally. Why? May be because we are trying to follow morale or standards which have been set by someone else. We are trying to emulate someone, trying to follow someone, all the time forgetting the simple fact that there is no free-size morale which will fit us all!
Why can't we just forget everything and 'make love'?!? Just mark here that by 'making love' I am trying to point at all the social taboos, all that which stop us from being what we actually are! I will choose making love to making war on any given day and under any given circumstances. May be this is the real definition of 'ahimsa'! "Allow people to do whatever they want to!" "This will cause in anarchy!" Most of my friends react like this when I speak of such ideas. My logic is simple. The more freedom you give, the more individual-space you create, the more mature the society becomes. The society is no play-school needing rules and regulations and above all regulators! Let me take a very tricky topic. Lets say we don't taboo incests. Will it increase the number of incest-cases? I doubt. It may raise for a period but it will dwindle down soon after. I remember to have travelled in Germany in early 2005 when gay relations have recently been given equal place in their society. I could find virtually innumerable gay couples displaying their passion in public. It was like a fashion I suppose. Few years after I was having my recent visit in Hamburg. I was living few streets off the gay-centre of the city. Still I could come across not a single gay couple kissing around! This strengthened my conviction that individual independence and faith give rise to a society more mature and evolved. Lets stop policing around. Lets stop being at a perpetual war or himsa (violence) and start making love!!
This brings my flow of thought to the next step: what is more dangerous or undesirable: a so called unchaste society or a society in war? And may be we can expand the paradigm of war to mental and psychological war as well, including the war between our own split personalities. I have seen many a so called good and decent family guys, who down their heart of heart still cherish some hidden desires!And our society is full of such people, who are at war with their own selves, who are in the so called morale dilemma. Virtually our society is in deep war internally. Why? May be because we are trying to follow morale or standards which have been set by someone else. We are trying to emulate someone, trying to follow someone, all the time forgetting the simple fact that there is no free-size morale which will fit us all!
Why can't we just forget everything and 'make love'?!? Just mark here that by 'making love' I am trying to point at all the social taboos, all that which stop us from being what we actually are! I will choose making love to making war on any given day and under any given circumstances. May be this is the real definition of 'ahimsa'! "Allow people to do whatever they want to!" "This will cause in anarchy!" Most of my friends react like this when I speak of such ideas. My logic is simple. The more freedom you give, the more individual-space you create, the more mature the society becomes. The society is no play-school needing rules and regulations and above all regulators! Let me take a very tricky topic. Lets say we don't taboo incests. Will it increase the number of incest-cases? I doubt. It may raise for a period but it will dwindle down soon after. I remember to have travelled in Germany in early 2005 when gay relations have recently been given equal place in their society. I could find virtually innumerable gay couples displaying their passion in public. It was like a fashion I suppose. Few years after I was having my recent visit in Hamburg. I was living few streets off the gay-centre of the city. Still I could come across not a single gay couple kissing around! This strengthened my conviction that individual independence and faith give rise to a society more mature and evolved. Lets stop policing around. Lets stop being at a perpetual war or himsa (violence) and start making love!!
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Can bad people have good future?
The other day I was considering this interesting question. Can bad people have good future? Can bad people aspire to become spiritual? Can bad people fit into the quota for nirvana? Well, by bad people I mean really bad buggers doing terrible sin. I am not just talking of those committing some social taboo without harming anyone. I am not also just talking of gays or incests having sex secretly and silently without bothering anyone. I am also talking of those who are causing serious harm and trouble to others. Even those who hurt and harm even their near-n-dear ones. And even those who ditch their friends or lovers! Can these people have any share of the pie we call enlightenment? Are they doomed for ever? Sorry for taking so much of space-n-time to just explain the question. I felt it important to make the question and point as clear as possible. In answering the question, I will answer from a first person point of view (presuming myself to be that bad guy!).
** First of all, as we have already discussed, everything and every happening is predestined. Individual choice is but an illusion. Its like reading a book. We discover a page every day. But that page is written long back. So, did I have any choice but to be bad? Was it really under my control to be or not to be bad?
** Every novel has heroes and villains. But for villains heroes are worthless. But for bad things good things lose their charm. So, if I have been chosen to play villain is it my fault?
** Lets say I hurt (physically or mentally) my friend. I did something which hurt him. Or is it that he was destined to get hurt, and I just acted as an instrument! He was destined to get hurt because of his karma! And I was destined to be the instrument in hurting him because of my karma.
** Coming to scriptures, the Bhagwat Gita is one of the most authoritative scriptures of the orient. What I understand from there is that, the God is trying to explain Arjuna to do two things. First of all understand his swadharma. And second perform your swadharma with all detachment. Arjuna's case was simple. In his case his caste and his swadharma concided (he was a kshyatriya, the warrior class and his natural disposition was to fight). But dont make the mistake of taking your social responsibilities as your swadharma. I may be born in a good family with good parents and with good friends. But if my natural disposition is towards the so called bad things, what am I to do? I still choose my natural bearing and interest as my swadharma. And then I perform it with detachment. Detachment here means detachment from the views of others, detachment from the thought of merit-or-sin, detachment from thought of past-n-future. So if I feel my natural inclination is to hurt people, I should do the same with all detachment. Its easy to play hero and get all applause. But it takes real talent to play villain! So am I at fault?
** First of all, as we have already discussed, everything and every happening is predestined. Individual choice is but an illusion. Its like reading a book. We discover a page every day. But that page is written long back. So, did I have any choice but to be bad? Was it really under my control to be or not to be bad?
** Every novel has heroes and villains. But for villains heroes are worthless. But for bad things good things lose their charm. So, if I have been chosen to play villain is it my fault?
** Lets say I hurt (physically or mentally) my friend. I did something which hurt him. Or is it that he was destined to get hurt, and I just acted as an instrument! He was destined to get hurt because of his karma! And I was destined to be the instrument in hurting him because of my karma.
** Coming to scriptures, the Bhagwat Gita is one of the most authoritative scriptures of the orient. What I understand from there is that, the God is trying to explain Arjuna to do two things. First of all understand his swadharma. And second perform your swadharma with all detachment. Arjuna's case was simple. In his case his caste and his swadharma concided (he was a kshyatriya, the warrior class and his natural disposition was to fight). But dont make the mistake of taking your social responsibilities as your swadharma. I may be born in a good family with good parents and with good friends. But if my natural disposition is towards the so called bad things, what am I to do? I still choose my natural bearing and interest as my swadharma. And then I perform it with detachment. Detachment here means detachment from the views of others, detachment from the thought of merit-or-sin, detachment from thought of past-n-future. So if I feel my natural inclination is to hurt people, I should do the same with all detachment. Its easy to play hero and get all applause. But it takes real talent to play villain! So am I at fault?
Saturday, August 08, 2009
The clock work!
Last night I was discussing with my guru on some random thoughts. He shared a wonderful idea with me. I am just rewriting it here.
If you have opened a clock, especially the mechanical clocks, you would have seen numerous tiny gears and wheels working in enchanting unison to make the clock tick. Our life is like that of a tiny mini wheel of the clock. We keep on rotating. We tend to think that our rotation is in our hands, or may be its me who is rotating. However, for the clock maker he knows that the whole clock has to work perfectly and in unison to make that tiny mini wheel rotate.
There are two aspects to this simile. One is that we may think our actions to be independent or determined by our own free will. But its all determined by a complicated set of wheels, gears and spring systems surrounding us! Secondly, we may think that we are menially insignificant. But again as a matter of fact, if at all we succeed in stopping our own rotation, the whole clock stops!
If you have opened a clock, especially the mechanical clocks, you would have seen numerous tiny gears and wheels working in enchanting unison to make the clock tick. Our life is like that of a tiny mini wheel of the clock. We keep on rotating. We tend to think that our rotation is in our hands, or may be its me who is rotating. However, for the clock maker he knows that the whole clock has to work perfectly and in unison to make that tiny mini wheel rotate.
There are two aspects to this simile. One is that we may think our actions to be independent or determined by our own free will. But its all determined by a complicated set of wheels, gears and spring systems surrounding us! Secondly, we may think that we are menially insignificant. But again as a matter of fact, if at all we succeed in stopping our own rotation, the whole clock stops!
Friday, August 07, 2009
Climb of an insect
Few days ago I was enjoying a short afternoon siesta! Suddenly I felt a tickling sensation on my arm. Looking closely I discovered a tiny insect riding happily or sadly (for you see I could not see his/her face) on my arm. At first I felt like crushing it for disturbing my slumber. But then I was already in a bad mood that afternoon and did not want to make it worse! Gently did I lift the tiny one using my fingers and placed it on floor. It took the least heed of what change has happened just then. It went on crawling with a sage like indifference! I was amused and amazed. First of all it did not crawl because it had to go anywhere. It crawled because that's what its made to do and that's what it can do. It knows that food and whatever luxury you may want or need will ultimately come to you as long as you keep on doing whatever you can. Secondly, what drastic changes may take place, it was the least bothered. It knew only one thing to do and it did it irrespective of all the changes that may happen to its surroundings! May be I am not able to express my feelings properly, but believe me it was ecstatic to observe the attitude of the insect!
Monday, July 27, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Passitheism
Let me first revise my established idea on causality or the rule of karma. Precisely speaking, it says no cause no effect; i.e. all events are preceded by a long chain of cause-n-effect vents starting from the very beginning of time. Tomorrow is determined completely by today and today by yesterday. This means that all the events occurring are predetermined and nothing is out of blue or because of any "free-will". Free will is but an illusion.
Given the above mentioned thesis, what is the role of god in our own life or in this creation? If everything is determined then what is the use of praying a god? Indian scriptures say that even gods are not beyond the rule of karma! So should we pray god? At the outset it may seem that if god is also a follower of he karmic laws and can not change a cause-n-effect chain, then he also is helpless. But there is a very nice catch here. God is helpless if its only your karma that determines your future! I.e. you as an individual do good work, then you get good future and vice-verse. But this is no the case! Karmic rules are applicable for the creation as a whole; its a holistic rule. The creation as a whole follows the cause-n-effect chain. And that's the reason for so many anomalies to he local karmic rule! You never exactly know why you might have a good future tomorrow or a bad future the other day. It surely follows the karmic rule but you can no longer pin-point the cause. Its more or less like the chaos theory! A cat crossing the road in 200BC in Rome might be the reason for which you faced the accident yesterday! Hence, may be, a distant may-be, you had a good luck yesterday because you prayed a certain god a month back. Gods might also have some power. But that's again an illusion as our own supposedly free-will. The bottom line is pray god or whatever power you feel like. But there is no guarantee of any result. And the future is predetermined all the same. This I what to term as passive theism or passitheism. Neither do I deny the existence of god; nor do I accept the same. Its just part of the flow and with no extra power whatsoever to change any predetermined event.
An interesting allegory to this is reading a novel. When you are reading a novel, everyday you come across certain new happenings. To you the reader, its new and fresh. But actually its all written down already. Its just a matter of discovering the event by uncovering the pages of the novel. You may call god as the writer of the novel who has written it and hence knows it all. But once written and passed on to your hands, the writer has no control over the happenings in the novel. Its a god who is passive in our lives, thought he might have created us all!
Given the above mentioned thesis, what is the role of god in our own life or in this creation? If everything is determined then what is the use of praying a god? Indian scriptures say that even gods are not beyond the rule of karma! So should we pray god? At the outset it may seem that if god is also a follower of he karmic laws and can not change a cause-n-effect chain, then he also is helpless. But there is a very nice catch here. God is helpless if its only your karma that determines your future! I.e. you as an individual do good work, then you get good future and vice-verse. But this is no the case! Karmic rules are applicable for the creation as a whole; its a holistic rule. The creation as a whole follows the cause-n-effect chain. And that's the reason for so many anomalies to he local karmic rule! You never exactly know why you might have a good future tomorrow or a bad future the other day. It surely follows the karmic rule but you can no longer pin-point the cause. Its more or less like the chaos theory! A cat crossing the road in 200BC in Rome might be the reason for which you faced the accident yesterday! Hence, may be, a distant may-be, you had a good luck yesterday because you prayed a certain god a month back. Gods might also have some power. But that's again an illusion as our own supposedly free-will. The bottom line is pray god or whatever power you feel like. But there is no guarantee of any result. And the future is predetermined all the same. This I what to term as passive theism or passitheism. Neither do I deny the existence of god; nor do I accept the same. Its just part of the flow and with no extra power whatsoever to change any predetermined event.
An interesting allegory to this is reading a novel. When you are reading a novel, everyday you come across certain new happenings. To you the reader, its new and fresh. But actually its all written down already. Its just a matter of discovering the event by uncovering the pages of the novel. You may call god as the writer of the novel who has written it and hence knows it all. But once written and passed on to your hands, the writer has no control over the happenings in the novel. Its a god who is passive in our lives, thought he might have created us all!
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Flight of a crow
From the very outset let me confess that this essay is inspired by an essay by J.D.Krishnamurthy, an essay named “Flight of an eagle”. During my last three years' of stay in one of the interior parts of the nation, I have seen a huge variety of birds starting from humble Indian Maina to some unique variety of migratory bird. I have seen them flying, dipping in water and praying on their food. Let me confess that I really found nothing special, attractive or grand about the flight of an eagle. Rather, I found the awkward flight of a house crow quite interesting. Crow is a menial bird with almost no extra or feature to attract your attention. Its light is awkward, clumsy and noisy. But so is ordinary life of yours and mine. Our lives are awkward, clumsy and noisy as well! This is not any high pitch thrilling sound attached to our lives, like that made by the eagle. Nor is there any magnificently smooth glide in our lives, unlike that of the flight of an eagle. But look at crow. How similar is our life to the flight of a crow: short spanned, erratic, unpredictable, jumpy and attached with cacophonous irritating sound! But this is what it is: our lives. And good or bad, our lives are our lives. There is no single justified logical point in trying the least to change it an iota. That will be like going against nature. I have never seen any crow trying to look, envy and then imitate the flight of an eagle. So just be what you are. Bad or good is a matter of perspective! Like is a drama where there are no audiences! So why toil to be somebody else There are no bouquets or brick-bats in store for you. Nothing gonna affect you. And even-if anything is affecting you, let it! Who care? As long as we are crows, we have a natural way of flight, I.e. the crow's flight. Lets stop being someone else. Lets embrace our very own crowness! Lets enjoy the crow's flight, and just remember that everything gonna change!
Pretending to be someone
Life is monotonous and mundane; its more so when you go on living the same life for ever. You never exactly come to realise when the life has just slipped off your grip. Not that I have any objection to life sliping off your sleeves. I just am a bit curious to see life from different points of views. But, its always been extremely difficult for ordinary human beings like you and me, to live different lives in the same life time. I have observed in UK that they particularly get this habit of experiencing different lives, or rather life in different set-ups, quite early in their lives. For example most of my British friends would go on vacation at least twice a year. And during that period they will not take their cell-phones with them, nor would they check their emails. Well, let me highlight these two luxuries of today, namely cell-phones and Internet, which have almost made it impossible for us to leave our lives aside even for a split of a second.
Tracking on the same trends, unintentionally of course, I am currently experiencing a new life today. Sitting in a lonely shabby tea-corner in a corner of the Science College of Kolkata University, I am experiencing a strange new life. Before I meet the professor, I am no body here. I know no one and no one knows me. For them I am a decent looking stranger with a particularly familiar broad smile. And for me, they are all my alter-egos. I have been in Kolkata for last two days, in a guest-house where again no one knows me! I have also hidden my identity to some extent , except for the extent which is needed to get some basic things done. Its nice. And I have been traveling in local town bus. More exciting and thrilling. My cell phone, luckily has no roaming facility and luckily again, there are no Internet parlours near the guest-house.
Big cities like Kolkata, London and Bombay have a life of their own! They have a certain strange mass psychology where you soon find your own psyche and ego engulfed. All the people, all the egos, all of them seem to have some strong similarity, similarity that is unique to that particular city. Hence, I find it very exciting to travel alone in such a big city, trying to soak in a bit of its personality. Its a nice feeling, feeling of stopping what you are and getting submerged in a unique personality pool. Its enlightening to live a different life. Its breathtaking and magnificent, to pretend to be someone else, who you can never be in your real life. Well, yes, you may say its self-deception; you may also say its blank pretension; or running away from reality. Say what you may, this is the type of break I would really look forward to again and again in my life. The joy of a vicarious life in real-life is a joy of its own kind!
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Insignificant vs. Singnificant
In my last few blogs, I have been talking about how insignificantly insgnificant is life, creation and all that's here around. Yesterday I came across a wonderful notion. I was reading through an essay by Swami Vivekananda, where he was talking about how creation is created by the merger of Prana (energy) and Akasa (mater); how it comes into being, goes through a cycle and again vanishes, just to reappear again. Even modern astrophysics to some extent supports this view. I.e. the universe was created because of big bang and there are ultimately two possible ends to it, viz. it will expand for ever till it becomes energy less and hence dark; or it may contract again and merge into a black-hole yet again. Its the second possibility which has been supported by Advitik philosophy.
Anyway, my point was something different. Given that its a cycle and given that this world follows a strictly cause-n-effect rule, where is the notion of significant or insignificant? When I breath, I just do it subconsciously without counting and without thinking which breath is better or worse than which other one. Its childish to compare one breath with another. Simillarly its childish to put epithets against events. Events are just events. Lives are just lives. Creations and just creations! Neither significant nor insignificant. We are helplessly parts of it. Whatever we are doing, thinking or speaking, has no novelty to it, all these are just events with no adjectives whatsoever.
Anyway, my point was something different. Given that its a cycle and given that this world follows a strictly cause-n-effect rule, where is the notion of significant or insignificant? When I breath, I just do it subconsciously without counting and without thinking which breath is better or worse than which other one. Its childish to compare one breath with another. Simillarly its childish to put epithets against events. Events are just events. Lives are just lives. Creations and just creations! Neither significant nor insignificant. We are helplessly parts of it. Whatever we are doing, thinking or speaking, has no novelty to it, all these are just events with no adjectives whatsoever.
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Suicide: the philosophical question!
My last blog got a few nice and interesting comments. Some say its the bold decision, the decision to suicide. While some say if you cant do any good while alive what good will you do by being dead?
May be I was not clear in my last blog. Or may be the topic was too touchy in the first place. Because no where did I say that one should commit suicide. Its more about thinking of suicide. Its more about realizing the utter futility of the air we give to our menial silly lives. Its about the folly of our lives.
"Butterfly effect" is a term coined by many who discuss the chaos theory. They say that the flapping of a butterfly in Uganda can cause a super cyclone in Orissa! But the other way is also equally likely, i.e. the flapping of a butterfly in Uganda can stop a super cyclone from materializing over Orissa!
Similarly, from my last blog I wanted to make both the sides clear. There is no big benefit of you staying alive. Neither is there any benefit of you committing suicide. It really makes no sense at all about what you do. Just zoom out (either in space or in time or in both) and you realize it hardly matters if you live or you die or kill or rob or rape or meditate!
May be I was not clear in my last blog. Or may be the topic was too touchy in the first place. Because no where did I say that one should commit suicide. Its more about thinking of suicide. Its more about realizing the utter futility of the air we give to our menial silly lives. Its about the folly of our lives.
"Butterfly effect" is a term coined by many who discuss the chaos theory. They say that the flapping of a butterfly in Uganda can cause a super cyclone in Orissa! But the other way is also equally likely, i.e. the flapping of a butterfly in Uganda can stop a super cyclone from materializing over Orissa!
Similarly, from my last blog I wanted to make both the sides clear. There is no big benefit of you staying alive. Neither is there any benefit of you committing suicide. It really makes no sense at all about what you do. Just zoom out (either in space or in time or in both) and you realize it hardly matters if you live or you die or kill or rob or rape or meditate!
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Why should you live?
I read somewhere many years ago, "the only truly philosophical question is suicide!" At that time I did appreciate the line. "Why should a man continue living", is a truely amazing question and occurs to most of us some time or the other in our lives. Mostly we avoid or ignore or postpone the question. I did the same. We mostly do so, I think, because we are scared that in case we find the answer to be in affirmative, then we may commit suicide. And that will stop us from enjoying our lives. Life, though confusing, has its own charm. So people discover all types of nonsense rules to stop us from thinking of suicide, e.g. "suicide is sin"!!
Few days back I read "What is Maya", an essay by Swami Vivekananda. So lucidely he has explained about "maya" and how life is interesting. My last blog reflects some of the after thoughts of that essay. As concluded there, life is interesting. But this aint any cause to continue living this life! Do you try all things that seem interesting; like trying weed?
So huge is the world. And so insiginficantly minial is our existence. Its like the life of some bacteria. You remember those scenes in some shows where they zoom-out the camera... till they show the globe! Many times I do the same in my thought process and try to go till the level of galaxy. Who really cares what you do to your friend or how to cheated your brother? Neither it matters how you helped the old blind man. Its all insignificantly insignificant.
One of my friends told, after much of discussion, "man lives for himself". OK, very well. This is like some circle then, "you live because you are alive". Let me cut the circle! If you are dead you are saved the effort to live!
PS: Well, dont think that I am gatehring suicidal tendency! Its all genuine enquiry!!
Few days back I read "What is Maya", an essay by Swami Vivekananda. So lucidely he has explained about "maya" and how life is interesting. My last blog reflects some of the after thoughts of that essay. As concluded there, life is interesting. But this aint any cause to continue living this life! Do you try all things that seem interesting; like trying weed?
So huge is the world. And so insiginficantly minial is our existence. Its like the life of some bacteria. You remember those scenes in some shows where they zoom-out the camera... till they show the globe! Many times I do the same in my thought process and try to go till the level of galaxy. Who really cares what you do to your friend or how to cheated your brother? Neither it matters how you helped the old blind man. Its all insignificantly insignificant.
One of my friends told, after much of discussion, "man lives for himself". OK, very well. This is like some circle then, "you live because you are alive". Let me cut the circle! If you are dead you are saved the effort to live!
PS: Well, dont think that I am gatehring suicidal tendency! Its all genuine enquiry!!
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Discussion with a friend: 1000 lives or 1000 years!!!
sudhansu: Control the controllable, don't worry about the uncontrollable
me: this is a good thing, where you learn it from?
sudhansu: Coach of one IPL team told, "we try to play with new youngster, so that they can play with confidence and give their best"! Hence I thought, we too should give the best shot of whatever is with us.
me: I feel we all give our best shot all the time. In the given conditions anyone of would have acted the same way as somebody else acted. Knowingly why should someone take the second best option? Better or worse; whatever we did was the best we could have done.
sudhansu: I think if one has the "striving for better" attitude, that's the best.
me: But the attitude also wont come to all! Because of history, past, and breeding etc.
sudhansu: Who so ever has not got the attitude, haven't yet realized his best.
me: who defines the "best"?
sudhansu: he Himself
me: If he himself defined the best, then why did he not work for it?
sudhansu: If he thinks later that he could have done that way or this way...means that that was not his whole hearted effort.
me: Once it is "later" its all done! Exactly at that instant he did not do it. Thinking of it "later" is like commenting on cricket live matches: the player should have played like this or should have taken that shot etc.
sudhansu: That's how he learns, next time he knows where he did the mistake.
me: Yes thats all fine; but at a particular instant still he is doing his best.
Lets say i am short tempered. After a spree of anger i think i shoud not have got angry. Then I can do meditation etc etc. But at that moment i did not do anything wrong!
When air flows through leaves no one says its right or wrong; I think our actions are like that.
Each moment we do the best. Even a dog wont take the second best path if he knew tat its the 2nd best.
sudhansu: If he knows that it's the best, then he should gracefully accept the results of his action.... and he understands everything he is going through is for his actions only... and... that's his best action
me: Yes
sudhansu: Then he is always happy!
me: Happy... may be may not be!
But he is certinly not unhappy
sudhansu: Is it, then there shouldn't be any sorrow and happiness!!Some are in that state, but many are not... they feel sad,
me: Yes; but surprisingly we all can be happy... somewhere I read "if u want to be happy, be".
sudhansu: I read somewhere that we are naturally all happy but we created misery around us.
me: That too is a problematic thing! Its basically blaming us, which i don't feel comfortable with!
But one thing I marked: life is interesting :)
sudhansu: People are living as rich and the poor. There must be something. Otherwise all the poor would have drowned in indian Ocean!
me: still they live! Why they live?
sudhansu: Because life is interesting!
me: yes :)
Because we think that their life is not worth living! But that may be true for us; not for them! Even a daily beggar with one eye goes on living...what for?
sudhansu: we have taken so much of a burden to think about others lives rather than ours
our standard is by our means
me: I think yes; this is a good phrase "life is interesting"; I cant say life is blissful or bad or good... yes... life really is interesting! Sometimes i feel very much amused; so much so tat i wish i could live 1000 years just observing life and people and creation :)
sudhansu: But there are 1000 lives around you every year!
me: yes :) That bargain is also fine with me; if i could live all the lives at a time...
sudhansu: that's equivant to 1000 years!
me: 1000 lives either in space or time :) ... Yes; very interesting concept! Great!!
me: this is a good thing, where you learn it from?
sudhansu: Coach of one IPL team told, "we try to play with new youngster, so that they can play with confidence and give their best"! Hence I thought, we too should give the best shot of whatever is with us.
me: I feel we all give our best shot all the time. In the given conditions anyone of would have acted the same way as somebody else acted. Knowingly why should someone take the second best option? Better or worse; whatever we did was the best we could have done.
sudhansu: I think if one has the "striving for better" attitude, that's the best.
me: But the attitude also wont come to all! Because of history, past, and breeding etc.
sudhansu: Who so ever has not got the attitude, haven't yet realized his best.
me: who defines the "best"?
sudhansu: he Himself
me: If he himself defined the best, then why did he not work for it?
sudhansu: If he thinks later that he could have done that way or this way...means that that was not his whole hearted effort.
me: Once it is "later" its all done! Exactly at that instant he did not do it. Thinking of it "later" is like commenting on cricket live matches: the player should have played like this or should have taken that shot etc.
sudhansu: That's how he learns, next time he knows where he did the mistake.
me: Yes thats all fine; but at a particular instant still he is doing his best.
Lets say i am short tempered. After a spree of anger i think i shoud not have got angry. Then I can do meditation etc etc. But at that moment i did not do anything wrong!
When air flows through leaves no one says its right or wrong; I think our actions are like that.
Each moment we do the best. Even a dog wont take the second best path if he knew tat its the 2nd best.
sudhansu: If he knows that it's the best, then he should gracefully accept the results of his action.... and he understands everything he is going through is for his actions only... and... that's his best action
me: Yes
sudhansu: Then he is always happy!
me: Happy... may be may not be!
But he is certinly not unhappy
sudhansu: Is it, then there shouldn't be any sorrow and happiness!!Some are in that state, but many are not... they feel sad,
me: Yes; but surprisingly we all can be happy... somewhere I read "if u want to be happy, be".
sudhansu: I read somewhere that we are naturally all happy but we created misery around us.
me: That too is a problematic thing! Its basically blaming us, which i don't feel comfortable with!
But one thing I marked: life is interesting :)
sudhansu: People are living as rich and the poor. There must be something. Otherwise all the poor would have drowned in indian Ocean!
me: still they live! Why they live?
sudhansu: Because life is interesting!
me: yes :)
Because we think that their life is not worth living! But that may be true for us; not for them! Even a daily beggar with one eye goes on living...what for?
sudhansu: we have taken so much of a burden to think about others lives rather than ours
our standard is by our means
me: I think yes; this is a good phrase "life is interesting"; I cant say life is blissful or bad or good... yes... life really is interesting! Sometimes i feel very much amused; so much so tat i wish i could live 1000 years just observing life and people and creation :)
sudhansu: But there are 1000 lives around you every year!
me: yes :) That bargain is also fine with me; if i could live all the lives at a time...
sudhansu: that's equivant to 1000 years!
me: 1000 lives either in space or time :) ... Yes; very interesting concept! Great!!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Necessary and sufficient conditions for friendship!
A question cropped into my mind yesterday.
Who is a real friend: one who feels for your in your happy moments or one who feels for you in your moments of need?
Answers were many. Someone also gave the example of how when she was under distress, only a few friends would call her every evening. And that made her feel so much better. I also have my own life-experience, when during one of my calamities I suddenly opened my door to discover three of my long-forgotten friends standing. That did made me feel so much better. Hence, it seems the question is baseless and has but one equivocal answer. A friend is one who stands beside you during your hour of peril.
However, I always believed that a real friend is one who can be heartily happy for your happiness! I thought a bit more and discovered a nice observation!
Agreed that; a friend is one who stands beside you during your hour of peril. But not all those who stand by you during your calamity are your friends! During your moment of calamity many will come out to help you. This is the natural human tendency! We feel pity for one in calamity. Most (not all) will feel an ego-boost to find someone is calamity. Thats why we all get a feel-good tango when we do some social work! It may sound blunt, but this is the fact. We dont feel intimidated by seeing someone in trouble.
Whereas, if someone is prospering our ego feels belittled! We may feel that logically he is my friend and I should be happy for his prosperity. Hence most of us show that we are happy when any of our friends is having more happiness than we have! But in our heart of hearts we know that there is a tinge of jealousy!
Hence, its easy to get people who will be sad when you are sad. But to find someone who will be happy (from his/her heart) when you are sad, is a herculean task!
Mathematically speaking the condition 'to feel sad when your friend is sad' is a necessary condition for being a true friend. But the condition 'to feel happy when your friend is happy' is a sufficient condition for being a true friend!
In other words, a true friend need to be sad when you are sad. But just because someone is sad when you are sad, does not make him your true friend. Whereas if someone is happy when you are happy, then he IS your true friend!
I.e. 'being sad when you are sad' is a quality of true friend; whereas 'being happy when you are happy' qualifies a true friend...
Who is a real friend: one who feels for your in your happy moments or one who feels for you in your moments of need?
Answers were many. Someone also gave the example of how when she was under distress, only a few friends would call her every evening. And that made her feel so much better. I also have my own life-experience, when during one of my calamities I suddenly opened my door to discover three of my long-forgotten friends standing. That did made me feel so much better. Hence, it seems the question is baseless and has but one equivocal answer. A friend is one who stands beside you during your hour of peril.
However, I always believed that a real friend is one who can be heartily happy for your happiness! I thought a bit more and discovered a nice observation!
Agreed that; a friend is one who stands beside you during your hour of peril. But not all those who stand by you during your calamity are your friends! During your moment of calamity many will come out to help you. This is the natural human tendency! We feel pity for one in calamity. Most (not all) will feel an ego-boost to find someone is calamity. Thats why we all get a feel-good tango when we do some social work! It may sound blunt, but this is the fact. We dont feel intimidated by seeing someone in trouble.
Whereas, if someone is prospering our ego feels belittled! We may feel that logically he is my friend and I should be happy for his prosperity. Hence most of us show that we are happy when any of our friends is having more happiness than we have! But in our heart of hearts we know that there is a tinge of jealousy!
Hence, its easy to get people who will be sad when you are sad. But to find someone who will be happy (from his/her heart) when you are sad, is a herculean task!
Mathematically speaking the condition 'to feel sad when your friend is sad' is a necessary condition for being a true friend. But the condition 'to feel happy when your friend is happy' is a sufficient condition for being a true friend!
In other words, a true friend need to be sad when you are sad. But just because someone is sad when you are sad, does not make him your true friend. Whereas if someone is happy when you are happy, then he IS your true friend!
I.e. 'being sad when you are sad' is a quality of true friend; whereas 'being happy when you are happy' qualifies a true friend...
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Free will
The way I see it, we can have two schools of thoughts:
1- God-believing: If we believe in God, then that God has to be omnipotent. Hence there is always a preplanned destiny. Because what use is a God who does not have control over time !! I read somewhere in a book by some physicist from UK: our condition is like a fly crawling upon a dusty picture. As its treading ahead, its deciphering a part of the picture. For it, its all new, its all his choice and all that. But for someone who can see the 'big picture' (pun intended), its all obvious!
2- Atheistic view: If our knowledge till the date is fine, then there was a big bang and the creation (including time) started from there. After that things started spreading out. But the origin is one. And we also know that there can be no effect without a cause. Hence with the cause being the same, the effects are all deterministic. Rather its calculable (but may not be predictable).
Hence, free-will is but an illusion! We just feel that we are taking a free-willed decision! But actually we are not... or may be I am wrong somewhere...
1- God-believing: If we believe in God, then that God has to be omnipotent. Hence there is always a preplanned destiny. Because what use is a God who does not have control over time !! I read somewhere in a book by some physicist from UK: our condition is like a fly crawling upon a dusty picture. As its treading ahead, its deciphering a part of the picture. For it, its all new, its all his choice and all that. But for someone who can see the 'big picture' (pun intended), its all obvious!
2- Atheistic view: If our knowledge till the date is fine, then there was a big bang and the creation (including time) started from there. After that things started spreading out. But the origin is one. And we also know that there can be no effect without a cause. Hence with the cause being the same, the effects are all deterministic. Rather its calculable (but may not be predictable).
Hence, free-will is but an illusion! We just feel that we are taking a free-willed decision! But actually we are not... or may be I am wrong somewhere...
Friday, April 10, 2009
Dejavu: Forbidden Love!
(originally written on 28-Jun 06)
Few years back I read a novel in OdiA, "kahibAku lAja" (tale of shame), which described the love between two cousins! Forbidden love. There are societies where cousin love and marriage is accepted. But where they are not, its a shame, its a sin, its a sabotage of culture, to do it. Surprisingly I found recently a friend who had done the sin of loving his cousin! Might sound disgusting to some. But how can you stop the force of love? It just happens. They might have been close. Then they attend puberty. Find that their ideas match. They get closer at a higher level. And before any of them realized, they are in love....or whatever word you chose for this feeling. (It might sound filmy but it IS the fact.) Then what? In the novel, the lovers finally got married, against the will of the society. Here the reality differs from story. My friend was helpless. He knew they could never get married. What they did was forbidden love. He had started a story with no end!
Same way, depending on the society, there can be forbidden loves of so many types. Every society has its own taboos and rules. Starting from extremes of gay-love to simple thing like loving some one from the same neighborhood, love can be forbidden in society.
My point is, what is it like, to be in a forbidden love? When you know that you cant dream of things like "getting married" or "being together for ever"? When you know you cant stake many for one. When you know running away wont be the best option. When you know love is painful, still you cant NOT do it. Does it make love more pure? Or at least as per the conventional philosophy? Because here you love for the present, knowing very well that there is no future! Does forbidden love teaches you the gist of love, to love with no expectations, to work without any desire for the fruit ("mA faleshu kadAchana")?
Few years back I read a novel in OdiA, "kahibAku lAja" (tale of shame), which described the love between two cousins! Forbidden love. There are societies where cousin love and marriage is accepted. But where they are not, its a shame, its a sin, its a sabotage of culture, to do it. Surprisingly I found recently a friend who had done the sin of loving his cousin! Might sound disgusting to some. But how can you stop the force of love? It just happens. They might have been close. Then they attend puberty. Find that their ideas match. They get closer at a higher level. And before any of them realized, they are in love....or whatever word you chose for this feeling. (It might sound filmy but it IS the fact.) Then what? In the novel, the lovers finally got married, against the will of the society. Here the reality differs from story. My friend was helpless. He knew they could never get married. What they did was forbidden love. He had started a story with no end!
Same way, depending on the society, there can be forbidden loves of so many types. Every society has its own taboos and rules. Starting from extremes of gay-love to simple thing like loving some one from the same neighborhood, love can be forbidden in society.
My point is, what is it like, to be in a forbidden love? When you know that you cant dream of things like "getting married" or "being together for ever"? When you know you cant stake many for one. When you know running away wont be the best option. When you know love is painful, still you cant NOT do it. Does it make love more pure? Or at least as per the conventional philosophy? Because here you love for the present, knowing very well that there is no future! Does forbidden love teaches you the gist of love, to love with no expectations, to work without any desire for the fruit ("mA faleshu kadAchana")?
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Dejavu: Feline Love
(I thought of reviving some of my old blog postings!! This one was written 02 JULY 2006.)
I was walking today from my flat to the university, and saw a black cat sitting in the sun. I went near her; she was not at all disturbed. I sat with her, she took the pain to look at who this god-damn fellow is! I patted her on her head. She rose. I knew what the cats like the best, a cuddle beside their neck. I did that and she was ecstactic! She mewed, came closer, straightened her tail, and purred! This love went on for a few minutes. I stoped cuddling, and rose. She immediately went back to her original position in sun. I started to depart. Looked back once or twice, only to find Ms.Cat happily enjoying the sun, as if nothing happened. Levae alone coming behind me, she even did not bother to give me a parting look (the looks that you get from dogs!).
This is feline love......detached, mature, and impersonal. Love that happens and only cares about present! No past acquaintance is needed for this love, nor does it leave any mark for future. Is this what seers describe as pure love? At the moment, as if there is nothing more to it, as if there is nothing above it. Just the very next moment, as if nothing has happened! Something to learn from my black cat, whom I loved for a few minutes???
I was walking today from my flat to the university, and saw a black cat sitting in the sun. I went near her; she was not at all disturbed. I sat with her, she took the pain to look at who this god-damn fellow is! I patted her on her head. She rose. I knew what the cats like the best, a cuddle beside their neck. I did that and she was ecstactic! She mewed, came closer, straightened her tail, and purred! This love went on for a few minutes. I stoped cuddling, and rose. She immediately went back to her original position in sun. I started to depart. Looked back once or twice, only to find Ms.Cat happily enjoying the sun, as if nothing happened. Levae alone coming behind me, she even did not bother to give me a parting look (the looks that you get from dogs!).
This is feline love......detached, mature, and impersonal. Love that happens and only cares about present! No past acquaintance is needed for this love, nor does it leave any mark for future. Is this what seers describe as pure love? At the moment, as if there is nothing more to it, as if there is nothing above it. Just the very next moment, as if nothing has happened! Something to learn from my black cat, whom I loved for a few minutes???
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Satyagrah III
This is the third post on this topic, written based on my limited understanding and appreciation of Gandhian philosophy. This time I will give the example of a current day problem prevalent in most of the academic campuses round India. We will try to find a solution to the same following the principle of Satyagrah.
Economy is sluggish, market is down and things are in utterly bad shape. Bad times bring forth the worst in human character! Hence the moral responsibility of the young mass is finding it hard to be up! A common off-shoot of the same in campuses like IITs is found among the final year students. Here, companies come to the campus to recruit students. Lets say you have been selected in a company. Later if a company comes whose salary package is at least 20% higher than the company where you have been placed, then you can appear in the interview of the new company as well. This is allowed once 80% of the students from the branch have been placed. This time companies were few and all wanted to take the brightest few. Lets say Hari is a bright student and have been placed in a company. Given the above situation he has all right to sit for the new company. However when 60% of his batch mates have not been placed, should he sit again and consume one sit? As a matter of fact many do sit. And many others who are sure that they wont be doing job and would rather go for higher studies, are also sitting for the next round. This in my opinion is utterly unethical. Now the question is can we use satyagrah to stop this practice?
Of course while handling this issue the first question that cropped in my mind was is this situation fitting in to the domain of satyagrah? What or which is the 'satya'or truth for which we are displaying 'agrah' or fondness?
I have been thinking on the above question for last two days. But still could not find an answer to it. May be this is not 'satyagrah', rather trying to establish our own vested interest or our own personal idea of morality...!
Economy is sluggish, market is down and things are in utterly bad shape. Bad times bring forth the worst in human character! Hence the moral responsibility of the young mass is finding it hard to be up! A common off-shoot of the same in campuses like IITs is found among the final year students. Here, companies come to the campus to recruit students. Lets say you have been selected in a company. Later if a company comes whose salary package is at least 20% higher than the company where you have been placed, then you can appear in the interview of the new company as well. This is allowed once 80% of the students from the branch have been placed. This time companies were few and all wanted to take the brightest few. Lets say Hari is a bright student and have been placed in a company. Given the above situation he has all right to sit for the new company. However when 60% of his batch mates have not been placed, should he sit again and consume one sit? As a matter of fact many do sit. And many others who are sure that they wont be doing job and would rather go for higher studies, are also sitting for the next round. This in my opinion is utterly unethical. Now the question is can we use satyagrah to stop this practice?
Of course while handling this issue the first question that cropped in my mind was is this situation fitting in to the domain of satyagrah? What or which is the 'satya'or truth for which we are displaying 'agrah' or fondness?
I have been thinking on the above question for last two days. But still could not find an answer to it. May be this is not 'satyagrah', rather trying to establish our own vested interest or our own personal idea of morality...!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)