We live, we eat, we survive, we grow, we love, we war, we entertain, we reproduce but what we r human for is "WE THINK". We think to accomplish all these activities. We think to think even. We r bonded to each other. In this transient world we choose our relation ship, we choose the longevity of the relation. We the living r in actual terms dead. What is wrong if I would say we r a different species of deads making a different class of our own. We too follow a monotonous and classical protocol. We seldom thrive to use the ultimate human qualities viz. courage, creativity and reasoning. We r born unique but we die a copy ! Through out our life we try following others doing what has already been done and following an already created way. We never try reaching new heights, unleashing new horizons. We live in but in a dead way, wrapping our all strengths under the coat of fear.
We claim the world is changing century after century. The change is only constant and the acceleration of change is accelerating. But when we take a close look we find it was an illusion. Actually we r looping in a circular path, like the ageing process. We create then destroy, we claim then blame, we create boundaries then we circumvent. What we do is we struggle our self, we struggle with our own thought and we struggle to convince our selves that life is real but is it?? We make relations; we love , we love to take pain for our love. We presume we can't survive with out them. But when they depart still we love; we love their memory, time continues and life goes on. Nothing changes except few of our behaviors. Its not because we adapt but because some how we know we r in the loop, we will be back to that point some time. That's why life goes on .
Truly
Abinash
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Analogy!
Great genius Albert Einstein proved this world to be a relative one following some rules of relativity and having some constraints. Hats off to that visionary genius.
It sounds paradoxical that the non physical things r more relative than the physical substance. We assume some one to be an intelligent person with respect to some one. We say some one is good relative to another. All these mental attributes r relative. So we and our thoughts r also relative.
We say a point is something which has no dimension and hence we can't put a definition for it. But we define a straight line as an one dimensional collection of points. Points?? But have not we just concluded that point has no definition; how come we can define something as a collection of something which it self is undefined. Isn't that weird. Again we say a plane is a collection of these points spreading infinitesimally. How come? If something has no dimension how can we assume its collection would make any sense? Worth's some thinking.
Now come to human attitude. We will make a geometrical analogy of it. If we r single minded and have a single character it hardly make any sense like a point but if we have a collection of such characters then is will be like a straight-line. But compare the straight line with a plane .....the straight-line is blank isn't it? So we still need to be versatile and have more firm characters to make some sense. But isn't a plane blank as compared to the 3-dimetional cube; yes its blank. That means there is not a limit to the point we can grow our character attributes. To make us mark able we need MULTIDIMENSIONAL growth of CHARACTER. Then only we r distinct .
So, we can conclude 2 points from the above analogy.
1) We need to grow in multiple dimetion with multiple abilities to match up life's indefinite requirements.
2) And most importantly we must not neglect any event or any thing because its small. the point is that it has some significance, up on which we can build on. Like a small dimensionless point builds a straight line which in turn builds a plane and ultimately the plane build the cube which is full.
Truly
Abinash
It sounds paradoxical that the non physical things r more relative than the physical substance. We assume some one to be an intelligent person with respect to some one. We say some one is good relative to another. All these mental attributes r relative. So we and our thoughts r also relative.
We say a point is something which has no dimension and hence we can't put a definition for it. But we define a straight line as an one dimensional collection of points. Points?? But have not we just concluded that point has no definition; how come we can define something as a collection of something which it self is undefined. Isn't that weird. Again we say a plane is a collection of these points spreading infinitesimally. How come? If something has no dimension how can we assume its collection would make any sense? Worth's some thinking.
Now come to human attitude. We will make a geometrical analogy of it. If we r single minded and have a single character it hardly make any sense like a point but if we have a collection of such characters then is will be like a straight-line. But compare the straight line with a plane .....the straight-line is blank isn't it? So we still need to be versatile and have more firm characters to make some sense. But isn't a plane blank as compared to the 3-dimetional cube; yes its blank. That means there is not a limit to the point we can grow our character attributes. To make us mark able we need MULTIDIMENSIONAL growth of CHARACTER. Then only we r distinct .
So, we can conclude 2 points from the above analogy.
1) We need to grow in multiple dimetion with multiple abilities to match up life's indefinite requirements.
2) And most importantly we must not neglect any event or any thing because its small. the point is that it has some significance, up on which we can build on. Like a small dimensionless point builds a straight line which in turn builds a plane and ultimately the plane build the cube which is full.
Truly
Abinash
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Is man Good or Bad in born????
Yesterday while discussing (ok.. ok... arguing) with on of my friends a weird topic came out and prolonged our so called discussion for 1 more hour. The topic was "Is man Good or Bad?". Thats as a creature man has always been enjoying the self proclaimed victory over earth and the superiority to all other living beings. Now we decide whats good and whats bad. But the question is when we are born.... what is our moral status. Do we posses a conscience by birth. Are we "The Man" good and ethical by birth and only this society and circumstances makes us evil???? I strongly disagree. In my point man is evil by birth. When we are born we have only one thing known to us "destruction" and anything that is bad. In fact its the society where we learn what is good and this bad-man suppresses. Not convinced? Ok look into it this way...
We say a baby is the purest form and knows only good as it is unaware of the maya and is indifferent to materialistic possession. But thats where this theory has the largest flaw and fails. A baby is the true sinner.
Point 1) Consider a child which knows nothing, not even how to speak and not what is death and what is construction or destruction. And here a butterfly comes which fascinates our baby. No sooner the butterfly comes to its reach, the baby catch holds of it just to mutilate it in to torn pieces and a life ends. Now the child does not know killing is bad but some thing some basic instinct worked inside which encouraged him to mutilate the butterfly. Had man been ever good by birth then the default instinct should be constructive instead of destructive. Give a new toy and its gone in no time. When man is born it has one instinct in him "evil", which knows destruction. But in flow of time, the social rules teaches us that we should not listen to this bad in us and we start to suppress it.
Point 2) Say you are alone and you know no one is there to see you. Then what is the action that first strikes to mind? Its the weirdest fantasies that we try to realize. Most of the times we feel the overwhelming urge to do anything that has been taught as bad.
Point 3) Teach a baby how to write a letter it will take much effort. But teach him how to break a pen it won't take ant effort. Any one adult or child to take very less time to learn anything thats bad. Because we have a hidden interest for it. Our inner self is slanted more towards bad then good. Accept it or not. Thats the truth.
This is the real bad that resides in us, in each of us. But we misunderstand to conclude that man is good by birth and only this society makes a bad out of us. But alas! only the reverse is true.
We say a baby is the purest form and knows only good as it is unaware of the maya and is indifferent to materialistic possession. But thats where this theory has the largest flaw and fails. A baby is the true sinner.
Point 1) Consider a child which knows nothing, not even how to speak and not what is death and what is construction or destruction. And here a butterfly comes which fascinates our baby. No sooner the butterfly comes to its reach, the baby catch holds of it just to mutilate it in to torn pieces and a life ends. Now the child does not know killing is bad but some thing some basic instinct worked inside which encouraged him to mutilate the butterfly. Had man been ever good by birth then the default instinct should be constructive instead of destructive. Give a new toy and its gone in no time. When man is born it has one instinct in him "evil", which knows destruction. But in flow of time, the social rules teaches us that we should not listen to this bad in us and we start to suppress it.
Point 2) Say you are alone and you know no one is there to see you. Then what is the action that first strikes to mind? Its the weirdest fantasies that we try to realize. Most of the times we feel the overwhelming urge to do anything that has been taught as bad.
Point 3) Teach a baby how to write a letter it will take much effort. But teach him how to break a pen it won't take ant effort. Any one adult or child to take very less time to learn anything thats bad. Because we have a hidden interest for it. Our inner self is slanted more towards bad then good. Accept it or not. Thats the truth.
This is the real bad that resides in us, in each of us. But we misunderstand to conclude that man is good by birth and only this society makes a bad out of us. But alas! only the reverse is true.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)