My mom brought us up with affection of unseen amount. She is so caring and loveable you can’t possibly ask more from a human being. For this unparallel amount of love and affection I got in my childhood and still now, I have grown up also as a polite, friendly and soft-hearted personality. I spontaneously sacrifice for others more than one could ask for and also want the same level of heartiness in reply. I am raised up in tight bound of love, so, I want more like this.
I feel sympathetic to almost anyone and this is coming out of no interest, neither for public display and nor as a conscious trial to be great. It’s just part of my character. I have seen people who are trying so hard (against themselves) to practice philanthropy, but only succeeding in outward display of it, not in enjoying it from their heart. So, I feel lucky that I don’t have to force myself to feel like this.
I am as bad as my company has made me and as much good as the amount of my remaining originality. Inside my core, I am good, but the environment is trying to corrupt me. People so often try consciously or unconsciously to prove that selflessness is synonymous to foolishness. That it’s smart to look for your own interest only. But, I know, it is not. That the amount of goodness and happiness hidden inside the act of helping others could only be seen with an open heart. It could neither be understood nor be felt with hearts that are ceaselessly busy in grabbing more and more.
My thoughts were always boundless and perfect, and my language always brought it into limits and imperfections.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
The Sweet Loneliness
I am about to accept one of the ultimate truths of my life, perhaps applied to any others as well. The truth is, I am alone. That external company can never fill up this bizarre loneliness, it’s earnestly private only. The loneliness itself is something one could fall in love with, without looking for any external attractions whatsoever. The beauty of this sweet loneliness can’t be worded exactly for it’s complete, and human languages are not. The closer one could be to this loneliness, the purer one becomes. Free from all prejudices and earthly limitations, this is something that has kept it’s originality since the beginning. You can’ t overlook it, because if you try, you no longer remain a meaningful self, but dissolved and distorted with the vague outline of the external world around you.
This loneliness teaches us the limits. It teaches the right balance, without which we are all emotionally handicapped beings.
Among so many questions in our life - life itself is the biggest mystery. I must solve this. This will indeed be the greatest of challenges in my whole life.
This loneliness teaches us the limits. It teaches the right balance, without which we are all emotionally handicapped beings.
Among so many questions in our life - life itself is the biggest mystery. I must solve this. This will indeed be the greatest of challenges in my whole life.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
The Silly Truth
We are nothing but a collection of memory with different approaches to deal with it.
God and Us : the essential difference
There is nothing to become so astonished by the level of sophistication and inherent intelligence in the design and expression of nature. The reason is simple: nature is intelligent naturally. The sentence seems very vague at the first look. But, I will ask you to give a little deeper thought into it.
Look, when we call something intelligent, or praise something for its inherent design, we mainly focus on how well that fits to the environment, and how well that correlates to the surroundings. Now, for a natural object, (anything from a dead rock, a tree to a living being) it bounds to mix well with the nature. This is a must because nature has created it from the scratch following her own style of designing.
What Nature represents is not absolute intelligence and probably there is nothing that could be seen as absolute intelligence. Because, the very way nature shapes the universe is how intelligence is being defined. And this is also our way of interpreting intelligence. As such, to term some natural phenomena as intelligently played is not informative at all.
This implies that if nature would have created things differently, a different set of actions and designs would have been seen as intelligent. The crux is anything nature creates and any fashion she employs, it will always be the most logical and efficient system an agent could find in its world.
Suppose for example, many of us take great surprise in the efficient design of our own physique. We think only a very intelligent being could have made such a sophisticated, well-suited well-organized creation. But, stop! Think again! Human body was built not in a single day, but in a continuous natural fashion. It is developed following all the natural rules and ingredients. It still is being constantly developed and changed. And thus, when it looks as something as it is now, it is certain to react efficiently with the nature, after all nature has created it! When you draw something arbitrarily you need not care about the shape, because it’s always the right shape whether or not it conforms to something else. But after you finish the drawing and give it a special name, others will find it that much hard reproducing it in the same fashion as you did. And every scratch of your paint-brush would then seem carefully and thoughtfully delivered.
So, I think thought is not the beginning of creation. It rather is a quality of something that is created, like us, human being! God need not think! He needs to create! It is us, who are to ponder!!
Look, when we call something intelligent, or praise something for its inherent design, we mainly focus on how well that fits to the environment, and how well that correlates to the surroundings. Now, for a natural object, (anything from a dead rock, a tree to a living being) it bounds to mix well with the nature. This is a must because nature has created it from the scratch following her own style of designing.
What Nature represents is not absolute intelligence and probably there is nothing that could be seen as absolute intelligence. Because, the very way nature shapes the universe is how intelligence is being defined. And this is also our way of interpreting intelligence. As such, to term some natural phenomena as intelligently played is not informative at all.
This implies that if nature would have created things differently, a different set of actions and designs would have been seen as intelligent. The crux is anything nature creates and any fashion she employs, it will always be the most logical and efficient system an agent could find in its world.
Suppose for example, many of us take great surprise in the efficient design of our own physique. We think only a very intelligent being could have made such a sophisticated, well-suited well-organized creation. But, stop! Think again! Human body was built not in a single day, but in a continuous natural fashion. It is developed following all the natural rules and ingredients. It still is being constantly developed and changed. And thus, when it looks as something as it is now, it is certain to react efficiently with the nature, after all nature has created it! When you draw something arbitrarily you need not care about the shape, because it’s always the right shape whether or not it conforms to something else. But after you finish the drawing and give it a special name, others will find it that much hard reproducing it in the same fashion as you did. And every scratch of your paint-brush would then seem carefully and thoughtfully delivered.
So, I think thought is not the beginning of creation. It rather is a quality of something that is created, like us, human being! God need not think! He needs to create! It is us, who are to ponder!!
Talking to myself
Am I clear about my Goal of life?
Is happiness my ultimate goal? Can I define happiness? Is the definition of happiness absolute or is it relative? If relative is there any happiness that is absolute? Should I seek it?
I wanted to know about my origin, the creation of this universe, the purpose of its creation and existence. Was it a right thing to want to know? Am I asking a question with answers beyond my capacity to grasp? How could I know my limits? Should I be concerned about my limits? Do I have limits?
What would be my reaction if when I get my answers? Should that lead me to a new set of questions? Can I ever be satisfied with all I know? Is there anything like ‘all’ as I just said?
Am I on the right track to reach it?
Is happiness my ultimate goal? Can I define happiness? Is the definition of happiness absolute or is it relative? If relative is there any happiness that is absolute? Should I seek it?
I wanted to know about my origin, the creation of this universe, the purpose of its creation and existence. Was it a right thing to want to know? Am I asking a question with answers beyond my capacity to grasp? How could I know my limits? Should I be concerned about my limits? Do I have limits?
What would be my reaction if when I get my answers? Should that lead me to a new set of questions? Can I ever be satisfied with all I know? Is there anything like ‘all’ as I just said?
Am I on the right track to reach it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)