The most interesting contrast I have ever come across in the natural world is the nature of Doves and Wolves. A Dove is a shy, graceful, and often intimidated creature. It is known as the meekest of all creatures. Whereas a Wolf - for its ferocity is an intense and violent creature with an aura of eeriness. It is known as the fiercest of all creatures.
One may wonder whether there are any similarities between them. And there is one similarity that stands out and it is a paradox. Consider the Dove as a finite horizontal line and the Wolf as a finite vertical line (finite because they are not infinite beings) . When you take these two lines together, there is a point of intersection- a paradox. You can now clearly imagine a figure made by these two lines and the paradox- a Cross.
This paradox is the most profound and admirable character of the natures of Doves and Wolves. And this paradox is known as Constancy. Doves and Wolves are two creatures that remain together with their partners for life. In the sense that a pair of Doves and a pair of Wolves can never be separated but by death alone. They never look for another partner till one is dead. It is a relationship which is commonly known as "Till death do us part." This nature of constancy is a paradox as it is observed in these two very contrasting creatures.
Now the question arises: Doesn't humanity show this nature of constancy too? It is difficult to give an answer. Because majority does not make totality. It will be like saying that everyone on earth has O +ve blood group because majority of the people has O +ve blood group. And also if I wear a blue glass and see everything blue it does not mean that the whole world becomes blue.
These days, although not everywhere and not everyone, getting a partner is more or less like getting a new pair of shoes. Once you feel that you are no longer in love with your shoes or your shoes are no longer in love with you or you find a better pair of shoes, you get the new pair of shoes.
But I feel there is a much more important question: Should we have this nature of constancy and how can we be like Doves and Wolves, not literally, which would mean laying eggs like doves and howling at night like wolves, but in the sense of the paradox?
I cannot be more sure to affirm that this nature of constancy is and had been a part of humanity; it must ha surely belonged to him once but which had been gradually corrupted with time and by man's own complacent nature, it is now almost lost. So the answer to the first part is "Yes" because it is our very own nature. Whereas to answer the second part is tough. All I can think I can do is to try and scrap out the rust from the old rusted iron. So here it goes.
To show constancy I think the primary requisite is to fall in love. Falling in love is a glorious thing but like all other feelings experienced by a man, this feeling too fades away and sometimes very quickly. So then should someone try to be in love all the time to be like Doves and Wolves? It is impossible to be in the state of "being in love" all the time. It is unimaginable to be in that state and lose sleep, lose appetite and fail to do ones work for years. This Love comes through the admiration of someone for his or her kindness, looks or personality and character. Lets call this love the "glorious love." Love must be something more than the "glorious love" else it can never have the constancy nature as it is just another feeling and all feelings fade. But of course the glorious love is very important and it is a starting point of all kinds of love and without a beginning there can be no progress.
We see that whenever someone is in the state of glorious-love there is a strong intention to make a lot of promises and pledges. Listen to any love song and you will immediately see the promises made by the lover to their beloved. "Everything I do I do it for you" -Bryan Adams, "I'll be there for you"- Rembrants, "I'll stand by you forever" - Enrique Iglesias (Hero) ,etc. So what happens when the glorious love fades away? Are the promises meant to be kept forever or only when one is in love, when one is in the glorious love?
Sometimes I wonder, to whom are they- the love song writers and singers, making these promises to. It must be definitely someone perfect, flawless, glorious and totally an imaginary being. For they seem to be simply making promises to their 'imaginary beloved' just to break it. And they can break it because it was merely an imagination.
Regarding the vows: When any normal person falls in love, the idea of marriage will surely be in his or her mind. If not then that person has not fallen in love but fallen in lust. Marriage is a vow, a promise one makes with his or her beloved, a vow of constancy. It is what is famously known as "when two becomes one", not in the literal sense but in the sense that the gun and the bullet makes one weapon or the violin and the bow makes one musical instrument. And this vow ought not to be broken under any circumstances of the feelings.
Many think that this glorious love is supposed to be forever and once they see that its fading they think they made a wrong choice and starts looking for a new beginning. Not realizing that the new glorious love that they might find will also eventually die.
So what could be the other kind of love? It must be a kind of love that wills to keep the vows made by the glorious love. A love that is kind and patient, a love that is caring and not proud, a love that is not rude and self-less, a love that protects, trusts and persevere to hold on to the vows and promises made. Lets call it the "wholesome love." This wholesome love is the True love. A person who thinks glorious love is true love is like a person who takes only the salad in a banquet and think the banquet to be just a salad banquet.
A wholesome love can also be the starting point but in this present world almost all the loves start with the glorious love.
Like a seed that must die or lose its normal shape and form to sprout into a new plant, the glorious love must die and will die but it must sprout into the wholesome love. Without the wholesome love, the glorious love remains partial and the nature of constancy remain unfulfillable. This wholesome love is what binds the couple together when the glorious love dims off, it is what prevents them from seeking a new glorious love in times of emotional drought, it is what keeps the promises from breaking, it is that ideal that will help us to regain our true nature of constancy and it is what that can make us to be like Doves and Wolves, it is what that can make us "us" again.
Now finally, one may think how can this person write about anything which he does not know at all. It will be an irony if the writer has never fallen in love, it will be more ironical if he is unmarried, and most ironical if he has committed his life to celibacy. But this is not his own idea but its merely an extract from the only "One" philosophy- the Christian Philosophy.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Monday, July 14, 2008
Westernized Indians and Indianised Westerners
Here is an excerpt from a book: "An Indian on his visit to Holland went out one evening with his host for a walk to get some milk. They walked to a dairy. The dairy had over a hundred cows and only one woman looked after most of the operation. The cows were milked mechanically; the milk came into a boiler and was sterilized. There was no sales counter and no salesman. The host opened the boiler’s tap and filled his jug with milk. Then he took out a twenty guilders note, picked up a bowl (full of money) from a window, put his money into it, helped himself to change, turned around, and started walking back. The Indian stunned and said “If you were an Indian, you would take the milk and the money.”
If people who buy the milk were not honest, then the diary owner will have to hire a salesman. The price of milk would go up. They would have less milk for the same amount of money. And if the customers were dishonest, why should the salesman or the dairy owner be trustworthy? If they were Indians, they would add water to the milk. Then we would have costly and impure milk. People would agitate and would demand the state to appoint milk-inspectors. And who would have to pay for them? In any case the customers and suppliers are dishonest, why should the inspectors be honest? With their powers they will not do anything unless appeased with bribes. And ultimately it ends with substandard milk at a higher price."
Maybe in one way we can think and admire the uncanny ability of an Indian to create job opportunities. But the more important issue is; have we lost our moral values and our integrity?
There was once an article in the newspaper: "Ambani brothers and Mittal plans to Indianise Europe by 2015." Is the situation from the story, the creation of jobs at the cost of losing integrity, called Indianisation?
What is Indianisation? It must be some quality, something different which makes India different and for which India is known for.
Someone said, “The difference between the west and India is that in west people do not believe in God whereas in India people don’t know which God to believe.”
So then does Indianisation mean the confusion of a society with numerous deities? Lets assume here that that is called Indianisation, I will consider only the negative aspects of India culture here.
If you see the young generation of India, the degree of the influence of western culture is enormous. Western culture and philosophies are propagated not through books these days but through music and movies, through the media which portrays their lifestyle unceasingly. We now think that using slang when you talk is cool, flirting is fun, divorce as a necessary part of marriage, premarital sex educative for post marital life, extra marital affairs a must for all married people, religion are for non-intellect and atheism for the intellect. One could think this age to be “the age of westernized Indians.”
This is what westernization is today. Although the term westernization was originally used to refer to the use of right reason in all spheres of life which moulded the western world during the times of Abraham Lincoln, etc.
We like criticizing Americans that they have no culture but in reality what is happening is that we are losing our culture to their so called no-culture. It’s a fascinating relation.
Culture + no-culture = no-culture
Why do we think of only the bad characteristics and qualities of a culture when we talk about the influences and effects of Westernization and Indianisation? I guess it’s just for the simple reason that it is easier to accept and imbibe them by and into another culture. And I am sticking with that thought henceforth. Although there are great qualities in both the cultures but unfortunately we can't adopt it.
In India, my assumption is that the root cause of losing culture and getting westernized can be attributed to the espousing of the atheistic worldview by the Indian youth. Just because westerners did we think we also should. We think that to be known as an intellect one has to be an atheist. If you ask one why he chose to be an atheist his reply will evidently be; because we cannot get a proof of the existence of God from religion. But have they found the proof of the non-existence of God intellectually (scientifically)? Hardly anyone will bother to investigate their claims neutrally from both sides.
Aldous Huxley said: “I wanted to believe the Darwinian idea, I chose to believe it, not because I think there was enormous evidence for it, nor because I believed it had the full authority to give the interpretations to my origins but I chose to believe it because it delivered me from trying to find meaning and freed me to my own erotic passions.”
Science is the god of an atheist and scientists are the messengers of the god called science. We have become so complacent and ignorant that we believe whatever science dictates is true.
Atheism means there is no God. But an Indian atheist will say: I believe there is no god. It’s yet another belief. An atheist will not know the reason why he is an atheist similar to most theists who will not know the reason for their beliefs. But an atheist is more dogmatic than a theist. Because his whole idea is that life is meaningless and it is meaningless to find the truth because the truth which he ultimately might find is that “life is meaningless.” India has added another deity to its long list of deities.
India is better because it had espoused a moral law giver who defines what is good and evil and that one will be judged according to ones action. But in the west, life itself is meaningless, there is no such thing as good and evil, it all depends on feelings. If they feel it is good then it’s good even though it is evil for someone else, if they feel it is an evil then it is evil. Good and evil are judged and distinguished based on feelings. What was the result? The implications of atheistic worldview are horrible; teenagers killed their own parents without any remorse, rape of young innocent girls, father killed child, child killed mother, mother killed father, etc, burglary, murders in drug deals, murders in street, divorce, extra-marital affairs, and not forgetting suicides, and the prevailing horrors of Auschwitz; killing of millions innocent babies through abortion every year. Even history cries out at the outcome of atheistic views.
If more and more Indian youth continue to embrace these atheistic ideas, it will be worst than Auschwitz. I am sure someone will think it to be an option for population control. Let that someone think the same thing when he becomes the victim or some of his loved ones become the victim. One thing for sure, abortion rate will increase exponentially. Again someone will think the money he can make in running a clinic. Let that someone imagine killing his own child. Westernizing India will have serious consequences. Watch out!!!
Finally, it appears that Western culture and Indian culture lack the sting and the answer to man’s question on origin, meaning, morality and destiny remains unanswered. And these question arises again; is there meaning to life? Is there a truth? Can we know the truth?
An atheist will say there is NO meaning although deep within himself he is hoping and wishing that he is wrong.
A theist will say there is meaning to life although he himself might be hoping that he knows the meaning of what he is affirming.
Allow me to conclude with sarcasm. According to an evolutionary atheist I think we can expect that lions will later evolve in their moral values and intelligence and by that time humanity will be extinct killing each other. They will be like us, the human today; they will use their mind to think. But the most amusing thing will be that even though a group of lions is collectively known as a “pride”, they will not have the pride to reject the presence of their very creator contrary to the pride of humanity which is rejecting it and is leading itself to its own destruction. Those unlucky human that survives will be kept in the zoo and the papa lion will tell the baby lion: there is man, “the king of his own destruction.”
Ps: feel free to disagree with me like I disagree with you in your blogs.
If people who buy the milk were not honest, then the diary owner will have to hire a salesman. The price of milk would go up. They would have less milk for the same amount of money. And if the customers were dishonest, why should the salesman or the dairy owner be trustworthy? If they were Indians, they would add water to the milk. Then we would have costly and impure milk. People would agitate and would demand the state to appoint milk-inspectors. And who would have to pay for them? In any case the customers and suppliers are dishonest, why should the inspectors be honest? With their powers they will not do anything unless appeased with bribes. And ultimately it ends with substandard milk at a higher price."
Maybe in one way we can think and admire the uncanny ability of an Indian to create job opportunities. But the more important issue is; have we lost our moral values and our integrity?
There was once an article in the newspaper: "Ambani brothers and Mittal plans to Indianise Europe by 2015." Is the situation from the story, the creation of jobs at the cost of losing integrity, called Indianisation?
What is Indianisation? It must be some quality, something different which makes India different and for which India is known for.
Someone said, “The difference between the west and India is that in west people do not believe in God whereas in India people don’t know which God to believe.”
So then does Indianisation mean the confusion of a society with numerous deities? Lets assume here that that is called Indianisation, I will consider only the negative aspects of India culture here.
If you see the young generation of India, the degree of the influence of western culture is enormous. Western culture and philosophies are propagated not through books these days but through music and movies, through the media which portrays their lifestyle unceasingly. We now think that using slang when you talk is cool, flirting is fun, divorce as a necessary part of marriage, premarital sex educative for post marital life, extra marital affairs a must for all married people, religion are for non-intellect and atheism for the intellect. One could think this age to be “the age of westernized Indians.”
This is what westernization is today. Although the term westernization was originally used to refer to the use of right reason in all spheres of life which moulded the western world during the times of Abraham Lincoln, etc.
We like criticizing Americans that they have no culture but in reality what is happening is that we are losing our culture to their so called no-culture. It’s a fascinating relation.
Culture + no-culture = no-culture
Why do we think of only the bad characteristics and qualities of a culture when we talk about the influences and effects of Westernization and Indianisation? I guess it’s just for the simple reason that it is easier to accept and imbibe them by and into another culture. And I am sticking with that thought henceforth. Although there are great qualities in both the cultures but unfortunately we can't adopt it.
In India, my assumption is that the root cause of losing culture and getting westernized can be attributed to the espousing of the atheistic worldview by the Indian youth. Just because westerners did we think we also should. We think that to be known as an intellect one has to be an atheist. If you ask one why he chose to be an atheist his reply will evidently be; because we cannot get a proof of the existence of God from religion. But have they found the proof of the non-existence of God intellectually (scientifically)? Hardly anyone will bother to investigate their claims neutrally from both sides.
Aldous Huxley said: “I wanted to believe the Darwinian idea, I chose to believe it, not because I think there was enormous evidence for it, nor because I believed it had the full authority to give the interpretations to my origins but I chose to believe it because it delivered me from trying to find meaning and freed me to my own erotic passions.”
Science is the god of an atheist and scientists are the messengers of the god called science. We have become so complacent and ignorant that we believe whatever science dictates is true.
Atheism means there is no God. But an Indian atheist will say: I believe there is no god. It’s yet another belief. An atheist will not know the reason why he is an atheist similar to most theists who will not know the reason for their beliefs. But an atheist is more dogmatic than a theist. Because his whole idea is that life is meaningless and it is meaningless to find the truth because the truth which he ultimately might find is that “life is meaningless.” India has added another deity to its long list of deities.
India is better because it had espoused a moral law giver who defines what is good and evil and that one will be judged according to ones action. But in the west, life itself is meaningless, there is no such thing as good and evil, it all depends on feelings. If they feel it is good then it’s good even though it is evil for someone else, if they feel it is an evil then it is evil. Good and evil are judged and distinguished based on feelings. What was the result? The implications of atheistic worldview are horrible; teenagers killed their own parents without any remorse, rape of young innocent girls, father killed child, child killed mother, mother killed father, etc, burglary, murders in drug deals, murders in street, divorce, extra-marital affairs, and not forgetting suicides, and the prevailing horrors of Auschwitz; killing of millions innocent babies through abortion every year. Even history cries out at the outcome of atheistic views.
If more and more Indian youth continue to embrace these atheistic ideas, it will be worst than Auschwitz. I am sure someone will think it to be an option for population control. Let that someone think the same thing when he becomes the victim or some of his loved ones become the victim. One thing for sure, abortion rate will increase exponentially. Again someone will think the money he can make in running a clinic. Let that someone imagine killing his own child. Westernizing India will have serious consequences. Watch out!!!
Finally, it appears that Western culture and Indian culture lack the sting and the answer to man’s question on origin, meaning, morality and destiny remains unanswered. And these question arises again; is there meaning to life? Is there a truth? Can we know the truth?
An atheist will say there is NO meaning although deep within himself he is hoping and wishing that he is wrong.
A theist will say there is meaning to life although he himself might be hoping that he knows the meaning of what he is affirming.
Allow me to conclude with sarcasm. According to an evolutionary atheist I think we can expect that lions will later evolve in their moral values and intelligence and by that time humanity will be extinct killing each other. They will be like us, the human today; they will use their mind to think. But the most amusing thing will be that even though a group of lions is collectively known as a “pride”, they will not have the pride to reject the presence of their very creator contrary to the pride of humanity which is rejecting it and is leading itself to its own destruction. Those unlucky human that survives will be kept in the zoo and the papa lion will tell the baby lion: there is man, “the king of his own destruction.”
Ps: feel free to disagree with me like I disagree with you in your blogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)