Was Shiva an Alien

Recently I watched a program on “Was Shiva an Alien?” Interesting hypothesis, but not good analysis/reasoning at arrive at conclusion. They missed out on interpretation of the literature on Lord Shiva, which could have made the claim to be more plausible. So here is my take on that ...

One of the oldest description of Shiva, is in Shiva Strotam - composed by his one of most famous worshipper – Raavan.
So let’s try and decipher, how Shiva Strotam (original text below in Sanskrit) describes Shiva.

जटा कटाह सम्भ्रम भ्रमन्निलिम्पनिर्झरी-
विलोल वीचि वल्लरी विराजमान मूर्द्धनि ।
धगद्धगद्धग ज्वल ललाट पट्ट पावके
किशोर चन्द्र शेखरे रतिः प्रतिक्षणं मम ।।
(btw you can listen to this shloka in the starting of the song "Kaun hai wo" from Movie Bahubnali. Click Here to listen to it.)

This shloka, is describing someone who is wearing a helmet with his thick locks of hair giving an illusion of moving milky way. The helmet has a moving wave on a display above it, it has a fire emitting gun at the center of helmet, and a torch light on top of helmet.

How do I come this interpretation? By translating it word by word. Let's do it together.
जटा means long locks of unkempt hair. //  कटाह = कढ़ाई ie a large circular pot.
सम्भ्रम – is सम भ्रम. In this सम =समान means "equivalent to"; भ्रम means illusion.
भ्रमन्निलिम्पनिर्झरी = भ्रमण + निलिम्प + निर्झरी
भ्रमण = Traveling. ;निलिम्प = Godly, heavenly; निर्झरी = River; निलिम्पनिर्झरी = आकाश-गंगा ie milky way.

Next line - विलोल वीचि वल्लरी विराजमान मूर्द्धनि
विलोल = लहराता हुआ, अस्थिर //  वीचि = लहर, तरंग,  किरण , चमक = shining wave.
वल्लरी = बेल ie a creeper   // विराजमान = Seated // मूर्द्धनि = upper part of the head.

Thus first shloka means "The long locks of hair in a pot, give an illusion of a moving Milkyway. An unsteady creeper like shiny wave is seated on very top of the head."

Next shloka
धगद्धगद्धग ज्वल ललाट पट्ट पावके
किशोर चन्द्र शेखरे रतिः प्रतिक्षणं मम ।।

धगद्धगद्धग ज्वल = धक् धक् करके जलता हुआ ie burning intensely
ललाट = forehead ; पट्ट = flat area ; पावके = Fire ; किशोर = young ; चन्द्र = Moon  ; शेखरे = top
किशोर चन्द्र शेखरे= One who has young moon on his top of head
रतिः = love  ;  प्रतिक्षणं = every second  ; मम = I

So the complete translation of both shlokas
The long locks of hair in a pot, give an illusion of a moving Milkyway. An unsteady creeper like shiny wave is seated on very top of the head.
The forehead has an intensely burning fire, and has a young moon on top of his head, - I wait lovingly every second for him.

Could it be describing someone who is wearing a glass helmet (कटाह) that is reflecting the milky way (भ्रमन्निलिम्पनिर्झरी) which has a moving sinewave display (ie unsteady creeper like wave =विलोल वीचि वल्लरी) on top (मूर्द्धनि) of helmet (कटाह ) and a fire emitting gun (धगद्धगद्धग ज्वल ललाट पट्ट पावके) mounted at the center of helmet and a torch light (किशोर चन्द्र शेखरे) on top of head/helmet.

Do these lines describe an alien; or a person from future; or a God is upto you to decide.

Assuming that these lines describe someone from future or an alien, lets see if the description makes sense. Nearest known thing to a torch light to a person few thousand year back would have been moon. Our space travelers as well as miners have a torch on their helmet. A helmet mounted gun that emits fire would have appeared like a third eye which burns when it opens.Now the question is why would anyone mount a gun on helmet’s forehead ? Well because it will help him aim better, and free the hands and also reduce reaction time. Very practical design I would say.

The way Ravana ( or whoever wrote these)  has described Shiva, it appears that he too has not seen Shiva, but is longing to see him.  Based on the verbal description in form of shlokas passed on generation to generation, an image of Shiva has been created. Maybe you can re-imagine the image of Shiva, by re interpreting the same words.

You only see what your eyes want to see

You only see what your eyes want to see...Madonna – from song Frozen.

Some of my friends support Modi all the way and some other see no virtue in any move that Modi makes. Some believe Kejriwal is the most honest person in the world and some believe exactly opposite of that. And they stick to that – against all odds, they are not even willing to consider new information if it is against their stand.

What is the thought process of a Bhakt.
Whats in your head... in your head... Zombie Zombie Zombie.. what's in your head ( Love that Cranberries song... good lyrics) 


Both Modi and Kejriwal had a very high decibel personality based campaign and had polarized the opinion about them. The opposition was shallow, and also had skeletons in their cupboards – and accordingly found it easy to attack personality rather than issues.
The trouble with personality based elections is that it results in binary supporters - either you trust/like someone or you don’t. There is no middle ground in a personality led election campaign.


But then the elections that brought these individuals to power are over. New information is available for both these politicians in terms of how they have behaved over last year or two.
Also why are their supporters/ detractors wearing their support/criticism on their sleeve all the time.
Why are these supporters using facebook / whatsapp to express their opinion all the time – and at times putting their personal / professional relationships at stake? Why are they so charged up and trying to convince others?


 This I believe is result of cognitive dissonance.
(Cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs.)

In order to minimize the discomfort, they try to deny any and every information that conflicts with their existing beliefs. They go out of their way- and start selling their own ideology / try to convert others. This reduces their dissonance.


People who believed Modi is evil / communal / feku ...are at a loss when they see something good attempted by him. A Modi hater will go out of way and use his/her personal reputation / relationships / friendships at stake - to prove Modi’s good activities are actually very bad. Doing this minimizes their dissonance. Infact if Modi was not doing good work, his detractors might have been less vocal about their opinions.


People who had a belief that Kejriwal is the most educated & honest person, find it very difficult to find fault with his policies / lack of actions now.


What can be done - well, there are tried and tested approaches to reduce cognitive dissonance- well that is a topic for a larger blog post....and frankly not my area of expertise.


In US, Trump also had a very similar personality focused high decibel campaign, and globally almost EVERYONE has a stand on Trump. If Trump starts doing something logical, he will face a lot of backlash / every good step will also be criticized.

Is nationality the new caste ?

India had a caste system which was looked down upon. Over a period of time concious efforts from a democratically elected goverment, has somewhat blurred the caste lines.

But what has happened to the global caste system? Yes global caste system aka Nationality, has become very strict over a period of time. Nationality is the new caste system - on a global scale.

I know, first thing in your mind is, nationality is not similar to caste concept.
So lets look at, what was caste system anyways, and then try to compare it with Nationality.

• Caste system, to use the classsical definition available on wiki, is "Strict segmentation of society, with the various groups being rigidly defined and membership of them determined by birth." sounds very similar to Nationality. 
• One of the key characteristics of the caste system was "Physical segregation in villages, accompanied by limitations on movement and access, including to religious and educational areas and to basic facilities such as supplies of water." Sounds every bit true for the nationality. 

Nationality is Physical segregation based on birth.

In modern India, as in most of the progressive nations of the world, you are born free. You have freedom of choice. Irrespective of the caste, you are free to choose jobs, educational institutes, area you want to live in, natural wonders you want to visit, religious places you want to go to.

You have every choice in your life - within the physically segregated area called your nation. 

Very similar to the big village of the particular caste, just that the village is big.
The cage is bigger, does not mean you are free.

Even value of human life depends on which nationality you belong to, very similar to caste system. Subconsciously the entire society has accepted it. Life of a US citizen vs a Bangladeshi Citizen - do you see them as same? Check the coverage given by any newspaper for a news related to kidnap/ killing  of these two nationalities and you will realize.

You have freedom within your Samaaj or sub society to marry and had to change the caste of the spouse, if marrying outside the caste - for which you had a big clearance process. Same true for marriage between people from different nationalities.

So you say changing your nationality is possible and changing the caste was not? Think again. religious cleaning process, marriages into higher cast, people faking their castes, did allow people change their castes, though not from lowest to the highest. People in the higher sub caste had this choice.Sounds very similar to process for changing nationality, and granting the new nationality is still very similar to a religious caste change ceremony. Application for immigration from one developed country to another is easier rather than from third world. 

 

Nationality has every bit of the character that the caste system had. Are we mature enough to realize this and grow up from Nationality?

 

Why do we need nationality ?

Life of Pi

Life of Pi.
Dark and opaque subplot.
I am sure, many would prefer not to acknowledge the true story, even if they logically understand that it is the only story plausible.

 So what was the story, as in real chain of events?

Ofcourse the one Pi tells in the end in very few words, as the alternate explanation given by him to the Japanese insurance guys.
Clearly all what Pi narrates about the tiger, hyena and zebra was a lie - euphemisms to the true story.

The true story is that the cook killed the Japanese sailor and Pi's mother. Pi killed the sailor. Pi ate a rat and human flesh, and survived for 227 days in the ocean.
For surviving 227 days, there was no way Pi could have been choosy about what he wants to eat. He had no option but to opt for the custom of the sea - ie survival cannibalism. Pi was to ashamed to openly admit but this was the only way.
Btw Richard Parker was also the name of the sailor in the  1838 novel of Edgar Allan Poe, where Richard Parker suggests to his fellow sailors to use one of them as food for others to survive. They draw lots and Parker gets canibalized in that novel. Btw a real life Richard Parker got cannibalized in 1884, and the name has come to remain closely associated with cannibalism. 

Coming back to Life of Pi, Pi turned cannibal, in the story it was his alter ego ie Richard Parker that killed and ate humans. 
When Pi was on brink of starving to death, he comes across a floating island, that provides him everything that he needs to survive. The island is of the shape of a human. It was a euphemism for a floating corpse. Pi discovers that the corpse that he is eating is that of a cannibal.(he discovers a tooth inside that island ie body)and fears other cannibals near by. He leaves the body once he understands that the water in that island has turned acidic ie the body is decaying. He ties his holy thread as a mark of his respect/ last rites that he can do on the ocean for a body.

 In the hospital, after breaking down over grilling by the Japanese insurance guys who do not believe the tiger story, Pi breaks down and tells Japanese insurance guys- what do you want to hear - you already know it. (Appealing to their logical reasoning) and tells them the truth. Japanese guys find it too dark to report, they would rather report a cock and bull illogical story, rather than a uncomfortable truth.

 "'So tell me, since it makes no factual difference to you and you can't prove the question either way, which story do you prefer? Which is the better story, the story with animals or the story without animals?' Mr. Okamoto: 'That's an interesting question?' Mr. Chiba: 'The story with animals.' Mr. Okamoto: 'Yes. The story with animals is the better story.' Pi Patel: 'Thank you. And so it goes with God.'"
Both the investigators agree that the story with animals is better one. In short they have started believing in miracles. 
The question is essentially do you want to believe an uncomfortable truth Or A soothing lie. A story which narrates a miracle ie an act of God is a soothing lie.
In any case Miracles are a way of putting a garb of respectability on uncomfortable truths. (Virgin mother-?? Must be a miracle... Sita swallowed by earth... Hello...)
 so it goes with God.

माया माया रे, ठगनी माया रे

Listening to Maya - a collaboration between Indian Ocean and Mohit Chauhan. Song is good, but somehow Mohit Chauhan was missing - I mean, it was more of a guest appearance for Mohit and did not appear to be a collaboration at any stage.

btw माया क्या है

अच्छा सवाल है
एक कहानी सुनाता हूँ, बचपन मे पढ़ी थी, याद नहीं कहाँ .
इस कहानी को कई तरह से सुनाया गया है, कभी कृष्ण सुदामा तो कभी विष्णु नारद और कभी कृष्ण और नारद के बीच हुई बातो के तौर पर.
कही सुदामा पानी लाने की जगह एक लड़की के प्रेम में फँस जाते है तो कही वो खुद एक लड़की के रूप में जन्म लेते है ..

जो हमें ज्यादा बढ़िया लगी, वो कहानी हम आप तक पहुचाते है - अपने अंदाज़ मे, यानी थोड़े फेर बदल के साथ

सुदामा जी को कृष्ण से कहते है , प्रभु हमें भी समझाओ तो सही की ये माया है क्या आखिर.
उनकी जिद के आगे कृष्ण भी झुक जाते है और कहते है माया को समझा नहीं जाता अनुभव किया जाता है. खैर कोई बात नहीं एक बार नदी मे एक डुबकी लगा के तो आओ, फिर तुम्हे बताता हूँ की माया क्या है.
सुदामा जी जैसे ही डुबकी लगाने लगते है, उनका पैर फिसल जाता है. नदी मे एक घड़ियाल होता है जो उनका पैर खीच के उन्हें गहरे पानी मे खींच लेता है और सुदामा कृष्ण को आवाज़ भी नहीं दे पाते, और मृत्यु को प्राप्त होते है.
सुदामा कुछ सोचते उस से पहले ही उन्हें दिखता है की उनकी आत्मा पुनरजन्म के लिए नगर सेठ के घर की और चल पड़ी है. सुदामा जी का जन्म नगर सेठ के घर मे होता है, मगर जब तक वो कुछ बोलना सीख पाते, वो कृष्ण और अपने पिछले जन्म को ही भूल जाते है और नये जीवन मे रम जाते है. जैसे जैसे समय बीतता जाता है , सुदामा युवा होते है, नगर सेठ बनते है और एक सुन्दर सी कन्या से उनका विवाह होता है. जीवन अच्छे से व्यतीत होने लगता है. पुत्र पुत्रियों के अलावा पोत्र पोत्री, प्रपोत्र, प्रपोत्री भी बड़े होने लगते है, और एक दिन उनका यानि नगर सेठ के शरीर का अंतिम दिन भी आ जाता है. मृत्यु के बाद सुदामा को अपना शरीर जलने के लिए ले के जाता दिखता है और वो अपने शोक कुल परिवार से अलग होने के बारे मे सोच कर बहुत ज्यादा दुखी होते है, जैसे ही राम नाम सत्य है का कोलाहल उन्हें दूर से सुनाई देता है, अचानक उनका शरीर ऊपर उठने लगता है. सुदामा यानि नगरसेठ अपने परिवार को जोर से आवाज़ देंना चाहते है, मगर अचानक देखते है की वो तो नदी मे है और कृष्ण उनके बगल मे खड़े मंद मंद मुस्कुरा रहे है, तभी उन्हें सामने से आता हुआ अपना यानि नगर सेठ का परिवार दिखता है. वो सब नगर सेठ के शरीर को जलाने नदी किनारे आये होते है, सुदामा उन्हें आवाज़ देना चाहते है मगर उनका गला रुंध सा जाता है. उन्हें समझ मे आ गया होता है, की एक पल मे, एक डुबकी लगाने जितने समय में वो एक पूरा जीवन जी चुके होते है.

यही माया है.



.

चिंता ता की कीजीऐ, जो अनहोनी होए

रामु गइओ रावनु गइओ जा कउ बहु परवारु
कहु नानक थिरु कछु नही सुपने जिउ संसारु

चिंता ता की कीजीऐ, जो अनहोनी होए ॥
इहु मारगु संसार को नानक थिरु नही कोइ

- गुरु तेग बहादुर

अर्थात
राम भी नहीं रह सके, रावन को भी जाना पड़ा - चाहे जितना बड़ा परिवार था - कोई नहीं रोक सका - जो होना था वो हुआ. कुछ भी हमेशा के लिए नहीं है, ये संसार एक सपने जैसा है.

चिंता ता की कीजीऐ जो अनहोनी होइ, अर्थात
चिंता तो उस बात की करो जो की न होनी हो -
This is deep, I like it - He is not asking us to start worrying for things that are not supposed to happen, but asking us to realise that there is nothing like अनहोनी - or "not supposed to happen".
No event can have a tag that "it was not supposed to happen".

Whatever will happen, was actually supposed to happen, and hence not unhonee.
इहु मारगु संसार को नानक थिरु नही कोइ - on this road called world, Nothing is permanent. It will change.

सो इस संसार की हर बात बदलने वाली है, कुछ भी ऐसा नहीं है जिसे देख कर आप कह सके की यह तो अनहोनी थी. जो भी होगा वो तो होना ही था. और जिस बात के बारे मे आपको पता ही है की ये तो होनी है, उसकी चिंता कैसी.

Somewhere it resonates with the Geeta Saar.

or if you relate more with the man who knew too much -
Que Sera, Sera,
Whatever will be, will be.

Cognitive dissonance & BLIND support for Anna

Would Lokpal change everything in your day-to-day life? Any rational thinking person would know the answer, still why there is the kind of BLIND support for the movement
I think the reason is that we want to minimize the cognitive dissonance.

We all have been guilty of promoting corruption in some form of other, but our ego defense mechanism says that no you were a victim, you have always wanted this corruption to end. By supporting Anna you are externalizing this problem of corruption, a malaise that is not being promoted by you but you are a victim.
Think again, how many times you had the choice and still chose to bribe to take a shortcut (remember the last time traffic police caught you when you were on phone; or the time when you had got on to the train on a RAC ticket ; or the time when you took your kid to for admission or ….) You never demanded bribe, but you yielded to take an easy route and promoted corruption. Now the moral values book that you teach your kids, the stand in debates that you take, does not go well with what your actions. This has been troubling you at the back of your mind, and the moment someone (Anna) brings up the issue, you feel caught red handed. Ego self defense mechanism kicks in and says, you are with Anna, you have been a victim who has yielded to corruption because of the corrupt system, now with Lokpal it will all end, afterall it’s the panacea to all kind of corruption.

Gandhi said, Be the change you want to see in the world.
Make a choice not to support/promote corruption in day to day life.

I think once you get rid of your guilty conscience (by self awareness) , you will not be blindly supporting the Lokpal, you will try and analyze have realistic fact based discussion on pros and cons of Lokpal, how to increase its efficacy, rather than blindly support it. You will also be able to make your ego collect the courage to exercise the choice of not promoting corruption.

Behavioural changes and War

Just reading Locust and grasshopper are same species, its just that grasshopper change shape & form and behaviourally on crowding.
Hmm.. So the enviornment and esp crowding has a lot to do with the behaviour - atleast for locusts.

There are behavioural switches in humans as well, maternal behaviour or PMSing behaviour change is something genetically hardwired in human females (this one deserves a separate blog post for sure). The secration of harmonses changes the person so much, tat it is diffcult to believe that you are dealing with the same individual. There are other non violent behaviour changes driven by environment - I am given to understand that we are even genetically hardwired to reciprocate after being given something.

Speaking of hardwiring of human brain, we are hardwired to survive - at all costs. Even if it means killing others. We kill others to ensure our survival with a utter disregard for their right to survive - (eggs or chicken on day to day and other humans during war times). This is not unique to humans, all animals have this trait, which is is a manifestation of life's most basic instinct of Survival.
This fight for survival is at the base of every fight for territory among animals, or wars that humans fight. War waged by western world for democracy in Libiya or Iraq or against AlQuaida is not all about eagletarian objective - deep down it is a fight for resources , fight for ensuring survival.

So this brings me to the question - are some cultures more violent than others - is it possible that they are more violent because of the kind of genepool that they inherited ?Specifically does this mean Islam is more violent due to what they inherited in gene pool. I dont think so.Evolution is a very very slow process. Islam or any religion for that matter has not been around for enough time to have impacted the genepool.
But then why ar so many muslims all over world sounding like fanatics - not only in Afganistan or kashmir,but even in UK or Delhi for that matter? Even more surprising is the fact that the same person who was a liberal is changing .. becoming somewhat more hardened.

Does it have something to do with crowding - or behaviour of mobs.
War too is a behavioural switch - we (or for that matter any other animal) are not fighting at all times. They are fighting in regions where they are threatened for their survival. Afterall we are genetically programmed /hardwired to fight when we are threatened for survivial. The problem is accentuated all over the world because western world tries to put all muslims in one basket. When fighting against AlQaida in Afghanistan, it should be projected as a fight against the terrorist in a particular region, rather than be projected as a fight against the muslim world.
So any religion / any genepool would behave in the same fashion the way current muslim world does, if they are put in the same situation.

Any thing that really sets "them" apart.. anything that makes western world feel threatened from muslims? yes the fact that their numbers have swelled suddenly, that means your genepool would have lower probability of survival over next few thousand years. You may not take a concious call on it, but you are hardwired for it.

So why was there a sudden increase in population?
One of the precipitating factor that I see, is the fact that muslim world was relatively backword/mired in poverty till recent times. and that meant you have to have more kids for a fair chance of having a offspring surviving to give birth to next generation ( or preserve your gene pool). Sudden discovery of oil meant prosperity coming to the middle east, predominantly to muslims in that region. This meant access to medical facilities, better nutrition and better chances of survival. Since muslims were being clubbed in basket, it meant the middle east muslims start supporting other muslims countries (this would increase thier chance of being able to fight back and survive - incase there is a fight for survival).

There have been wars whenever there has been overcrowding, and a fight for resources. The muslims too fight among themselves, shia vs sunni. For that matter I am told among Hindus as well Shaiv vs Vaishnav riots were common in ancient times. Christians to have had spilled the blood of their fellow christians- religion has got not much to do with our cruel ways.
Infact discovery of America / Australia have taken away the overcrowding from the Europe in a big way.

The behaviour of a mob is very different from the behaviour of individuals. During peace times we all trust each other, during a riot - and esp if there is a possibility of you being impacted, your response would change dramatically.

Just wondering what does this mean for
- India, whose population density is among the highest in the world / and overcrowding is making the resources scarce.
- USA/ developed world - whose territory is being claimed by others.

The future is yours, it belongs to you,

This beautiful verse was on the best of luck card sent to me in 1998 by my Elder brother.

The future is yours, it belongs to you,
And with faith in God
and in yourself, too,
No hill is too high,
no mountain too tall,
For with faith in the Lord,
you can conquer them all...
And all that you wish for
that is honest and true
The Lord will certainly give to you,
Not always the way you most desire
But always He gives
what you most require.

These words inspire a lot of confidence - "Future is yours, it belongs to you".. kind of makes you feel that whatever you are attempting for your future is already yours, all what you have to do is, just claim it.

I also love the way it makes you prepared to accept the results - even if they are not what you had attempted.
"Not always the way you most desire
But always He gives
what you most require."

Accept what has been the result - don't get disheartened - this may not be what you desired but, it is what you actually required - (As judged by God - so don't question that).

विस्तृत नभ का कोई कोना, मेरा न कभी अपना होना, परिचय इतना इतिहास यही, उमड़ी कल थी मिट आज चली

मैं नीर भरी दुख की बदली!


स्पंदन में चिर निस्पंद बसा,
क्रंदन में आहत विश्व हँसा,
नयनों में दीपक से जलते,
पलकों में निर्झणी मचली!

मेरा पग पग संगीत भरा,
श्वासों में स्वप्न पराग झरा,
नभ के नव रंग बुनते दुकूल,
छाया में मलय बयार पली!

मैं क्षितिज भृकुटि पर घिर धूमिल,
चिंता का भार बनी अविरल,
रज-कण पर जल-कण हो बरसी,
नव जीवन-अंकुर बन निकली!

पथ न मलिन करता आना,
पद चिह्न न दे जाता जाना,
सुधि मेरे आगम की जग में,
सुख की सिहरन हो अंत खिली!

विस्तृत नभ का कोई कोना,
मेरा न कभी अपना होना,
परिचय इतना इतिहास यही,
उमड़ी कल थी मिट आज चली
- Mahadevi Verma.

I am very impressed by the last two stanzas.
I identify myself with these two stanzas - as a cloud which is here for the timebeing, though not as a "dukh ki badli".

Existence

Here is one more piece of poetry which was noted down in my diary some 10years back..

Little fly
thy summer’s play
my thoughtless hand
has brushed away

Am not I
a fly like thee?
Or art not thou
a man like me?

For I dance
and drink and sing
till some blind hand
shall brush my wing.

William Blake
Songs of Experience, ‘The Fly’ (1795)

This makes you realize the small pleasures and pains that you come across in daily life do not matter.
And makes one think
Is my life as inconsequential as that of a fly –
well ….
ummmm….
Yes.
At least when you take a macro view.
It’s difficult to accept.

But look at it this way, if you were to find out some information about someone of your stature in society, who would have existed 100 years back, what would you find out? I am not talking about any poet like William Blake, or any big historical figure, but about a common man.
Did that guy matter.. except for his progeny , he is non entity. Inconsequential.

So is the stature in society really what matters. Or is it same as being the biggest or fastest fly?

Or more fundamentally, being known and remembered when you are gone and dead, this parameter in itself is a wrong parameter.
So, for that matter when you are alive, being rich and famous matters?

Probably collecting experiences is what matters..

A part of me feels yes. why?
Well, let me take an analogy, assume you were on a trip to a foreign country - for the first AND the last time (for some reason you know you may never get to come back). It's a beautiful country, but still you end up spending all your time in one room. You get to see nothing but the walls, smell nothing but the same room, and get to speak to no one. How would you feel?
Do you want the same thing when you leave this world?
A part of me feels , may be its not wrong to experience, but it still is of no consequence.
Why ?
Well how different is it from being a fly which has tasted all fruits (or a few for which all flies were fighting) in the in the small market - which the fly thinks is the complete world.
... is it of any consequence?

So, where does this lead us to??
You are inconsequential.
No matter what.
There is nothing to be ashamed of, there is nothing that you can do about it.
And it is fine that way, accept it.
You do not know where you are going. You do not have any control on what will happen to you. (watch documentary on earthquakes, tsunami on national geographic if you have any doubts) And you DO NOT matter.

Realise that you are inconsequential, and so is most of humdrum of your life.

So.
Be aware.
Be aware that not only you but everything adn everyone else as well, is inconsequential.
Do things that you think are right. Follow your heart.
And have fun.
Don’t forget - any day might be the last day for the fly.
Do not worry about what others think about you. You are inconsequential, and so are they as well as their thoughts about you.

You may give your child your love but not your thoughts.

I was reading The Prophet by Khalil Gibran, its a book worth understanding – not just reading.
Found this chapter on Children very pertinent.

“Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you, yet they belong not to you.
You may give them your love but not your thoughts.
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow, which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.”

Invariably parents esp the mother starts treating the child as the extension of self, and tries to achieve what they have not been able to in their lifetime. The parents start deriving a vicarious pleasure from the life of the child. This is how they end up spoiling the child. They were deprived of certain things during their childhood, and they want their kids to have it more than they could have ever dreamt of having in their child hood. Live examples: My wife wants to buy every toy whose name our son, has ever uttered. For mothers it is even more difficult to believe the fact that the child does not belong to her, and just that they are with us – independent individuals who can not be owned.

My job as a father is to expose him to life - gradually. To provide him access to opportunities of realizing his potential, of developing himself.
Walk with him through this process as a friend, till it becomes a self sustaining process.

What do you want in life

Someone asked me a couple of days back, what do you want in life ?
I dont know what his objective was, probably to get into a more challenging job profile or.. anything for that matter.
The spontaneous answer was make it big in life.

Thats true.
I want to make it big in life.
but should this be the aim?
esp when one knows the futility of it adn believes it does not really matter.
So, is it worth it ?

on the contrary, why not? What's there to loose?
Whatever is there to loose does not matter either.
:-)

You are the guy who'll decide where to go

These are some of my fav quotes , I am reorganising my blogs, and have moved some of the posts that were on the other two blogs to this one.

"Try Not. Do or do not. There is no try"
-- Yoda, Star Wars

"I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I intended to be."
-- Douglas Adams

"Waiting is a trap. There will always be reasons to wait. The truth is, there are only two things in life, reasons and results, and reasons simply don't count."--Dr. Robert Anthony"

Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any one thing."--Abraham Lincoln

Excellence is not a skill. It is an attitude.
--Ralph Marston

There is just one life for each of us: our own. --Euripides

You have brains in your head.You have feet in your shoes.You can steer yourself in any direction you choose.You're on your own.And you know what you know.You are the guy who'll decide where to go.
--Dr. Seuss

Stop and THINK

Stop and THINK
Here is Pooh Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back of his head, behind Christopher Robin. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs, but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could stop bumping for a moment and think of it. ---AA Milne, Winnie the Pooh

Days , weeks and months passby... and no time to step aside and think. Maybe its not lack of time, but lack of a reason. Maybe I have got used to the bumpy way of coming downstairs.

Alice in Wonderland

The story goes something like this...
Alice reaches a fork in the road, and asks the Cheshire Cat sitting on a tree,
`Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?'
`That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,' said the Cat.
`I don't much care where--' said Alice.
`Then it doesn't matter which way you go,' said the Cat.
`--so long as I get SOMEWHERE,' Alice added as an explanation.
`Oh, you're sure to do that,' said the Cat, `if you only walk long enough.'

In your life, you will certainly reach SOMEWHERE if you keep walking.
And you will reach somewhere further if you walk further ...and so on..

What is the reason for your journey ?
Is it a destination? A destination or The destination ? Or Milestones to be crossed ?
Is there a purpose to you walking and slogging - what is it ?

More fundamental Question : Is there an end to the journey?

What is more important for you - the journey or the destination?

As I see, the desitinations do change and the journey becomes endless.
You spend the only currency you have - ie  time - which is irreversible, on this journey called life.
To me it appears, the journey matters more than the milestones crossed.

In that case Is'nt Journey a Destination?