I don’t why, but this morning as I woke up, I just felt something really unusual…”What if I lost everything I cared for? Everyone I held dear?”
This got me thinking and I couldn’t but marvel at the thought as to how many people around the universe, whoever had cognitive powers, would be thinking the exact same thing at the exact same moment?
Now, this thought of “losing” made me feel really bad, and I thought, “If there was a way for me to settle midway, or to not lose everything, but something of the extent that wouldn’t make me feel awful, would I take it?”
Simultaneously, if I were at my saddest, would I be happy to jump to that “midway point” from the abyss that I was shammed into?
Now, this “Midway Point” is the place where people are content, irrespective of whether you are the happiest or the saddest. When happy, you have a fear of losing, and when you are sad, you have a hope of gaining. So, maybe, when an intellectual person who understands this complex yet utterly simple logic of happiness and sadness arrives at the “Midway Point”, he/she will stop trying or aspiring for “something more”.
The Midway Point is one where one doesn’t have a fear of losing nor hope of gaining. This is where all causal events are welcomed as it comes and accepted in it true sense of reality. And I believe that this is called Moksha.
A compromise between fear and hope of prospects is Moksha
Now, I wondered, what drives a person to get up and go about the day, each new day? I pondered on this question for quite some time and realised that the idea of productivity, which leads to happiness, drives us to a new tomorrow, or atleast that is what is true in my case.
I want to be happier, be it through amassing power, earning money, gaining knowledge or being loved, all I want is, ultimately, to be happy, have that smile in my mind or on my face. Now, I wondered, how happy can one be?
Ruminating on it for 5 minutes told me that one can be only as happy as far as the fear of losing his/her happiness kicks in. Then the idea of preserving the joy inspires further effort, which would be exhausting and fuel the fear furthermore.
So, true happiness can be amassed only as long as the fear of losing it kicks in.
So, what inspires Moksha? The idea of losing everything? Or the idea of just being a little more happy?
Equilibrium is the order of nature and I guess a balance of these emotions and prospects is defined as Moksha.
However, I don’t think I’d ever settle for anything, so I’d rather fight to keep my state of happiness then go to a state where I’d be “meh” about everything.
But conceptually, I think it is a fine state to go I thought and wore a smile on my face.
Anyway, a couple of Happy Friendship Day messages started distrubing my thought process and mom too came into my room and forced to jump off the bed and march into the bathroom, so well, I guess this is it for today.
For those of you who haven’t read my “Philosophical Musings”, please go through what’s below.
A philosophical musing (part 1) , thanks to Dr. Lakshith Biddappa Malchira
The doctor, his friend and I were discussing about different religions in India and about the existing divide, when the concept that people created religion only so that they could attribute concepts that weren’t comprehensible to an invisible force called God, was floated.
This God or a non-answer answer to unanswerable questions relieved quite a few people of the fear they felt because of the unexplainable happenings of the nature like the occurrences of diseases, floods, earthquakes, famine, apparent misfortune and ultimately, the most feared idea of death.
However, when the so-called God eventually became an unanswerable entity to the various wants of the people, they began to grow superstitious and tried to unburden their burden on those entities that could be easily seen and understood. Thus originated the concept of worshiping water, fire, wind, trees and such forms of beliefs.
However, this again became too generic and people needed something more specific to rely on in times of crisis of dearth of hope. They needed one single entity to give them hope and such, and so originated the whole idea of idol worship.
However, different people idolised different people, and these idolised people idolised various idols. Hence, due to the inherent human need to stand out and outdo others, different forms of worship began, each believing that their’s was the only right way.
Then grew the fanatics, then the divide and then everything just blew out of proportion.
Philosophical musings (part 2)
The doctor went on to explain about the paintings of objects like that of flying saucers at the pyramids in Egypt, Mayan disks of extraterrestrial contact, the evidences of spacecraft like artefacts with the Celts and also certain verses in the Vedas hinting at alien contact. He postulated the possibility of there being an alien life on earth before, actually many such occurrences, and that the people here devised practises in their form, favour and ideal.
Many scholars of yore, who came to learn about such “species”, if you may, made use of these occurrences in their favour and fashioned, through their stories, either gods or devils of these out-of-convention beings. Once again, most Gods were thought about in human form as opposed to demons, thus relieving people of their fear by saying that they have a protector in their midst who would fend these demons (aliens) and such.
Nothing would have gone berserk if these scholars had the idea of labelling their work under “fiction”. However, they didn’t. They wrote songs which came to be called shlokas or gospels or whatever equivalent it is in all religions, they came up with themes for their stories which eventually became rituals and they had brilliant protagonists who came to be worshipped as “almighty” for personal gains.
Also, with regards to the alien entity, a little open mindedness will serve people right if they’d realise that in the millions of years since the earth became an ambient place for survival, behavioural modernity, as we know it, was achieved only 50,000 years ago and the scientific temper has only been in the picture (though not entirely yet) for a few hundreds of years.
When the possibility of the existence of sub-atomic particles, of bosons, of quarks and such sprung into being only a few tens of years ago, when the smallest particle in the much smaller entity of the enormous universe was discovered only a few years ago, the talk of aliens sure brings nothing more than laughter aimed at mockery at the expense of the author.
I want to tell people that we aren’t the first ones here. Our sister species, Neanderthals and Denosovans, have traipsed this land, but whether or not Homo sapiens were derived from these species is a matter of speculation.
Anyway, the point is that there have been many other entities to inhabit earth before us and we are relatively new here. Our cerebral capacity is only recently developing into a deeper territory of cognitive reasoning and well, we still are a long way from figuring out the origins of life and whether or not there was a so-called “creator”.
So, when solutions cannot be found to certain questions, the boundary conditions of observation much be extended, giving room for more data and thus exploring newer dimensions. Accept that you don’t know something and that things just shouldn’t be questioned, considerable stride must also be made to find answers.
So, this part aims at telling you all that there might exist life outside of earth, which might be considered or fictionalised as Gods by people on earth. This is accepting that there might be a far greater power out of the confines of the earth, which had an influence on the people of earth, but it certainly isn’t God as our religious teachings preach us.
As I arrive at Mysore after a tiring three-day visit to Bangalore, here is my Philosophic Musing #3, which I always write on my travel.
Do ignore the typos, if any, and as to the references, ah! What the hell is in a name? I bet Shakespeare would agree well with me on this.
Give it a read.
Gaurav checks-in at DRC with Adarsh at 7 PM, Ramya is having dinner with Adarsh at 7 PM in an restaurant in the United States, Adarsh is driving a limo at 7 PM at U.K…Suresh says Adarsh is muscular, Aarthi says Adarsh is tall and really fat, through various sources it can be learnt that Adarsh has a PhD in math, in English, in Sanskrit, in aerospace engineering, in music, in dance…Adarsh is a politician, he is an entrepreneur, a criminal, a murderer, a cop, a judge…
Does this mean that Adarsh is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient?
Did it occur to you that the Adarsh here needn’t necessarily be just one mere mortal, but millions of people around the world with the same first name?
I believe the concept of seeing God as omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent originated from a very similar concept.
As explained in my musing #1, those who considered “the Air” as their God might have said God is everywhere, those who considered “the Fire” as their God might have said the God can reduce anything into ashes and by extrapolating this theory, we can deduce that there might have been one person who just wrote, “God (#1) is omniscient, God (#2) is huge, God (#3) is very strong…when actually, again, God was just a term used to represent the collective solution for the insecurities of people.
Something to think about, don’t you think?