When we define life or when we try to explain our own lives ,there is always this desire to put it in absolute terms.We want to identify our life through our profession,our achievements,our failures and also through our nationality/race/caste.But as I have explored trying to explain my life through these stable terms ,I have realized that it is a illusion.The same thing happens when I try to define someone through these narrow limitations.
But can we survive in this world without making these limited claims?
If someone asks you whether this person is "good"?
What should the answer be?
Should I say that according to my limited information which I got through the range of conversation and also through gossip ...
He is like "this"
May be the society thinks he is weird, but the same set of foolish people may claim his greatness later.So my problem has always been how do you define a human?
Sometimes I feel the philosophical answers sound perfect. Personality is just a facade which covers our true self.The true self has no attributes and is perfect.
3 comments:
"The true Self has no attributes and is perfect."
This sort of solves the question - If you are asked whether a person is "good", you must answer that he is "good" because his true Self has no attributes and is perfect. He may succumb to selfish desires, she might succumb to anger - but the sages say there is a part of each person which does not, a guiding Principle which, as you say, has no attributes and is perfect.
Ach, the English language is no good at discussing this sort of thing, unfortunately...
Everything (Almost) is relative. We are not able to define any thing without referring to something else. But still we look at life in such 'absolute' terms! What a contradiction!
Destination Infinity
"The true Self has no attributes and is perfect."???
That sounds like a clear "absolute" in itself...aren't you going around in circles? How can you say everything is relative then make a statement like that? No offence. Nice blogg.
Post a Comment