Just occurred to me. Nobody has the complete picture of life. Everyone has just her piece of life. Nevertheless, every person is considered to be complete in herself. Makes one wonder. (This, despite the fact that each one of us has immense - infinite - potential that we do not tap into to become a much better and greater force).
Yet, this small piece of life that we 'own' is eclectic as it evolves over a period of time and derives itself from multiple sources. Sometimes it sadly loses its innocent, to-be-celebrated originality but sometimes it is, appropriately so, influenced for the better. It is when you bring (from the numerous individuals around you) small pieces of different lives together that you begin to 'see' something that makes sense. I don't know if this is the case with everyone, but many of us have this urge to see things at the macro level and go beyond the small and limited world that we live in. We like to see the connections. We like to see the whole purpose and meaning of life, ours and the world's. We can't be here for nothing. Living a life within oneself seems such a criminal thought. (Though sometimes just by being yourself and not bothering about anything else, you still make an impact on the world and inspire it to do better. Look at inspiring sports personalities who play for just themselves, people who fight death etc.)
Going back to my original thread of seeing the picture at the macro level, amusingly enough, when you gather many pieces, there are so many contradictions between them! This contradiction means chaos to the uninitiated mind but clears everything in one paradoxical sweep if it is a perceiving mind. My mind leaps to another question now. So, is enlightenment a permanent feature once it happens to you - for however brief a period of time - or is it something that flashes its face once in a while but ruthlessly disappears if you don't recognize it and then work hard and long enough to hold on to it?
9 comments:
great, deep thought nimmy. i often think about self/group/organizational actualization as well... in terms of enlightenment, i think it comes in fleeting moments and then things change again... i enjoy thinking about the times when i want to break things down to the micro level, then other times i'm more interested in the macro level. this is making me think...thanks!
thanks for leaving a comment, anon! :) i was looking forward to some responses. your own experience of enlightenment being a fleeting thing that goes away in a while....i am wondering whether it stays on provided "blah blah"....umm...maybe i am not thinking enough now, will come back when, hopefully, the aha! moment strikes me!! do come back to share more of your thoughts... :)
Aha here i have a fav topic of mine to prey on.,. :) Keeping my banter apart, what you have said is right.,.
I have a curious question in this regard. I assume that "living in our micro world" has been disparaged here.The "Howard Roark" in Atlas Shrugged was depicted as being micro. Isnt it ??
Secondly to your question of enlightenment, iam certainly not wise enough to comment on that, yet
what i have learnt from my mentors is "Enlightenment is something which evolves over a period of time. One can never say he is enlightened, because to know that one has a lot to learn is the true sign of enlightenment, which continues forever".
hey prashanth! your comment is just what i need to think more (and better) on this topic! thanks a ton!! i can make out that this is your favourite topic because you've come up with an amazing example of a person (however imaginary he is) who lived in a 'micro' world. i was thinking of famous sports personalities as an example....the people who play for their own sport and forget the rest of the world...but still are an inspiration. but your example of Roark is Perfect. can't think of a more apt example, perhaps. and the irony is that he has been an inspiration for thousands of people including me about pursuing one's passion and ignoring the world and yet suffering because of that!! Hmm....you really have given me a great example to think of. But let me clarify that when I say 'macro' world, I do not necessarily mean people who are pursuing others' interests and thinking about others more than themselves...these are people who understand the bigger picture - conceptually, spiritually, mentally...etc - they understand how the world is connected, its purpose etc....that way, don't you think Roark does score a point or two? :-) All said and done, I do agree with you that Roark is better classified as a 'macro' person....
And about what you've heard on enlightenment, I do think that's spot on. Looking at it from another angle, just knowing that there is more to learn *is* enlightenment! And what a mega coincidence....my next post - which I put up yesterday night - was about this very aspect....though not in as many words but in the form of a poem... :-) thanks so much, prashanth....your comment is really interesting and made me think again....
oops...made a mistake....what i meant at the end of the first paragraph is that I do agree with you that Roark is better classified as a 'micro' person... :)
and another thing i must add here, prashanth, is that when i say enlightenment, i dont necessarily mean something on the lines of what happened to Buddha resulting in the invention of a new religion....but something much smaller, ordinary and temporary....
...like how did you solve a critical problem you faced...sometimes you end up doing very wise and creative things and crossing such a phase beautifully....that's when you feel you were enlightened for a while...you behaved like you were directed by divine forces....
but there are other times, when you mess it up....and cause more problems for yourself....so, you might conclude that you learned something once or did something well in a natural way in a certain situation....but somehow lost that mind later....
dont know if i am rambling or conveying my message clearly...hope you got what i am trying to say :)
It definitely makes sense.,. Thats for the experts to decide.,. ;)
I liked the Hakuna Matata part. Had forgot it.,. Good to hear that again ;)
If there is nothing like good and bad, if everything is what it is with respect to the point of reference. Then enlightenment too must be evolving and cannot be a permanent feature.
hmm....angeli....got me thinking again....:) so....what was enlightenment yesterday may not be enlightenment today? uhhh...orrrrr.....look at this way...there's no way in which you can possibly see the whole truth one shot....you tend to just see a small piece of "it" or see somethin from just one angle.....with time, you get wiser and see the remaining pieces or remaining views of "enlightenment"....that seems like EVOLUTION....though it is not evolution in the literal sense...?!!??!! it's just that the picture appears gradually and comes in full view after a delay...
or....there are as many unique situations as there are number of people in the world...and this is a function of time as well...so...what is enlightenment in one situation is not really so in another...???!!!!????!
yes....i know....chaos in my mind?
Post a Comment