The essence and secret of life

Disclaimer/Premonition:

This article is intended neither to offend anyone nor to renounce any and all forms of religion and god. If you are deeply religious and if you believe in god creating the universe, heaven/hell and the like, please do not proceed further!

Just like most other human beings, if not all, I have repented and will repent some of my past actions and behaviour. Such retrospection may, sometimes, provoke thoughts that may lead ones' conscience to question the very purpose of such actions and in some rare cases, to question the very purpose of all actions. What are we doing here? What is our role? If, as some 'qualified' interpreters of religious texts say, our role and destiny are pre-defined, are we just puppets? For instance, if a man or woman is destined to be a criminal, and, in spite of his/her efforts to stay good, still becomes a criminal, then what is the justification in punishing that person?

Here is the catch: most religious preachings, if not all, teach that a person's destiny is in his or her own hands. This statement is a gross contradiction to the abovementioned statement that our destiny is pre-defined.

This is the juncture at which there is a great chance for mortals to be enlightened, at least with respect to our role. I am quite confident that all the 'holy books' point to one and the same thing: each one of us is a 'supreme' being and we are responsible for our own actions, which, we can completely control. The heaven and hell refer to the state of one's mind; that state can be one of bliss (heaven), if the action performed is positive, and one of misery (hell), if the action is negative. Like everything else, there are exceptions in this case too: those who don't repent upon committing a sin are the devil's incarnation. Simple as that! This explanation duly satisfies the mutually contradicting statements that god governs our destiny and that our destiny is in our own hands.

Coming back to our roles, they are much akin to the roles of anything and everything else we see. May be like the role of a dog; may be like that of a machine...The point is, we are just an agglomeration of molecules and atoms, resulting from the origin of universe, due to the big bang or otherwise. Just as valuable and not-so-valuable materials are formed the same type of molecules, human beings and other 'inferior' life forms can also be formed from one common source. So, if we are just a bunch of molecules and if we ourselves are gods, is there anything at all that governs us?

Yes, of course! Like any physical problem, we are governed by a set of 'boundary conditions'. These boundary conditions ensure an equilibrium of the system. They are the gods of gods, that is, our gods. To put it in simple terms, these boundary conditions are nothing but the nature and it's forces. Time and again, this equilibrium is disturbed, resulting in natural disasters (man-made disasters fall under our actions - they are initiated and propagated by human actions alone). These natural disasters are the nature's backlash to human actions; nature's way of curtailing and/or terminating things. It is a way to remind us that there is something beyond our control. If we respect our nature as well as the 'gods' in others, I am quite sure that there is only one direction for us: forward! By moving forward and making others' life easier, our goal is partly or completely fulfilled. Of course, it is well-known that no system can be ideal and/or perpetual - thus, it is impossible for the human race or the (other) animal race to survive for an infinitely long time duration. Armageddon is inevitable.

The original intention of all the religions was the same as the concept found here. To impart these ideas into the brains of the human beings effectively, different religions adopted different courses - different 'gods', different sets of rules. It is unfortunate that the original message has been lost somewhere down the line.

Though I write as if I have totally understood the concept of life, I am actually really far from it. But more and more of those deep, positive retrospections, I may be there....some day. As of now, I am quite content that by not killing or torturing others physically or mentally, by not indulging myself in acts that are detrimental to others and by not being unrepentant, I manage to stay away from being a devil.

There is a fair chance that I am awfully wrong in perceiving the real identity of god and our roles. There is also a likelihood that god indeed exists in some form. If it is the case, then one thing is for sure: there should be only one god or one 'set' of gods. Each religion has its own version of god's identity and origin. But then the universe was created only once, meaning that all the religions are referring to the one and only god, albeit in different forms. So, at the end of the day, each and every believer from each and every religion offers prayers to the same god! All the more reason why we shouldn't fight in the name of religion.

Religious conflicts - utterly meaningless

Find below, a very intriguing excerpt from the book "The Last Templar" by Raymond Khoury. It surely makes one think and question the validity of the superstitions that we're surrounded by, as well as the whole point of religious conflicts. Are we a backward race? Have we really learned something in past few thousand years, since the inception of the concept "religion"?

We are still in the realm of fantasy, here, today, in the twenty-first century. We're really no more advanced than those ancient people, who lived 2000 years ago. The whole planet is gripped by mass delusion. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism....people are ready to fight to the death to defend everything in these books they hold sacred, but what are they really based on? Legends and myths going back thousands of years? Abraham, a man who, if you believe the Old Testement, fathered a child at the tender age of one hundred and lived to be one hundred and seventy-five years old? Does it make sense that people's lives should still be ruled by a collection of laughable hokum? (such utterly laughable myths are prevalent in all the religions).

It is easy to blame all the conflicts in our history on politics and greed; and, of course, they play a role...but beneath it all, religion has always been the fuel that keeps the furnaces of intolerance and hatred burning. And it holds us back from better things, but mostly, from coming to terms with the truth about who we've become, from embracing everything science has taught us and continues to teach us, from forcing us to make ourselves accountable for our own actions. These primitive tribesmen and women, thousands of years ago - they were scared, they needed religion to try and understand the mysteries of life and death, to come to terms with the vagaries of disease, weather, unpredictable harvests and natural disasters. We don't need that anymore. We can pick up a cellphone and talk to someone on the other side of the planet. We can put a remote controlled car on Mars. We can create life in a test tube. And we could do a lot more. It's time we let go of our ancient superstitions and face who we really are, and accept that we have become what someone from just a hundred years ago would consider a God. We need to embrace what we're capable of and not rely on some arcane force from above that's going to come down from the sky and make things right for us.

The unnecessary pain and suffering religion has caused to people, over the centuries, is there to see and grieve. It served a great purpose when it was conceived. It gave people hope, it provided a social support system, it helped bring down tyranny. It served the needs of a community. What does it serve today, apart from blocking medical research and justifying wars? We laugh when we look at the preposterous gods that the Incas or the Egyptians used to worship. Are we any better? What will people think when they look back on us, in a thousand years? Will we be the subject of the same ridicule? We're still dancing to tunes created by men who thought that a thunderstorm was a sign of God's anger. That all needs to be changed!

Well, these arguments seem quite valid. The author is driving his point home with certainity. In my view too, we're being coaxed into conflicts that are uncalled for, based on certain religious issues that most of us don't even understand thoroughly! This is a pathetic state of affairs, and the only way from here is up - to be more rational. But then, it is rather hard for me to accept the author's views that religion is totally unnecessary. Yes, I completely understand that there are superstitions aplenty and yes, we should all try and get rid of them, but is it really possible to abolish the concept of religion altogether? It provides people comfort, peace of mind and it still is the only way through which the poor and the needy are being served. I am being torn between two states of mind: 1- religion is very important and it is a blessing to the human beings; 2 - religion is a necessary evil. It gives rise to problems, but also helps in solving some socio-economic problems. But I surely CANNOT adopt the third option, the one suggested by the abovementioned author that religion is an unnecessary evil. In fact, I am slowly becoming more inclined to the second state of mind - religion is evil but necessary. Additionally, it is my belief that all major religions are based on the existence of a supreme being - that supreme being is one and the same. In other words, God may either be the nature or the primeval atom, from which the universe came into being due to the big bang, or both. The nature and the primeval atom are so much more powerful than anything anywhere (even though the primeval atom doesn't physically exist anymore, it's influence will be around forever). They dictated and will continue to dictate the course of our lives. We can never completely control them. May be I should say that the nature and the primeval atom are the gods of gods, as we ourselves are 'gods' in a way, due to the fact that we are made up of the remnants of the primeval atom, coupled with the fact that we have the ability to think and differentiate between good and evil.

what do you think, folks?

My take on anti-Brahmanism

I would like to make one thing clear before you proceed to read this post: I do not believe in any caste or religious systems; I am a true believer that any and all the religions have, in the due course of their evolution, either suppressed or altered the 'original' message.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of late, reservation and quota systems have been attracting a lot of attention in India. As an offshoot of this, anti-Brahmanism has also been brought into the limelight. Too many people in India have too many prejudices, viewing many a thing with jaundiced eyes.

It is true that the Brahmins and other "higher" castes WERE the proponents of discrimination, untouchability and the like. But it is to be noted that the original intentions of the caste system were different and they were lost somewhere in the middle ages (w.r.t India). Originally, each caste was assigned a specific role - the Kshathriyas were warriors, the Brahmins were priests and highly educated and so on. According to the Vedas, "the Brahmins are priests, the Kshathriyas are warriors, the Vaisyas are artisans and the Sudras are servants". Just because the Sudras and Vaisyas were assigned tasks that weren't as noble as those of priests or warriors, it does not mean that they were treated like slaves. In every society, such task-assignments existed and still continue to exist. To quote a few examples from Europe, even now, there are people with family names that demonstrate their profession - German Schuhmacher means shoe-maker; German Zimmermann means carpenter; Dutch Boer or Meier means farmer and so on (it is to be noted that in the modern era, they may or may not be involved in the professions corresponding to their family names). These professions were and are as important to the society as other professions. So, in the vedic period, the idea behind the classification was not discrimination, but organisation, to ensure that all the tasks were performed effectively. As centuries went by, discrimination evolved out of this somehow. And for this, the whole cross-section of the society was responsible! By trying to gouge out an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, we are only demeaning ourselves - we are debasing India as a whole! I am not saying that the "higher" castes were/are blameless, but let's think ahead!

One more thing: Indians, in general, are intent on blaming the weakest. We were pillaged and plundered by the Muslim invaders, who, over a period spanning centuries, looted billions, if not trillions worth of gold and other valuables, resulting in the wretched living conditions in which more than half the Indian population finds itself. But now, the Muslims in India, who are the followers of the faith cultivated by these invaders, or in some cases, descendants of these invaders, are being given good privileges (again, the quota system). I am not against it; in fact, I appreciate the fact that so many Indian leaders were/are Muslims. But my question is, why blame the Brahmins and other "higher" castes alone? Surely, they didn't commit mass-murders, they didn't commit extensive crimes and didn't loot anyone's wealth - at least not in large scales. Why don't the same people, who're magnanimous enough to forgive the crimes of the Muslims, extend the same tendency to others too? Also, the arrival of Christianity to India paved way for centuries of colonialisation. But we tend to accept the Christians in India without any problems, which, in my view, is admirable. But why not accept the Brahmins and other "higher" castes? Similarly, no one talks about China-occupied Kashmir (yes, China occupied quite a big chunk of Kashmir, over which there was a war in the sixties, between India and China, in which the Chinese had the upper hand. Since then that region has been under Chinese control). Then why do we talk about the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir all the time? Is it because China is too strong? Let's treat all things, religions and people equally and live rationally! Let's remember and try to practise the age-old Indian virtue of treating things without prejudice!