Taken from We The Living, Chapter 9:
“Do you believe in God, Andrei?”
“No.”
“Neither do I. But that’s a favorite question of mine. An upside-down question, you know.”
“What do you mean?”
“Well, if I asked people whether they believed in life, they’d never understand what I meant. It’s a bad question. It can mean so much that it really means nothing. So I ask them if they believe in God. And if they say they do — then, I know they don’t believe in life.”
“Why?”
“Because you see, God — whatever anyone chooses to call God — is one’s highest conception of the highest possible. And whoever places his highest conception above his own possibility thinks very little of himself and his life. It’s a rare gift, you know, to feel reverence for your own life and to want the best, the greatest, the highest possible, here, now, for your very own. To imagine a heaven and then not to dream of it, but to demand it.”
“You’re a strange girl.”
“You see, you and I, we believe in life. But you want to fight for it, to kill for it, even to die — for life. I only want to live it.”
I always believe that satisfying oneself now should be the only task a man should have. Also, the task may be acted upon in any way he sees fit. That is living the life for me.
May 13th, 2008
I’m currently reading Ayn Rand’s We The Living and I would like to post the notables (according to me). That way I won’t forget the things I pick-up from her.
Taken from the second chapter:
“Frankly,” said Victor, “your attitude is slightly antisocial, Kira… we all have our duty to society to consider.”
“Exactly to whom is it that you owe a duty, Victor?”
“To society.”
“What is society?”
“Society, Kira, is a stupendous whole.”
“If you write a whole line of zeroes, it’s still - nothing.”
“I fear for your future, Kira,” said Victor. “It’s time to get reconciled to life. You won’t get far with those ideas of yours.”
“That,” said Kira, “depends on what direction I want to go.”
Need I say more?
May 11th, 2008
A listing of lines that I like from lyrics of the songs in my current playlist. The playlist in my i-touch-nothing-happens does not have a wide variety of artists. I currently have select artists/bands - Manic Street Preachers, Stereophonics, Travis, Oasis, Queens of the Stoneage, Heather Nova, Chantal Kreviazuk, A Fine Frenzy, Ryan Adams, David Gray, Badly Drawn Boy, Coldplay, Nelly Furtado, Radiohead, Damien Rice, and Robbie Williams. That’s quite a spectrum of moods in a short list.
When I’m on the move (i.e. walking) I usually have something stuck in my ears. That’s when I do most of my thinking. A line or two from a song can inspire me to write, most of the time ravings because if you have listened to these artists, then you will know where I get my confidence and confirmation to write what you may call abhorring statements. So, without further ado…
My little empire
I’m fucked with being fucked
- My Little Empire, Manic Street Preachers
That is quite a statement especially if you are being oppressed most of the time. I am clearly oppressed by thoughts and emotions. Fortunately, I have society to blame for it.
Cold, cold water
Surrounds me now
- Cold Water, Damien Rice
The song is actually religious. If I continue with the lyrics, Rice is actually saying that even if everything is not alright, he has the Lord’s presence to help him. I obviously had those lines cut-off because these are the only lines that matter to me. It’s my current state…just kidding. Well, kidding aside, I like the way Rice describes suffering in those lines.
You left me on the shelf
And now there’s no-one to rely on
But if it’s all the same to you
Here’s what I’m gonna do
I’m gonna buy a gun
Gonna shoot everything, everyone
And then I’m coming for you
‘Cos it was you that drove me to
- Last Train, Travis
Before anyone jumps into conclusion, I’m not condoning massacre. I couldn’t believe the first time I heard this - coming from Travis either. I find that these lines express helplessness and complete frustration. Why did I include this verse on the list? I guess I’m showing how comfortable I am at accepting these kinds of things. I still have sanity left in me to decide that this action is not part of my values, nor it will ever be. I may be a master at emotional torture, but physical pain is not my forte. Physical manifestation of pain towards others is against my belief because that would mean I am blatantly accepting an inevitable connection between men. My principle in life is so simple: as long as I don’t initiate physical pain to someone, then I’m preserving my values.
How about emotional pain? Emotional pain does not provide evidence of who caused the pain because there is no trail between the cause and effect. Emotion is stateless, thus there is no point of reference.
May 9th, 2008
There is a universal law governing our daily lives. That law is the concept of right and wrong. We live our daily lives trying to be a better person by doing what is right. We navigate our lives toward righteousness. The question is “what is right and what is wrong?” Furthermore, “who decides what is right and what is wrong?” I will attempt to put my logic into words and the values I set to myself. Beware of the absurdity I may induce.
What is right and what is wrong is relative to who decides them. Therefore, the questions I posed should be contracted into one because one can’t be answered without touching the other. It is us who decides what is right and what is wrong based on the values we set to ourselves. If I value differently compared to another, my sense of what is right could be wrong to another. Preserving your values makes that act of preservation right.
A value is something (an object, emotion, etc.) that satisfies the happiness of man or guides the man’s pursuit of happiness. An individual is defined by the value he sets to himself. That is why having people in one place is never peaceful. They vary their values and thus create conflicts. Naturally speaking, man lives for himself. Think about your priorities; it always simplifies to I. A very good example would be a competition. I would cheer for a group where I belong, then I would cheer to who is closer to me, then to the closest and eventually I would cheer for myself against the rest.
Righteousness is always related to its host. Let’s say that man values an object that he doesn’t have, but another has it. The object is of critical significance towards attaining man’s happiness. However, the only way to acquire that object is by taking possession of it from another – assuming it is very rare to find because it’s only one of its kind. To man acquiring that object from another is a path to righteousness because by acquiring that object would yield to his happiness.
On the other hand, the other would see man’s action as wrong because to him that is theft. So here, we see one act perceived differently by different entities. Unfortunately for man, society is governed. The state of nature is controlled. His act would be branded as wrong. A man’s happiness is constrained by society. Again, my view on society’s direct denial of man’s eternal bliss is shown here. Man should be an island.
Religion exists based on the concept of right and wrong. If you live your life righteously, then you would go to an afterlife where everything is beautiful, otherwise you go to an afterlife of eternal suffrage. unlike most of the people, I believe I have neither a sin nor have sinned. I live my life according to the values I set for myself and have to always satisfy those values, ergo making me righteous. Does that mean I’m going to “heaven?” That’s another topic I must cover. Afterlife is a subject I have the greatest interest because it is the ony answer to all the questions.
May 7th, 2008
A man is born to serve what purpose? My guess is as good as yours. Is it to populate, shape and define the world? Maybe. What I am sure of is that a man is born waiting to die. A man’s life is finite. He lives and after a span of time, he dies – forever decayed; no soul, no afterlife. During the time the man lives, he undergoes several transformations toward his ending. He suffers through time to reach that end. Life is a process of dying.
So why do we value life so much? Life is not precious because sooner or later it is gone. It causes all kinds of pain. So why do we protect something that is worthless and destructive? What is so good about the world that we thrive to live in it longer. These questions are yet to be answered; not here, but hopefully a hint appears.
I’ve lived twenty-six worthless years and spent a decade of those years in a quest to answer these questions. I have no answer, but I realized a tiny bit of it – happiness. There is no stopping the birth of man no matter what laws, medications, family planning we implement. Time and time again, man will be born save annihilation. Even so, man will evolve one way or another. So I thought, what would man do if he has no control over his birth? He has to live life and goes in a journey where he avoids suffering that is brought by living. Only in the absence of suffering happiness is reached.
What is suffering? Suffering is a feeling of destruction. Something that will cause physical and mental aspect of man to break down. These things we know as grief, jealousy, envy, hunger, pain, torment, and many more which your imagination can define. By that definition, we can deduce that man suffers because of another. Man does not grieve because of himself, he grieves because of another. Man loves (a form of attachment) another and will do everything to keep the attachment intact. Once the attachment is lost, man undergoes a series of states of suffering - grief, loneliness, depression, etc.
Since the cause of suffering is not oneself, society gets the blame. Social attachment torments a man. Being social do bring happiness, but only until a point. In society man acquaints himself with another who would bring happiness in a moment, but would later on bring lifelong suffering. Once a man attaches himself to another, he will protect both the relationship and the other entity as if it is a treasure.
A treasure is defined as an entity which – naturally – cannot be lost. It is only lost if hidden (i.e. kept or stolen), but it still exists. Life cannot be a treasure because it is lost no matter how careful the caretaker is. What is left behind when a man dies is a pseudo-self which is also known as memory.
Protecting a treasure is already cumbersome and takes so much out of a person. That act in itself contributes to a person’s suffering. How else would the feeling be if the treasure is lost? Naturally, anger, grief, disbelief, etc arise. As previously stated these are sufferings. It is true that having that treasure makes a man happy, but it’s troublesome taking care of that treasure.
In conclusion, eternal bliss cannot be attained by sharing with others. Eternal bliss is for an individual, not a group that’s why it is so difficult to achieve. The happiness we enjoy now is only temporary and we should enjoy that as much as possible. Think not of the future nor the past, enjoy the moment because it is now that will shape the future. Be happy if you’re happy.
May 5th, 2008
On my way to the office today, I passed by a Romanian Festival. They have the festival annually. I bought lunch at the festival - an expensive but fulfilling lunch. I had an Italian sausage on a hero and a stick of shish kebab. Last year I had gyro, so I didn’t want one this year.
I had a very interesting conversation with Avey in the office - mainly on my love life. Everyone in the office is curious about my love life, but surprisingly I’m not embarrassed about it. I’m very open about it unlike before. It’s a good feeling, but I still need to work on my I love you response to Mai when I’m on the phone with her while I’m at the office. I’m still shy about it.
Funny thing happened while I was on the ferry on my way home. As the ferry was docking, a kid - about 4-5 years old - sat next to me and faced the two loud girls in front of me. When the girls left their seats to get off the boat, the kid (a girl) screamed at them to “not go anywhere.” It was funny and scary at the same time. The kid was screaming madly. The girls got scared and I left my seat also because she might come after me next. What a character.
Goddamn, I miss Mai a lot.
May 3rd, 2008
If something strikes a nerve in my head I usually blog or linger a thought about it. However, due to some uncontrolled circumstances, I lost my inspiration over the weekend. So here I am again, trying to remember the moment which confirmed and disappointed my way of living. I may have seen a movie that could push “Mallrats” or “Good Will Hunting” down a notch. I’ve only seen “Into The Wild” once, so I don’t know the effect if I watch it over and over again.
“Into The Wild” confirmed my ideals and that it had been lived once. It’s a story of a man (Christopher Johnson McCandless played by Emile Hirsh) who detached himself from society because he hated it so much. He embraced the peaceful and adventurous Nature. He disregarded the material things because he believed it caused. It’s really a very powerful equation because I never thought of it that way. I’ve always thought of it’s result specifically. I’ve always deduced it to suffering. To say that it causes struck a domain with a wider range. Wealth and power causes suffering. His definition precedes mine. It’s a discovery of greater value for me. Wealth and power causes ______. Anything could be filled in the blank and that’s what I meant by a wider range.
I’d really would like to write more about MCandless’ thoughts but I won’t. I would go straight to the disappointment he brought me before he died. His last testament was the confession that “happiness only real when shared.” This is where I still define myself from him. Happiness, as I always believe, is for oneself. Having it shared with someone else does not make happiness eternal. A man’s journey should lead him to eternal bliss and all of us shall perish not achieving it. We are all slaves of love and care. We submit to love. I witness that because I for one have been forced into submission by the feeling of imperceptible care for someone. The selfless and voluntary devotion to someone. The reality of happiness is unattainable because we are not completely detached from society. From the movie, he made friends with others which brought his own demise. He lingered the thought of going back to society to share his experience with others. He was not always true to himself because he always hinted the return to society. His transformation wasn’t complete.
I am fully aware that I cannot come close to what McCandless have gone to, but I strongly believe that my realization is enough for me to live that life inside my head. I shall die not a hypocrite for I am living the things I believe inside me. My shell matters to me not.
April 28th, 2008
Next Posts
Previous Posts
