The Creator.

Ah the eternally old question, who is the creator? And boy did we struggle to answer such a question!

To answer a question, first we need to define what are we talking about here. A creator would be a being whose mere existence gave life to the universe and those within it. Who wills and denies. Who gives and takes. Who is responsible for fortune and providence.

Well, I found him. The eternal being. Always been there but we are too blind to see it. It is you; your self is the creator. It is you who created the universe, who wills and denies, who gives and takes. Your mere existence gave rise to the universe. Eternity is but a short while, when you cease to exist, the universe falls with you.

It's all inside you. The divinity is right here, within yourself. What are wills, desires and aversions but those that you yourself make. What is fortune and what is providence except that what you draw for yourself as being so in your own mind. What is the universe but your perceptions, judgments and conceptions that you so recklessly compose within you. With you being its center, you are free to create and destroy however you please.

With this knowledge, with this newly acquired status and greatness, how will you go on living? How will you assess the knowledge of the good and the bad? Will you still seek happiness and goodness from without? Where your domain ends? Or will you start pulling it from your universe? From within your self? Where the good is rewarded with good and evil is rewarded with evil. Where your wills, desires and aversions never fail. Where your providence never expires. You are the only thing you need.

Retreat. Reflect. Create. Evolve. 

Meditations on the Self (Part I)

• 1-      Do not seek the acceptance of others. The only acceptance you should strive for is that of your own Self’s.
• 2-      I have seen those who like to call themselves Perfectionists. These people try to have their own Self get their way even in matters they have no control upon or does not lie in their true power. Here the Self transforms into The Beast of the Ego. It loses its connection with the truth and drowns in error.
• 3-      Focus on things that you can control. As long as your intentions are pure, you are leading a good life. 
• 4-      ‘Whatever the world may say or do, my part is to keep myself good. Whatever the world may say or do, my part is to remain an emerald and keep my colour true.’
• 5-      ‘Nothing can be good for a man unless it helps to make him just , self-disciplined, courageous, and independent; and nothing bad unless it has the contrary effect.’
• 6-      Strengthen your resolve so that no event can be strong enough to shake your peace. How to strengthen your resolve? By training and living according to the rules of the Self. A wide vaccuum will be created in which events have no place.
• 7-      Heaven and hell, light and darkness; you are everything. Take your time. And build your Self. Then take your time to destroy it. Then take your time to rebuild it again. Until you accept the process as a necessary part of existence, you’re still blinded by the Beast of the Ego.
• 8-      Kill or be killed? -You hold the divinity in you. Spread the message and forgive the blind. 

Die Kunst glücklich zu sein*:

*Sorry Arthur Schoppenhauer.

Ich habe ständig versucht zu finden, eine Beziehung zwischen Erziehung und die aufkommende persönliche Eigenschaften. Ich habe allerdings einmal entschlossen, dass es keine gibt. Dass, wenn nötig, kann man auf die Merkmale der Erziehung verzichten, also übergehen. Aber daran liege ich falsch und ich nehme mich selbst als Beispiel an. Obwohl ich effektiv die Religion los lasse, merke ich die Wirkungen, die noch im Spiel stehen. Entweder in meiner Sprache, Gedanken oder Verhältnis. Und das ist nur weil ich mit der Religion erzieht wurde.

Und jetzt zur Sache, ich denke es gibt eine echte Beziehung zwischen der Philosophie der Erziehung und der Glücklichkeit, und zwar; Trägodie. Was wirklich merkwürdig in der Erziehung der Kinder ist das Gepräge. Merkwürdig. Man wurde von alles herum geprägt, also die Menschen, die Umwelt, das Medien usw. Gepräge ist ein passives Prozess und darf auch aktiv sein. Natürlich versuchen die Eltern der Kinder an bestimmten Gesetzen oder Gedankenweise beizubringen. D.H eine Philosophie der Erziehung gibt es. Diese Gesetze sinken so tief im Geist dass man nicht mehr daran denkt und einfach ihnen folgt. Wirken die Erziehung dann auf (fast) alle Verhältnisse, Stimmungen und Gedanken, Glücklichkeit inbegriffen.

Jetzt nehme ich 2 Prämisse an. Erstens ist was über das Gepräge gesagt wurde und zweitens die, dass das Leben eine Trägodie ist. Wenn wir die Kinder dazu beibringen, dass das Leben eine Trägodie ist, werden sie nie erwarten was gutes davon und dann sind sie davon geprägt, dass sie nie was gutes erwarten sollen. Dann werden sie nicht daran denken, dann ist es ein psychologische Zustand, die Misere des Lebens. Wenn man in der Wüste lebt, erwartet er nicht es zu regnen aber wenn es auf einen Fall regnet, wird man froh. Was einen Scherz gut macht ist nicht der Scherz auf sich sondern die „Punch line“ weil es unerwartet ist.

Ich finde es wirklich aufregend und etwa komisch, dass Trägodie und Misere ein Schlüssel zu der Glücklichkeit sein kann. Es liegt an der Erwartungen. Es ist absolut einfach da zu sagen, hab keine Erwartungen aber auch absolut schwer daran zu folgen. Aber wenn man schon geprägt ist, keine Erwartungen zu haben dann wird alles klappen. Wenn das Kind an die Zwei Prämissen erzieht wurde, wird er jede Gelegenheit annehmen um glücklich zu sein und wird er jedes, was leben zu bieten hat, akzeptieren. Er hat effektiv seinen Defaultwert von Glücklichkeit abgesenkt sodass jedes wird er eigentlich glücklich machen. Und auch werden die unglückliche Ereignisse ihn nie unglücklich machen. Warum? Weil sie zu erwarten sind. Die Punchline hat er schon gewusst.

Aufregend und wert weiterzufolgen.

Diese Idee befindet sich schon in der stoische Philosophie aber man natürlich philosophiert nicht als Kind sondern wenn er eine Erwachsene ist und dann ist es schon schwer sich zu ändern. Aber auch da die Kinder beizubringen könnte gefährlich sein. Muss man vorsichtig sein. Langweile ist der Erzfeind dieser Philosophie. Ich glaube ganz und gar an der Trägodie des Lebens. Deswegen wird man langweilt wenn er keine Erwartungen auf das Leben hat. Aber ich denke, dass es die Risiko wert diese Philosophie anzunehmen.

Deep into Human Psychology: On the nature of Forgiveness.

Charles Darwin made it plain and simple; Survival is at the base of interactions in any species. Forgiveness can surely be regarded in that light, the light of survival. As to survive, one has to forgive and to forgive, one has to cancel out and reject whatever hatred that leads to destruction.
But there is more than meets the eye. My main questions are: Do we truly forgive? and What is the nature of forgiveness?

Forgiveness is the opposite of Ego. They are 'inversely proportional'. To forgive is to completely cancel the ego. So now the logical step would be to first explain my definition of the word "Ego". Ego is the definition of individuality of a human being. Ego lies in the heart of each individual soul. Individual here is the keyword. The ego is the "I". A symbolic/philosophical notion that would define a being and differentiate his existence from another. Now the I doesn't appreciate being hurt or insulted or cheated on or lied to. The I will want to retaliate and inflict similar damage to the opposite side, and that is where the concept of forgiveness comes into play. Or the illusion of forgiveness as I am beginning to see it.

I believe that the ego is present in all creatures and that the concept of forgiveness is only present in our species since it is the one that require rational thinking and futuristic views. Since it looks beyond the harm and hatred in favour of the greater good. It effectively suppresses the innate need in us, the need of the I, to re-inflict the pain unto the offender. And that is where my belief in forgiveness as an illusion lies. The ego cannot be suppressed. Despite the efforts of all eastern philosophies to try to get rid of the ego, I believe that it cannot be done permanently. Since by getting rid of the ego, we lose our identity as individual human beings. So an attack on an ego is an attack on the self, an unforgivable 'sin'.

But what I believe really happens here is just another build up of a bad memory which will be lost inside and will be retrieved whenever necessary. One can clearly observe in himself being upset at something that hurt him which he allegedly has forgiven. One can hear from the talks of the self-help gurus instructing people that they should 'forgive' themselves. Which is one of the most irrational things to say to someone.

Humans forget but they never forgive. That is a fact I concluded from the observations. Bad deeds are time bombs awaiting to be discharged when the opportunity comes. Moderation and balance is the key. A clear conscious way on when to allow oneself to forget (I am using now the verb forget instead of forgive) and when to retaliate is the key. I strongly believe that the continual suppression of the ego, which is one of the main goals of all eastern philosophies and to some extent middle eastern and western religions, is dangerous to our race, and is dangerous to us as individuals. But I can see why forgiveness is always taught as an absolute virtue, as allowing the ego to grow out of control can be equally dangerous. And I understand the need for humans to have an absolute value to hang on to without the need to rethink the parameters.