GUESTBOOK
Friends' Update
-
Loading ...Please wait..
Guest Book
7:10 pm
43 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
Subscribe
ashitshankersaxena’s blog
Broadcasting my thoughts
Categories:
Regarding what is meant by “looking or seeking with in” it is definitely not the innards of the physical form. Here i can only quote what i have read. One says “this is my handkercheif” completely aware that you and the kercheif are different. The you say “This is my hand”. we dont say “I am the hand” But unlike the prev case, we identify ourself with the hand. One has to realize that as the kerchief is different from YOU, so is the body. If one tries to catch that “I” which is saying MY body, MY thought…realizing that body and thought (mind) are not YOU….that is one technique of observing the observer…
Cheers
Sahiti
truth and artifice, i think it is a bit of both, it is when the seeking of the seeker is met with divine grace..the process of looking within is what the seekers have been doing..but the ways to do it are many. It should match the disposition of the seeker. One who is rational cannot succeed in Bhakti yoga..and the emotional one in Jnana yoga..so all these seekers were cutting the paths towards the self….few discovered and may be many more combinations/variations possible…
Thanks for visiting my blog and placing your comments.
ok, good info…. thanks a lot..
Are you sure there were enough number of boats? I checked the Wiki article and it mentions, “”There were insufficient lifeboats on the Titanic for all passengers, though the legal requirements of the day were met.”" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic ..
Dear, if you know the bloggers then you can smell if the incident mentioned is right or wrong
The disclaimer has been put up because of one incident that was reported in college. Hope you can guess 
Ashit, you can email me anytime on thoughtworkx@rediffmail.com
Thanks for waking me up with that comment
I was almost dozing off 
Sure would love to read that as Vipassana is on my list of To Do. But 10 days leave from work is too much to get for now
Ashit, I don\’t know how long i will continue on this path of searching in my own way! Certainly I don\’t want to do it for long? Who does \’want\’ to keep searching without finding!
But I have a take on when someone makes a real discovery for himself or for the world - it is by making the thought and desire pervade the entire time we are awake, when our mind/body tire out so much with the search and the obsession and we fall asleep. That is when, in that sleep will we find what we are searching for - either the structure of benzene or any other truth. I am still trying to make the search pervade my life. It is long before, I can/should sleep 
Yes, I am deeply moved by how honest was Gotama in his search for truth and thoroughly impressed with the posts like yours, when some of his teachings are presented in plain english, with no jargon. However, with a foundation in some Hindu jargon, I have a mental block now on going to start afresh trying to learn a newer path of spiritualism
May be I am wrong, May be I need to, not sure when and how I would start! Any suggestions on a starting point for dummies?? 
Thanks for the encouragement, Ashit! I understand the need to have faith in the truth and I do have one FAITH as I mentioned in the post - “Faith on the fact that there DOES exist a common source and a lot of people did see it”. A single piece of information which makes all the jargon redundant and that it would be really simple. But as I said I am totally an amateur to define if something is TRUTH or ignorance, yet, and I am willing to fumble and make mistakes before i learn how to. I am only hoping that I have patience and strength to see it through
May be as Siddhartha (in Herman Hesse’s book) says - I should learn to be patient and how to fast for longer
Hey,
This is simi…….
wanna Join me Gr8Gang…..it’s fun………
My gang is
http://www.gr8gang.com/gangs/rediffilanders
Cu
hahaha
I thot u were busy!!!!!
No …I ve read it Ayn Rand, enjoyed it….but I m very well conversant wid d realities of dis world. I m very much aware of d difference betn d things written in d books and d things actually happening. I ve spent some time in Corporate world n know hjow things move…
That post of mine was for academic purposes and I did mention abt d difference in real life n wen d characters of Ayn Rand wd be relevant.
I can also sum it up as say Invisible hand propounded by Adam Smith dint come to rescue everytime there was a problem in markets and economies.
Many economists of these days are follower of Ayn Rand, one of dem being Greenspan.
Well I fully agree wid u dat watever she said may not be fully relevant coz of d conditions prevailing in d real world. As I pointed out that dat her theory of objectivism wd b applicable in a capitalist utopian world where Fair Rules theorem wd be followed but it is not followed.
But her thoughts are still relevant . I ve come across a lot of people who were big fans of Ayn Rand, tried to follow the principles she propounded but they lost out and realised the realities .
But still one must have certain ideals, heroes to look for at this age…..
Needless to say dat I m in early 20s n a greta fan of Ayn Rand but I do admit dat at times her writings do tend to be a bit on fanciful side and dat is wat I ve tried to convey here.
And I do stand by my statement dat she was one of d most influential writer of the last century though her target area may be teenagers or youngsters.
I vent read much abt her personal life but wat else do u think is wrong in her writing….wd like to discuiss wid u.
Thanks for your ‘welcome’, ma’am risen-from-the-ashes!!
Did you mean ‘courage’ not to go around gathering a large basket of ‘friends’ on rediff?? well, the whole ambit of truth vs artifice applies to the making of ‘virtual’ friends as well.
Thanx! You are truly courageous! lovely posts
hi… I’ve been practicing buddhism for over 4 years.. the Nichiren daishonin school.. chanting.. the Vipassana was one of the things I tried last year.. thouroughly enoyed it and found it both difficult and meaningful.. and calming.. but wasn’t able to choose that over the practice that was already working for me… as for no blogs on it.. I have written so much on it in terms of experiences and studies that I never thought to put up something on th blog.. maybe i will
thanks for ur comment ashit. u are right. it is wrong to link events of nature to god (and then blame god for it too…)
i had actually wanted to hear this answer of yours. only two comments (yours and one other) gave me satisfactory replies. in my previous blog too.. i was expecting either brickbats for blaming god to be a greater terror (as was apparent from the statistics in my blog) or a denial that acts of nature are not the acts of god. but i dint get anything of that sort. and i wanted to highlight that shooting ppl or planting bombs alone doesnt comprise terror. that was a serious blog and that why i wrote so many examples. since they have become a daily occurance we have sort of become immune to all these forms of terror. only when one undergoes the experiences himself / herself, will he know why it is terrifying.
i have become a victim of my own undoing. been writing too much humour since i started blogging so i guess ppl shy away from my serious writing.
ya,you are right,,but i have my own ways of understanding things which work for me,,,,,i am satisfied with my methods dear……humnay varnan kiya kewal information ko share karnay kay lia,,,,,vipasana ka shivar karnay ka bahut logo kay paas time hay lekin meray pass naheen..
Hey,
This is simi…….
wanna Join me Gr8Gang…..it’s fun………
My gang is
http://www.gr8gang.com/gangs/rediffilanders
Cu
nd don’t Forget 2 add me in ur friendlist
Ashit, this is just to say I don’t find any purpose for me in discussing stuff with you. Till I find a purpose and use in doing that, I will ignore you. Please don’t expect any discussion on this or any past and future comments of yours.
Sarath Chandra
thanks for the info…but my aim has never been to embrace Rand’s teachings..and somehow I can’t digest this line “Scholars scoff at the Rand bounty, saying the ideas are too shallow to build courses around”…scoff? thats sounds totally childish, if her ideas are too shallow, then don’t accept the money and don’t teach the course…
I did read lot of writings against Rand. I personally think Nathaniel Branden strikes a good balance. Thanks for the additional info
Hi,
Thanks for letting me know the science behind it. I am always surprised and fascinated with this awareness of which we are not aware. It seems to save me from a whole lot of troubles most of the time and that too Just in Time
Hi,
Thanks for letting me know the science behind it. I am always surprised and fascinated with this awareness of which we are not aware. It seems to save me from a whole lot of troubles most of the time and that too Just in Time
hi sir i am shefa….one sick person has hacked my iland….i want help of you all ilanders…by asking rediff team to blacklist such people…can u help me???my id is shefa.shefa@rediff.com
3) Lastly, its her way which endears to the reader, objectivism…its logic, plain hard logic, logic in ideas, logic in arguments, logic everywhere…even if you absolutely disagree with her ideas and have equally strong arguments, she is still successful, she has forced you to think. There are lots of books written full of philosophy, they present the philosophy and leave you to ponder, Rand’s books tell you how to think, how to analyse and deduce your own philosophy, she takes such an extreme stand that the reader is forced to think, is it really possible, if yes, then why? or its totally impossible, if yes then why?? Even though the reader is thinking on her ideas but the way the reader thinks is in an entirely novel way…
my 2 cents on why ppl read Rand…its not the “heaviness”, yes they are heavy in some way but so are classics..people/teenagers do not run after classics as they do after Rand…Rand is readable/addictive because
1) her books are evergreen as the heroes/situations are evergreen, people can relate to it, she has picked up situations which happen everywhere, just an analogy, the old man and the sea, how many people can actually relate to it? very few ppl even though its the simplest story ever…if you can relate to a story, u get interested…
2) the situations are handled in the most idealistic way, I agree teenagers are idealistic and Rand presents such an offering, no doubt people worship her for providing an idealistic solution and get shocked/shattered when they are not able to follow the solutions, here I blame her “my way or the highway” attitude in her writings but so does this come when people grow up and realise that there is no Superman, no Batman, no Santa Claus…
*sigh*, same thing as I put in vaibhav’s GB…discussing Rand is immaterial when u can spend so much time discussing her idea’s
As for discussing Rand, I think it is virtually impossible to discuss anybody’s philosophy, not just Rand’s over such short messages. I look at each of Rand’s ideas independently. I agree with some; disagree with some; and am yet to make up my mind over a few others. It is a continuous process. My stand on Rand for now is she contributed at least some important ideas. I don’t think I will discuss Rand, as I don’t think that is practical, or worth the effort, nor do I think it matters much one way or another what one thinks of Rand. I can discuss ideas and issues separately, as and when they come up, and I think this is more relevant to each individual.
I am free for the rest of the day, so you can expect quick responses, unless something comes up
Any stand must stand to scrutiny; whether you take her seriously or not. Frankly, I don’t care one way or another, as judgements are personal in nature. As I said, I intend discussing only ideas as and when they come up, not the source/person.
Further, a discussion presumes both participants consider each other worthy of contribution. If one considers the other as not a grown up if the other takes up a particular stand s/he disagrees with, it no longer can be a discussion. You consider yourself as a grown up and you expect the other to grow up to your level eventually. Obviously, s/he does not have anything worthwhile to contribute as s/he has a lot of growing up to do, and you assume s/he will grow out of it eventually. In such a situation, I don’t think it can be defined as a discussion anymore.
I did read that at your blog and earlier from some other sources too, and very much agree with the basic points made.
Anyway, I don’t think we are talking of the same thing. I did not say you are insulting the non-grown ups. I was saying that you are claiming anybody who takes Rand seriously as “not a grown up” which is obviously insulting.
Anyway, I think I’d rather stay away. I don’t think we’ll gain much anyway by interacting. See you around.
I still don’t see how if a person cannot follow what s/he says as his/her philosophy, how you can judge the philosophy “as fanciful, intellectual construct”. The only thing I can judge from it is that s/he did not follow the philosophy. I will leave the rest without response as they are personal opinions.
However, don’t you think it is condescending (and insulting) to your reader to repeatedly use the words “grow up” or “grow out”. There are many quite old people who think Rand must be taken seriously. You can tell your reasons for your opinions, but I don’t think these words serve as reasons.
The usage of those words, for me, only implies you are pre-empting any discussion on the issue by putting the one who wants to talk as “not grown up”. If you made up your mind and are not open to discussion, I don’t think there is any point talking.
If you still think it is right to use those words, let’s agree to disagree on this
As for your comments on the quality of her work and her other qualities, anybody can have their own opinion. I personally think she presented many important ideas. However, I’d rather discuss the ideas (as and when they come up) than the person.
And nice to meet you.
I just thought I will communicate with you directly instead of filling Vaibhav’s comments with largely irrelevant stuff (atleast to his post)
Surely you are right when you say “actions need to be matched against assertions”. But that ought to be used to judge the person, not the assertion. For example if I say “you should always speak the truth” or “you should always be cool under pressure”, they are valid assertions. If I cannot follow them, it doesn’t imply the assertions are false; only I am not strong enough to hold my nerve or gutsy or whatever. Many times we know what is right; but just don’t have the internal strength to follow that through. It is a different matter whether anybody agrees with Rand’s philosophy or not; but her personal failure doesn’t imply that her assertions (or philosophy) is wrong, only that she lived her life wrong. I think we must separate ideas from the person, and evaluate them on their own merit.
:((((((
dear truthful sir why am I no longer friend? do i seem full of artifice sire?I wonder …
Hi, thank u for the comment the sunset was too good and fortunately such vibrant colours can be seen almost everyday during this season….