One of my favorite stories. This thought provoking piece of advice is attributed to Sri Ramana Mahirishi.
How to be be Happy
Once a lady, who was troubled by many problems, approached Guru Ramana for some sound advice on how to live a happy and contented life.
The Guru gave her a patient hearing and did not interrupt her as she listed all her troubles and needs. Once she was through he asked her to tell him, in simple terms, as to what exactly she was looking for and how he could be of help.
The lady blurted out - “Swamiji, I want to be happy! Nothing more. Please tell me how to be happy with all these things troubling me?”
Swami Ramana responded – “My Dear Lady, the solution is simple. Will you do as I tell you?”
The lady vigorously nodded her head to indicate her willingness.
The Guru continued – “You said ‘I want to be happy’. Now here is my advice. First drop the ‘I’ from your statement. What is left in it now? Could you repeat it?”
She replied – “want to be happy.”
Guruji then said – “Ah! Now that we have got rid of ‘I’ from your statement, why don’t you remove ‘Want to’ also from it and repeat that which is remaining?”
She thought for a moment and said – “Be Happy”
“There you have it!” Guru chuckled “the solution to your problems. Drop the "I" and the "want" from your life then you will be Happy!"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
2How to be be Happy
Once a lady, who was troubled by many problems, approached Guru Ramana for some sound advice on how to live a happy and contented life.
The Guru gave her a patient hearing and did not interrupt her as she listed all her troubles and needs. Once she was through he asked her to tell him, in simple terms, as to what exactly she was looking for and how he could be of help.
The lady blurted out - “Swamiji, I want to be happy! Nothing more. Please tell me how to be happy with all these things troubling me?”
Swami Ramana responded – “My Dear Lady, the solution is simple. Will you do as I tell you?”
The lady vigorously nodded her head to indicate her willingness.
The Guru continued – “You said ‘I want to be happy’. Now here is my advice. First drop the ‘I’ from your statement. What is left in it now? Could you repeat it?”
She replied – “want to be happy.”
Guruji then said – “Ah! Now that we have got rid of ‘I’ from your statement, why don’t you remove ‘Want to’ also from it and repeat that which is remaining?”
She thought for a moment and said – “Be Happy”
“There you have it!” Guru chuckled “the solution to your problems. Drop the "I" and the "want" from your life then you will be Happy!"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi! Good question.
But what the Guru seems to say is to drop your greed and "wanting" things to happen the way you want. He is saying be a Karmayogi and "Just do it." Nishkama karma! Do your duty wholeheartedly without hankering for the fruits - as Krishna advised Arjuna. Do you see the viewpoint? I might be wrong... I am willing to be corrected... over to you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
But what the Guru seems to say is to drop your greed and "wanting" things to happen the way you want. He is saying be a Karmayogi and "Just do it." Nishkama karma! Do your duty wholeheartedly without hankering for the fruits - as Krishna advised Arjuna. Do you see the viewpoint? I might be wrong... I am willing to be corrected... over to you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
True. There is a state of mind wherein you will be working to fulfill all your wants. But you will find no desire driving you to fulfill those wants. In other words, if your wants are fulfilled, you will not be perturbed with too much happiness. If your wants are not fulfilled, then you will not be perturbed with too much sorrow because "desire" is not there anyway. To achieve that state of mind is very difficult....
In fact, the managements view such people with suspicion because they find the attitude of such people as "disinterestedness towards work and profession" since the absence of desire sends them a wrong signal. They often fail to understand that there will be no difference between a "man of passion/desire" and a "man of peace, equilibrium & contentment" regarding output. Many managements view a "burning desire to fulfill dreams" as a positive personality trait, and they feel such people will do anything to do the job well to win accolades from bosses and excel in that process. They like such people.
Hence, I doubt whether spirituality and management philosophies go hand in hand. If we get a boss who understands us, then we can live happily despite being "dispassionate" about our wants.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In fact, the managements view such people with suspicion because they find the attitude of such people as "disinterestedness towards work and profession" since the absence of desire sends them a wrong signal. They often fail to understand that there will be no difference between a "man of passion/desire" and a "man of peace, equilibrium & contentment" regarding output. Many managements view a "burning desire to fulfill dreams" as a positive personality trait, and they feel such people will do anything to do the job well to win accolades from bosses and excel in that process. They like such people.
Hence, I doubt whether spirituality and management philosophies go hand in hand. If we get a boss who understands us, then we can live happily despite being "dispassionate" about our wants.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi! Barkha, Thx. I also posted tips for "how to be Unhappy" here: :D :( :D
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If we honestly be what we are and not what others expect us to be, then is it not true that happiness and sadness all belong to the abstract existence? The problem actually arises when we seek the abstract in the material world. We first preconceive that our association/ownership of a material object is what will bring us happiness. Whereas the object around which our so-called happiness revolves is static, it is our thoughts that are dynamic. If you need to attain a particular state of mind, it is within you, not outside.
Regards,
Arvind
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
Arvind
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello, Mr. Chandrashekar,
Very well written and argued. Points noted. The key question here is:
Is this person working hard and passionately for selfish reasons and motives? If a person is "passionately" pursuing personal goals within an organization, then too he would be looked upon with suspicion. But if he is working hard for the common good and for the organizational goals, then he would be a non-threat and an asset. Such a person is a true blue Karmayogi. He doesn't want anything for himself. There is no "I" here and selfish "want" here....
Think of great personalities like Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, etc. They did work passionately and ceaselessly - but for a greater cause other than their own personal glory. Am I okay in this line of thinking?
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Very well written and argued. Points noted. The key question here is:
Is this person working hard and passionately for selfish reasons and motives? If a person is "passionately" pursuing personal goals within an organization, then too he would be looked upon with suspicion. But if he is working hard for the common good and for the organizational goals, then he would be a non-threat and an asset. Such a person is a true blue Karmayogi. He doesn't want anything for himself. There is no "I" here and selfish "want" here....
Think of great personalities like Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, etc. They did work passionately and ceaselessly - but for a greater cause other than their own personal glory. Am I okay in this line of thinking?
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Avalok,
I hope you will agree with me if I say Gandhi cannot do a marketing job in today's business organizations.
Regarding the perception that it is possible to view a selfless person as an asset and a passionate/selfish person as someone who works for his own selfish ends, not for the organization, I quote the example of a glass half full. Some people say this glass is "half empty," some people will say this glass is "half full."
Hence, what perception managements develop seeing a selfish man and seeing a selfless man is a subjective matter left to the discretion of the fellow who wants to understand it in whatever way he wants.
Thirdly, it is immaterial whether one works with "selfish motive" or "unselfish motive" as long as he works for the organization and gives output. For instance, Sachin Tendulkar scored over 78 centuries for India. He loves scoring centuries; he is selfish about his records. Do we say, "because he worked with selfish motives, he did not contribute anything for India"?
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I hope you will agree with me if I say Gandhi cannot do a marketing job in today's business organizations.
Regarding the perception that it is possible to view a selfless person as an asset and a passionate/selfish person as someone who works for his own selfish ends, not for the organization, I quote the example of a glass half full. Some people say this glass is "half empty," some people will say this glass is "half full."
Hence, what perception managements develop seeing a selfish man and seeing a selfless man is a subjective matter left to the discretion of the fellow who wants to understand it in whatever way he wants.
Thirdly, it is immaterial whether one works with "selfish motive" or "unselfish motive" as long as he works for the organization and gives output. For instance, Sachin Tendulkar scored over 78 centuries for India. He loves scoring centuries; he is selfish about his records. Do we say, "because he worked with selfish motives, he did not contribute anything for India"?
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello, Mr. Chandrashekar,
Once again, well-argued. Gandhi was a terrific marketing guy, and he did a great job "selling" the idea of non-violence to the world. That too in an age where there were no TV, cable, internet, etc.
My counterexamples for not having passionate but selfish persons on board will be Hitler, Mussolini, etc., or Duryodhana & the Kauravas of Mahabharath, or Karna for that matter. They were all passionate but they were egoistic and were not team-oriented. One wants team players and not guys who will trod on others to climb the ladder.
As for the example of Sachin T - we are getting into dangerous and emotional territory here. Still, "he is playing for himself" is a tag attached to guys who go after personal records. Ample columns with statistics have been written about how often Sachin has failed to deliver when the crunch came when compared to others. It is all a matter of perception...
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Once again, well-argued. Gandhi was a terrific marketing guy, and he did a great job "selling" the idea of non-violence to the world. That too in an age where there were no TV, cable, internet, etc.
My counterexamples for not having passionate but selfish persons on board will be Hitler, Mussolini, etc., or Duryodhana & the Kauravas of Mahabharath, or Karna for that matter. They were all passionate but they were egoistic and were not team-oriented. One wants team players and not guys who will trod on others to climb the ladder.
As for the example of Sachin T - we are getting into dangerous and emotional territory here. Still, "he is playing for himself" is a tag attached to guys who go after personal records. Ample columns with statistics have been written about how often Sachin has failed to deliver when the crunch came when compared to others. It is all a matter of perception...
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all,
You are forgetting what you started here. Sachin Tendulkar is not your point here; happiness is what matters. Do your best at your work, and the best will come to you. Do not blame someone for your results, just as you are doing. Sachin did give his best. The only player who is not selfish is being called selfish in our HR column. I pity.
Leaders are born, not chosen. Well, you are not left with an option nowadays, so you are free to choose one. Be happy in doing so. I am giving you one here. Be happy.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You are forgetting what you started here. Sachin Tendulkar is not your point here; happiness is what matters. Do your best at your work, and the best will come to you. Do not blame someone for your results, just as you are doing. Sachin did give his best. The only player who is not selfish is being called selfish in our HR column. I pity.
Leaders are born, not chosen. Well, you are not left with an option nowadays, so you are free to choose one. Be happy in doing so. I am giving you one here. Be happy.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, Mr. Satya,
I agree with you. The topic got deviated, and I am a Sachin fan too. As I said, cricket topics are subjective and lead to controversies, and statistics can be manipulated. My message was and is that one who is unselfish and doesn't want anything for himself is a happy man.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with you. The topic got deviated, and I am a Sachin fan too. As I said, cricket topics are subjective and lead to controversies, and statistics can be manipulated. My message was and is that one who is unselfish and doesn't want anything for himself is a happy man.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
lol: :lol:
Dear Avalok and Satya,
"Emotional stability" and "Ability to bear and accept constructive criticism" are going to become extremely important personality traits in coming days.
When I commented on Sachin Tendulkar, there is some disturbance in you people. I did not deviate from the subect. How, I will explain later. Coming to Sachin Tendulkar, I love Selfish people. There is some inclination in many people to assume "moral high ground" by talking about lofty idealism, and people like Gandhi, Mandela, Budhdha, Ramana Maharshi etc.
That is why when I say, Sachin Tendulkar plays for his records there is some emotional outburst out there.
But my perception about Selfish people is different. I love Selfish people because they are also sources of creativity and productivity.
In one one day international game, India was 13/3. Sachin came and scored a century and when he left the field the score was 200/4. Whether he played for the country or for his own image does not matter as long as his contribution made a positive difference to the score.
That is how selfish people too contribute towards the productivity in organizations. With what motive they work is immaterial for us, as long as their work results into some output. In that context I have taken the name of Sachin Tendulkar. Hence I have not deviated from the subject.
Now coming to the issue of happiness, I don’t entirely agree with Ramana Maharshi’s views. Spirituality depends as much on Materialism, as much as Materialism depends on Spirituality. If all people become Yogis, and start living in forests then we would not have had Tajmahal and Eiffel Tower in our world. Passion, desire and selfishness are not enemies of true Spiritual leaders.
If any woman comes to me saying, “I am unhappy….I want to be happy….suggest me how to be happy…” then I will ask her, “what makes you happy” instead of giving spiritual discourses. If she says, “I need a Luxurious house” that makes me happy. I will explore by asking, “tell me the truth why do you want a Luxurious house”. If she says, “One of my relatives has it…” then I will get the idea that she is jealous of her relative’s house that is why she wants to possess it too.
Without “inquiry” no one can self-realize, no one can help others to self-realize. Without self-realization, no one can be happy. Many people don’t want to reveal the true reasons for their suffering. That makes their lives miserable. If a woman is open enough she will disclose to the extent of saying, “As I don’t have a luxurious house or a luxury car…I am unhappy….”. To admit that itself requires great deal of honesty. On further inquiry if she reveals that, because my cousin has a luxury car or luxurious house, I too want it, but I can’t afford it, then that is outstanding achievement for both the spiritual leader and the woman.
The woman may be jealous or there could be some other reason for her desire to own a luxurious house. But without inquiry, no one can find out the source of suffering and without knowing the source of suffering no one can know the source of happiness.
Read what Mark has written in his Psychometry write up yesterday that is appearing in our discussions:
(Quote) All we really need to know about psychology is this. The way we feel affects the way we think. What we think directs our behaviour. How we behave and the way others behave towards us affects the way we feel. This feeling – thinking – behaviour cycle was described by Galen almost 2000 years ago. It seems the smartest animal on Earth can sometimes be awfully slow to learn. (Unquote)
The woman if she is jealous about her relative possessing a luxurious house, she can’t be happy once she goes back home. She will be happy, as long as she will be in the presence of Swamiji. Once she goes back home the comparisons between her status and her relative’s status will again start haunting her and she will again go back to her old moods.
That is why I will not give any ready made spiritual discourse to anyone without “proper inquiry” into their state of mind.
Now, having known the problem, there are two ways of addressing it.
I would not tell her, “Desire is the root cause of suffering….if you don’t have desire…then you don’t have suffering….” like Budhdha or Ramana Maharshi.
I will ask her, “Are you capable of making money and constructing a luxurious house?”. If the answer is yes. Then I will suggest her to be on the job to earn money. If she is not capable of earning money, then we have to give spiritual discourse to her. That does not mean Spirituality is meant for incapable people/people who fail in the path of materialism.
I told in the beginning that Spirituality depends on Materialism as much as Materialism depends on Spirituality. It is Nature’s Dharma that some people have to practice spirituality and some people have to produce goods and lend their services to mankind. Without material being produced no Swamiji can have big buildings, auditoriums to give lectures on Spirituality. And Desire in human beings motivate them to work, and that work produces material (wealth).
Hence, there is nothing wrong in having a desire. One must pursue one’s desires with interest and passion. And enjoy the process of fulfilling those desires. Spiritual people carry the tendency to treat these personality traits as some kind of crime or sin on the part of people who possess them. But I view Selfish people too with same level of compassion and gratitude as I view unselfish people, because if they are selfish about their Material pursuits, we are selfish about our Moral high ground and Spiritual pursuits. There is not much difference between us and them.
We need not look at those poor “Selfish creatures” like Sachin Tendulkar and the Woman I mentioned above with sympathy as if to suggest they don’t know what we know. Nor should we presume that Sachin Tendulkar must be having a mindset of some Mother Theresa or Jesus Christ. Sachin Tendulkar need not possess the mindset of Jesus Christ in order to score Centuries. It is OK for me, to accept him, even if he is selfish about himself and his desire to score centuries and play for his own records, contribute to the Indian Score.
I don’t know anything about Hitler and Mussolini, regarding Kauravas my opinion is that they are perfect team players, they sacrificed their lives for the glory of each other. They got defeated in the battle of Kurukshetra for different reasons not because they were not good team players. Dharma was not on their side. That was the main reason why they lost the War.
There’s nothing permanent about Mind’s vagaries. Good thoughts, Bad thoughts occur like waves coming to the sea-shore from the depths of an Ocean. Hence I don’t categorize people or human beings as two groups, viz., selfish people or unselfish people. When we are in a loving mood, everybody appears lovable to us and we tend to appear unselfish. But after some time (an hour or a day) the bad thoughts start impacting our minds, and we start viewing everybody around with suspicion as though they are acting selfishly with us. Our feelings influence the behavior and reactions of others, as much as the feelings and motivations of others, influence our feelings and behavior.
How to be happy is not in our hands, as long as we don’t realize what impacts our psyche. Some people derive happiness by being selfish, and some people derive happiness by being unselfish. The same person may feel happy by being selfish sometime, and be happy by being unselfish some other time. It is not necessary that one be strictly unselfish in order to be happy.
Thanks and regards
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
lol: :lol:
Dear Avalok and Satya,
"Emotional stability" and "Ability to bear and accept constructive criticism" are going to become extremely important personality traits in coming days.
When I commented on Sachin Tendulkar, there is some disturbance in you people. I did not deviate from the subect. How, I will explain later. Coming to Sachin Tendulkar, I love Selfish people. There is some inclination in many people to assume "moral high ground" by talking about lofty idealism, and people like Gandhi, Mandela, Budhdha, Ramana Maharshi etc.
That is why when I say, Sachin Tendulkar plays for his records there is some emotional outburst out there.
But my perception about Selfish people is different. I love Selfish people because they are also sources of creativity and productivity.
In one one day international game, India was 13/3. Sachin came and scored a century and when he left the field the score was 200/4. Whether he played for the country or for his own image does not matter as long as his contribution made a positive difference to the score.
That is how selfish people too contribute towards the productivity in organizations. With what motive they work is immaterial for us, as long as their work results into some output. In that context I have taken the name of Sachin Tendulkar. Hence I have not deviated from the subject.
Now coming to the issue of happiness, I don’t entirely agree with Ramana Maharshi’s views. Spirituality depends as much on Materialism, as much as Materialism depends on Spirituality. If all people become Yogis, and start living in forests then we would not have had Tajmahal and Eiffel Tower in our world. Passion, desire and selfishness are not enemies of true Spiritual leaders.
If any woman comes to me saying, “I am unhappy….I want to be happy….suggest me how to be happy…” then I will ask her, “what makes you happy” instead of giving spiritual discourses. If she says, “I need a Luxurious house” that makes me happy. I will explore by asking, “tell me the truth why do you want a Luxurious house”. If she says, “One of my relatives has it…” then I will get the idea that she is jealous of her relative’s house that is why she wants to possess it too.
Without “inquiry” no one can self-realize, no one can help others to self-realize. Without self-realization, no one can be happy. Many people don’t want to reveal the true reasons for their suffering. That makes their lives miserable. If a woman is open enough she will disclose to the extent of saying, “As I don’t have a luxurious house or a luxury car…I am unhappy….”. To admit that itself requires great deal of honesty. On further inquiry if she reveals that, because my cousin has a luxury car or luxurious house, I too want it, but I can’t afford it, then that is outstanding achievement for both the spiritual leader and the woman.
The woman may be jealous or there could be some other reason for her desire to own a luxurious house. But without inquiry, no one can find out the source of suffering and without knowing the source of suffering no one can know the source of happiness.
Read what Mark has written in his Psychometry write up yesterday that is appearing in our discussions:
(Quote) All we really need to know about psychology is this. The way we feel affects the way we think. What we think directs our behaviour. How we behave and the way others behave towards us affects the way we feel. This feeling – thinking – behaviour cycle was described by Galen almost 2000 years ago. It seems the smartest animal on Earth can sometimes be awfully slow to learn. (Unquote)
The woman if she is jealous about her relative possessing a luxurious house, she can’t be happy once she goes back home. She will be happy, as long as she will be in the presence of Swamiji. Once she goes back home the comparisons between her status and her relative’s status will again start haunting her and she will again go back to her old moods.
That is why I will not give any ready made spiritual discourse to anyone without “proper inquiry” into their state of mind.
Now, having known the problem, there are two ways of addressing it.
I would not tell her, “Desire is the root cause of suffering….if you don’t have desire…then you don’t have suffering….” like Budhdha or Ramana Maharshi.
I will ask her, “Are you capable of making money and constructing a luxurious house?”. If the answer is yes. Then I will suggest her to be on the job to earn money. If she is not capable of earning money, then we have to give spiritual discourse to her. That does not mean Spirituality is meant for incapable people/people who fail in the path of materialism.
I told in the beginning that Spirituality depends on Materialism as much as Materialism depends on Spirituality. It is Nature’s Dharma that some people have to practice spirituality and some people have to produce goods and lend their services to mankind. Without material being produced no Swamiji can have big buildings, auditoriums to give lectures on Spirituality. And Desire in human beings motivate them to work, and that work produces material (wealth).
Hence, there is nothing wrong in having a desire. One must pursue one’s desires with interest and passion. And enjoy the process of fulfilling those desires. Spiritual people carry the tendency to treat these personality traits as some kind of crime or sin on the part of people who possess them. But I view Selfish people too with same level of compassion and gratitude as I view unselfish people, because if they are selfish about their Material pursuits, we are selfish about our Moral high ground and Spiritual pursuits. There is not much difference between us and them.
We need not look at those poor “Selfish creatures” like Sachin Tendulkar and the Woman I mentioned above with sympathy as if to suggest they don’t know what we know. Nor should we presume that Sachin Tendulkar must be having a mindset of some Mother Theresa or Jesus Christ. Sachin Tendulkar need not possess the mindset of Jesus Christ in order to score Centuries. It is OK for me, to accept him, even if he is selfish about himself and his desire to score centuries and play for his own records, contribute to the Indian Score.
I don’t know anything about Hitler and Mussolini, regarding Kauravas my opinion is that they are perfect team players, they sacrificed their lives for the glory of each other. They got defeated in the battle of Kurukshetra for different reasons not because they were not good team players. Dharma was not on their side. That was the main reason why they lost the War.
There’s nothing permanent about Mind’s vagaries. Good thoughts, Bad thoughts occur like waves coming to the sea-shore from the depths of an Ocean. Hence I don’t categorize people or human beings as two groups, viz., selfish people or unselfish people. When we are in a loving mood, everybody appears lovable to us and we tend to appear unselfish. But after some time (an hour or a day) the bad thoughts start impacting our minds, and we start viewing everybody around with suspicion as though they are acting selfishly with us. Our feelings influence the behavior and reactions of others, as much as the feelings and motivations of others, influence our feelings and behavior.
How to be happy is not in our hands, as long as we don’t realize what impacts our psyche. Some people derive happiness by being selfish, and some people derive happiness by being unselfish. The same person may feel happy by being selfish sometime, and be happy by being unselfish some other time. It is not necessary that one be strictly unselfish in order to be happy.
Thanks and regards
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Ayn Rand influence?
How To Be Unhappy
Make little things bother you. Don't just let them, MAKE them. Lose your perspective on things and keep it lost: don't put first things first. Get yourself a good worry, one about which you cannot do anything. Be a perfectionist, which means not that you work hard to do your best, but that you condemn yourself and others for not achieving perfection. Be right. Be always right. Be the only one who is always right, and be rigid in your rightness. Don't trust or believe people, or accept them at anything but their worst and weakest. Be suspicious. Insist that others always have hidden motives. Always compare yourself unfavorably to others. This guarantees instant misery. Take personally everything that happens to you. Don't give yourself whole-heartedly to anyone or anything. Author Unknown
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
How To Be Unhappy
Make little things bother you. Don't just let them, MAKE them. Lose your perspective on things and keep it lost: don't put first things first. Get yourself a good worry, one about which you cannot do anything. Be a perfectionist, which means not that you work hard to do your best, but that you condemn yourself and others for not achieving perfection. Be right. Be always right. Be the only one who is always right, and be rigid in your rightness. Don't trust or believe people, or accept them at anything but their worst and weakest. Be suspicious. Insist that others always have hidden motives. Always compare yourself unfavorably to others. This guarantees instant misery. Take personally everything that happens to you. Don't give yourself whole-heartedly to anyone or anything. Author Unknown
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi!
This is in support of Mr. Chandrashekar's viwpoint....
From The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand
Background:
Howard Roark is the Hero of Ayn Rand’s Fountainhead.
A brilliant architect and an uncompromising person.
The climax:
Meanwhile Keating asks Roark for help with the Cortlandt Homes, a public housing project. The idea of economical housing intrigues Roark. He agrees to design the project and let Keating take the credit on the condition that no one makes a single alteration to his plan.
When Roark returns from a summer-long yacht trip with Wynand, he finds that, despite the agreement, the Cortlandt Homes project has been changed. Roark asks Dominique to distract the night watchman one night and then dynamites the building. When the police arrive, he submits without resistance. The entire country condemns Roark, At the trial, Roark seems doomed, but he rouses the courtroom with a statement about the value of selfishness and the need to remain true to oneself. Roark describes the triumphant role of creators and the price they pay at the hands of corrupt societies. The jury finds him not guilty.
Howard Roark's
Courtroom Speech
“Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire. He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light. He was considered an evildoer who had dealt with a demon mankind dreaded. But thereafter men had fire to keep them warm, to cook their food, to light their caves. He had left them a gift they had not conceived and he had lifted darkness off the earth. Centuries later, the first man invented the wheel. He was probably torn on the rack he had taught his brothers to build. He was considered a transgressor who ventured into forbidden territory. But thereafter, men could travel past any horizon. He had left them a gift they had not conceived and he had opened the roads of the world.
“That man, the unsubmissive and first, stands in the opening chapter of every legend mankind has recorded about its beginning. Prometheus was chained to a rock and torn by vultures—because he had stolen the fire of the gods. Adam was condemned to suffer—because he had eaten the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Whatever the legend, somewhere in the shadows of its memory mankind knew that its glory began with one and that that one paid for his courage.
“Throughout the centuries there were men who took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision. Their goals differed, but they all had this in common: that the step was first, the road new, the vision unborrowed, and the response they received—hatred. The great creators—the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors—stood alone against the men of their time. Every great new thought was opposed. Every great new invention was denounced. The first motor was considered foolish. The airplane was considered impossible. The power loom was considered vicious. Anesthesia was considered sinful. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid. But they won.
“No creator was prompted by a desire to serve his brothers, for his brothers rejected the gift he offered and that gift destroyed the slothful routine of their lives. His truth was his only motive. His own truth, and his own work to achieve it in his own way. A symphony, a book, an engine, a philosophy, an airplane or a building—that was his goal and his life. Not those who heard, read, operated, believed, flew or inhabited the thing he had created. The creation, not its users. The creation, not the benefits others derived from it. The creation which gave form to his truth. He held his truth above all things and against all men.
“His vision, his strength, his courage came from his own spirit. A man's spirit, however, is his self. That entity which is his consciousness. To think, to feel, to judge, to act are functions of the ego.
“The creators were not selfless. It is the whole secret of their power—that it was self-sufficient, self-motivated, self-generated. A first cause, a fount of energy, a life force, a Prime Mover. The creator served nothing and no one. He lived for himself.
“And only by living for himself was he able to achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of achievement.
“Man cannot survive except through his mind. He comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only weapon. Animals obtain food by force. Man has no claws, no fangs, no horns, no great strength of muscle. He must plant his food or hunt it. To plant, he needs a process of thought. To hunt, he needs weapons, and to make weapons—a process of thought. From this simplest necessity to the highest religious abstraction, from the wheel to the skyscraper, everything we are and everything we have comes from a single attribute of man—the function of his reasoning mind.
“But the mind is an attribute of the individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. There is no such thing as a collective thought. An agreement reached by a group of men is only a compromise or an average drawn upon many individual thoughts. It is a secondary consequence. The primary act—the process of reason—must be performed by each man alone. We can divide a meal among many men. We cannot digest it in a collective stomach. No man can use his lungs to breathe for another man. No man can use his brain to think for another. All the functions of body and spirit are private. They cannot be shared or transferred.
“We inherit the products of the thought of other men. We inherit the wheel. We make a cart. The cart becomes an automobile. The automobile becomes an airplane. But all through the process what we receive from others is only the end product of their thinking. The moving force is the creative faculty which takes this product as material, uses it and originates the next step. This creative faculty cannot be given or received, shared or borrowed. It belongs to single, individual men. That which it creates is the property of the creator. Men learn from one another. But all learning is only the exchange of material. No man can give another the capacity to think. Yet that capacity is our only means of survival.
“Nothing is given to man on earth. Everything he needs has to be produced. And here man faces his basic alternative: he can survive in only one of two ways—by the independent work of his own mind or as a parasite fed by the minds of others. The creator originates. The parasite borrows. The creator faces nature alone. The parasite faces nature through an intermediary.
“The creator’s concern is the conquest of nature. The parasite’s concern is the conquest of men.
“The creator lives for his work. He needs no other men. His primary goal is within himself. The parasite lives second-hand. He needs others. Others become his prime motive.
“The basic need of the creator is independence. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be curbed, sacrificed or subordinated to any consideration whatsoever. It demands total independence in function and in motive. To a creator, all relations with men are secondary.
“The basic need of the second-hander is to secure his ties with men in order to be fed. He places relations first. He declares that man exists in order to serve others. He preaches altruism.
“Altruism is the doctrine which demands that man live for others and place others above self.
“No man can live for another. He cannot share his spirit just as he cannot share his body. But the second-hander has used altruism as a weapon of exploitation and reversed the base of mankind’s moral principles. Men have been taught every precept that destroys the creator. Men have been taught dependence as a virtue.
“The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality—the man who lives to serve others—is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit? The conquered slave has a vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man and he degrades the conception of love. But this is the essence of altruism.
“Men have been taught that the highest virtue is not to achieve, but to give. Yet one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution—or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement.
“Men have been taught that their first concern is to relieve the sufferings of others. But suffering is a disease. Should one come upon it, one tries to give relief and assistance. To make that the highest test of virtue is to make suffering the most important part of life. Then man must wish to see others suffer—in order that he may be virtuous. Such is the nature of altruism. The creator is not concerned with disease, but with life. Yet the work of the creators has eliminated one form of disease after another, in man’s body and spirit, and brought more relief from suffering than any altruist could ever conceive.
“Men have been taught that it is a virtue to agree with others. But the creator is the man who disagrees. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to swim with the current. But the creator is the man who goes against the current. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to stand together. But the creator is the man who stands alone.
“Men have been taught that the ego is the synonym of evil, and selflessness the ideal of virtue. But the creator is the egotist in the absolute sense, and the selfless man is the one who does not think, feel, judge or act. These are functions of the self.
“Here the basic reversal is most deadly. The issue has been perverted and man has been left no alternative—and no freedom. As poles of good and evil, he was offered two conceptions: egotism and altruism. Egotism was held to mean the sacrifice of others to self. Altruism—the sacrifice of self to others. This tied man irrevocably to other men and left him nothing but a choice of pain: his own pain borne for the sake of others or pain inflicted upon others for the sake of self. When it was added that man must find joy in self-immolation, the trap was closed. Man was forced to accept masochism as his ideal—under the threat that sadism was his only alternative. This was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on mankind.
“This was the device by which dependence and suffering were perpetuated as fundamentals of life.
“The choice is not self-sacrifice or domination. The choice is independence or dependence. The code of the creator or the code of the second-hander. This is the basic issue. It rests upon the alternative of life or death. The code of the creator is built on the needs of the reasoning mind which allows man to survive. The code of the second-hander is built on the needs of a mind incapable of survival. All that which proceeds from man’s independent ego is good. All that which proceeds from man’s dependence upon men is evil.
“The egotist is the absolute sense is not the man who sacrifices others. He is the man who stands above the need of using others in any manner. He does not function through them. He is not concerned with them in any primary matter. Not in his aim, not in his motive, not in his thinking, not in his desires, not in the source of his energy. He does not exist for any other man—and he asks no other man to exist for him. This is the only form of brotherhood and mutual respect possible between men.
“Degrees of ability vary, but the basic principle remains the same: the degree of a man’s independence, initiative and personal love for his work determines his talent as a worker and his worth as a man. Independence is the only gauge of human virtue and value. What a man is and makes of himself; not what he has or hasn’t done for others. There is no substitute for personal dignity. There is no standard of personal dignity except independence.
“In all proper relationships there is no sacrifice of anyone to anyone. An architect needs clients, but he does not subordinate his work to their wishes. They need him, but they do not order a house just to give him a commission. Men exchange their work by free, mutual consent to mutual advantage when their personal interests agree and they both desire the exchange. If they do not desire it, they are not forced to deal with each other. They seek further. This is the only possible form of relationship between equals. Anything else is a relation of slave to master, or victim to executioner.
“No work is ever done collectively, by a majority decision. Every creative job is achieved under the guidance of a single individual thought. An architect requires a great many men to erect his building. But he does not ask them to vote on his design. They work together by free agreement and each is free in his proper function. An architect uses steel, glass, concrete, produced by others. But the materials remain just so much steel, glass and concrete until he touches them. What he does with them is his individual product and his individual property. This is the only pattern for proper co-operation among men.
“The first right on earth is the right of the ego. Man’s first duty is to himself. His moral law is never to place his prime goal within the persons of others. His moral obligation is to do what he wishes, provided his wish does not depend primarily upon other men. This includes the whole sphere of his creative faculty, his thinking, his work. But it does not include the sphere of the gangster, the altruist and the dictator.
“A man thinks and works alone. A man cannot rob, exploit or rule—alone. Robbery, exploitation and ruling presuppose victims. They imply dependence. They are the province of the second-hander.
“Rulers of men are not egotists. They create nothing. They exist entirely through the persons of others. Their goal is in their subjects, in the activity of enslaving. They are as dependent as the beggar, the social worker and the bandit. The form of dependence does not matter.
“But men were taught to regard second-handers—tyrants, emperors, dictators—as exponents of egotism. By this fraud they were made to destroy the ego, themselves and others. The purpose of the fraud was to destroy the creators. Or to harness them. Which is a synonym.
“From the beginning of history, the two antagonists have stood face to face: the creator and the second-hander. When the first creator invented the wheel, the first second-hander responded. He invented altruism.
“The creator—denied, opposed, persecuted, exploited—went on, moved forward and carried all humanity along on his energy. The second-hander contributed nothing to the process except the impediments. The contest has another name: the individual against the collective.
“The ‘common good’ of a collective—a race, a class, a state—was the claim and justification of every tyranny ever established over men. Every major horror of history was committed in the name of an altruistic motive. Has any act of selfishness ever equaled the carnage perpetrated by disciples of altruism? Does the fault lie in men’s hypocrisy or in the nature of the principle? The most dreadful butchers were the most sincere. They believed in the perfect society reached through the guillotine and the firing squad. Nobody questioned their right to murder since they were murdering for an altruistic purpose. It was accepted that man must be sacrificed for other men. Actors change, but the course of the tragedy remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with declarations of love for mankind and ends with a sea of blood. It goes on and will go on so long as men believe that an action is good if it is unselfish. That permits the altruist to act and forces his victims to bear it. The leaders of collectivist movements ask nothing for themselves. But observe the results.
“The only good which men can do to one another and the only statement of their proper relationship is—Hands off!
“Now observe the results of a society built on the principle of individualism. This, our country. The noblest country in the history of men. The country of greatest achievement, greatest prosperity, greatest freedom. This country was not based on selfless service, sacrifice, renunciation or any precept of altruism. It was based on a man’s right to the pursuit of happiness. His own happiness. Not anyone else’s. A private, personal, selfish motive. Look at the results. Look into your own conscience.
“It is an ancient conflict. Men have come close to the truth, but it was destroyed each time and one civilization fell after another. Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage’s whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.
“Now, in our age, collectivism, the rule of the second-hander and second-rater, the ancient monster, has broken loose and is running amuck. It has brought men to a level of intellectual indecency never equaled on earth. It has reached a scale of horror without precedent. It has poisoned every mind. It has swallowed most of Europe. It is engulfing our country.
“I am an architect. I know what is to come by the principle on which it is built. We are approaching a world in which I cannot permit myself to live.
“Now you know why I dynamited Cortlandt.
“I designed Cortlandt. I gave it to you. I destroyed it.
“I destroyed it because I did not choose to let it exist. It was a double monster. In form and in implication. I had to blast both. The form was mutilated by two second-handers who assumed the right to improve upon that which they had not made and could not equal. They were permitted to do it by the general implication that the altruistic purpose of the building superseded all rights and that I had no claim to stand against it.
“I agreed to design Cortlandt for the purpose of seeing it erected as I dedigned it and for no other reason. That was the price I set for my work. I was not paid.
“I do not blame Peter Keating. He was helpless. He had a contract with his employers. It was ignored. He had a promise that the structure he offered would be built as designed. The promise was broken. The love of a man for the integrity of his work and his right to preserve it are now considered a vague intangible and an inessential. You have heard the prosecutor say that. Why was the building disfigured? For no reason. Such acts never have any reason, unless it’s the vanity of some second-handers who feel they have a right to anyone’s property, spiritual or material. Who permitted them to do it? No particular man among the dozens in authority. No one cared to permit it or to stop it. No one was responsible. No one can be held to account. Such is the nature of all collective action.
“I did not receive the payment I asked. But the owners of Cortlandt got what they needed from me. They wanted a scheme devised to build a structure as cheaply as possible. They found no one else who could do it to their satisfaction. I could and did. They took the benefit of my work and made me contribute it as a gift. But I am not an altruist. I do not contribute gifts of this nature.
“It is said that I have destroyed the home of the destitute. It is forgotten that but for me the destitute could not have had this particular home. Those who were concerned with the poor had to come to me, who have never been concerned, in order to help the poor. It is believed that the poverty of the future tenants gave them the right to my work. That their need constituted a claim on my life. That it was my duty to contribute anything demanded of me. This is the second-hander’s credo now swallowing the world.
“I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy. Nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim, how large their number or how great their need.
“I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others.
“It had to be said. The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing.
“I wished to come here and say that the integrity of a man’s creative work is of greater importance than any charitable endeavor. Those of you who do not understand this are the men who’re destroying the world.
“I wished to come here and state my terms. I do not care to exist on any others.
“I recognize no obligations toward men except one: to respect their freedom and to take no part in a slave society. To my country, I wish to give the ten years which I will spend in jail if my country exists no longer. I will spend them in memory and in gratitude for what my country has been. It will be my act of loyalty, my refusal to live or work in what has taken its place.
“My act of loyalty to every creator who ever lived and was made to suffer by the force responsible for the Cortlandt I dynamited. To every tortured hour of loneliness, denial, frustration, abuse he was made to spend—and to the battles he won. To every creator whose name is known—and to every creator who lived, struggled and perished unrecognized before he could achieve. To every creator who was destroyed in body or in spirit. To Henry Cameron. To Steven Mallory. To a man who doesn’t want to be named, but who is sitting in this courtroom and knows that I am speaking of him.”
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is in support of Mr. Chandrashekar's viwpoint....
From The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand
Background:
Howard Roark is the Hero of Ayn Rand’s Fountainhead.
A brilliant architect and an uncompromising person.
The climax:
Meanwhile Keating asks Roark for help with the Cortlandt Homes, a public housing project. The idea of economical housing intrigues Roark. He agrees to design the project and let Keating take the credit on the condition that no one makes a single alteration to his plan.
When Roark returns from a summer-long yacht trip with Wynand, he finds that, despite the agreement, the Cortlandt Homes project has been changed. Roark asks Dominique to distract the night watchman one night and then dynamites the building. When the police arrive, he submits without resistance. The entire country condemns Roark, At the trial, Roark seems doomed, but he rouses the courtroom with a statement about the value of selfishness and the need to remain true to oneself. Roark describes the triumphant role of creators and the price they pay at the hands of corrupt societies. The jury finds him not guilty.
Howard Roark's
Courtroom Speech
“Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire. He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light. He was considered an evildoer who had dealt with a demon mankind dreaded. But thereafter men had fire to keep them warm, to cook their food, to light their caves. He had left them a gift they had not conceived and he had lifted darkness off the earth. Centuries later, the first man invented the wheel. He was probably torn on the rack he had taught his brothers to build. He was considered a transgressor who ventured into forbidden territory. But thereafter, men could travel past any horizon. He had left them a gift they had not conceived and he had opened the roads of the world.
“That man, the unsubmissive and first, stands in the opening chapter of every legend mankind has recorded about its beginning. Prometheus was chained to a rock and torn by vultures—because he had stolen the fire of the gods. Adam was condemned to suffer—because he had eaten the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Whatever the legend, somewhere in the shadows of its memory mankind knew that its glory began with one and that that one paid for his courage.
“Throughout the centuries there were men who took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision. Their goals differed, but they all had this in common: that the step was first, the road new, the vision unborrowed, and the response they received—hatred. The great creators—the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors—stood alone against the men of their time. Every great new thought was opposed. Every great new invention was denounced. The first motor was considered foolish. The airplane was considered impossible. The power loom was considered vicious. Anesthesia was considered sinful. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid. But they won.
“No creator was prompted by a desire to serve his brothers, for his brothers rejected the gift he offered and that gift destroyed the slothful routine of their lives. His truth was his only motive. His own truth, and his own work to achieve it in his own way. A symphony, a book, an engine, a philosophy, an airplane or a building—that was his goal and his life. Not those who heard, read, operated, believed, flew or inhabited the thing he had created. The creation, not its users. The creation, not the benefits others derived from it. The creation which gave form to his truth. He held his truth above all things and against all men.
“His vision, his strength, his courage came from his own spirit. A man's spirit, however, is his self. That entity which is his consciousness. To think, to feel, to judge, to act are functions of the ego.
“The creators were not selfless. It is the whole secret of their power—that it was self-sufficient, self-motivated, self-generated. A first cause, a fount of energy, a life force, a Prime Mover. The creator served nothing and no one. He lived for himself.
“And only by living for himself was he able to achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of achievement.
“Man cannot survive except through his mind. He comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only weapon. Animals obtain food by force. Man has no claws, no fangs, no horns, no great strength of muscle. He must plant his food or hunt it. To plant, he needs a process of thought. To hunt, he needs weapons, and to make weapons—a process of thought. From this simplest necessity to the highest religious abstraction, from the wheel to the skyscraper, everything we are and everything we have comes from a single attribute of man—the function of his reasoning mind.
“But the mind is an attribute of the individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. There is no such thing as a collective thought. An agreement reached by a group of men is only a compromise or an average drawn upon many individual thoughts. It is a secondary consequence. The primary act—the process of reason—must be performed by each man alone. We can divide a meal among many men. We cannot digest it in a collective stomach. No man can use his lungs to breathe for another man. No man can use his brain to think for another. All the functions of body and spirit are private. They cannot be shared or transferred.
“We inherit the products of the thought of other men. We inherit the wheel. We make a cart. The cart becomes an automobile. The automobile becomes an airplane. But all through the process what we receive from others is only the end product of their thinking. The moving force is the creative faculty which takes this product as material, uses it and originates the next step. This creative faculty cannot be given or received, shared or borrowed. It belongs to single, individual men. That which it creates is the property of the creator. Men learn from one another. But all learning is only the exchange of material. No man can give another the capacity to think. Yet that capacity is our only means of survival.
“Nothing is given to man on earth. Everything he needs has to be produced. And here man faces his basic alternative: he can survive in only one of two ways—by the independent work of his own mind or as a parasite fed by the minds of others. The creator originates. The parasite borrows. The creator faces nature alone. The parasite faces nature through an intermediary.
“The creator’s concern is the conquest of nature. The parasite’s concern is the conquest of men.
“The creator lives for his work. He needs no other men. His primary goal is within himself. The parasite lives second-hand. He needs others. Others become his prime motive.
“The basic need of the creator is independence. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be curbed, sacrificed or subordinated to any consideration whatsoever. It demands total independence in function and in motive. To a creator, all relations with men are secondary.
“The basic need of the second-hander is to secure his ties with men in order to be fed. He places relations first. He declares that man exists in order to serve others. He preaches altruism.
“Altruism is the doctrine which demands that man live for others and place others above self.
“No man can live for another. He cannot share his spirit just as he cannot share his body. But the second-hander has used altruism as a weapon of exploitation and reversed the base of mankind’s moral principles. Men have been taught every precept that destroys the creator. Men have been taught dependence as a virtue.
“The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality—the man who lives to serve others—is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit? The conquered slave has a vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man and he degrades the conception of love. But this is the essence of altruism.
“Men have been taught that the highest virtue is not to achieve, but to give. Yet one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution—or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement.
“Men have been taught that their first concern is to relieve the sufferings of others. But suffering is a disease. Should one come upon it, one tries to give relief and assistance. To make that the highest test of virtue is to make suffering the most important part of life. Then man must wish to see others suffer—in order that he may be virtuous. Such is the nature of altruism. The creator is not concerned with disease, but with life. Yet the work of the creators has eliminated one form of disease after another, in man’s body and spirit, and brought more relief from suffering than any altruist could ever conceive.
“Men have been taught that it is a virtue to agree with others. But the creator is the man who disagrees. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to swim with the current. But the creator is the man who goes against the current. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to stand together. But the creator is the man who stands alone.
“Men have been taught that the ego is the synonym of evil, and selflessness the ideal of virtue. But the creator is the egotist in the absolute sense, and the selfless man is the one who does not think, feel, judge or act. These are functions of the self.
“Here the basic reversal is most deadly. The issue has been perverted and man has been left no alternative—and no freedom. As poles of good and evil, he was offered two conceptions: egotism and altruism. Egotism was held to mean the sacrifice of others to self. Altruism—the sacrifice of self to others. This tied man irrevocably to other men and left him nothing but a choice of pain: his own pain borne for the sake of others or pain inflicted upon others for the sake of self. When it was added that man must find joy in self-immolation, the trap was closed. Man was forced to accept masochism as his ideal—under the threat that sadism was his only alternative. This was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on mankind.
“This was the device by which dependence and suffering were perpetuated as fundamentals of life.
“The choice is not self-sacrifice or domination. The choice is independence or dependence. The code of the creator or the code of the second-hander. This is the basic issue. It rests upon the alternative of life or death. The code of the creator is built on the needs of the reasoning mind which allows man to survive. The code of the second-hander is built on the needs of a mind incapable of survival. All that which proceeds from man’s independent ego is good. All that which proceeds from man’s dependence upon men is evil.
“The egotist is the absolute sense is not the man who sacrifices others. He is the man who stands above the need of using others in any manner. He does not function through them. He is not concerned with them in any primary matter. Not in his aim, not in his motive, not in his thinking, not in his desires, not in the source of his energy. He does not exist for any other man—and he asks no other man to exist for him. This is the only form of brotherhood and mutual respect possible between men.
“Degrees of ability vary, but the basic principle remains the same: the degree of a man’s independence, initiative and personal love for his work determines his talent as a worker and his worth as a man. Independence is the only gauge of human virtue and value. What a man is and makes of himself; not what he has or hasn’t done for others. There is no substitute for personal dignity. There is no standard of personal dignity except independence.
“In all proper relationships there is no sacrifice of anyone to anyone. An architect needs clients, but he does not subordinate his work to their wishes. They need him, but they do not order a house just to give him a commission. Men exchange their work by free, mutual consent to mutual advantage when their personal interests agree and they both desire the exchange. If they do not desire it, they are not forced to deal with each other. They seek further. This is the only possible form of relationship between equals. Anything else is a relation of slave to master, or victim to executioner.
“No work is ever done collectively, by a majority decision. Every creative job is achieved under the guidance of a single individual thought. An architect requires a great many men to erect his building. But he does not ask them to vote on his design. They work together by free agreement and each is free in his proper function. An architect uses steel, glass, concrete, produced by others. But the materials remain just so much steel, glass and concrete until he touches them. What he does with them is his individual product and his individual property. This is the only pattern for proper co-operation among men.
“The first right on earth is the right of the ego. Man’s first duty is to himself. His moral law is never to place his prime goal within the persons of others. His moral obligation is to do what he wishes, provided his wish does not depend primarily upon other men. This includes the whole sphere of his creative faculty, his thinking, his work. But it does not include the sphere of the gangster, the altruist and the dictator.
“A man thinks and works alone. A man cannot rob, exploit or rule—alone. Robbery, exploitation and ruling presuppose victims. They imply dependence. They are the province of the second-hander.
“Rulers of men are not egotists. They create nothing. They exist entirely through the persons of others. Their goal is in their subjects, in the activity of enslaving. They are as dependent as the beggar, the social worker and the bandit. The form of dependence does not matter.
“But men were taught to regard second-handers—tyrants, emperors, dictators—as exponents of egotism. By this fraud they were made to destroy the ego, themselves and others. The purpose of the fraud was to destroy the creators. Or to harness them. Which is a synonym.
“From the beginning of history, the two antagonists have stood face to face: the creator and the second-hander. When the first creator invented the wheel, the first second-hander responded. He invented altruism.
“The creator—denied, opposed, persecuted, exploited—went on, moved forward and carried all humanity along on his energy. The second-hander contributed nothing to the process except the impediments. The contest has another name: the individual against the collective.
“The ‘common good’ of a collective—a race, a class, a state—was the claim and justification of every tyranny ever established over men. Every major horror of history was committed in the name of an altruistic motive. Has any act of selfishness ever equaled the carnage perpetrated by disciples of altruism? Does the fault lie in men’s hypocrisy or in the nature of the principle? The most dreadful butchers were the most sincere. They believed in the perfect society reached through the guillotine and the firing squad. Nobody questioned their right to murder since they were murdering for an altruistic purpose. It was accepted that man must be sacrificed for other men. Actors change, but the course of the tragedy remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with declarations of love for mankind and ends with a sea of blood. It goes on and will go on so long as men believe that an action is good if it is unselfish. That permits the altruist to act and forces his victims to bear it. The leaders of collectivist movements ask nothing for themselves. But observe the results.
“The only good which men can do to one another and the only statement of their proper relationship is—Hands off!
“Now observe the results of a society built on the principle of individualism. This, our country. The noblest country in the history of men. The country of greatest achievement, greatest prosperity, greatest freedom. This country was not based on selfless service, sacrifice, renunciation or any precept of altruism. It was based on a man’s right to the pursuit of happiness. His own happiness. Not anyone else’s. A private, personal, selfish motive. Look at the results. Look into your own conscience.
“It is an ancient conflict. Men have come close to the truth, but it was destroyed each time and one civilization fell after another. Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage’s whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.
“Now, in our age, collectivism, the rule of the second-hander and second-rater, the ancient monster, has broken loose and is running amuck. It has brought men to a level of intellectual indecency never equaled on earth. It has reached a scale of horror without precedent. It has poisoned every mind. It has swallowed most of Europe. It is engulfing our country.
“I am an architect. I know what is to come by the principle on which it is built. We are approaching a world in which I cannot permit myself to live.
“Now you know why I dynamited Cortlandt.
“I designed Cortlandt. I gave it to you. I destroyed it.
“I destroyed it because I did not choose to let it exist. It was a double monster. In form and in implication. I had to blast both. The form was mutilated by two second-handers who assumed the right to improve upon that which they had not made and could not equal. They were permitted to do it by the general implication that the altruistic purpose of the building superseded all rights and that I had no claim to stand against it.
“I agreed to design Cortlandt for the purpose of seeing it erected as I dedigned it and for no other reason. That was the price I set for my work. I was not paid.
“I do not blame Peter Keating. He was helpless. He had a contract with his employers. It was ignored. He had a promise that the structure he offered would be built as designed. The promise was broken. The love of a man for the integrity of his work and his right to preserve it are now considered a vague intangible and an inessential. You have heard the prosecutor say that. Why was the building disfigured? For no reason. Such acts never have any reason, unless it’s the vanity of some second-handers who feel they have a right to anyone’s property, spiritual or material. Who permitted them to do it? No particular man among the dozens in authority. No one cared to permit it or to stop it. No one was responsible. No one can be held to account. Such is the nature of all collective action.
“I did not receive the payment I asked. But the owners of Cortlandt got what they needed from me. They wanted a scheme devised to build a structure as cheaply as possible. They found no one else who could do it to their satisfaction. I could and did. They took the benefit of my work and made me contribute it as a gift. But I am not an altruist. I do not contribute gifts of this nature.
“It is said that I have destroyed the home of the destitute. It is forgotten that but for me the destitute could not have had this particular home. Those who were concerned with the poor had to come to me, who have never been concerned, in order to help the poor. It is believed that the poverty of the future tenants gave them the right to my work. That their need constituted a claim on my life. That it was my duty to contribute anything demanded of me. This is the second-hander’s credo now swallowing the world.
“I came here to say that I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy. Nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim, how large their number or how great their need.
“I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others.
“It had to be said. The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing.
“I wished to come here and say that the integrity of a man’s creative work is of greater importance than any charitable endeavor. Those of you who do not understand this are the men who’re destroying the world.
“I wished to come here and state my terms. I do not care to exist on any others.
“I recognize no obligations toward men except one: to respect their freedom and to take no part in a slave society. To my country, I wish to give the ten years which I will spend in jail if my country exists no longer. I will spend them in memory and in gratitude for what my country has been. It will be my act of loyalty, my refusal to live or work in what has taken its place.
“My act of loyalty to every creator who ever lived and was made to suffer by the force responsible for the Cortlandt I dynamited. To every tortured hour of loneliness, denial, frustration, abuse he was made to spend—and to the battles he won. To every creator whose name is known—and to every creator who lived, struggled and perished unrecognized before he could achieve. To every creator who was destroyed in body or in spirit. To Henry Cameron. To Steven Mallory. To a man who doesn’t want to be named, but who is sitting in this courtroom and knows that I am speaking of him.”
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Contentment is the friend of laziness and the enemy of creativity. Unhappiness and desire are friends of perfection. Being unhappy with ourselves and our work sometimes leads to great achievements.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
I do agree with most of your points except for the fact that Duryodhana/Karna were not team-oriented. As far as they are concerned, they always worked as a team and displayed unity and concern for their team members in testing times too. Definitely, the motives were not positive, but the teamwork was very much there.
Regards,
Urvashi
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I do agree with most of your points except for the fact that Duryodhana/Karna were not team-oriented. As far as they are concerned, they always worked as a team and displayed unity and concern for their team members in testing times too. Definitely, the motives were not positive, but the teamwork was very much there.
Regards,
Urvashi
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Three cheers to Mr. Chandra Sekhar for standing by his point with some excellent examples and fantastic quotes. This might be something that is called "clarity" in whatever you do!!!
Hats off to you, Mr. Chandra Sekhar!!!
Regards,
Kiran.
From Netherlands
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hats off to you, Mr. Chandra Sekhar!!!
Regards,
Kiran.
From Netherlands
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Avalok,
Good question. It seems the Guru is saying to drop your greed and the "wanting" for things to happen the way you desire. He suggests being a Karmayogi and simply doing it - practicing Nishkama karma. Perform your duty wholeheartedly without craving for the outcomes, as Krishna advised Arjuna. Do you see this viewpoint? I am open to correction if I am mistaken. Over to you.
Yes, I understand your point this time. You mean to say that when we give our job or life our full effort, we tend to find happiness. Additionally, I would like to add that living in the present moment and not being influenced by thoughts like "what would people think of me" leads to happiness. Krishna's advice remains relevant to this day.
From United States, San Mateo
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Good question. It seems the Guru is saying to drop your greed and the "wanting" for things to happen the way you desire. He suggests being a Karmayogi and simply doing it - practicing Nishkama karma. Perform your duty wholeheartedly without craving for the outcomes, as Krishna advised Arjuna. Do you see this viewpoint? I am open to correction if I am mistaken. Over to you.
Yes, I understand your point this time. You mean to say that when we give our job or life our full effort, we tend to find happiness. Additionally, I would like to add that living in the present moment and not being influenced by thoughts like "what would people think of me" leads to happiness. Krishna's advice remains relevant to this day.
From United States, San Mateo
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you, Mr. Chandrashekar, for agreeing with me that team players are more important than selfish individuals. In your treatise, you stated: "Regarding the Kauravas, my opinion is that they are perfect team players. They sacrificed their lives for each other's glory. They were defeated in the battle of Kurukshetra for various reasons, not because they lacked teamwork." Have a nice day!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Shwetaps,
I am happy you got my point. I am really enjoying the conversations on this post. There are lots of people who are wiser than me, and I am thankful to each one for sharing their thoughts with us.
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am happy you got my point. I am really enjoying the conversations on this post. There are lots of people who are wiser than me, and I am thankful to each one for sharing their thoughts with us.
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
What I have gleaned so far from the logic submitted is that:
We should be happy to be unhappy. We can be creative only when we are unhappy. Selfish behavior is good. Contentment equals laziness. The wisdom of Gurus is misleading and idiotic. Kauravas are good, but... It is foolish to seek contentment - better to seek unhappiness. Unhappiness (sometimes) leads to excellence. Fill your organization with unhappy, discontented, and selfish people for success.
Welcome to "clarity."
God bless you all, Unhappily!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What I have gleaned so far from the logic submitted is that:
We should be happy to be unhappy. We can be creative only when we are unhappy. Selfish behavior is good. Contentment equals laziness. The wisdom of Gurus is misleading and idiotic. Kauravas are good, but... It is foolish to seek contentment - better to seek unhappiness. Unhappiness (sometimes) leads to excellence. Fill your organization with unhappy, discontented, and selfish people for success.
Welcome to "clarity."
God bless you all, Unhappily!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
:D :lol: :lol:
Dear Avalok,
I am very happy & impressed to see you pondering over my ideas burning midnight oil.
On most of the matters, because of your inclination to be a “funny man”, you got me wrong, but you are on the job to understand. You need to understand me more to get me right. Firstly I would like to admit that I am not enemy of Spirituality and Gurus. I don’t deny the importance of Spirituality in our lives, nor I have any scant respect for Gurus and their advice. I am like a Cat on the wall….I look both sides as to which is the better place to jump…the Spiritual plane or the Material plane….I often feel the middle path is always good. That means sometimes jump this side, sometimes jump that side.
I will come statement by statement….in what you assembled from my thoughts.
“We should be happy to be unhappy”
Did you see Wimbledon championships recently? There you will find the Star players like Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Serena Williams and Maria Sharapova appear to us getting unhappy, angry with themselves when they can’t play the shot properly. In the game of life too man has a natural inclination to perform and perfect his life and work. When they don’t live up to the expectation, they get frustrated, angry and unhappy with their performance.
But that is all momentary. Let us say, during the final match, Rafeal Nadal could not live up to his expectations. He gets angry with himself, unhappy with himself during the course of the match. After the match is over, he comes back to normalcy from his emotional hype, because he knows there is no use committing suicide because he lost the final.
He gathers his temperament, calmness and give positive feedback to himself…like…”what if I have lost the match…I am only 21 years old….I am like a rising Sun, Federer is going to become part of history books very soon…..anyway I have come up to the finals and performed better than last Wimbledon final….there is a lot of future for me….”.
In all great people unhappiness will be there. But they don’t allow it occupy their minds so much that it takes away their joy and peace of mind. Where it is necessary they will allow unhappiness to crop up and use that to improve their performance. I am not saying we should fill our organizations with unhappy, dissatisfied souls who always appear to us frustrated with their lives.
Your second statement :
“We can be creative only when we are unhappy….”.
I did not say like that, nor I agree with this view. You got me wrong. Even happiness can inspire creativity. When we are in a joyous mood, our emotional intelligence works and we crack very intelligent jokes that fill the audience with laughter. Did you notice? At the same time, unhappiness also leads to creativity, that is why wise people earlier said, “necessity is the mother of invention”.
Your third statement :
“Selfish behavior is good”
There also you got me wrong. As long as our selfishness does not defeat the purpose of the organization and does not cause inconvenience to others, it is OK to be selfish. Selfishness is OK as long as it does not lead one to indulge in illegal behavior.
I had a friend in my past organization who used work very hard to impress the boss. He used to come to office punctually. He used to take on all the load of boss’s work on his head, and very soon he became the dearest subordinate of the boss. That used to affect his peers and subordinates and they used to murmer behind him about his sycophancy to the boss. They used to sit and gather away from him and he understood that they don’t like his presence when they are together. The motive behind his work was to achieve a better position in the hierarchy and better pay. Is it illegal? After all, the purpose of every HR philosophy is to help the employees to identify their individual goals and aspirations with the goals of organization. If he performs better then organization as a whole benefits out of his productivity. If organization performs better he will benefit. Hence there is no difference between Self and Organization.
Some people indulge in corruption to make money. That defeats the purpose of organization. That kind of selfishness is not good.
Even when it comes to Sachin Tendulkar I sometimes noticed that when India needs to score at the rate of 7 runs per over to achieve the target in one days, when he approaches his Century, he slows down and that defeats the purpose of our game i.e., winning the match. Till 90s he score at the rate of 7 runs per over, and after he reaches 90s the run rate falls down to 3 to 4 runs per over increasing the burden on his fellow batsman and team. I don’t say, it happens very often, but it happens sometimes.
That kind of selfishness is also not good. He can be selfish when India bats first, and he can spend time to slow down to score his Century when India is at some 250/4 in 35th over. That kind of selfishness is OK.
I hope you will notice there are many kinds of selfishness, some are considered acceptable, some are consider anti-social or immoral, some are considered illegal and some are considered not acceptable.
Your fourth statement :
“Contentment equals laziness”
We should have contentment about what we have achieved, but not about what we are going to achieve.
Your fifth statement :
“Wisdom of Gurus is misleading and idiotic…”
I have already answered this in the opening lines….”that cat on the wall approach…”.
Your sixth statement :
“Kauravas are good, but….”
I did not say, Kauravas are good, I only said they are good team players. Even a gang of wolves is a good team when it hunts down a forest buffalow or a zebra, they show efficiency in their hunting skills. It is not necessary that only good people can become good team players.
Your seventh statement :
“It is foolish to seek contentment – better to seek unhappiness”
We should have contentment about what we have achieved, but not about what we are going to achieve.
“Unhappiness (sometimes) leads to excellence…”.
You got me right here. But you notice I have reserved the space for you to express your freedom of expression by using the word “sometimes” to agree with your view that unhappiness may also lead to depression and suicide.. I do agree that unhappiness sometimes leads to depression and suicides. In fact all creative people carry a wide range of thought processes. Their emotional intelligence leads them to depression sometimes when they are unhappy, because they have the ability to add one thought to another because their imaginative faculties work very strongly. Almost all creative people are very moody in nature. Their mood swings are unpredictable.
If they channelise their passions in a positive direction they are capable of achieving any heights, but if they channelize in a negative direction then there is every possibility that their thought process and imaginative faculties leads them to depression and irresistible impulse to commit suicide.
Regarding your final statement you will find my reply in opening lines:
In all great people unhappiness will be there. But they don’t allow it occupy their minds so much that it takes away their joy and peace of mind. Where it is necessary they will allow unhappiness to crop up and use that to improve their performance. I am not saying we should fill our organizations with unhappy, dissatisfied souls who always appear to us frustrated with their lives.
Thanks and regards for applying your mind on my ideas. God bless you.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Avalok,
I am very happy & impressed to see you pondering over my ideas burning midnight oil.
On most of the matters, because of your inclination to be a “funny man”, you got me wrong, but you are on the job to understand. You need to understand me more to get me right. Firstly I would like to admit that I am not enemy of Spirituality and Gurus. I don’t deny the importance of Spirituality in our lives, nor I have any scant respect for Gurus and their advice. I am like a Cat on the wall….I look both sides as to which is the better place to jump…the Spiritual plane or the Material plane….I often feel the middle path is always good. That means sometimes jump this side, sometimes jump that side.
I will come statement by statement….in what you assembled from my thoughts.
“We should be happy to be unhappy”
Did you see Wimbledon championships recently? There you will find the Star players like Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Serena Williams and Maria Sharapova appear to us getting unhappy, angry with themselves when they can’t play the shot properly. In the game of life too man has a natural inclination to perform and perfect his life and work. When they don’t live up to the expectation, they get frustrated, angry and unhappy with their performance.
But that is all momentary. Let us say, during the final match, Rafeal Nadal could not live up to his expectations. He gets angry with himself, unhappy with himself during the course of the match. After the match is over, he comes back to normalcy from his emotional hype, because he knows there is no use committing suicide because he lost the final.
He gathers his temperament, calmness and give positive feedback to himself…like…”what if I have lost the match…I am only 21 years old….I am like a rising Sun, Federer is going to become part of history books very soon…..anyway I have come up to the finals and performed better than last Wimbledon final….there is a lot of future for me….”.
In all great people unhappiness will be there. But they don’t allow it occupy their minds so much that it takes away their joy and peace of mind. Where it is necessary they will allow unhappiness to crop up and use that to improve their performance. I am not saying we should fill our organizations with unhappy, dissatisfied souls who always appear to us frustrated with their lives.
Your second statement :
“We can be creative only when we are unhappy….”.
I did not say like that, nor I agree with this view. You got me wrong. Even happiness can inspire creativity. When we are in a joyous mood, our emotional intelligence works and we crack very intelligent jokes that fill the audience with laughter. Did you notice? At the same time, unhappiness also leads to creativity, that is why wise people earlier said, “necessity is the mother of invention”.
Your third statement :
“Selfish behavior is good”
There also you got me wrong. As long as our selfishness does not defeat the purpose of the organization and does not cause inconvenience to others, it is OK to be selfish. Selfishness is OK as long as it does not lead one to indulge in illegal behavior.
I had a friend in my past organization who used work very hard to impress the boss. He used to come to office punctually. He used to take on all the load of boss’s work on his head, and very soon he became the dearest subordinate of the boss. That used to affect his peers and subordinates and they used to murmer behind him about his sycophancy to the boss. They used to sit and gather away from him and he understood that they don’t like his presence when they are together. The motive behind his work was to achieve a better position in the hierarchy and better pay. Is it illegal? After all, the purpose of every HR philosophy is to help the employees to identify their individual goals and aspirations with the goals of organization. If he performs better then organization as a whole benefits out of his productivity. If organization performs better he will benefit. Hence there is no difference between Self and Organization.
Some people indulge in corruption to make money. That defeats the purpose of organization. That kind of selfishness is not good.
Even when it comes to Sachin Tendulkar I sometimes noticed that when India needs to score at the rate of 7 runs per over to achieve the target in one days, when he approaches his Century, he slows down and that defeats the purpose of our game i.e., winning the match. Till 90s he score at the rate of 7 runs per over, and after he reaches 90s the run rate falls down to 3 to 4 runs per over increasing the burden on his fellow batsman and team. I don’t say, it happens very often, but it happens sometimes.
That kind of selfishness is also not good. He can be selfish when India bats first, and he can spend time to slow down to score his Century when India is at some 250/4 in 35th over. That kind of selfishness is OK.
I hope you will notice there are many kinds of selfishness, some are considered acceptable, some are consider anti-social or immoral, some are considered illegal and some are considered not acceptable.
Your fourth statement :
“Contentment equals laziness”
We should have contentment about what we have achieved, but not about what we are going to achieve.
Your fifth statement :
“Wisdom of Gurus is misleading and idiotic…”
I have already answered this in the opening lines….”that cat on the wall approach…”.
Your sixth statement :
“Kauravas are good, but….”
I did not say, Kauravas are good, I only said they are good team players. Even a gang of wolves is a good team when it hunts down a forest buffalow or a zebra, they show efficiency in their hunting skills. It is not necessary that only good people can become good team players.
Your seventh statement :
“It is foolish to seek contentment – better to seek unhappiness”
We should have contentment about what we have achieved, but not about what we are going to achieve.
“Unhappiness (sometimes) leads to excellence…”.
You got me right here. But you notice I have reserved the space for you to express your freedom of expression by using the word “sometimes” to agree with your view that unhappiness may also lead to depression and suicide.. I do agree that unhappiness sometimes leads to depression and suicides. In fact all creative people carry a wide range of thought processes. Their emotional intelligence leads them to depression sometimes when they are unhappy, because they have the ability to add one thought to another because their imaginative faculties work very strongly. Almost all creative people are very moody in nature. Their mood swings are unpredictable.
If they channelise their passions in a positive direction they are capable of achieving any heights, but if they channelize in a negative direction then there is every possibility that their thought process and imaginative faculties leads them to depression and irresistible impulse to commit suicide.
Regarding your final statement you will find my reply in opening lines:
In all great people unhappiness will be there. But they don’t allow it occupy their minds so much that it takes away their joy and peace of mind. Where it is necessary they will allow unhappiness to crop up and use that to improve their performance. I am not saying we should fill our organizations with unhappy, dissatisfied souls who always appear to us frustrated with their lives.
Thanks and regards for applying your mind on my ideas. God bless you.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello and Good Morning, Mr. Chandrashekar,
I appreciate you for sharing your thoughts. The defense is very good and very detailed. Kudos.
My response is in the form of a story/fable I wrote sometime back, which is uploaded here. Please go through it when you are in a relaxed mood.
Have a nice day!
Om Sai Ram!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I appreciate you for sharing your thoughts. The defense is very good and very detailed. Kudos.
My response is in the form of a story/fable I wrote sometime back, which is uploaded here. Please go through it when you are in a relaxed mood.
Have a nice day!
Om Sai Ram!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
:lol: :lol: I remember the old song of Mukesh reading your story.... "Sajan Re Jhoot Math Bolo....Khudaa Ke Paas Jaanaa Hai.... Na Haathi Hai...Na Ghodhaa Hi....Waha Paidal Hi Jaanaa Hai..."
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Being happy is a state of mind. Taking out the word "I" and "want to" are easier said than done. Nevertheless, history has numerous examples of greed and wants leading people nowhere. This life is worth living as long as you live. In the absence of happiness come a lot of worries, stress, and eventually life-threatening diseases. Set goals you can achieve and be satisfied with your efforts; true happiness will follow.
Pierson David
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Pierson David
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all & Avalok,
The discussion is over? Many people may be wondering what could be the relevance of this discussion to the HR profession. This discussion is very much relevant to our profession because this discussion tells us, "what motivates a human being."
If we are spiritual leaders, we can give spiritual discourses to people who come to us with any discontent. But as HR professionals, it is irrelevant for us what "state of mind" a man should possess. What is relevant for us is whether happiness leads to better output or unhappiness. It is the concern of spiritual leaders to suggest people to be happy if they have a frame of mind wherein they are suffering from misery for not achieving what they want in their lives and for not enjoying their lives the way they want, not of HR professionals. We are only bothered "what motivates people" not "what their motives should be."
If he gets motivated by spirituality we get output from him, by motivating him on the path of spirituality. If he gets motivated by selfish desires, as long as what we suggest to them is not illegal and anti-social, we motivate him to give his best to the organization by motivating him on the path of materialism.
That is how this discussion is relevant for HR professionals.
Why should we know what motivates people and be concerned about their motivations when we have power in our hands to get them to do what we want them to do?
It is very easy for anyone to pass an order, "do as I say," because we have been vested with power and authority to get things done by our subordinates. But it takes great abilities to get the work from them with their "willful submission." When our subordinates follow our orders with "willful submission" rather than feeling it as a matter of compulsion to follow, then there will be a better work atmosphere around us.
That is why we should be concerned about what motivates them.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The discussion is over? Many people may be wondering what could be the relevance of this discussion to the HR profession. This discussion is very much relevant to our profession because this discussion tells us, "what motivates a human being."
If we are spiritual leaders, we can give spiritual discourses to people who come to us with any discontent. But as HR professionals, it is irrelevant for us what "state of mind" a man should possess. What is relevant for us is whether happiness leads to better output or unhappiness. It is the concern of spiritual leaders to suggest people to be happy if they have a frame of mind wherein they are suffering from misery for not achieving what they want in their lives and for not enjoying their lives the way they want, not of HR professionals. We are only bothered "what motivates people" not "what their motives should be."
If he gets motivated by spirituality we get output from him, by motivating him on the path of spirituality. If he gets motivated by selfish desires, as long as what we suggest to them is not illegal and anti-social, we motivate him to give his best to the organization by motivating him on the path of materialism.
That is how this discussion is relevant for HR professionals.
Why should we know what motivates people and be concerned about their motivations when we have power in our hands to get them to do what we want them to do?
It is very easy for anyone to pass an order, "do as I say," because we have been vested with power and authority to get things done by our subordinates. But it takes great abilities to get the work from them with their "willful submission." When our subordinates follow our orders with "willful submission" rather than feeling it as a matter of compulsion to follow, then there will be a better work atmosphere around us.
That is why we should be concerned about what motivates them.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A revolving lithic conglomerate accumulates no congeries of minuscule verdant bryophyte. :D
The person presenting the finial cachinnation possesses thereby the primary cachinnation. :lol:
Missiles of ligneous or petrous consistency have the potential of fracturing my osseous structure, but appellations will remain sempiternally innocuous. :twisted: :P :lol: :D
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The person presenting the finial cachinnation possesses thereby the primary cachinnation. :lol:
Missiles of ligneous or petrous consistency have the potential of fracturing my osseous structure, but appellations will remain sempiternally innocuous. :twisted: :P :lol: :D
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
:lol: :lol: Use easy words Dear! I am a logician not a litterateur. I will come back to you after referring dictionary..... Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thx Aditi, That is in case you are refering to my story and not Mr. Chandrashekar’s who I believe, of late, has been busy & highly motivated to hunt for and refer a good dictionary!! :D :lol:
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is not wrong to want or hope. It is the attachment to the want that is the trouble. One requires to be detached. Ofcourse it is not easy; but then all good things are not easy.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"The Joy of Life"
This is the true joy of life. The being used for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one. The being a force of nature instead of a feverish and selfish clod of ailments and grieving senses complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.
I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community and that as long as I live, it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can. I want to be thoroughly used up when I die. For the harder I work, the more I live.
I rejoice in life for its own sake. Life is no brief candle to me. It is a sort of splendid torch which I have got to hold up for the moment, and I want to make it burn as brightly as possible before handing it on to future generations. - George Bernard Shaw
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is the true joy of life. The being used for a purpose recognized by yourself as a mighty one. The being a force of nature instead of a feverish and selfish clod of ailments and grieving senses complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.
I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community and that as long as I live, it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can. I want to be thoroughly used up when I die. For the harder I work, the more I live.
I rejoice in life for its own sake. Life is no brief candle to me. It is a sort of splendid torch which I have got to hold up for the moment, and I want to make it burn as brightly as possible before handing it on to future generations. - George Bernard Shaw
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Avalok and others,
I am happy and encouraged to see so many people visiting this discussiona and viewing it.
It is better to worry about worldly matters than about material; even better to worry about spiritual matters than worldly matters
This does not mean we should totally ignore material, worldly matters. The difference of interest to be shown in those things (in degrees) is explained in the quotation above. If you ask me if there is anything more wonderful and more complex than human mind, then I don’t have an answer to offer. As far as I can see and understand, the most complex and wonderful object I have ever found is the “human mind”. It is as deep as Ocean and as complex as a dense Forest.
We are HR professionals, we do the job of “indirectly contributing” to the process of creation of wealth all over the world. We need to know what motivates human beings, in their thinking patterns and their working patterns. I am deeply surprised by the discovery of the fact that most often the behavior of human beings, their thinking patterns and working patterns are governed by their emotions and feelings rather than by their ability to reason. And I am disturbed by it because if at all we can motivate human beings to use their reasoning faculties rather than being swayed away by emotions and feelings, then we can help the process of transfer of wealth from richer to poorer sections of the world population, but we fail to do so.
This is important because the Planet Earth can satisfy the needs of human beings not their greed (Mahatma Gandhi). That is why as responsible habitats of this planet we must learn to use the natural resources as optimally as possible and utilize the material (wealth) produced of it the most optimum way possible.
What comes in the way of this noble cause is the complexity of human mind itself!
For instance I have the story of my own family members to tell.
Till the end of last month I used to stay with my parents in their house. Because of some reasons, I am compelled to shift to another city and they are compelled to shift to another city. We vacated the house during the last week of the month. I had my PC, TV and some books…to shift to the new house (near my sister’s place) in the new city. In my room, there was lot of unused material. I wanted to give off all that material in charity to one of the servants who worked at our house. During the shifting process, my father was confused and scared which objects he shall shift, which objects he shall ignore, which objects I will take, which objects he will take and so on.
I had a philosophy about “art of living”. We should keep as few things as possible in our houses if we cannot afford to clean them up every day. One new thing we bring into the house, our work increases because we have to clean the dust accumulated to it. That is why we should keep as few things at home as possible so that we can keep our house clean and so that we can clean our house easily and fastly. When we rise to such a position wherein we can appoint one worker to clean all the objects in the house, then only we should keep all the things (that we use for interior decoration) in the house.
And whatever things we need to run a small house, like Refrigerator, TV, Fans, Cots, Stove, Utensils for cooking etc., we can purchase just by spending Rs.50000/- or so.
When we have capacity to earn Rs.30000/- per month we should not worry about the material we have at home. That is my philosophy about “art of living”.
So I told my father, “my property is my PC, my TV and these books, rest of the things I am going to give off to Krishnaveni …(the maid servant who worked at our home)…”.
My father did not like the idea at all because he did not want to give off the things that he (or we) purchased for money to servant just like that. He became jealous of the thought that our servant would enjoy all those things I leave for nothing. He started searching what are all the things in my room that he purchased so that he can at least avoid giving off those things by me to the servant.
He found a heap of Cassettes gathering dust in one almirah. After I left the job in North India I stayed with him for almost 4 years. During those four years, he never heard one song of those cassettes! He had a Tape recorder and Cassette player that he purchased more to show off to others than to hear songs. He bundled the Cassette player and speakers and stored it in store room for all those four years. In other words, not to speak of cassettes, even the Tape recorder-cum- Cassette player itself is a burden on him.
But he did not want to get rid of that burden because, he did not want to allow others to enjoy it. We purchased it for money, why should we give it off free for others? Does anyone give anything free of cost to us when we need it?
These are all the arguments that people often make, and my father is no exception to it.
He will allow that tape recorder-cum-cassette player to gather dust and in that process become dysfunctional, and after 10 years or so, (if he is still alive) he will throw it away.
I feel, “how nice if he can give off that object to someone who need it or someone who has a desire to own it and enjoy it, so that they don’t have to purchase a new one from market. If my father gives off that object in charity, then one tape-recorder cum cassette player will not be purchased from the market. If one tape-recorder cum cassette player is not purchased from the market, then one producer will have to produce one of it less. In other words, one manufacturer will not use the Earth’s resources as much as he uses to make on Tape recorder-cum-cassette player. That is how we save the “natural resources” on this planet.
That is how we use the wealth produced optimally. That is how we save and preserve the depleting natural resources for the future generations.
Once we search any house in the world, we will find so much of unused material that could be of help/use to others. But what comes in the way of giving off all that unused material to poor people is our own attachment towards objects. There is no reason why people are attached to objects and keep them at home thinking this will be of use to me some day or the other. But that day never comes. A cement bag kept in the store room never comes out and it is forgotten by the owner of the house himself that he has it in his store room. And when he needs a cement bag for any repair, he will purchase a new one from the market!
That is why wise people said, “It is better to worry about worldly matters than about material; even better to worry about spiritual matters than worldly matters….”.
After I shifted my material to my sister’s house, I found so many objects here that she kept in her small house which almost looks like a Villain’s den. When I was eating food, I encounter so many insects. Yesterday when I was eating food, one spider came into my food to share it. I left the food as it is and took a new plate.
Lizards say Hello to me from the roof of the house. Every object inside the house is full of dust, but there is no way she gets the idea to get rid of those objects. That is a small house they stay. But they themselves say, because of the exhorbitant rise in real estate prices, that small house, the area occupied by that small house costs around Rs.18 lacs!
Now tell me when they are capable of getting 18 lacs by selling off that house, why should they worry about these small objects that does not cost even Rs.10000/- for them if their cost is totaled?
My brother-in-law took the Life membership of Country club spending Rs.40000/-. He spent another Rs.50000/- or so to construct a small temple in his village. He is a small employee in a small cooperative Bank. He cannot actually afford to do all that. But what motivated him to spend like this is, his inclination to get name and fame from his villagers, friends and relatives.
On the other side, my sister’s kitchen has grown dark with the smoke emanating from the stove. There is so much of dust gathered inside the kitchen around and inside the dust, spider’s webs, they have so many insects moving around. It just takes Rs.500/- to get it white-washed. They did not get the idea for the last 18 years or so, to get it white washed. If they get it white-washed once, so many insects will die and the room will look livable.
What is the reason…why my brother-in-law could spend Rs.50000/- to construct a temple in his village and Rs.40000/- to take Life membership of Country club, but he did not get the idea to get his house white-washed so that he could avoid insects falling into his plate when he eats food?
There is no reason why she has kept so many small, small objects in her house and living without being capable of cleaning them? I have discovered a big Jacket that I left in her house when I came 8 years back on the top of one wooden frame kept to throw away unused articles! That has been gathering dust there and so many little insects have started their families inside that Jacket.
I questioned my sister about so many objects. There are four legs of one cot, kept in the kitchen gathering dust. I asked my sister why did you keep them. She said, if you throw them away, your brother-in-law will scold me, he wants them to be kept.
Just see the ignorance of people!
I told my sister my philosophy. It just requires Rs.50000/- or so to get whatever material you want to make a living in a house, don’t worry about all these things, “can’t we afford to send Rs.50000/- or so when we need to spend on these objects….?”. I told her, “I will give you all the money you require in future to purchase objects such as these, now you get rid of all these unused things so that you don’t make your house a Hell…”.
She is convinced with my logic, but she is scared of my brother-in-law.
Just see how complex and unreasonable the human mind is!
They have kept all the objects without having time to clean them up, without having capacity to clean them up so that they can avoid gathering dust, and gathering insects, spiders, spider web around them etc. They themselves are capable of spending Rs.50000/- or so to purchase all those objects if they construct a new house. But their attachment to old articles have at present made their lives miserable. When they eat, we don’t know how many insects they eat along with their food!
My purpose of writing this to HR community is to think about it seriously.
Spend one Holiday paying a visit to unused and old articles kept in your storage places, store rooms, almirahs etc in your house. Say "hello" to every object and "good bye" to every unused object. It is time worth spending for your happiness and also for the happiness of all those people who benefit from your charity.
If you are not using them, just throw them away if they are of no use, or if they are of use to somebody else, and you don’t have interest to use, donate them to needy people!
There are millions of poor people in India who will willingly take what we offer to them, even if what we offer to them are old objects.
That will serve the cause of “transfer of wealth” from rich to poor and also it will make your lives easier and happier, and the lives of people who receive such objects happier because they can better enjoy the objects you offer to them in charity than you can!
thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am happy and encouraged to see so many people visiting this discussiona and viewing it.
It is better to worry about worldly matters than about material; even better to worry about spiritual matters than worldly matters
This does not mean we should totally ignore material, worldly matters. The difference of interest to be shown in those things (in degrees) is explained in the quotation above. If you ask me if there is anything more wonderful and more complex than human mind, then I don’t have an answer to offer. As far as I can see and understand, the most complex and wonderful object I have ever found is the “human mind”. It is as deep as Ocean and as complex as a dense Forest.
We are HR professionals, we do the job of “indirectly contributing” to the process of creation of wealth all over the world. We need to know what motivates human beings, in their thinking patterns and their working patterns. I am deeply surprised by the discovery of the fact that most often the behavior of human beings, their thinking patterns and working patterns are governed by their emotions and feelings rather than by their ability to reason. And I am disturbed by it because if at all we can motivate human beings to use their reasoning faculties rather than being swayed away by emotions and feelings, then we can help the process of transfer of wealth from richer to poorer sections of the world population, but we fail to do so.
This is important because the Planet Earth can satisfy the needs of human beings not their greed (Mahatma Gandhi). That is why as responsible habitats of this planet we must learn to use the natural resources as optimally as possible and utilize the material (wealth) produced of it the most optimum way possible.
What comes in the way of this noble cause is the complexity of human mind itself!
For instance I have the story of my own family members to tell.
Till the end of last month I used to stay with my parents in their house. Because of some reasons, I am compelled to shift to another city and they are compelled to shift to another city. We vacated the house during the last week of the month. I had my PC, TV and some books…to shift to the new house (near my sister’s place) in the new city. In my room, there was lot of unused material. I wanted to give off all that material in charity to one of the servants who worked at our house. During the shifting process, my father was confused and scared which objects he shall shift, which objects he shall ignore, which objects I will take, which objects he will take and so on.
I had a philosophy about “art of living”. We should keep as few things as possible in our houses if we cannot afford to clean them up every day. One new thing we bring into the house, our work increases because we have to clean the dust accumulated to it. That is why we should keep as few things at home as possible so that we can keep our house clean and so that we can clean our house easily and fastly. When we rise to such a position wherein we can appoint one worker to clean all the objects in the house, then only we should keep all the things (that we use for interior decoration) in the house.
And whatever things we need to run a small house, like Refrigerator, TV, Fans, Cots, Stove, Utensils for cooking etc., we can purchase just by spending Rs.50000/- or so.
When we have capacity to earn Rs.30000/- per month we should not worry about the material we have at home. That is my philosophy about “art of living”.
So I told my father, “my property is my PC, my TV and these books, rest of the things I am going to give off to Krishnaveni …(the maid servant who worked at our home)…”.
My father did not like the idea at all because he did not want to give off the things that he (or we) purchased for money to servant just like that. He became jealous of the thought that our servant would enjoy all those things I leave for nothing. He started searching what are all the things in my room that he purchased so that he can at least avoid giving off those things by me to the servant.
He found a heap of Cassettes gathering dust in one almirah. After I left the job in North India I stayed with him for almost 4 years. During those four years, he never heard one song of those cassettes! He had a Tape recorder and Cassette player that he purchased more to show off to others than to hear songs. He bundled the Cassette player and speakers and stored it in store room for all those four years. In other words, not to speak of cassettes, even the Tape recorder-cum- Cassette player itself is a burden on him.
But he did not want to get rid of that burden because, he did not want to allow others to enjoy it. We purchased it for money, why should we give it off free for others? Does anyone give anything free of cost to us when we need it?
These are all the arguments that people often make, and my father is no exception to it.
He will allow that tape recorder-cum-cassette player to gather dust and in that process become dysfunctional, and after 10 years or so, (if he is still alive) he will throw it away.
I feel, “how nice if he can give off that object to someone who need it or someone who has a desire to own it and enjoy it, so that they don’t have to purchase a new one from market. If my father gives off that object in charity, then one tape-recorder cum cassette player will not be purchased from the market. If one tape-recorder cum cassette player is not purchased from the market, then one producer will have to produce one of it less. In other words, one manufacturer will not use the Earth’s resources as much as he uses to make on Tape recorder-cum-cassette player. That is how we save the “natural resources” on this planet.
That is how we use the wealth produced optimally. That is how we save and preserve the depleting natural resources for the future generations.
Once we search any house in the world, we will find so much of unused material that could be of help/use to others. But what comes in the way of giving off all that unused material to poor people is our own attachment towards objects. There is no reason why people are attached to objects and keep them at home thinking this will be of use to me some day or the other. But that day never comes. A cement bag kept in the store room never comes out and it is forgotten by the owner of the house himself that he has it in his store room. And when he needs a cement bag for any repair, he will purchase a new one from the market!
That is why wise people said, “It is better to worry about worldly matters than about material; even better to worry about spiritual matters than worldly matters….”.
After I shifted my material to my sister’s house, I found so many objects here that she kept in her small house which almost looks like a Villain’s den. When I was eating food, I encounter so many insects. Yesterday when I was eating food, one spider came into my food to share it. I left the food as it is and took a new plate.
Lizards say Hello to me from the roof of the house. Every object inside the house is full of dust, but there is no way she gets the idea to get rid of those objects. That is a small house they stay. But they themselves say, because of the exhorbitant rise in real estate prices, that small house, the area occupied by that small house costs around Rs.18 lacs!
Now tell me when they are capable of getting 18 lacs by selling off that house, why should they worry about these small objects that does not cost even Rs.10000/- for them if their cost is totaled?
My brother-in-law took the Life membership of Country club spending Rs.40000/-. He spent another Rs.50000/- or so to construct a small temple in his village. He is a small employee in a small cooperative Bank. He cannot actually afford to do all that. But what motivated him to spend like this is, his inclination to get name and fame from his villagers, friends and relatives.
On the other side, my sister’s kitchen has grown dark with the smoke emanating from the stove. There is so much of dust gathered inside the kitchen around and inside the dust, spider’s webs, they have so many insects moving around. It just takes Rs.500/- to get it white-washed. They did not get the idea for the last 18 years or so, to get it white washed. If they get it white-washed once, so many insects will die and the room will look livable.
What is the reason…why my brother-in-law could spend Rs.50000/- to construct a temple in his village and Rs.40000/- to take Life membership of Country club, but he did not get the idea to get his house white-washed so that he could avoid insects falling into his plate when he eats food?
There is no reason why she has kept so many small, small objects in her house and living without being capable of cleaning them? I have discovered a big Jacket that I left in her house when I came 8 years back on the top of one wooden frame kept to throw away unused articles! That has been gathering dust there and so many little insects have started their families inside that Jacket.
I questioned my sister about so many objects. There are four legs of one cot, kept in the kitchen gathering dust. I asked my sister why did you keep them. She said, if you throw them away, your brother-in-law will scold me, he wants them to be kept.
Just see the ignorance of people!
I told my sister my philosophy. It just requires Rs.50000/- or so to get whatever material you want to make a living in a house, don’t worry about all these things, “can’t we afford to send Rs.50000/- or so when we need to spend on these objects….?”. I told her, “I will give you all the money you require in future to purchase objects such as these, now you get rid of all these unused things so that you don’t make your house a Hell…”.
She is convinced with my logic, but she is scared of my brother-in-law.
Just see how complex and unreasonable the human mind is!
They have kept all the objects without having time to clean them up, without having capacity to clean them up so that they can avoid gathering dust, and gathering insects, spiders, spider web around them etc. They themselves are capable of spending Rs.50000/- or so to purchase all those objects if they construct a new house. But their attachment to old articles have at present made their lives miserable. When they eat, we don’t know how many insects they eat along with their food!
My purpose of writing this to HR community is to think about it seriously.
Spend one Holiday paying a visit to unused and old articles kept in your storage places, store rooms, almirahs etc in your house. Say "hello" to every object and "good bye" to every unused object. It is time worth spending for your happiness and also for the happiness of all those people who benefit from your charity.
If you are not using them, just throw them away if they are of no use, or if they are of use to somebody else, and you don’t have interest to use, donate them to needy people!
There are millions of poor people in India who will willingly take what we offer to them, even if what we offer to them are old objects.
That will serve the cause of “transfer of wealth” from rich to poor and also it will make your lives easier and happier, and the lives of people who receive such objects happier because they can better enjoy the objects you offer to them in charity than you can!
thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
How to be Happier than yesterday....
1. Decide that Today Will Be a Great Day.
Make it real by writing it down and saying it out loud to yourself. It may seem kooky but it works. When I set my wakeup alarm on my cell phone, I have this message displayed "Wake up and smile! Today is going to be a Great Day!" Don't be embarrassed. No one needs to know you do this. :)
2. Take it Slow.
If yesterday was bad or if you are tired today, take it slow to "warm up" before you kick your day into high gear. If you need to, stay in "slow & steady" pace for the whole day.
3. Cultivate Compassion,
Don't Judge. For a whole day make a pact with yourself not to judge yourself or others. Give everyone, including yourself, the benefit of the doubt for one whole day. Even if you don't believe what you're telling yourself at first, stick with it. It will help change the mental pathways that you tread every day. What do you have to lose except maybe a little misery?
4. Observe, Don't React.
When you encounter things that would normally make you angry, (traffic, certain people, slow computer, etc), plan to observe these things in a detached way as opposed to reacting with anger. If you are angry a lot, be kind to yourself and figure out what is making you angry. Often reacting in anger is a habit, and the good news is habits can be broken! Start slow. Are you chronically tired? Are you frustrated with something in your life? Write it down or talk it out with a friend and then make a plan to remedy your triggers.
If it's rest you need, take some time, say before bed or first thing in the morning, to mentally review which commitments you could cut back on or delete altogether. By freeing up some time, you could get some more rest, exercise, or time to work on something you want to change.
If you're trying to change something in your life to rid yourself of frustration and anger, make a plan, and enlist someone to help you even if it is to just help keep you on track with your plan.
If you are angry about things in your life that you can't control, try to make a small dent in your frustration a little bit each day. A helpful question might be to ask yourself, "How can I be at peace with this situation today?"
5. Smile at People.
Smile at everyone you meet. Fake it 'til you feel it. Laugh at the ridiculous things that happen in life! Humor is the ultimate for producing a sense of well-being. If humor is not your forte, seek out or call the funniest person you know and tell them you need some jokes to get the ball rolling today.
6. Pay it Forward.
Do something nice for someone else. Try doing this all day. Compliment people, thank people, let people go ahead of you in traffic or in line. Watch how quickly that goodness comes back to you!
7. Treat Yourself!
Make it a point to indulge in a favorite treat or activity, or break one of your own rules today. You know that thing you always want to do, but you never allow yourself. Maybe it's a piece of chocolate cake or maybe knock off from work early for once. You could go to the bookstore, see a movie, go to the beach. Or you could include a friend or loved one in on the fun. Maybe you and some friends could go play paintball or go to F1 Go-Carts. Or perhaps you could pick up some food for dinner, grab a blanket, and treat your spouse/friend/kids to an impromptu evening picnic!
8. Count your Blessings.
Even when things are bad, there are always things to be thankful for. List them out in your head or write them down.
9. Get some Great Rest Tonight! You deserve it!
Have a great day!
Source: Written for Dumb Little Man by K. Stone, author of Life Learning Today
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Decide that Today Will Be a Great Day.
Make it real by writing it down and saying it out loud to yourself. It may seem kooky but it works. When I set my wakeup alarm on my cell phone, I have this message displayed "Wake up and smile! Today is going to be a Great Day!" Don't be embarrassed. No one needs to know you do this. :)
2. Take it Slow.
If yesterday was bad or if you are tired today, take it slow to "warm up" before you kick your day into high gear. If you need to, stay in "slow & steady" pace for the whole day.
3. Cultivate Compassion,
Don't Judge. For a whole day make a pact with yourself not to judge yourself or others. Give everyone, including yourself, the benefit of the doubt for one whole day. Even if you don't believe what you're telling yourself at first, stick with it. It will help change the mental pathways that you tread every day. What do you have to lose except maybe a little misery?
4. Observe, Don't React.
When you encounter things that would normally make you angry, (traffic, certain people, slow computer, etc), plan to observe these things in a detached way as opposed to reacting with anger. If you are angry a lot, be kind to yourself and figure out what is making you angry. Often reacting in anger is a habit, and the good news is habits can be broken! Start slow. Are you chronically tired? Are you frustrated with something in your life? Write it down or talk it out with a friend and then make a plan to remedy your triggers.
If it's rest you need, take some time, say before bed or first thing in the morning, to mentally review which commitments you could cut back on or delete altogether. By freeing up some time, you could get some more rest, exercise, or time to work on something you want to change.
If you're trying to change something in your life to rid yourself of frustration and anger, make a plan, and enlist someone to help you even if it is to just help keep you on track with your plan.
If you are angry about things in your life that you can't control, try to make a small dent in your frustration a little bit each day. A helpful question might be to ask yourself, "How can I be at peace with this situation today?"
5. Smile at People.
Smile at everyone you meet. Fake it 'til you feel it. Laugh at the ridiculous things that happen in life! Humor is the ultimate for producing a sense of well-being. If humor is not your forte, seek out or call the funniest person you know and tell them you need some jokes to get the ball rolling today.
6. Pay it Forward.
Do something nice for someone else. Try doing this all day. Compliment people, thank people, let people go ahead of you in traffic or in line. Watch how quickly that goodness comes back to you!
7. Treat Yourself!
Make it a point to indulge in a favorite treat or activity, or break one of your own rules today. You know that thing you always want to do, but you never allow yourself. Maybe it's a piece of chocolate cake or maybe knock off from work early for once. You could go to the bookstore, see a movie, go to the beach. Or you could include a friend or loved one in on the fun. Maybe you and some friends could go play paintball or go to F1 Go-Carts. Or perhaps you could pick up some food for dinner, grab a blanket, and treat your spouse/friend/kids to an impromptu evening picnic!
8. Count your Blessings.
Even when things are bad, there are always things to be thankful for. List them out in your head or write them down.
9. Get some Great Rest Tonight! You deserve it!
Have a great day!
Source: Written for Dumb Little Man by K. Stone, author of Life Learning Today
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There are two ways we can make ourselves happy when we get angry with things around. One way is to change the things in the outside world that we don't like. Other way is to change ourselves to adapt ourselves to the things that we carry antagonism for in such a way that they don't disturb our peace of mind.
Most often it is not possible for us to change the things in the outside world that we don't/can't like because many things are not in our control. Hence the easier way is to transform ourselves rather trying to change the world.
But that does not mean we should not make any attempt to change the world. While making attempts to transform our innerself to adjust to the things we don’t like, we should also try to transform the things that we don’t like, because if our anger has a good reason behind it, then that means something is wrong in the outside world. In such matters we should not feel something is wrong with us that is why we are getting angry, nobody is worried about it.
People lived under British rule, till Freedom fighters like Gandhi, Nehru, Netaji, Sardar Patel etc. led them to Freedom and Independence. People generally sleep over many matters they don’t question. It is the leaders who have the resolve to change the things in the outside world that carry guts and determination to change the world. If we are unreasonably getting angry with the things in the outside world, then we should transform our innerself. But if our anger is reasonable, like our freedom fighters wanting Self-rule and not like the British rule then the only way is to struggle to change the world. It is in that process we became free.
Many things around us appear to us very unreasonable. People generally sleep over many matters until the leaders (not politicians...I am talking about true leaders) raise the issues and wake them up from their unconscious states of mind.
Take for instance the issue of “traffic” that we see on roads in Cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad etc. One of the reasons why there is so much of traffic congestion in peak hours is Taxis, Autorickshaws and Two wheelers. People use Taxis, Autorickshaws during peak hours because they don’t get city buses. They can’t even board the bus, because the bus is jampacked in almost all the cities I mentioned above during peak hours.
If we have the capacity to reason with, then the doubt we get is “what are the options available to the local travelers of these cities…”. I know about Hyderabad, because I was born and brought up there. In Hyderabad, let us take the route between Dilsukhnagar and ESI Hospital, the Bus number is 158. If anyone wants to go from Dilsukhnagar to ESI Hospitals, he has five options.
1. He should be having his own means of conveyance (Two wheeler or Four wheeler)
2. He can go by Call Taxi
3. He can go by Autorickshaw
4. He can go by Metroliner (Semi-luxury bus which costs somewhat more than ordinary city bus)
5. He can go by ordinary city bus service
The distance between Dilsukhnagar and ESI Hospital is around, say, 60 km. Let us say a person called X has a house in Dilsukhnagar and he has his office near ESI Hospital.
It takes around Rs.400/- per day for X if he is a four-wheeler owner (to go to Office and come back to Dilsukhnagar) on petrol assuming that Petrol per litre is Rs.50/- and the four wheeler gives 15 km per litre mileage.
It takes around Rs.100/- per day for X if he is a two-wheeler owner to go to office and come back assuming that two wheeler gives a mileage of 60 km per litre.
It takes around Rs.900/- per day for X if he wants to go by Call taxi to go to office and come back.
It takes around Rs.400/- per day for X if he wants to go by Autorickshaw to go office and come back.
It takes around Rs.40 per day for X if he wants to go by Metroliner to office and come back.
It takes around Rs.15 to 20 per day for X if he wants to go by City bus to office and come back.
Now when we see the above costs, the cheapest way one can travel to ESI Hospital from Dislukhnagar and come back is City bus. Next, cheapest way is Metroliner. The third cheapest option is two-wheeler.
Now you may ask what this has to do with traffic? I will tell you.
People are compelled to travel in Cars, Twowheelers, Taxis, Autorickshaws because the State Road Transport Corporation could not provide an option for them to travel in a Bus that carries no congestion. Even a common man is exploited by Autorickshaw driver because if he wants to go home early for some urgent work to attend at home, the only option available to him apart from City bus, Metroliner is Autorickshaw.
Let us say, Y is a Clerk in some government department, he goes to office everyday by city bus. It costs him Rs.750/- per month. One day, he had to take Autorickshaw to come home because his old mother has suddenly fallen ill during August 2007. During that month, his expenses on traveling shoots up to Rs.950/-!
A few days, he takes the luxury of Autorickshaw to come back home after toiling in office, it will cost him more than Rs.2000/-!
One side this is exploitation, another side, it increases traffic congestion because Autorickshaws add to the traffic during peak hours.
If we see so many Autodrivers, Taxi drivers getting business during peak hours in Cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad etc. we will come to know that there could be many Ys traveling in them.
All this happens only for one reason!
There is no option for travelers between Rs.40/- metroliner and Rs.400/- for Autorickshaw!!
It happens uniformly in all cities of India as if all the State governments have colluded with Autorickshaw drivers and Taxi drivers to benefit them and to harass and exploit common man both by way of increasing traffic congestion and also by way of exhorbitant charges collected by them.
My question to all those State governments is “Why not introduce, Luxury buses that would cost tickets of Rs.15/- (up to 15 km distance), Rs.40/- (up to 30 km distance), Rs. 60/- (up to 50 km distance) and Rs.75/- for any distance above 50 km.
Remove 100 to 150 ordinary buses from the fleet of ordinary city buses and introduce Luxury buses in all routes of these cities. People’s purchasing power has increased, they can easily purchase the tickets. There is no reason why we should think that “City bus fares should remain uniform and they are meant exclusively for middle class and poor sections of society”. In fact introduction of Luxury buses for Local travels helps middle class and poor people also because they can avoid Auto-rickshaws. Let us say, it costs Rs.75/- for Y to travel from ESI Hospital to home. Is it not cheaper than Autorickshaw fare that costs him Rs.200/-?
We have different tariffs for different comfort levels in all other services. Take Railways, there is Ist A/c, 2nd A/c, 3rd A/c, Sleeper etc. For theatres, we have Balcony, Dress circle etc. There are different tariffs for different comfort levels, people have got used to it, why can’t the same be introduced for City Bus traveling?
My point is it will benefit people two ways.
1. It will help people to avoid Taxis and Autorickshaws and that way it will avoid their exploitation
2. It will avoid traffic congestion because as many people who would use Cars, Two-wheelers, Taxis, Autorickshaws would use Luxury buses to travel.
My point is that there is so much of traffic congestion in major cities of India, because, the Local travelers have no option to choose between City bus and Autorickshaw and the difference of tariffs between these two will be too high for long distances leading to exploitation of travelers apart from increasing traffic congestion.
If the corporations like KSRTC, APSRTC, BEST etc cannot allow private travelers to introduce Luxury Local travel buses, let them introduce on their own! Just introduce Luxury buses and allow only 4-5 people to stand (for the purpose of occupying vacated seats) in the bus not more than that. Make such rule and implement it strictly.
Mumbai will surely become Shanghai if BEST can do that; not only Mumbai all other cities will look like that, because if 100 different passengers taking 100 Autorickshaws avoid travelling in 100 autorickshaws and instead use one Luxury bus, then the difference between space occupied by 100 Autorickshaws (on roads) and One luxury bus is the difference that we will make on our traffic!! That is how we can avoid traffic congestion in Cities.
People who can spend 400 to 500 rupees for Taxis and Autorickshaws for long distances will not mind spending between Rs.15 to 75/-. Isn’t it?
Avalok! Sometimes we have to observe and also react!! To create a better world….
…………
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Most often it is not possible for us to change the things in the outside world that we don't/can't like because many things are not in our control. Hence the easier way is to transform ourselves rather trying to change the world.
But that does not mean we should not make any attempt to change the world. While making attempts to transform our innerself to adjust to the things we don’t like, we should also try to transform the things that we don’t like, because if our anger has a good reason behind it, then that means something is wrong in the outside world. In such matters we should not feel something is wrong with us that is why we are getting angry, nobody is worried about it.
People lived under British rule, till Freedom fighters like Gandhi, Nehru, Netaji, Sardar Patel etc. led them to Freedom and Independence. People generally sleep over many matters they don’t question. It is the leaders who have the resolve to change the things in the outside world that carry guts and determination to change the world. If we are unreasonably getting angry with the things in the outside world, then we should transform our innerself. But if our anger is reasonable, like our freedom fighters wanting Self-rule and not like the British rule then the only way is to struggle to change the world. It is in that process we became free.
Many things around us appear to us very unreasonable. People generally sleep over many matters until the leaders (not politicians...I am talking about true leaders) raise the issues and wake them up from their unconscious states of mind.
Take for instance the issue of “traffic” that we see on roads in Cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Calcutta, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad etc. One of the reasons why there is so much of traffic congestion in peak hours is Taxis, Autorickshaws and Two wheelers. People use Taxis, Autorickshaws during peak hours because they don’t get city buses. They can’t even board the bus, because the bus is jampacked in almost all the cities I mentioned above during peak hours.
If we have the capacity to reason with, then the doubt we get is “what are the options available to the local travelers of these cities…”. I know about Hyderabad, because I was born and brought up there. In Hyderabad, let us take the route between Dilsukhnagar and ESI Hospital, the Bus number is 158. If anyone wants to go from Dilsukhnagar to ESI Hospitals, he has five options.
1. He should be having his own means of conveyance (Two wheeler or Four wheeler)
2. He can go by Call Taxi
3. He can go by Autorickshaw
4. He can go by Metroliner (Semi-luxury bus which costs somewhat more than ordinary city bus)
5. He can go by ordinary city bus service
The distance between Dilsukhnagar and ESI Hospital is around, say, 60 km. Let us say a person called X has a house in Dilsukhnagar and he has his office near ESI Hospital.
It takes around Rs.400/- per day for X if he is a four-wheeler owner (to go to Office and come back to Dilsukhnagar) on petrol assuming that Petrol per litre is Rs.50/- and the four wheeler gives 15 km per litre mileage.
It takes around Rs.100/- per day for X if he is a two-wheeler owner to go to office and come back assuming that two wheeler gives a mileage of 60 km per litre.
It takes around Rs.900/- per day for X if he wants to go by Call taxi to go to office and come back.
It takes around Rs.400/- per day for X if he wants to go by Autorickshaw to go office and come back.
It takes around Rs.40 per day for X if he wants to go by Metroliner to office and come back.
It takes around Rs.15 to 20 per day for X if he wants to go by City bus to office and come back.
Now when we see the above costs, the cheapest way one can travel to ESI Hospital from Dislukhnagar and come back is City bus. Next, cheapest way is Metroliner. The third cheapest option is two-wheeler.
Now you may ask what this has to do with traffic? I will tell you.
People are compelled to travel in Cars, Twowheelers, Taxis, Autorickshaws because the State Road Transport Corporation could not provide an option for them to travel in a Bus that carries no congestion. Even a common man is exploited by Autorickshaw driver because if he wants to go home early for some urgent work to attend at home, the only option available to him apart from City bus, Metroliner is Autorickshaw.
Let us say, Y is a Clerk in some government department, he goes to office everyday by city bus. It costs him Rs.750/- per month. One day, he had to take Autorickshaw to come home because his old mother has suddenly fallen ill during August 2007. During that month, his expenses on traveling shoots up to Rs.950/-!
A few days, he takes the luxury of Autorickshaw to come back home after toiling in office, it will cost him more than Rs.2000/-!
One side this is exploitation, another side, it increases traffic congestion because Autorickshaws add to the traffic during peak hours.
If we see so many Autodrivers, Taxi drivers getting business during peak hours in Cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad etc. we will come to know that there could be many Ys traveling in them.
All this happens only for one reason!
There is no option for travelers between Rs.40/- metroliner and Rs.400/- for Autorickshaw!!
It happens uniformly in all cities of India as if all the State governments have colluded with Autorickshaw drivers and Taxi drivers to benefit them and to harass and exploit common man both by way of increasing traffic congestion and also by way of exhorbitant charges collected by them.
My question to all those State governments is “Why not introduce, Luxury buses that would cost tickets of Rs.15/- (up to 15 km distance), Rs.40/- (up to 30 km distance), Rs. 60/- (up to 50 km distance) and Rs.75/- for any distance above 50 km.
Remove 100 to 150 ordinary buses from the fleet of ordinary city buses and introduce Luxury buses in all routes of these cities. People’s purchasing power has increased, they can easily purchase the tickets. There is no reason why we should think that “City bus fares should remain uniform and they are meant exclusively for middle class and poor sections of society”. In fact introduction of Luxury buses for Local travels helps middle class and poor people also because they can avoid Auto-rickshaws. Let us say, it costs Rs.75/- for Y to travel from ESI Hospital to home. Is it not cheaper than Autorickshaw fare that costs him Rs.200/-?
We have different tariffs for different comfort levels in all other services. Take Railways, there is Ist A/c, 2nd A/c, 3rd A/c, Sleeper etc. For theatres, we have Balcony, Dress circle etc. There are different tariffs for different comfort levels, people have got used to it, why can’t the same be introduced for City Bus traveling?
My point is it will benefit people two ways.
1. It will help people to avoid Taxis and Autorickshaws and that way it will avoid their exploitation
2. It will avoid traffic congestion because as many people who would use Cars, Two-wheelers, Taxis, Autorickshaws would use Luxury buses to travel.
My point is that there is so much of traffic congestion in major cities of India, because, the Local travelers have no option to choose between City bus and Autorickshaw and the difference of tariffs between these two will be too high for long distances leading to exploitation of travelers apart from increasing traffic congestion.
If the corporations like KSRTC, APSRTC, BEST etc cannot allow private travelers to introduce Luxury Local travel buses, let them introduce on their own! Just introduce Luxury buses and allow only 4-5 people to stand (for the purpose of occupying vacated seats) in the bus not more than that. Make such rule and implement it strictly.
Mumbai will surely become Shanghai if BEST can do that; not only Mumbai all other cities will look like that, because if 100 different passengers taking 100 Autorickshaws avoid travelling in 100 autorickshaws and instead use one Luxury bus, then the difference between space occupied by 100 Autorickshaws (on roads) and One luxury bus is the difference that we will make on our traffic!! That is how we can avoid traffic congestion in Cities.
People who can spend 400 to 500 rupees for Taxis and Autorickshaws for long distances will not mind spending between Rs.15 to 75/-. Isn’t it?
Avalok! Sometimes we have to observe and also react!! To create a better world….
…………
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Good Mr. Chandrashekar,
Question: Are you a happy person?
----------------------------------------------------------
90/10 Principle
By: Steven Covey
Have you read this before?
Discover the 90/10 Principle. It will change your life (at least the way you react to situations). What is this principle?
10% of life is made up of what happens to you. 90% of life is decided by how you react. What does this mean?
We really have no control over 10% of what happens to us. We cannot stop the car from breaking down. The plane will be late arriving, which throws our whole schedule off. A driver may cut us off in traffic. We have no control over this 10%. The other 90% is different. You determine the other 90%.
How? By your reaction. You cannot control a red light. However, you can control your reaction. Do not let people fool you; YOU can control how you react.
Let us use an example: You are eating breakfast with your family. Your daughter knocks over a cup of coffee onto your business shirt. You have no control over what just what happened. What happens when the next will be determined by how you react. You curse. You harshly scold your daughter for knocking the cup over.
She breaks down in tears. After scolding her, you turn to your spouse and criticize her for placing the cup too close to the edge of the table. A short verbal battle follows. You storm upstairs and change your shirt. Back downstairs, you find your daughter has been too busy crying to finish breakfast and get ready for school. She misses the bus. Your spouse must leave immediately for work.
You rush to the car and drive your daughter to school. Because you are late, you drive 40 miles an hour in a 30 mph speed limit. After a 15-minute delay and throwing $60 traffic fine away, you arrive at school. Your daughter runs into the building without saying goodbye. After arriving at the office 20 minutes late, you find you forgot your briefcase. Your day has started terrible. As it continues, it seems to get worse and worse. You look forward to coming home, When you arrive home, you find small wedge in your relationship with your spouse and daughter.
Why? Because of how you reacted in the morning. Why did you have a bad day?
A) Did the coffee cause it?
B) Did your daughter cause it?
C) Did the policeman cause it?
D) Did you cause it?
The answer is “D”.
You had no control over what happened with the coffee. How you reacted in those 5 seconds is what caused your bad day. Here is what could have and should have happened.
Coffee splashes over you. Your daughter is about to cry. You gently say, "Its ok honey, you just need, to be more careful next time". Grabbing a towel, you rush upstairs. After grabbing a new shirt and your briefcase, you come back down in time to look through the window and see your child getting on the bus. She turns and waves. You arrive 5 minutes early and cheerfully greet the staff. Your boss comments on how good the day you are having.
Notice the difference?
Two different scenarios. Both started the same. Both ended different.
Why? Because of how you REACTED.
You really do not have any control over 10% of what happens. The other 90% was determined by your reaction.
Here are some ways to apply the 90/10 principle.
If someone says something negative about you, do not be a sponge. Let the attack roll off like water on glass. You do not have to let the negative comment affect you! React properly and it will not ruin your day. A wrong reaction could result in losing a friend, being fired, getting stressed out etc.
How do you react if someone cuts you off in traffic?
Do you lose your temper?
Pound on the steering wheel? A friend of mine had the steering wheel fall
Off)
Do you curse?
Does your blood pressure skyrocket?
Do you try to bump them?
WHO CARES if you arrive ten seconds later at work? Why let the cars ruin your drive.
Remember the 90/10 principle, and do not worry about it.
You are told you lost your job. Why lose sleep and get irritated? It will work out. Use your worrying energy and time into finding another job.
The plane is late; it is going to mangle your schedule for the day. Why take out your frustration on the flight attendant? She has no control over what is going on. Use your time to study, get to know the other passenger.
Why are stressed out? It will just make
Things worse.
Now you know the 90-10 principle. Apply it and you will be amazed at the results. You will lose nothing if you try it.
The 90-10 principle is incredible. Very few know and apply this principle.
The result? Millions of people are suffering from undeserved stress, trials, problems and heartache.
We all must understand and apply the 90/10 principle.
It CAN change your life!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Question: Are you a happy person?
----------------------------------------------------------
90/10 Principle
By: Steven Covey
Have you read this before?
Discover the 90/10 Principle. It will change your life (at least the way you react to situations). What is this principle?
10% of life is made up of what happens to you. 90% of life is decided by how you react. What does this mean?
We really have no control over 10% of what happens to us. We cannot stop the car from breaking down. The plane will be late arriving, which throws our whole schedule off. A driver may cut us off in traffic. We have no control over this 10%. The other 90% is different. You determine the other 90%.
How? By your reaction. You cannot control a red light. However, you can control your reaction. Do not let people fool you; YOU can control how you react.
Let us use an example: You are eating breakfast with your family. Your daughter knocks over a cup of coffee onto your business shirt. You have no control over what just what happened. What happens when the next will be determined by how you react. You curse. You harshly scold your daughter for knocking the cup over.
She breaks down in tears. After scolding her, you turn to your spouse and criticize her for placing the cup too close to the edge of the table. A short verbal battle follows. You storm upstairs and change your shirt. Back downstairs, you find your daughter has been too busy crying to finish breakfast and get ready for school. She misses the bus. Your spouse must leave immediately for work.
You rush to the car and drive your daughter to school. Because you are late, you drive 40 miles an hour in a 30 mph speed limit. After a 15-minute delay and throwing $60 traffic fine away, you arrive at school. Your daughter runs into the building without saying goodbye. After arriving at the office 20 minutes late, you find you forgot your briefcase. Your day has started terrible. As it continues, it seems to get worse and worse. You look forward to coming home, When you arrive home, you find small wedge in your relationship with your spouse and daughter.
Why? Because of how you reacted in the morning. Why did you have a bad day?
A) Did the coffee cause it?
B) Did your daughter cause it?
C) Did the policeman cause it?
D) Did you cause it?
The answer is “D”.
You had no control over what happened with the coffee. How you reacted in those 5 seconds is what caused your bad day. Here is what could have and should have happened.
Coffee splashes over you. Your daughter is about to cry. You gently say, "Its ok honey, you just need, to be more careful next time". Grabbing a towel, you rush upstairs. After grabbing a new shirt and your briefcase, you come back down in time to look through the window and see your child getting on the bus. She turns and waves. You arrive 5 minutes early and cheerfully greet the staff. Your boss comments on how good the day you are having.
Notice the difference?
Two different scenarios. Both started the same. Both ended different.
Why? Because of how you REACTED.
You really do not have any control over 10% of what happens. The other 90% was determined by your reaction.
Here are some ways to apply the 90/10 principle.
If someone says something negative about you, do not be a sponge. Let the attack roll off like water on glass. You do not have to let the negative comment affect you! React properly and it will not ruin your day. A wrong reaction could result in losing a friend, being fired, getting stressed out etc.
How do you react if someone cuts you off in traffic?
Do you lose your temper?
Pound on the steering wheel? A friend of mine had the steering wheel fall
Off)
Do you curse?
Does your blood pressure skyrocket?
Do you try to bump them?
WHO CARES if you arrive ten seconds later at work? Why let the cars ruin your drive.
Remember the 90/10 principle, and do not worry about it.
You are told you lost your job. Why lose sleep and get irritated? It will work out. Use your worrying energy and time into finding another job.
The plane is late; it is going to mangle your schedule for the day. Why take out your frustration on the flight attendant? She has no control over what is going on. Use your time to study, get to know the other passenger.
Why are stressed out? It will just make
Things worse.
Now you know the 90-10 principle. Apply it and you will be amazed at the results. You will lose nothing if you try it.
The 90-10 principle is incredible. Very few know and apply this principle.
The result? Millions of people are suffering from undeserved stress, trials, problems and heartache.
We all must understand and apply the 90/10 principle.
It CAN change your life!
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Chandrashekhar,
I agree with your view to a large extent. In this world, it is not possible to live without "MOH" (i.e., attachment) and "MAYA" (i.e., money). In this way, you have already denounced the world when, in fact, you are in this living world. All the five senses God created have their own functions. Now, what is required is the creation of balance among all the five senses and using them in the right manner. I quote one saying on how to live in this world: "you should live in this world like a lotus flower, whose roots are in the mud and the distance between its flower is above the mud/root".
Yours truly,
Satish Kumar
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with your view to a large extent. In this world, it is not possible to live without "MOH" (i.e., attachment) and "MAYA" (i.e., money). In this way, you have already denounced the world when, in fact, you are in this living world. All the five senses God created have their own functions. Now, what is required is the creation of balance among all the five senses and using them in the right manner. I quote one saying on how to live in this world: "you should live in this world like a lotus flower, whose roots are in the mud and the distance between its flower is above the mud/root".
Yours truly,
Satish Kumar
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Avalok & Satish,
I don't think we need to depend on Western psychologists or thinkers to mend ourselves. We have a wealth of knowledge in our own scriptures. The example of the father you have given is the example of a person who is under the influence of Rajas and Tamas. Why does a man get angry when his daughter drops some coffee/tea on his business shirt? Because he is "passionate" about impressing his peers, subordinates, authorities, people he meets in his office. Why does he want to impress all these people? He wants to achieve success, glory, earn riches, and so on. In other words, his mind is attached to "goals"/"fruits".
If he is a detached person, he will think like this: What happens if I go to the office with a spoiled shirt? People may look at me with an odd impression. Let them look. The boss may get angry and remove me from the job. Let him remove me from the job; I already made enough money to survive even if I don't do the job now. Or, I can get a job somewhere else. Why should I get angry with my daughter who has done something without any motive to disturb my peace?
You spoke about Nishkaama Karma; hence, I don't think I need to explain about Modes of Nature. But, for the convenience of readers, I am quoting the Bhagavad Gita here, which helps us to know how to be detached from this material world and at the same time carry out our work (karma) without being attached to the fruits of the work. When we rise above Modes of Nature, we get detached from this material world.
Modes of nature cause "Maaya" (illusion), and people are always under the influence of feelings and emotions because of the influence of Modes of Nature. Feelings cause perceptions and emotions. For example, how do you explain jealousy, and what perception does it cause/develop?
"HE/SHE HAS SOMETHING THAT I DON'T HAVE"
What perception is caused by Hatred?
"I DON'T LIKE"
Like this, every feeling causes a perception in us, and our feelings and perceptions determine our attitude towards the people we interact with.
Emotion is the expressed form of feeling. We are under the influence of feelings, emotions, wrong perceptions as long as we are influenced by Modes of Nature. We attain a state of mind when we are not influenced by Modes of Nature. Then we get the ability to perceive the Truth in an unconditioned way. (Unconditioned means unconditioned by our feelings and emotions).
All people who achieve liberation from the influence of Modes of Nature are "Happy".
Material nature consists of three modes—goodness, passion, and ignorance. When the eternal living entity comes in contact with nature, O mighty-armed Arjuna, he becomes conditioned by these modes.
O sinless one, the mode of goodness, being purer than the others, is illuminating, and it frees one from all sinful reactions. Those situated in that mode become conditioned by a sense of happiness and knowledge.
The mode of passion is born of unlimited desires and longings, O son of Kunti, and because of this, the embodied living entity is bound to material fruitive actions.
O son of Bharata, know that the mode of darkness, born of ignorance, is the delusion of all embodied living entities. The results of this mode are madness, indolence, and sleep, which bind the conditioned soul.
One who neither hates nor desires the fruits of his activities is known to be always renounced. Such a person, free from all dualities, easily overcomes material bondage and is completely liberated, O mighty-armed Arjuna.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don't think we need to depend on Western psychologists or thinkers to mend ourselves. We have a wealth of knowledge in our own scriptures. The example of the father you have given is the example of a person who is under the influence of Rajas and Tamas. Why does a man get angry when his daughter drops some coffee/tea on his business shirt? Because he is "passionate" about impressing his peers, subordinates, authorities, people he meets in his office. Why does he want to impress all these people? He wants to achieve success, glory, earn riches, and so on. In other words, his mind is attached to "goals"/"fruits".
If he is a detached person, he will think like this: What happens if I go to the office with a spoiled shirt? People may look at me with an odd impression. Let them look. The boss may get angry and remove me from the job. Let him remove me from the job; I already made enough money to survive even if I don't do the job now. Or, I can get a job somewhere else. Why should I get angry with my daughter who has done something without any motive to disturb my peace?
You spoke about Nishkaama Karma; hence, I don't think I need to explain about Modes of Nature. But, for the convenience of readers, I am quoting the Bhagavad Gita here, which helps us to know how to be detached from this material world and at the same time carry out our work (karma) without being attached to the fruits of the work. When we rise above Modes of Nature, we get detached from this material world.
Modes of nature cause "Maaya" (illusion), and people are always under the influence of feelings and emotions because of the influence of Modes of Nature. Feelings cause perceptions and emotions. For example, how do you explain jealousy, and what perception does it cause/develop?
"HE/SHE HAS SOMETHING THAT I DON'T HAVE"
What perception is caused by Hatred?
"I DON'T LIKE"
Like this, every feeling causes a perception in us, and our feelings and perceptions determine our attitude towards the people we interact with.
Emotion is the expressed form of feeling. We are under the influence of feelings, emotions, wrong perceptions as long as we are influenced by Modes of Nature. We attain a state of mind when we are not influenced by Modes of Nature. Then we get the ability to perceive the Truth in an unconditioned way. (Unconditioned means unconditioned by our feelings and emotions).
All people who achieve liberation from the influence of Modes of Nature are "Happy".
Material nature consists of three modes—goodness, passion, and ignorance. When the eternal living entity comes in contact with nature, O mighty-armed Arjuna, he becomes conditioned by these modes.
O sinless one, the mode of goodness, being purer than the others, is illuminating, and it frees one from all sinful reactions. Those situated in that mode become conditioned by a sense of happiness and knowledge.
The mode of passion is born of unlimited desires and longings, O son of Kunti, and because of this, the embodied living entity is bound to material fruitive actions.
O son of Bharata, know that the mode of darkness, born of ignorance, is the delusion of all embodied living entities. The results of this mode are madness, indolence, and sleep, which bind the conditioned soul.
One who neither hates nor desires the fruits of his activities is known to be always renounced. Such a person, free from all dualities, easily overcomes material bondage and is completely liberated, O mighty-armed Arjuna.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Very Good Mr. Chandrashekar,
Wisdom is wisdom. Period.
No need to categorize it as western or eastern. We need to learn from all.
No need to get paranoid or jingoistic about the "ownership" of wisdom.
No need to be jealous of western thought Gurus.
This whole topic started from Ramana Maharishi's advice on "How to be happy".
I am glad you are beginning to see the Truth of the sage's advice.
Here are some quotes from "Tao de ching" (Eastern Wisdom - Of course):
A leader is best when people barely know he exists, not so good when people obey and acclaim him, worse when they despise him. But of a good leader who talks little when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves.
I have three precious things which I hold fast and prize. The first is gentleness; the second is frugality; the third is humility, which keeps me from putting myself before others. Be gentle and you can be bold; be frugal and you can be liberal; avoid putting yourself before others and you can become a leader among men.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Wisdom is wisdom. Period.
No need to categorize it as western or eastern. We need to learn from all.
No need to get paranoid or jingoistic about the "ownership" of wisdom.
No need to be jealous of western thought Gurus.
This whole topic started from Ramana Maharishi's advice on "How to be happy".
I am glad you are beginning to see the Truth of the sage's advice.
Here are some quotes from "Tao de ching" (Eastern Wisdom - Of course):
A leader is best when people barely know he exists, not so good when people obey and acclaim him, worse when they despise him. But of a good leader who talks little when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves.
I have three precious things which I hold fast and prize. The first is gentleness; the second is frugality; the third is humility, which keeps me from putting myself before others. Be gentle and you can be bold; be frugal and you can be liberal; avoid putting yourself before others and you can become a leader among men.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Avalok,
You need to develop a lot more to understand a little bit of what I am. My sincere advice to you is to join some Vipassana course.
I am fully aware when I use a sentence like this, you will tend to disagree with me and compete with me saying NO. Those tendencies show that you still have "Ego."
Why I am advising this to you is, you are still suffering from "superiority complex" and assuming yourself to be the Teacher and me to be your student who is suffering from "ajnana." You are assuming that you are driving me on the path of enlightenment.
We are not in a "knowledge competition." I don't know about you, I know about myself. I am not in it. But the way you use tough English words shows that your mind is still wavering between the pendulum swing of "inferiority complex" and "superiority complex."
If you practice Vipassana, it will help you to treat others as equals. When we are under the influence of Rajas and Tamas, we often waver between the inferiority and superiority complexes. In that process, we try to compete and sometimes assume "we are too smart," and often we feel "others need to know more."
Usage of sentences like "you are beginning to see the Truth in Gurus advice..." and all are superfluous sentences because I have already explained I have nothing against Spiritual Gurus in the beginning itself. They only show that you want to play the role of someone who leads others on the path of enlightenment. That is why I am saying there are shades of "superiority complex" in your thinking patterns.
"Knowledge with humility" is always beautiful than "knowledge with a superiority complex." You will grow as a better human being (you are already a good human being) if you learn to listen more and talk less.
All these complexes will go, and we will grow into modest human beings who treat others with dignity and humility when we get rid of Rajas and Tamas. Vipassana meditation is one of the ways to get rid of it. When we don't have inferiority and superiority complexes, then we treat others as "equals." We achieve a state of mind wherein we neither feel we are inferior to others and try to dominate them (to show and prove we too have knowledge, competence, etc.) like you have used "tough English words" to show off your knowledge, nor feel we are superiors like suggesting me in the present communication, "you are beginning to see the light..." as though you are leading me on the path of "enlightenment."
Chandrasekhar
P.S.
OK Avalok! It is nice interacting with you. I am not going to respond to any more communications in this forum/topic. Thanks and bye.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You need to develop a lot more to understand a little bit of what I am. My sincere advice to you is to join some Vipassana course.
I am fully aware when I use a sentence like this, you will tend to disagree with me and compete with me saying NO. Those tendencies show that you still have "Ego."
Why I am advising this to you is, you are still suffering from "superiority complex" and assuming yourself to be the Teacher and me to be your student who is suffering from "ajnana." You are assuming that you are driving me on the path of enlightenment.
We are not in a "knowledge competition." I don't know about you, I know about myself. I am not in it. But the way you use tough English words shows that your mind is still wavering between the pendulum swing of "inferiority complex" and "superiority complex."
If you practice Vipassana, it will help you to treat others as equals. When we are under the influence of Rajas and Tamas, we often waver between the inferiority and superiority complexes. In that process, we try to compete and sometimes assume "we are too smart," and often we feel "others need to know more."
Usage of sentences like "you are beginning to see the Truth in Gurus advice..." and all are superfluous sentences because I have already explained I have nothing against Spiritual Gurus in the beginning itself. They only show that you want to play the role of someone who leads others on the path of enlightenment. That is why I am saying there are shades of "superiority complex" in your thinking patterns.
"Knowledge with humility" is always beautiful than "knowledge with a superiority complex." You will grow as a better human being (you are already a good human being) if you learn to listen more and talk less.
All these complexes will go, and we will grow into modest human beings who treat others with dignity and humility when we get rid of Rajas and Tamas. Vipassana meditation is one of the ways to get rid of it. When we don't have inferiority and superiority complexes, then we treat others as "equals." We achieve a state of mind wherein we neither feel we are inferior to others and try to dominate them (to show and prove we too have knowledge, competence, etc.) like you have used "tough English words" to show off your knowledge, nor feel we are superiors like suggesting me in the present communication, "you are beginning to see the light..." as though you are leading me on the path of "enlightenment."
Chandrasekhar
P.S.
OK Avalok! It is nice interacting with you. I am not going to respond to any more communications in this forum/topic. Thanks and bye.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The centipede was happy, quite,
Until a toad in fun
Said, “Pray, which leg goes after which?”
This worked his mind to such a pitch,
He lay distracted in a ditch,
Considering how to run.
:cry: :oops: :twisted: :evil: :shock: :( :o :? 8)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Until a toad in fun
Said, “Pray, which leg goes after which?”
This worked his mind to such a pitch,
He lay distracted in a ditch,
Considering how to run.
:cry: :oops: :twisted: :evil: :shock: :( :o :? 8)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
OK. Avalok!
If you don't think I am quoting out of context, let me share my views on how we can be happy. If we share half of our job with someone who is in need, that makes us happy. It happens like this. If you have the influence to push these ideas across with relevant people, please do it for the sake of our country.
"I have a good idea about how to reduce unemployment and offer employment to underprivileged people. But it is purely 'lateral thinking', it requires a great deal of dynamism on the part of the government and CII to respond to that idea. If you are in a position to push through this concept then try to push it across.
Don't we see maid-servants working at the houses of the middle class and higher middle-class people for the purpose of cleaning utensils, washing clothes, cleaning the floor of the house, etc.? The practice at our home is that if one day, the maid-servant does not come, she will send another worker to do her job.
Why can't we have the same practice for other jobs? Let us say, Shilpi is Manager-HR in a big company like Reliance Industries Ltd. She gets a salary of Rs. 50,000/- per month. But the timings of her job are from 9 a.m. in the morning to 9 p.m. in the evening. By the time she reaches home, it is 10 p.m. The only work she can do after she reaches home is to eat and then sleep and get up the next day morning at 7 a.m. and start preparing to go to the job to be in the office by 9 a.m.
She gets a good salary but she is not in a position to enjoy her family life because of her timings. She is ready to get rid of half of her salary if somebody is prepared to share half of her burden.
She wants to share half of her salary with her friend Vijaya, who is also an HR professional who is on the lookout for a good job, but because she does not have good experience, she will get a salary around Rs. 20,000/- per month.
The Law of the land should allow Shilpi to share half of her job with Vijaya so that she can come home early and enjoy family life. At the same time, she can enjoy the friendship of Vijaya. That means both of them will be employed for the "same position" but half of the compensation benefits (like Salary, PF, Gratuity, Bonus, etc.) that Shilpi has been enjoying will go to Vijaya now, for sharing half of her work in proportion to the ratio of the number of days each one has worked for the organization.
Shilpi can quickly train Vijaya to match up to her talent because Vijaya needs as much competence to perform half of Shilpi's job as Shilpi has, and Shilpi can train Vijaya to perform the job. Vijaya will not get so talented otherwise if she works for another company for Rs. 20,000/- salary. It will take another 5 years to grow as talented as Shilpi and earn a job that fetches her a salary of 30,000/-. But if she joins Shilpi as a co-worker, then after five years because of the increase in the salary of the job both of them have been doing, she may get a share of Rs. 35,000/- per month after five years!
Even if she decides to part ways with Shilpi and do a full-time job somewhere else, she can get a job fetching Rs. 70,000/- per month after five years, because she is now as talented as Shilpi is.
Coming to the job aspect, how they divide the work between them is their problem. They can decide, "I will work from Jan to June, you work from July to December." Or, they can decide, "I will work from 9 to 3 in the afternoon, you work from 3 to 9 in the evening."
What is the advantage of this system of employing two persons for the same job for the company/employer? They would not take leaves much because they will be working only half the time, i.e., six hours per day or six months per annum! The compensation paid is the same. Sometimes if there is work pressure, the boss can ask both of them to be on the job! The company has absolutely nothing to lose. It only needs flexibility to allow Shilpi to take Vijaya as her co-worker.
If privileged sections of the Indian population can take underprivileged people to do half the job, or some part of the job (there should be flexibility to allow the co-worker to even take 25%, 30%, or 40% of the job if the nature of the job allows to correctly arrive at the percentage work involved in the job), then the SCs, STs, and OBCs can be trained to become equals by the people who share their job with them!
It may sound quite unpracticable, but if this is done, then most of the unemployment problems in the country will vanish because India is a country where people do a lot for friendship. There may be workers in factories who want to share half their job with a friend. There may be people like Shilpi who want to share half their burden with people like Vijaya.
This can happen at all levels, from the position of an ordinary factory worker to the position of CMD in companies.
This kind of flexibility to allow the employees to share their job with their friends will ensure that the job is perfectly done. If the Law of the land and Companies can allow this kind of flexibility, then we will soon find advertisements in Newspapers given by Employees of companies asking people having a certain set of skills to "share their job." They will take the prospective candidates to the Employer and tell him, "this is the one who will do half of my job...I am responsible for him, his actions, and his placement in our company."
Remember this may not simply help friends but also the sons, daughters, or other relatives. A father who is Vice-President (marketing) in a big company like Tata Steel may share half of his job with his Son who has recently passed MBA with specialization in marketing. You know when a father gives training to his son, how it works...he will take personal interest and help him to grow as talented he is in no time.... in other words, the Son will start the career from the position his father has left!
As emotional bondages between friends, relatives, family members are strong in our country, this kind of flexibility to share the job will do a lot of good for both the families, unemployed, and also to the companies/employers.
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you don't think I am quoting out of context, let me share my views on how we can be happy. If we share half of our job with someone who is in need, that makes us happy. It happens like this. If you have the influence to push these ideas across with relevant people, please do it for the sake of our country.
"I have a good idea about how to reduce unemployment and offer employment to underprivileged people. But it is purely 'lateral thinking', it requires a great deal of dynamism on the part of the government and CII to respond to that idea. If you are in a position to push through this concept then try to push it across.
Don't we see maid-servants working at the houses of the middle class and higher middle-class people for the purpose of cleaning utensils, washing clothes, cleaning the floor of the house, etc.? The practice at our home is that if one day, the maid-servant does not come, she will send another worker to do her job.
Why can't we have the same practice for other jobs? Let us say, Shilpi is Manager-HR in a big company like Reliance Industries Ltd. She gets a salary of Rs. 50,000/- per month. But the timings of her job are from 9 a.m. in the morning to 9 p.m. in the evening. By the time she reaches home, it is 10 p.m. The only work she can do after she reaches home is to eat and then sleep and get up the next day morning at 7 a.m. and start preparing to go to the job to be in the office by 9 a.m.
She gets a good salary but she is not in a position to enjoy her family life because of her timings. She is ready to get rid of half of her salary if somebody is prepared to share half of her burden.
She wants to share half of her salary with her friend Vijaya, who is also an HR professional who is on the lookout for a good job, but because she does not have good experience, she will get a salary around Rs. 20,000/- per month.
The Law of the land should allow Shilpi to share half of her job with Vijaya so that she can come home early and enjoy family life. At the same time, she can enjoy the friendship of Vijaya. That means both of them will be employed for the "same position" but half of the compensation benefits (like Salary, PF, Gratuity, Bonus, etc.) that Shilpi has been enjoying will go to Vijaya now, for sharing half of her work in proportion to the ratio of the number of days each one has worked for the organization.
Shilpi can quickly train Vijaya to match up to her talent because Vijaya needs as much competence to perform half of Shilpi's job as Shilpi has, and Shilpi can train Vijaya to perform the job. Vijaya will not get so talented otherwise if she works for another company for Rs. 20,000/- salary. It will take another 5 years to grow as talented as Shilpi and earn a job that fetches her a salary of 30,000/-. But if she joins Shilpi as a co-worker, then after five years because of the increase in the salary of the job both of them have been doing, she may get a share of Rs. 35,000/- per month after five years!
Even if she decides to part ways with Shilpi and do a full-time job somewhere else, she can get a job fetching Rs. 70,000/- per month after five years, because she is now as talented as Shilpi is.
Coming to the job aspect, how they divide the work between them is their problem. They can decide, "I will work from Jan to June, you work from July to December." Or, they can decide, "I will work from 9 to 3 in the afternoon, you work from 3 to 9 in the evening."
What is the advantage of this system of employing two persons for the same job for the company/employer? They would not take leaves much because they will be working only half the time, i.e., six hours per day or six months per annum! The compensation paid is the same. Sometimes if there is work pressure, the boss can ask both of them to be on the job! The company has absolutely nothing to lose. It only needs flexibility to allow Shilpi to take Vijaya as her co-worker.
If privileged sections of the Indian population can take underprivileged people to do half the job, or some part of the job (there should be flexibility to allow the co-worker to even take 25%, 30%, or 40% of the job if the nature of the job allows to correctly arrive at the percentage work involved in the job), then the SCs, STs, and OBCs can be trained to become equals by the people who share their job with them!
It may sound quite unpracticable, but if this is done, then most of the unemployment problems in the country will vanish because India is a country where people do a lot for friendship. There may be workers in factories who want to share half their job with a friend. There may be people like Shilpi who want to share half their burden with people like Vijaya.
This can happen at all levels, from the position of an ordinary factory worker to the position of CMD in companies.
This kind of flexibility to allow the employees to share their job with their friends will ensure that the job is perfectly done. If the Law of the land and Companies can allow this kind of flexibility, then we will soon find advertisements in Newspapers given by Employees of companies asking people having a certain set of skills to "share their job." They will take the prospective candidates to the Employer and tell him, "this is the one who will do half of my job...I am responsible for him, his actions, and his placement in our company."
Remember this may not simply help friends but also the sons, daughters, or other relatives. A father who is Vice-President (marketing) in a big company like Tata Steel may share half of his job with his Son who has recently passed MBA with specialization in marketing. You know when a father gives training to his son, how it works...he will take personal interest and help him to grow as talented he is in no time.... in other words, the Son will start the career from the position his father has left!
As emotional bondages between friends, relatives, family members are strong in our country, this kind of flexibility to share the job will do a lot of good for both the families, unemployed, and also to the companies/employers.
Thanks and regards,
Chandrasekhar.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"Quote: If we share half of our job with someone who is in need, that makes us happy. Now you are the Guru of Happiness!
So, I believe you are sharing half of your job with someone in need... right? The world requires more Good Samaritans like you.
Also, you have the tendency to cut and paste your personal agendas across various topics in this forum, whether it is relevant or not... sad!
For someone who is not able to motivate their own father and relatives, you have lots of unsolicited advice... pity you, and I hope God will save you.
I am also watching your spat with Bob, Mike, etc.
I am unhappy that you are happy... 😈 😈 🙄 😀"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
So, I believe you are sharing half of your job with someone in need... right? The world requires more Good Samaritans like you.
Also, you have the tendency to cut and paste your personal agendas across various topics in this forum, whether it is relevant or not... sad!
For someone who is not able to motivate their own father and relatives, you have lots of unsolicited advice... pity you, and I hope God will save you.
I am also watching your spat with Bob, Mike, etc.
I am unhappy that you are happy... 😈 😈 🙄 😀"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
For someone who is not able to motivate their own father and relatives, you have lots of unsolicited advice... pity you and hope God will save you... :lol: Cutting jokes on yourself? Good sense of humor...
I am unhappy that you are happy... :lol: Read Thomas A. Harris' book... I am OK. You are OK.
Also, you have the tendency to cut and paste your personal agendas across various topics in this forum, whether it is relevant or not... sad! There are people who are already working on my agendas. Anyway, these are not personal agendas. They don't benefit me anyway. Coming to their relevance, they are as relevant for HR as Spirituality is.
So I believe you are sharing half of your job with someone who is in need... right? The world requires more Good Samaritans like you... :lol: :lol: I am sharing my job with those who don't want to share it. Though they like me, they don't like to do the work I expect them to do. They feel like slaves doing things I tell them to do.
Regards and Thanks, Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am unhappy that you are happy... :lol: Read Thomas A. Harris' book... I am OK. You are OK.
Also, you have the tendency to cut and paste your personal agendas across various topics in this forum, whether it is relevant or not... sad! There are people who are already working on my agendas. Anyway, these are not personal agendas. They don't benefit me anyway. Coming to their relevance, they are as relevant for HR as Spirituality is.
So I believe you are sharing half of your job with someone who is in need... right? The world requires more Good Samaritans like you... :lol: :lol: I am sharing my job with those who don't want to share it. Though they like me, they don't like to do the work I expect them to do. They feel like slaves doing things I tell them to do.
Regards and Thanks, Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Humor Break :D :D :)
Marx:
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
"Time wounds all heels."
"Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!"
"There is only one way to find out if a man is honest...ask him. If he says 'yes', you know he is crooked."
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Marx:
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
"Time wounds all heels."
"Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!"
"There is only one way to find out if a man is honest...ask him. If he says 'yes', you know he is crooked."
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi!
Nice to know your sense of humor is improving :D :D :D
Rumi:
The Intellectual Quest
The intellectual quest is exquisite like pearls and coral, but it is not the same as the spiritual quest. The spiritual quest is on another level altogether. Spiritual wine has a subtler taste. The intellect and the senses investigate cause and effect. The spiritual seeker surrenders to the wonder.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Nice to know your sense of humor is improving :D :D :D
Rumi:
The Intellectual Quest
The intellectual quest is exquisite like pearls and coral, but it is not the same as the spiritual quest. The spiritual quest is on another level altogether. Spiritual wine has a subtler taste. The intellect and the senses investigate cause and effect. The spiritual seeker surrenders to the wonder.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whatever way your argument might be leading, let me tell you the truth that this message has helped me a lot. In fact, it was very situational for me, and I used this SMS for one of my friends right away.
Thank you so much for sharing and keep sharing this kind of stuff.
Regards,
Prashanth Reddy
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you so much for sharing and keep sharing this kind of stuff.
Regards,
Prashanth Reddy
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks, Prashanth, for your acknowledgment. No one is privy to the truth. We are all in the same boat, doing the best we can.
I am glad that you replied to this post. It was getting a little boring, dreary, and repetitive, with ego clashes and confused wisdom, et al. Your post is a breath of fresh air.
Thanks again.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am glad that you replied to this post. It was getting a little boring, dreary, and repetitive, with ego clashes and confused wisdom, et al. Your post is a breath of fresh air.
Thanks again.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Time is in nobody's hands. You can neither kill time, nor create it. Somebody creates life for you and allots some time for you to survive on this planet. If what you mean by killing time is not utilizing it properly, then I would like to say there are so many life forms that kill time. Trees, plants, for instance, always kill time. Animals, birds, all marine life forms kill time. But they are very much a part of our life. No other life form on Earth worries about time except human beings. The lesson I learned from trees and plants is that being a part of life requires that we be ignorant and unaware of the passage of time. Even that state of mind can give us happiness.
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
:lol: :D :lol: Oh! Yeah! I got your point. The point is how to be happy, seeing others unhappy. Chandrasekhar
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Rumi again...
Someone Should Start Laughing
I have a thousand brilliant lies
For the question:
How are you?
I have a thousand brilliant lies
For the question:
What is God?
If you think that the Truth can be known
From words,
If you think that the Sun and the Ocean
Can pass through that tiny opening Called the mouth,
O someone should start laughing!
Someone should start wildly Laughing –Now! :D :lol:
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Someone Should Start Laughing
I have a thousand brilliant lies
For the question:
How are you?
I have a thousand brilliant lies
For the question:
What is God?
If you think that the Truth can be known
From words,
If you think that the Sun and the Ocean
Can pass through that tiny opening Called the mouth,
O someone should start laughing!
Someone should start wildly Laughing –Now! :D :lol:
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Greatest obstacle to happiness.pdf
Happiness.ppt
Happiness Index- over all rank of most professions[1]. doc