O Ye Of Little Faith!

A majority of modern day intellectuals and people from the fields of science have taken to religion bashing. Frankly with the abominable number of fanatics ever on the increase I really can’t blame them. The core of today’s problems seems to be on account of terrorists and their numerous holy wars, which they believe shall offer them a one way ticket to paradise. Its actually amusing when you hear the conditions these representatives of God, seem to impose on fellow man, in order to protect the righteousness of their respective faiths.
Now for instance you have one group that might shoot you in the head if you are immodestly dressed. The definition of immodesty can differ from person to person. But immodesty allegedly in the eyes of God are wearing jeans, T shirts and make up for women, nevertheless I'm practically clueless what a man must do to appear immodest.(perhaps wearing make up....which is both immodest and a trifle disturbing).
I suppose it is difficult to grow up with a God who has a strict fashion sense. I suppose God wouldn’t want his heavenly angels to get corrupted when immoral mortals ascend towards his realm.
I suppose the most immoral thing that one can do is question holy literature (even at times when it can sound as a product of fertile imagination of a three year old). Now, that can send you on a one way ticket straight to hell.
I can imagine why science must have begun its personal vendetta against religion.
I cant blame them for hopping mad when religion persecuted Galileo, Copernicus and numerous others who dared question "The Book"(but later issued apologies...a century too late perhaps). The poor souls nevertheless were merely speaking the truth.
And truth is not something that is welcome in a world of rigid laws which have nothing to do with rationality or logic.
All in all religion hasn’t painted a very pretty picture as far as a mode to deliver humanity towards salvation is concerned. Till date historically humanity has been purged, persecuted, excommunicated and even burnt alive at the most ridiculous and insignificant of human errors.
The crusades and inquisitions which killed off more people than the holocaust were means to spread the true message of the "religion of peace".
Frankly any sane human today will think it best to shun something that has in the past and in the current scenario persecuted humanity till no end.
If some wise guy came up to me and said that I would be going to hell just because I am not a part of his congregation, my first impulse would be to batter him with the first object I could lay my hands on (hopefully it shouldn’t be a sledgehammer). Frankly I'm not the sort of person who’s accustomed to hearing nonsense.
All in all no one can deny the extent of hypocrisy that exists within organized religions of late.
We are humans, and most of us aren’t even that fortunate to live splendid lives as some others. Lets face it...life isn’t always peachy, and when the going gets tough, the last thing anyone would want is a religious busybody telling you that you might have booked a ticket to hell because you missed some trivial religious service.
All in all I cannot blame humans for rejecting something which they find utterly useless to begin with.
Nevertheless......I am a man of faith.
But my idea of faith is far different from what is being taught at Sunday school to brainwash children. I believe in associating logic with faith. I suppose to science faith itself is illogical. But science has its pitfalls as well, which I shall come to later.
Faith today has been institutionalized. It has become encompassed in rigid laws and regulations that serve no practical purpose. It now belongs as a privilege to the holier hierarchy rather than the masses. And as a consequence, to suit their own selfish interests God has been turned into a merciless madman who will smite you for something as ridiculous as incorrect dressing. Perhaps these men of God ought to print their own holy fashion catalogue to depict the latest styles in vogue in the kingdom of heaven.
But that is not true. How many of these god men who preach ridiculous laws have themselves even has a glimpse of God? Its the masses that I pity. The masses who are robbed of their trust and faith to suit the purpose of a fraudulent money making institution.
There are very few representatives of faith who have actually implored on the people to think for themselves. And hardly anyone has even advocated the right to question something they think is incorrect without the risk of excommunication.
Faith, is something that is highly personal. It belongs to you and not to some corrupt clergy of an equally corrupt institution.
Faith nevertheless is imperative in life because its the only means by which one can be introduced towards unconditional moral behavior.
Mind you I said unconditioned. The ability to do good without expecting anything in return. One ought’nt be disappointed when you help a beggar and didn’t win the lottery the next day.
The most purest of things in life are those that come without conditions attached. Unconditional love, unconditional generosity and unconditional faith.
Its an absolute pity that faith so far has been used as an instrument to instill fear, insecurity and guilt amongst human beings.
We all have had our weak moments in life. We all have done some things that we are not proud of. It’s not sacrilegious to lose strength.
And conversely the role of God here is to overlook your weakness and accept you for who you are. Unconditionally. Not to make you feel worse than you already are.
As said famously, "To err is human, to forgive is divine."
We are humans. And till the last day on earth we will continue to make mistakes. Hopefully we ought to have learnt from the past ones though.
The main idea of faith is, that someone up there loves you. For who you are, not for what you say or do.
If I pray or go to a religious place, I do it out of my own accord. Not because someone told me to or because I fear the wrath of God.
There are certain things in life that one must realize for oneself. Its not something that someone should force upon you.
As far as science is concerned, I am yet to hear the scientific explanation for the need of moral behavior. I want to know the scientific reasoning for why someone shouldn’t cheat on his wife(a loving one at that). Because the wife doesn’t know her husband is cheating on her, no one is getting hurt mentally or physically and the situation is just perfect. But nevertheless it is wrong. You know its wrong but since its situationally plausible you might as well get away with it.
Science has found cures for numerous maladies.
Can it cure humanity of greed? Of unnecessary lust? Of anger?
Perhaps it can if one performed a lobotomy (resecting areas of the brain which hold specific human emotions).
But that would reduce humans to vegetables. And that’s not what life is all about.
So the ideal scientific society balanced in social structure would consist of human vegetables.
Between a hyper-religious society of persecuted beings and a scientific society of emotionless automatons neither seems the least bit appealing.

But the best question of all? Can science create life? Yes the thing that surrounds all of us. Within the bees, birds and the trees.
I am not talking about cloning. For that is creating life out of pre existing life. Nor am I refering to the theory of alien insemination.

I am talking of creating at least one living breathing organism from scratch!
Scientists reproduced the conditions in which life was first created in the beginning. Water, carbon and nitrogenous compounds were assimilated and the end result was a soup of amino acids(one of the basic building blocks of DNA).
But not life!
Certain things whether you like it or not has to be attributed to divinity.
Neither science nor faith can reign individually as supreme. They must coexist. You need both science and faith to make life worth living.
Actually they did exist together in Hellenistic Greece which was home to one of greatest scientific minds such as Archimedes, Hippocrates and Pythagoras.
It existed together in Vedic India, where mathematicians like Aryabhatta and Bhaskaracharya influenced modern arithmetic.
It existed in Mayan South America, a civilization known to devise one of the most accurate astronomical calendars which have accurately predicted eclipses and transits to this present day. Thus both science and religion coexisted in harmony in the ancient world till the advent of modern riffraff 2000 years ago and ruined religion for all of us.

As difficult as it seems to get into heaven, its equally hard to get into hell. You aren’t going to hell if you got drunk or went to a club or missed a religious service.
There exists hell. But only for those who have brought undue suffering upon humanity. And I can guarantee the fact that those who propagate ridiculous lies about faith in order to mislead the masses have already booked a one way ticket to the fiery chasms of hell.
The only thing God hates is arrogance. Lets face it, we don’t like arrogance any better. I personally detest snobs and pompous braggarts.
So there you have it.
You need not institutionalize yourself to a rigid faith. The only representative of God you need is you!

Thus for both for the believers and the unbelievers, Give Faith a Chance!

Reel versus Real

A great deal of hullabaloo is being created about the movie Slumdog Millionaire of late. The film has been showered with accolades and honours across the globe.
Frankly, I wasn't the least bit interested in watching a movie in which the principle storyline was some poor kid becoming a millionaire on a quiz show. I suppose I am a little cynical when it comes to overnight rags to riches stories.
But nevertheless in the end I did end up watching the movie, purely out of curiosity, in order to see what the fuss was all about.
And what shall I say? I was smitten by the movie. Now I cannot stop raving about it. Soon, I began to download the songs, reading reviews, interviews of the stars connected with the film and etcetera.
A few days later news has it that the movie has won four golden globe awards including best music by our very own A.R. Rahman.
Yesterday while skimming through the usually dreary headlines, I came across a news article which said the Big B of bollywood....aka Amitabh Bacchan has slammed the movie accusing it to portray India in poor light.
I suppose that invoked the ire of the fellow netizens who in turn accused Mr. Bacchan of being jealous, unfair and insensitive.
Ironically there was an iota of truth in what he said, nevetheless I suppose he said it the wrong time. The last thing you must do, is critisize something when that particular something is currently the beloved of the people.
But I guess celebrities wont be celebrities if they didn't court controversy. So there you have it. The basic mistake of saying the right thing at the wrong time.
And why is the timing wrong? Well, on one hand you have the usual masala bollywood flicks going down the drain as it fails to woo the public, and on the other hand you have brutally realistic cinema depicts the rise of a slumdog amidst the vile underbelly of Mumbai.... captivating the hearts of millions.
Thus Mr. Bacchan's comment couldn't have come at a more inopportune moment. Obviously the junta gets the impression that the "Shahenshah" of Indian cinema is a trifle jealous.
Nevertheless while I myself am awed by the film I cannot entirely disagree with the Big B in this regard.
Its relieving that western filmmakers no longer depict India as the land of snake charmers and scantily clad bimbettes dancing to the tune of an elephant. But at the same time, no western filmmaker has depicted India in a positive light either. I still remember watching Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom where Indians were depicted as barbarians eating frozen monkey brains for desert. I was positively aghast at the very idea.
While technically slumdog didn't weave ridiculous depictions of India, nevertheless it did depict things that some people would prefer to ignore.
Like the anti muslim riots, luring orphans to be beggars etc. Obviously they were the central themes on which the plot was based, but nevertheless I would prefer, if it was something meant to be seen by the Indian audience only. Perhaps to awaken their conscience and wean them off the their usual diet of mindless entertainment that bollywood offers. Not something the western audience ought to have seen.
Now we all have skeletons in our closets, and the last thing we would want, is the remainder of society to be aware of them. The riots, the poverty, corruption are all things that India is obviously not proud of. Nevertheless the last thing it would want is court infamy by depicting its problems to a third party stranger. Namely the west.
The west obviously in its films has depicted its own pitfalls. But nevertheless it has shown its greatness as well.
India on the other hand has so far been shown as a land of poverty, misery and eccentric natives.
It would do us all a world of good if someone along the way portrayed India in better light. Especially to the west. I do suppose they still take us to be monkey brain eating oddballs who are now poor and wretched to boot.
A little while ago, I saw a movie called 'Rang De Basanti'. It was revolutionary in its own right and I quite liked the storyline. It dealt with a couple of youngsters taking on corrupt Indian politicians by revolutionary means. It did significantly well in the box office. And it did arouse the conscience of the younger Indian generation. Now I suppose a movie like that would have been appropriate enough to be introduced to the western audience. It introduces a different India. An India with a well educated youth. An India which is eager to deal with its problems, albeit a little differently. An intelligent India.
But I don't suppose that ever happened. And the west shall never have even the remotest notion that Indians are actually a civilized race.
But for the love of God the last thing I would want is the west to see kind of nonsensical cinema bollywood churns out by the dozen. That would give them the impression of Indians being melodramatic singing and dancing lunatics.
I cannot blame the west for depicting India the way they do. Frankly bollywood has done precious little to propagate the better side of India. The only thing that has been done so far has been to export Indian actresses to hollywood to make absolutely forgettable hollywood movies, which no one in his right mind would want to watch.
Countries like China and Japan have created reasonable cinema which the western world could digest and appreciate. Even western directors have made decent Kung Fu flicks. Their reputation remains thus intact, as that of a civilized eastern race.
Every country has its own set of problems. But the last thing they'd want would be some third party stranger to make the world aware of its sensitive issues.
I wonder how would China feel if a western director employed Chinese actors to portray the oppression faced by the Tibetan people. Both the Chinese government and its people would be hopping mad.
A majority of the world knows China for its cuisine and kung fu, while only a few know it for its issues with Tibet.
Unfortunately so far India is still known as snake charming, elephant riding natives who persecute the minority and do rope tricks in their spare time. I actually once met a Russian who asked me whether we still ride elephants.
A precious few across the world are aware of the rich Indian culture that has inspired millions.
Bollywood obviously has the ways and means to propagate our country in better light.
But whether or not it chooses to do so is another question.

The Fall of Man

Eariler, I happened to see a movie called defiance. It basically dealt with the persecution of Jews in during the Nazi invasion of Belarus. As far as the movie is concerned, I do suppose it was quite satisfactory with regard to the entertainment value it had in store. But nevertheless it got me thinking, about how someone can be persecuted for a reason as ridiculous as belonging to a certain sect or class. In this case namely, Jews. I have seen Schindler's list and The Pianist and the movie I'll be watching next is The Reader. Apart from being a Kate Winslet fan, any movie which deals with the Holocaust is of particular interest to me.

They basically serve as a reminder to how low humanity can stoop. How the most intelligent of beings on the earth can squabble over something utterly trivial. Its ironic because they say that only humans can show compassion and kindness. Its one of the things that seperate us from the rest of the animals. However, time and again we have proven that not only can we utterly eschew kindness and comapassion, but we can turn into monsters as well. I suppose its the clever ability of the human mind to metamorphasise in into which ever vile being one chooses to.
I do not wish to ponder upon how and what lead the humans to persecute their brethren.
I suppose one could attribute it to anthrapological aspects.
I dont suppose the Jews were persecuted because they were Jews. I merely believe that their persecution occured on account of them always being a minority in whatever host nation they chose to live in.

And when their hosts deceided to flex their muscles, they were the ones who were the first to get beaten.
Its very much like the nerd who is regularly bashed by the high school bullies. Merely the wrong place at the wrong time sort of scenario.
All beings including our primate cousins like to subjugate the weak amongst their herd in order to show who's boss.
Inspite of all the progress we have made as a civilized soceity, I daresay we are'nt that different.
Its common practice to prey upon the weak. It asserts dominance of one race upon the other. I obviously do not propagate such practice, nevertheless its extremely unlikely that such practice can ever be abandoned. Old habits die hard.
The only diffrence between humans and apes, is that apes will attack you without any plausible reason. Just a whack on the head.
But humans being gifted "intellectuals" will attack the innocent with excellent reasoning so as to why they are doing so.
Thus in the end the opressor is seen as a saint and the opressed is seen as a vile thug. And thats how the cookie crumbles.
Take the Jews for instance. The Germans began a most interesting propaganda expalining how the 'pure blooded' blue eyed blonde Germans were genetically, intellectually and morally superior to the corrupt, miserly Jew.
The Germans were deemed saviors for rescuing their countrymen from the clutches of the Jews. I wonder though, if the Germans were actually in need of rescuing in the first place.
Nevertheless the propaganda worked, and what followed suit is something I believe is well known to everyone.
So who's to blame? One would say obviouly the Germans. For today they are seen as the instigators of hatred and violence towards the less fortunate races.
Nevertheless, I would like to offer an alternate hypothesis.
Suppose the Jews instead were the majority and the Germans a minority, what then?
Could there have ever occured an incident when a fanatic Jewish leader deceided to exterminate the minority Germans because he considered them a threat to the Jewish way of life?
Its a possibility. Why not?
Take the current events into consideration for instance.
The Palestinians in the Gaza strip are the minority and the Jews the majority. Agreed that few rockets from Gaza were fired into Isreal causing minor casualties. But in retaliation Israel has deceided to bombard Gaza (women and children included) to kingdom come.
We all know that around 250 or so innocent people have lost their lives in the conflict. Israel knows this as well. I do not call the Gaza bombing a genocide, but nevertheless its an act of absolute persecution of the minority. Obviously diplomacy has no say here whatsoever.
But heres the point. Its all about might. Its all about who has the power. The power to deceide whos lives and who doesnt. Today the Jews are powerful enough to obliterate an entire race of men. Whether they shall do it or not is another question. But obviously they have forgotten what it was like to be hunted like animals during the days of the holocaust. I daresay the Palestinians feel that way now.
I doubt there is anything such as a noble race. A race that remains tolerent and kindly towards the minority. And I doubt there is ever going to be one. You seldom hear a "civilized" soceity being generous and kind towards the minority. Such cases are rare and often even unheard of.
Lets consider history shall we?
Long before the Holocaust.
The year is 64 Ad. And Emperor Nero has just returned from the Circus Maximus where he along with the Pagan citizens of Rome watched christians being torn apart by lions. They laughed as the christians screamed for mercy. Most christians then almost always ended up as martyrs. Sympathizers on the street would remark "why would someone persecute the christians, who are the very embodiment of peace and virtue?"
Now lets proceed a little further ahead.





The year is 380 AD. On the roman throne sits Emperor Theodosius I. Nicene Christianity has now been officially declared sate religion.
What follows suit is a chain of events. Pagan temples are torn down, the Vestal Virgins(priestesses who served the Goddess Vesta) are disbanded and humiliated. Practice of Pagan faith now is a punishable offence. Pagans are now persecuted. In Alexandria, a coptic christian mob rapes and brutally murders the Pagan scholar Hypatia due to her criticism of the Alexandrian Pope Cyril (who is now deemed a saint).
I wonder whatever happened to the peaceful and virtuous christian populace? Ironically they were the ones that propagated the concept of love thy neighbour.
But I suppose the fine print read "Love thy neighbour but kill him if he isin't christian."
Sarcasm apart in the end I can say as history is a witness, that the race of man can seldom ever be noble.
Given the chance the presecuted can later be the persecuter. Irrespective of the numerous doctrines ones faith quotes, man cant help succumbing to the fact that there is an animal within him waiting to exert authority over the less fortunate. I suppose man remains subjected to the laws of the animal kingdom rather than the laws of humanity.
Being human we have the ability to look after the unfortunate through compassion and mercy. We are the only beings that can offer selfless love. Selflessness doesnt exist within animals.
But I suppose with each passing day man succumbs more and more to his animal instincts.
The above examples show, that all that matters today is the aquistion of power and nothing else. I have no remedy, nor any suggestions to get over this problem. One doesnt need remedies. All one needs is the ability to realise what exactly transpires around oneself. The ability to judge by yourself whether your actions were noble or corrupt. Nevertheless I doubt mankind has ever been introspective. If it were I doubt we would be having the sort of problems we face today.
One doesnt need to search far for answers. All answers lie within oneself.
If the current hateful trend continues I shant be surprised if mankind succeeds in destroying itself.
Unless the very idea of racial or communal superiority is abandoned I dont think peace can ever reign upon this earth.
Otherwise we shall be the first species which shall succeed in eliminaiting ourselves.

The Perils Of Virtue

Throughout the ages both faith and humanitarian principles have highly advocated the doctrine of virtuous behavior. Faith has time and again reminded humanity the importance of being virtuous and noble.
Indeed it does sound appealing to many, nevertheless most virtues of late are either ignored or completely forgotten. And frankly, I cannot blame humanity for doing so. The world we live in today has no place for virtue. I suppose virtue just is int in vogue with the modern principles of existence.
I suppose the main reason being, the hazards of virtuous behavior.
Yes being virtuous is a hazard. More hazardous than smoking cigarettes or doing drugs. Its a hazard to those who advocate it and to those who practice it. I suppose its one of the things of late that one can very well do without. You may yourself ask the numerous practitioners of the noble art and you will find them frustrated and utterly disgruntled with themselves and the realm within which they live in.
One cannot blame them either. For the mistake they made, was to introduce a long forgotten concept to the world that neither recognises it nor requires it.
"Its the 21st century" they say, if we go by the doctrines of goodness and nobility we shall find ourselves ruined.
As a personally disgruntled advocate of goodness and fair play, I say to you...abandon all thoughts of virtue and embrace the doctrine of falsehood and deceit.
That way, you and those near and dear to you shall remain content, secure and a trifle prosperous.
Lets face it, that is how the world today operates. The newspapers for instance are a glaring proof of how deceit has triumphed over honesty.
Honesty, patience, charity, tolerance etc have lost their followers.
Goodness is now known as weakness of character. Honesty now goes by the name of stupidity, charity is known to be foolhardiness and etcetera.
The only place virtue has in the world today is behind the four walls of perhaps a monastery. Isolated and untouched.
If you exhibit virtue within any modern city today, you'll soon find yourself bereft of all your possessions.
Its a pity no doubt but what can one do? Virtue looks wonderful when it is depicted in novels, holy books or even the cinema. But the truth is that it has no place in the world of man.
I wonder, inspite of experiencing the real world we all know so well today why do parents and elders continue to propagate virtue to the younger generation?
Is it because they are ashamed of what they have done over the years and they do not want their children to follow in their besmirched footsteps? Or is it because they wish to rekindle the dying embers of virtue through their children? Then if it is so then someone ought to tell them that they are sending their child on a perilous journey, where the outcome may well be unsatisfactory.
I suppose rather than teaching their child to be good, they ought to teach their child to be smart, and to fend for himself irrespective of the means he uses.
In the end I suppose, as a world citizen, all that matters is how much one has gained irrespective of the means used. Once you are at the pinnacle of success, one doesn't really bother much with how you got there. Indeed the ends justify the means.
For unless you have some sort of stupendous luck, the most wise thing for anyone to do would be to avoid the perils of virtue.
For within the vile society we all know so well, virtue is alas an unwelcome stranger.

Apart From The Herd

Its usually considered to be a gift, when one possesses talents or qualities that set him apart from the others. When one has ideas that usually someone at his age or profession doesn't. I suppose such a person might be considered apart from the rest.
But I suppose mere genius is not the only credential that sets someone apart from the rest. One may remain away from the herd on perhaps more unflattering grounds as well. Like a social stigma of some sort.
While I do not credit myself to be either a genius nor someone suffering from a socially incommunicable affliction, I nevertheless am aloof, and away from the herd. Why? You may ask. And I would quote numerous reasons.
While I belong to the human race, for reasons beyond me I often grow vary of my brethren. I simply cannot concur with their ways.

The human race is often divided on numerous grounds, like the rich and poor, the sane and the insane, the noble and the corrupt and in my case the typical and the typical.
No prizes for guessing which sect do I belong to with regard to the last mentioned category.
While it may seem unique to some, belonging to an atypical sort is a rather lonely means of existence.
None of your ideas or ideals for that matter have anything in common with the rest of the populace. While you may consider yourself to be unique, the remainder of society may consider you as perhaps a fool, a heretic or simply an idiot.
When you are set apart from the rest, these are the accusations that you must be accustomed to by now.
But irrespective of how resilient you may be to society's ridicule, heart of hearts somewhere within you cherish the thought that if only you could be more like those around you. Heart of hearts you wish that if only you weren't so different, and so cut out from the rest.
I guess none of us choose to be atypical, it is something nature bestows upon us whether we like it or not.
Either you may live with it or you may fight it out and try at best to integrate with society.
Both I guess have their own consequences. By accepting who you are, you manage to create an identity for yourself, and by integrating with society you lose it.
As much as society seems to ridicule and discourage individualism, at the same time one cannot deny how much it cherishes atypical beings within its realm.
I suppose at a time when other children were playing, young Einstein must have had his head in the clouds, wondering about the prospects of the physical science.
Or when others were discussing politics and the latest trends in music, Archimedes was busy wandering the street, absentmindedly mumbling incomprehensible drivel.
I wonder if they ever wondered, whether they had missed out on any of the things that people their age commonly dealt with.
I wonder if ever they had even the minute sense of regret of not having a normal childhood or a normal youth on account of their intellectual affliction.
But I guess with the sort of laurels they received by the time the world recognised their genius, all their regrets would have been put to rest.
I guess it takes a while for those around you to accept you for who you are, its just that the wait is long and a trifle strenuous.
While I look around my common brethren, I sense a deep regret of not being more like them, but I suppose as time shall pass my herd shall accept me for who I am, and for the variety I bring within the herd. But its a bit of a wait.....and a long one at that.

Evolution versus Intelligent Design

Throughout the course of modern history, both religion and science have been at tenterhooks with regard to which is the better system.
While science follows the strict doctrine of hypothesis, analysis, experimentation, observation and conclusion, Religion follows a rather simple doctrine much to the chagrin of science called faith.
Faith involves none of the principles of science, it merely bases its conclusions based upon what each respective prophet has claimed is true.
In the current world of rationality, such practice is deemed insane and ludicrous.
And thus both systems have been at each others throats as long as possible.

One particular argument that has caught my attention is the age old argument between evolution versus the theory of intelligent design.
Science does not believe in a maker, or a divine creator.
Nor does it believe that we were produced out of thin air. That seems to be an argument logical enough!
But then how did we come to be?
And for that matter how did all that we see and hear about us come to exist?
While I have much disbelief with regard to the creationist story the abrahamic faiths have spun so far, at the same time I cannot accept the scientific verdict that that we just happen to be molecular accidents.
Its like serendipity on a massive scale.

The best thing for any analyst is to have an open mind. A mind open to ideas no matter how bizarre and ridiculous.
And that's what I believe is worth striving for.
I do not belong to any abrahamic sect, for I have my roots within the Dharmic faiths.The eastern faiths to my knowledge have never been at crossroads with scientific ideas.

As science progressed so did faith. And frankly speaking, before the advent of abraham, there weren't any faith versus science arguments.
The Dharmic faiths allow enough room to keep our minds open. So did the Hellenistic and the Egyptian faiths.
They allow us to inculcate ideas of faith within scientific possibilities leaving no room for controversy!
Now getting back to the topic,
Darwinian theory of evolution has put forward certain basic seemingly logical principles which govern the basic rules and regulations a species must observe in order to survive. All of us know of the idiom called survival of the fittest.
All species have a complex mechanism to survive and procreate. Scientists claim that the key to survival rests in the genome of each individual species.
Opossums play dead, zebra travel in herds so that their black and white stripes can confuse the color blind lion, chameleons camouflage discreetly and etcetera.

I at one point of time raised tame pigeons. Pigeons born in a cage, unexposed to the wild. They were set free at one point, and used to stay put in my garden. Yet when they would sight a hawk, they would run in a frenzy.
Now, given the fact that they never saw a hawk all their lives, how did they know that the big bird out there is out to get them?What mechanism prompted them to act so?

Genetics? An inborn mechanism that prompts immediate action following a threat to survival.

Science puts most of the animal species into the category of genetically programmed molecular lifeforms meant so survive and procreate at all costs.I guess some were well programmed while the others like the dodo were not genetically "updated" to flee from the big two legged beast.

Heart of hearts I feel there is more to life than just programmed functioning.
I have heard of cases when pet dogs rescued their owner from say a fire only to succumb itself. According to programming this doesn't make sense since the basic instinct' of the dog would be to run away from the fire rather than towards it. So I suppose that violated the law of survival at any cost.
What is it that makes us deviate from basic programming? Does being selfless count as part of survival? Does sacrifice come anywhere in the evolutionary laws? For that matter does love?

Lobsters are known to mate for life. Say, for instance one of the mates dies before the act of procreation, the remaining lobster remains celibate for life. That again violates the law of continuation of species.
According to programming the lobster should then find a new mate and at any cost salvage the law of creating further generations so that the species survives at any cost.

But that does not happen. So shall we call that a programming error?
Science does not believe in a Creator/Creatress, because its something that totally defies logic.
Logic is a definite science without room for deviations from the main principle.

But then, what aspect within life itself seems logical?

Wheres the logic in a woman sacrificing a promising career for the man she loves? Wheres the logic in a man giving up his true love so that his best friend can marry the woman of his dreams?

Wheres the logic behind a someone who gives up most of his possessions so that he may spend the remainder of his life as a hermit?

A number of things on the earth defy logic and genetic programming.

Not everything in our realm can be narrowed into the basics of fact and logic.

Not everything in our realm can be thoroughly classified and understood.

Certain things remain beyond logic and understanding. You do not need to see divine phenomenon on earth to prove the existence of faith.
The answers lie here on earth itself between the creatures that inhabit it.
We happen to be beings that are not mere molecular accidents.
I do not support the theory of spontaneous Creation, for evolution does seem a logical explanation to our existence.
But the timing and the process seems in my opinion impeccable.

Can you imagine the creation of the human race along with large carnivorous dinosaurs?We shan't have seen the light of the day. Its easy to associate everything with coincidence.Its the best word science has as its arsenal to discredit anything that has any connection with faith.

But I believe in a higher power, a power that brought us where we are through evolution or any other process for that matter. I refuse to believe that we are molecular "accidents" or coincidentally we just happened to be created.

I refuse to believe that the world runs on a strict doctrine of fact, practicality and logic. For the proof is right before us,

We are human, not automatons. All that we say and do today defies logic, defies practicality, defies factual accuracy.

I believe in a Higher power watching over us just as we were watched over when we first came to be. Science cannot explain the necessity of love, sacrifice and selfless behavior.

But as we all know, whether we happen to believe in God or not, that there is no point to living without love. And love is not an accident, Its a manifestation of that spark of divinity, from whence we came to be.

What say Darwin?

Transit Passengers

Usually its a common occurrence that when you travel by a plane or a train, given that you are alone, you tend to get chatty with the one sitting next to you.
Provided the person with you is receptive, you strike the right note and the journey thus becomes pleasant.
By the time the ride comes to an end, you part ways. And for the remainder of the journey you may end up solitary, to the extent of missing the person with whom you were travelling with.

Life is filled with interesting analogies. All things common place in our day to day lives have a profound underlying meaning. Those wise enough manage to grasp life wishes to depict, while others are too busy intertwined within themselves to realize the true meaning of things.
I lost someone special today.
Someone close to me. Someone I hoped I would meet after a certain period.
Its hard to imagine the absence, but at the same time I guess that's how things are meant to be, whether we like it or not.
Spending a great deal of time with that person, one takes for granted that things shall be the same forever.
I cannot blame ourselves. For after all, we are but human.
Unfortunately there does come a time, when those near you decide to go away, and there's precious little that you can do to stop them.
But one must remind ourselves, that those gone are the same as we are.
Passengers in transit.
We are in transit. We belong to a realm that is not permanent. We belong to a realm subject to change. And we are just travelling along.
Travelling is hard, the road might get bumpy, you might not seem to be heading towards the place you do wish to reach, there could be delays and who knows, the ride could come to an abrupt halt.
But there are things that make a cumbersome travel a trifle pleasant. And that's the passenger along with you.
You share your thoughts, your feelings, you happen to face the same ordeals together. And soon, lifes a peach!
Sometimes after mutual passengers part, there is a great sense of dismay.
A vacuum, which you cannot help filling.
For a while you seem lost. And you don't really know what to do with yourself.
But if you are fortunate, another passenger will soon take the earlier ones place.
And the ride might get peachy again. Of course at start you might not concur with everything the new passenger says or does, but we underestimate ourselves. We are human, and soon we find ourselves warming up to the new passenger.
We do have the ability to move on just like the ones before us did.
Truth be told......I have no answer to what one should do if they part with the ones they love.
But what I do know, is that by realising that certain aspects in life are all but inevitable, one can gather the strength to move on.
At times of loss, people may bombard you with philosophy, personal anecdotes, so on and so forth.
But in my opinion the best consolation comes from within. When you realise what's best and make peace with yourself.
I shall always regret the fact that I could never properly bid goodbye to whom I lost.
But heart of hearts I hope that the passenger in question understood my predicament.
May God take care of you,
I shall always love you Patti,
your grandson,
Vyas.