Eighth-Post

“The Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.” -- William Shakespeare

“The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.” -- Tacitus

For those who have tendency to believe in digital formats, it should be made clear that William Shakespeare and Tacitus did not favor of having no Scripture or Laws at all.

Although the 'Survival of the Fittest” theory of Charles Darwin has been discarded but according to me it also paved the path of concept that can be termed as “Struggle for the survival”.

There is another theory – Newton's First law of Motion – 'A body retains its state of rest or motion until an external force is applied on it'.

In general it is very hard to use the quotations and the theories together, but I have always found those in conjunction to keep hold of 'power' considering the quotation “You need power only if you want to do something bad, otherwise only love is sufficient to do anything”.

Don't forget to reckon the 'intentions' of the 'system' under investigation.

Dedication...

Since the Internet has made writing a common phenomenon and T.V. channels acting, dance and singing in the form of realty shows, I have felt a great relief deep down.

Now these so called creative persons have started feeling the actual pain of other experts specifically administrators/managers, doctors and engineers.

Its not like, I do not want to become proficient in a language but why should I? Ideas have been communicated among 'humans' since prehistorical era anyhow. Actual development is carried out by 'Science and Commerce'. So why should I waste time on an non-occurring phenomenon.

The language and style of my writings is dedicated to 'them'.

Seventh-post

A uncommon incident which can seen on a metro train platforms is that a slim person is trying to step out of train at the last moment and got its nose jabbed by the automatic doors. One such incident inspired this article.

Note: People who advocate a slender body must consider this serious or just ignore it.

In middle school we taught a story about freedom and rights. The moral 'was' ­ “your freedom ends where my nose begins.” Definitely writer was a biased person who could thought of slim ones only. What about the ones with a good/great belly! The mentioned phrase must have created a sensation in those bellies.

Thus considering the above incident and statement, two unknown benefits of belly are:

a) It often saves your nose.
b) It provides you more space for freedom

Other well known established/unestablished benefits of belly are:

a) your survival period/chances are better in case of calamities.
b) young kids (toddlers) love playing near/around it, thus you are popular among them.
c) nobody can easily suppress you while adjusting on a seat.
d) it discourages people to start a fight with you.
e) you are seldom asked to do 'risky' jobs like passing through a narrow passage, adventure climbing in household works, chasing somebody etc.

So in my opinion it is not bad to have a good/great belly if you are healthy with it. Have a nice belly!

Sixth-post

If Hindu Mythology is actually history then why is it so glorified and narrated in such articulated words that it lost its factual correctness or the philosophical inputs it provides?

I have tried to explain this taking two examples from Indian cinema.
Movie Name        Release date   User Rating   Reviews      Opening Collection   Total Collection
Swades                 17 Dec, 2004 8.3 by             214 public   $ 424,804.00             $ 1,223,240.00
                                                     53,217 users  75 critic
Rang De Basanti  26 Jan, 2006  8.4 by             313 public   $ 701,666.00             $ 2,197,694.00
                                                     65,396 users  33 critic
                                                                                                                          (as on 17 Jan, 2016)
                                                                             -- Data Courtesy IMDB.com and Boxofficemojo.com

Although I don't like to provide the data, here it is for blabbers.

Now let lus compare the movies from a different prospective:

Swades was a simple presentation with high moral grounds providing the real practical approach to solve the problems it addresses. Rang-DE-Basanti was a great dramatic playout lacking the actual vision with no practical solutions to the problems it addresses.
I have not heard a single incident triggered by the inspiring Rang-DE-Basanti but definitely the stories which followed Swades.

Although nobody bothers to follow the path or idea of Rang-DE-Basanti, yet seldom dares to criticize it negatively due to the patriotic hullah created by it in the start of movie and of course in marketing. Don't forget about the sensual reliefs it provides. But I have seen a lot of them criticizing Swades as if it is the greatest exhibitionist.

My only point is that only a few thoughtful are interested in reality and they would find it & follow it anywhere, anyhow. rest of us need entertainment and some dope to charge ourselves. In the end I would say that the idea should be well dressed if you want to reach out more and stay for long. Forget about the actual theme which inspired it. If you deny provide the contradictions.

"Staya ka prakash nirbal aatmaon mein jugnu ki chamak hai."
                                                                                               -- Munshi Premchand

Fifth-post

I always wonder whether I believe in what I want to or disbelieve contradictory to it for both may seem to be complementary but can generate different results at same time.

Let me explain this with a simple example: I like monotheism and strongly believe that the fortune we spend on different rituals can be used in better ways. But it contradicts to the beliefs of my parents’ religious system and leads to conflicts.

In search of right spiritual guidance I explored a few options available to me - read books, met disciples of different religious groups having entirely different beliefs - enthusiasts and conformists. I really amaze why people get so much obsessed with one system that they become abusive of others. Yet I was able to find few who were open for all with few limitations, of-course necessary.

The conflicts in my beliefs are due to a science student (1985-2000, schooling in India) brought up in a traditional middle-class religious family; with benefit of having a close look on Hindu rituals and following them while searching for logical explanations. Thank God for those who did the job for me. Now we do have answers for many rituals - few intellect and few humorous.

When I was studying engineering - that too electronics, I understood - its easier to work with “ones and zeros” i.e. digital rather than “continuous” i.e. analog. When I read OSHO aka Rajneesh, I realized life can not be digitalized; its always analog. Yet very few “humans” ready to accept or understand it.

As I am on the way of developing my own beliefs, I do wonder when I will be able to fill a feedback form which is not ‘digitalized’ as -

Poor
Satisfactory
Average
Good
Excellent

N.B.: Please provide the feedback, “analog” or “digital” whichever suits you best.

Fourth-post

If you are a Mathematics major after high-school (Class X), then just revisit your Calculus book. In Calculus, you will find that they teach limits, domain, range and differentiation first and then Integration.

Do you ever wonder why this approach? If you have to learn to integrate then why do we need to differentiate. Or let me put it this way – Can you learn the importance and exact working principles of integration if you don't have command on former topics?

Exact integration can be done only when you understand the limits, domains, ranges and purpose and procedures of differentiation properly. By nature humans learn and love to differentiate. They try to classify each and everything, and try to decider the limits accordingly.

Those who becomes too much obsessed with differentiation, enjoy a part of it so much that they forgot to learn the integration as former is enjoyable and make them feel GOD like. Yet few differentiation learn the basics of integration and do so within their own range but my concerns are about those who learn the high levels but choose to remain inactive or focus particular domains only leaving the rest.What is their actual perspective for such an action. They sometimes allow the ongoing process of differentiation and sometimes even support it.

Of course one unanswered question is – Who is the supreme differentiators and integrator? Are two different persons or the same? A true mathematician barely thinks about it as I have never heard of a non-believer mathematician. Have You?

Third-post

“I have many answers but only one question -- Is the question right?”

While watching “Tamasha” (a Hindi movie), few questions which intrigued me, popped up once again.

As a fresher, there are few definite questions which you have to face in the job interviews.

The first one – “Tell me something about yourself.”

Actually, I could not find the right answer for it after so many years. But one thing I am sure about it is that this is the best question to test if a person can handle a client or not. In simple language, whether you are a human psychology genius or not!

In my point of view the question or statement should be – tell me something about yourself that I want to know. Now this will provide a chance to candidate to confirm exactly what do you want to know about me rather than making wild guess and falling apart.

Another most common question is – “How much salary do you expect?”

Really! Do you want to know my expectations or just want to know whether you can afford me or not. Whatever salary I will quote, you will try to negotiate it down. Even if I quote a salary low below your expectations so you could afford me, you will start doubting my credibility.

The third one is my favorite – “Where do you see yourself after 5 years (or 10 years) from now?”

Seriously, you want to know my actual plans whatever they are! I myself do not know my plans for next few days. In case I tell you about my ‘dreams’, you will start judging me on the parameters of optimism and pessimism about which I doubt you yourself are clear.

Second-post

We are the Maggi noodles generation. All we have been told is it gets cooked in just two minutes. So we can wait for those two minutes. After that two minutes we want our Maggi otherwise we will impatient and there will be nuisance or chaos.

The most important thing to notice, which they do not tell you, is that Maggi gets ready in two minutes only when you put it in ‘boiling water’ with the lab conditions satisfied. So we do not calculate the time necessary untill the water boils and the other environmental factors.

Those who do not read the instructions well enough on the Maggi packet keep on complaining rather than learning from the observation or experience. Personal taste does effect the users experience.

Note: Maggi is the brand name of instant noodles of Nestle company. It has been used as we grew up with it.

First-post

“You are still too much in your shell*, you need to open up and a little more positivity in your outlook.”

*Shell, along with the talk of positivity instantly reminds me of 'atoms'.

The structure of atom, as established by Bohr's atomic model consists of an inner core called nucleus having positive and neutral particles, and negative particles revolve around the nucleus in definite energy shells. As these negative particles revolve, they do not gain or loose energy. If sufficient energy is provided to them, they leave their shell. Outer most first.

There are many kind of atoms in the world, classified into categories based on the number of negative particles in their outer shell. Atoms in each category exhibit almost the same properties. Most of the atoms do not have sufficient negative particles in outer shell, so they either loose, gain or share them to achieve material stability. The atoms having sufficient negative particles in outer shell become inactive, they do not react. Also some atoms have self-decaying properties, transforming into lighter atoms till they achieve stability.

One well established theory is that atoms do not exchange positive particles. To attain positivity they will have to loose negative particles only, only if there are receivers for those particles or the balance get disturbed. Thus not all the atoms can loose negative particles, to maintain balance few shall have to receive.

Almost all religious faiths (As much I know about), believe we have “GOD” inside us. It is deep down in our core with all the positivity to guide us. So I can suggest our thoughts as negativity which appears in *shells. Thus to attain positivity we will have to loose negativity, possible only when receivers are present. Not all can do so due to natural tendency.

Just like atoms, based on our natural tendency, we create bonds. The type of these bonds and the results does depend upon the 'natural' conditions in which the bonding occurs. Don't forget to consider the structure formed, it also defines the properties of final material.

-- अहं ब्रह्मास्मि --