The Ultimate Inevitability
In the famous Yaksha Yudhishtir Samvad in Mahabharata, Lord Yama in guise of Yaksha asks Yudhistir many questions which Yudhistir answers with wisdom. Each of these answers can be explored in depth individually. Of the many questions, I found one very poignant.
Yaksha asks Yudhistir 'What is the most absurd thing in life?'
(Please excuse my crude translation)
Yudhistir answers 'We see millions of people around us die yet we never think we will die'
Death has had a sobering effect on man since eternity. Every culture has evolved its own rites, rituals and beliefs about death and life after death. Death is inevitable. Its the rule of nature and law of the universe. Its cruel and decisive.
Yet the concept of death has inspired man. Man has always tried to do things that would conquer death. The Great Pyramids, the Taj Mahal and many many more examples can be cited which have been expressions of man to 'conquer death' in the way he knew best. Death gives us limited time, a deadline so to say. Death makes us question things. Death makes us ask 'why are we here?' . Death scares us. Death inspires us to think, to create, to acquire knowledge, to question, and all this possibly so that we may leave a legacy. Ultimately death humbles us.
So death or rather our mortality is probably the ultimate source of inspiration for humankind.
I would also like to leave behind a legacy in the footprints of time knowing very well that they would be blown away by the winds of change. (Even legacy is mortal!)
8 comments:
" Death makes us question things. Death makes us ask 'why are we here?' . Death scares us. Death inspires us to think, to create, to acquire knowledge, to question, and all this possibly so that we may leave a legacy. Ultimately death humbles us.
So death or rather our mortality is probably the ultimate source of inspiration for humankind."
Just replace death by life and thats what I believe in.
catch 22:
True, life inspires and humbles. But if one were to live forever then I doubt anyone would question a whole lot of things. The essence here is mortality than clinical death.
The ability of man to draw positive inferences from something essentially regarded as negative or rather dark is what that keeps him going forward.
Yaksha: 'What is the most absurd thing in life?'
Me: 'That man - or most men, whose primary faculty is reasoning, is unable to come to terms with the pointlessness of his existence, and that we spend our lives trying - in vain - to reason out the purpose of our lives.'
Death just is. Just like birth just is. Death means nothing. Just like birth means nothing.
We are born. We die. That is all. And in between, because of our inability to come to terms with our own insignificance in the cosmic scheme of things, we fool ourselves by thinking 'this' or 'that' is the purpose of our lives, and that by doing 'this' or 'that' we are 'conquering death'.
Why should we conquer death at all? Why should we leave a legacy when in the very 'end' it won't matter at all?
'So death or rather our mortality is probably the ultimate source of inspiration for humankind.' -- If at all anything inspires, it's one's own 'ego', and not death, really.
'I would also like to leave behind a legacy in the footprints of time knowing very well that they would be blown away by the winds of change. (Even legacy is mortal!)' - Why would you like to leave behind a legacy? What good does it do to you when you will in the end be a pile of ash or fossil fuel? What good will it do anyone when the world ends?
As far as I know, you are given a life to lead; live it in the best way possible, let others live, do something that interests you - just to keep yourself occupied, be good at doing that 'something' which interests you, and when it's time to kick the bucket, do so without any regrets. That's all.
PS: That was briliant, catch 22. Good one.
Death just is. Birth just is. What ever lies between the two is it also 'just is'?
Man wants progress and seeks progress. 'progress is defined by each person / group in different ways'.
If everything is 'just is' then why does one want to do something that interests, and do it 'well'? Who is going to be bothered whether one did the job well or not when he is reduced to a pile of ashes. By wanting to do it well, one wants to do it better than before. One wants to 'progress'. It is personal progress.
By wanting to do something which is remembered by others or that which is a legacy, man wants to contribute in a significant way (in a way he feels best) to the progress of mankind, to the thought processes and possibly lives of others.(Read legacy). That legacy may be good or bad, accepted or rejected, applauded or ridiculed.
Having an ego is never an issue. Ego pushes you to do better than before. (Read:Do things well) But what creates issues is having 'ego problems'. One needs to know the difference well.
Some men are inspired by their insignificance in the cosmic scheme of things and would like to be significant in the 'smaller' world. That is their source of inspiration.
I hope you don't mind longish comments...
Firstly the clarifications:
Death just is. Birth just is. What ever lies between the two is it also 'just is'? -- That's precisely the point. Life just is. We just 'exist'.
'If everything is 'just is' then why does one want to do something that interests, and do it 'well'?': -- To do something that interests is to keep oneself from boredom, like I said in the earlier comment 'just to keep yourself occupied'. And the reason to do it well, in your own words, is:Ego pushes you to do better than before. (Read:Do things well)And when I said 'ego' I meant that which makes one realise the value of oneself, that from which one derives his self-esteem. And I certainly did not mean it as 'An inflated feeling of pride in your superiority to others'. I'm quite aware of the difference.
Who is going to be bothered whether one did the job well or not when he is reduced to a pile of ashes. -- Nobody is. Nobody bothers if one does the job well or not. To quote the Nike slogan. 'Just do it'. Only he who does the job is bothered. Because of his ego. His ego doesn't permit him to be second-rate.
That's that. Now to what I agree with in your reply.
Yes, Man 'needs' to progress. Need is the key here. Again, as you rightly said, progress is a subjective issue here.
Yes, Man 'needs' to contribute in a 'significant' way to the 'progress' of mankind and the 'world' -- all words in inverted commas being subjective issues again.
What I certainly don't agree with in your reply as well as in your original post is the part about the 'legacy', the 'conquering death' bit and especially 'death or rather our mortality is probably the ultimate source of inspiration for humankind'.
There is no point in leaving legacies, a 'legacy' being a subjective issue here. One has no control over one's 'legacy', if one is presumptuous enough to consider it as 'his' legacy alone. Take Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands of years of accumulated human 'legacy' and 'progress' put to optimum use. Just brilliant.
So does that mean I'm saying we should not progress? Does that mean I'm saying we should not strive to do better? Yes. We jolly well should. Not for the sake of leaving behind a legacy. Not for the sake of conquering death. Not for the sake of feeling significant in our 'smaller' worlds. But for the sake of making something out of ourselves for our own sake. But for going that one step better every time, thus going where nobody has gone before, and thereby satisfying and fuelling our 'ego'. But for telling yourself -- and not others -- that 'yes, I did good'. Of course, mankind would benefit sometimes through this effort of ours, although not always.
If, as you say, contributing to mankind is the purpose of our lives, does that mean those who can't contribute -- to whatever size their worlds are -- don't lead a purposeful life? Does that mean we need a world (cosmic size or 'smaller' size)around us to realise the purpose of our existence and add value to our lives? I don't think so. It is quite possible to lead a purposeful and valuable life even in isolation.
Death is just a bodily funcion. You eat poison, you die. You eat food, you live. Simple. It is jarring to think of it as a source of inspiration.
If the Pyramids were built, they weren't for some digital-camera-carrying-wrigley's-chewing-panama-hat-wearing tourist to gawk at. Neither were they built just to see how long they could stand. A tribute, a tomb to someone held in esteem, that's what they were. The same way the Taj is a tribute to someone who was loved a lot.
Finally, to quote a brilliant woman who knew what she was talking about, "Man's ego is the fountainhead of human progress." Certainly not Death.
The attitude of just do it is due to gross misidentification of over selves to bodies rather than permanent spirit souls. We are all moving in different bodies among 84,00,000 species according to our activities in previous lives. Death is that junction where our traverse in future is designed. All our lives are filled with four miseries of birth old age disease and death. Apart from that miseries from our own body mind fellow living entities and nature as enunciated in Bhagavad Gita. We can only break this cycle of birth and death by taking to the process of God Consciousness pertaining to teaching of ones own religion. With this pursuit when one elevates into more and more pure modes of consciousness realizations of higher dimension and permanence of self will be dawned. Then the attitude of just live for today will have no meaning. For further references please refer to the books of A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad, founder Acarya of International Society of Krishna Consiousness
Got here due to a search I was doing for all questions between Y & Y. Read your post. It is a very beautiful thought to reflect on. Enjoyed reading it. Thanks!
Post a Comment