The idea anyone should have
when formulating their thoughts
is to be okay with accepting
and adapting when necessary.
I am not a Buddhist, but there
has always been something
about it that's interested me.
It's their idea of balance,
and why I'm not a Buddhist is
because they seem to believe
you must live by a code
of self-denial, to the point
where you free yourself
by disassociating yourself,
as if the world is intrinsically
a bad place.
I've always considered that
to be pretty ridiculous,
and this is coming from
someone who thinks people
in general care very little
for people in general.
Instead of self-denial,
I advocate an initiative
that promotes self-awareness.
The difference is that
self-denial takes control
away, believes control itself
is impossible within the idea
of balance, whereas self-awareness
is all about knowing your
limitations and your potential,
about the things you can
and the things you should do.
It's about the self in the community.
The self in the community
is a person who doesn't accept
that the more we progress, the more
we ought to isolate ourselves
from each other, which is a distinct
product of the New Fade, technology
and innovation that allows us
to do things our own way and
at our own time, which like the idea
of balance is not itself a bad thing,
but if the only things we care
about are doing things our own way
and at our own time, we relegate the idea
of others to a far more alien concept
than it truly has any right to be.
Cogito ergo sum:
I think there I am
the only person
I know truly exists.
I don't know the Latin,
but I would rather argue
that I think therefore
I have an obligation
as much to myself
as others,
sort of "turn the other cheek,"
which is ironic because Christianity
is as messed up as Buddhism
when it comes to understanding
and accepting that one person
is not alone in the world,
that there always is
and should always be
a community that at some
basic level
we are all a part of.
The self in the community
strikes a balance that
accepts self-awareness as the ability
to recognize what we can do for
ourselves, and what we ought
to be doing for others.
This is not charity.
This is not communism.
This is an understanding that
we owe it to ourselves
to be there, to be available,
to do good deeds not because
we think we will be rewarded,
but because the right thing to do
is the right thing to do.
It is not morality,
it is solidarity,
a cult with secrets
anyone can share,
a joke you didn't see coming
but do not resent because of it.
But that we cannot easily accept
this is a true tale of modern woe,
that romance does not always make us go.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.