Sunday, February 19, 2012

3: Question its functionality

Our actions are mired with our own experiences and joys from knowing the Truth, which we then share, but only after experiencing them ourselves. And when we share them, we always include our own takes on the matter, as our experiences dictate. We don't always share it in a completely detached way and we can't really share it in a detached way since it is so close to our hearts indeed.

In doing so, we aren't always emanating and functional. Lost in the mire of our own excitement and joy of sharing, it is very easy to have our love lose its functionality in purpose when offered out. We can very easily seem to think that our deeds are of such a nature when what we are indeed doing is solely keeping up the excitement in our own lives.

It may just be one that serves and achieves its own purpose. The only way to check them is to look at our works, as they be, and consider their utility value – as if they were apersonal actions, as if we did those things with absolutely nothing to gain from them. We must evaluate them for the utility value, for it is their utility value that defines their function and the nature of their function best.

Such a test which shows whether it is one that is always moving forward, growing, desirous, outreaching, helping, seeking and such would be to take our ways and add them up in terms of their resultant effect. At the end of the day, what is achieved? Does it achieve such a purpose? Or do we solely serve our own psyche?

The best way to do that is to remove the personal implications from the truth we present and offer, for the sake of evaluation, and then look to see if we are indeed helping the other person. Do this and not let the response, especially the one that we want to see, be a factor in how we offer or whether we offer it or not for that matter. If we expect only the response that we expect, we are not really doing it for them but for us as well, since that is going to determine whether we offer it and how we offer it.

But, it is impossible to completely detach our implications from what we do. If we do that, we wouldn't even be able to even offer it. It would have no meaning and we would have no reason to offer it. So, there must be a balance between the two when it is not meaningless (then it can't be offered at all) and when it completely places the choice to take and use to the one we offer it to. It is difficult to do both - hanging around and offering it anyway until the person wants to take it but hey! that's the only way you really offer love that has only the other person in mind. If it is indeed what it is worth taking, it will come to use to the person when they need to use it. When the person realises that they need it, it will always be there to take it.

Similarly when we deal with ourselves, we should question its functionality as well. Do our ways when we deal with ourselves really add up to something when detach them from our attachment to them? If we were to apersonalise the way we deal with ourselves, what will those steps add up to? Where do they lead to indeed? This comes down to the content value of what we do. What is it that they indeed profess? What kind of lives do they make us lead? What lives to we indeed lead in the process, depending on whether we follow them or not? What does it eventually break down to? If we were to evaluate this, what would be the end sum result? Is all our attachment to nothing of any good that we can speak of? If its content value cannot speak of anything worthy, what is it that we allow ourselves to get attached to? Is it a mere psyche pleasing exercise or is it really something of some worth?

No comments:

Post a Comment