BEING AND BECOMING

Descartes was the father of modern science. His vision of mind-body dualism (known as Cartesian dualism) led the foundation of science, which is based upon a dualistic conception of observer and observed. Descartes was a rationalist who did thought experiment to reach at the conclusion that Mind, Body (external nature), and God exist. Because no finite being could possibly exist without infinite reality. Newton went further and ensured to displace God from the realm of natural cosmic reality. But the central proposition of mind-body dualism remained as the foundation of modern science. Francis Bacon claimed that "we must put nature to rack to compel it to answer our questions". Here "We" denotes the reality of a rational mind, which is not subjected to the law of cosmos. Cosmos is a machine for Descartes, which is governed by mechanical law. On the contrary, mind is free from the bondage of mechanical law. It has freedom of will in Kantian systems of ethics. Because

Our past sometimes becomes a burden for the present. I wonder what unites so many emotions into being. Whether being is any unity or it is fragment of totality. Fragment in its concrete is material, psychic, or spiritual reality? I remember past with fondness sometimes with little anxiety, like if I would have chosen this path; if and but are integral to my daily existence. It is made out of choice and co-incidence. Sometimes, I feel, everything is perfectly designed by forces unknown to us; but the rationalist commitment makes me suspicious. Being and becoming are two strange words; neither I am aware of being and there is no possibility to become, since being itself appears to be super-imposed thought. Without beingness I exist without any burden of past or expectation of future. There is no scope of sin or guilt. Every experience is new and fresh. Consciousness is really a timeless reality; it doesn't evolve in Darwinian sense. The ignorance which clouds it are removed in due co

Love is like a flower Nourishes the soul Through its sublime existence It is transfered by hearts  Without ownership Its life is momentary But fragrance is momentous There is no better healer No efficient medicine But love which is truly like a flower

I have always been a shy person, but when you're in the world, you're no longer a private person. At a time I feel if privacy isn't a myth like any other story? I believe everyone of us is living a story, a fictitious journey, whose every fragment appears to be so real to think otherwise. Somebody rightly said that only fiction reveals the true reality. I don't find any difference between fiction and reality. As Pablo Picaso rightly said that "everything you can imagine is real". What I love about life is not that it is a fixed destination rather a journey, whose direction is seldom commanded or have any particular direction. I believe, my life is already determined to a large degree. The concept of free will is quite mythical. My language, culture, identity, religion, genetics, and environment, etc. are already determined here. I have done nothing to choose between these things which are so integral to my being. My life is determined by many accidental journe

In every morning, new ideas knock the door. To whom it approaches? The self or to itself? This question appears to be so simple but profound. In our daily reality, we find acquaintance with the self or the image of the self? In Buddha's vision there is no soul, no essence, and of course, no quintessence. What is, then, the meaning of I, you, We, and Them? Whether language has any compulsion to indicate self through these denotational practices? Or it indicates something in our conventional experiences, but to stretch the language further, it is reduced to that zero level from there on there is hardly anything representable in speech, word, thought, or experience. There is silence. Silence is not void, in fact. It is the supreme intelligence to recognize the enslavement from thought in form of conditioning. There is well known saying that whatever comes passes away. It is a fact. If things are so momentous; how can anyone be so sure about quintessence? In our daily life, many people

You're at a journey of becoming something, so am I and everyone. Since your birth, what have you become? Which growth so powerful to proud of? You're getting old. You haven't realized that. You're getting too bored in the mechanical repetition of vocation, profession, career, or whatever you call it. You have adopted a mentality of belonging someone, as a religious or gender identity, caste or class mentality, I v. You and we v. them. You have shown to the world how much successful you're; you have all the great fortunes, all the wealth and prosperity. But is there someone unhappy inside you? Don't you try to forget your conscience for material outward progress and success? Do you smile like a child or do you have to smile to please someone out of compulsion? Do you dance or like to dance but cannot do so since you're matured old person, habituated and enslaved in your own known world that you don't have time to be so naïve and childish? Do you like to t

When I say fundamental question, I assume certain questions which are not so fundamental, rather it may be treated as superficial. Whether you have taken a cup of coffee since morning, qualifies the latter question. But it still deserves to be known as question. Second, Why do I assume that there are certain fundamental questions? Because, my life is so intriguing often that I ask certain questions. At least, I try to search certain questions whose answers may or may not be available to me or may not appear as easily as a cup of tea or coffee. To me, the first characteristic of a basic question is "why". People often talk about what is this or that. Such questions are verbalized by the meaning provided dictionary. It's all about language and interpretation, like a lawyer knows how to manipulate a word. But such questions float around at the superficial water. Question such as what deserves to be called as a questions related to known world, created by linguistics discipli

Information, idea, and knowledge are treated as power. From Francis Bacon to the era of the emergence of social media, information is revered for its capacity to transform the world. Many spiritual commentators like, Jiddu Krishnamurti, did not appreciate the idea of accumulation. Be it knowledge, information, or wealth, accumulation is nothing but a burden to carry. It is often believed that the great people like to carry burden like what Nelson Mandela or Mahatma Gandhi did. Sometimes, they ignore their own families to treat humanity as a family. Information overload is problem for our age. So, filtering is required to prioritise what is significant and what is not. If I can shift the responsibility to know the world and rehabilitate myself in an "inner retreat of  citadel", what Isaiah Berlin made a remark about German Romanticism, and particularly about Kant, Fichte, and Schelling (See, Berlin, The Two Concepts of Liberty). Martha Nussbaum was, similarly, skeptical about

Pure joy of action And the moments of reflection Keep aside reaction Just flow without direction Remain empty for salvation Don't take too many information Be mindful of your emotions Life is worthy of devotion Be it success or devastation Dance without any invitation Only happiness is your destination Keep moving with young generation

अच्छे इंसान की खूबसूरती को चश्मे के रंग से देखने की अक़्सर भूल होती है, अच्छाई शीशे में नहीं दिल में उतरती है  और आंखों में छलकती है। अहंकारी की भाषा में उसके अक्स का वज़न सबसे ज्यादा होता है एक प्रेमी से मिल कर देखिए वो टूटे पत्तों सा हवा में तैरता रहता है बिना किसी परवाह के कि आशियाने से कब मिलना होना लोग अक़्सर कहते हैं संभल कर चलो  आजकल लोग सयाने हो चले हैं भीड़ की शक़्ल देख उसकी तस्वीर नहीं ली जाती हर एक जीवन में धूप सी रोशनी और रात के स्याह से बादल होते हैं कमाने को तो लोग नाम और शोहरत कमाते हैं पर कुछ लोग होतें हैं जिनके बारे में पीछे में भी बात होती है तो चेहरे पे मुस्कान छलक जाता है अर्जित करना शायद इसे ही कहते हैं।

When I was young and alive Profoundly deeper was etheric sky The moment ambition took its flight I became a pawn of others' dreams And their insurmountable cries  Mountains were then a traveler's joy The moment ambition took its flight I became a pawn of others' dreams        And their insurmountable cries I was then listening many voice Silence of my soul and its deeper lullaby Melody has lost its touch  Amidst cacophony of artificial tide The moment ambition took its flight I became a pawn of others' dreams And their insurmountable cries  I find around too much light Too many colourful but fake smile Crowd is everywhere taking one side I was then a free careless child The moment ambition took its flight I became a pawn of others' dreams   And their insurmountable cries

Recent few weeks have been significantly important for the world. Particularly, election in America and its final culmination is celebrated across the world. Celebration does signify the triumph of liberal value. But what is so liberal about current trend of liberalism? Pro-market freedom at the cost of extreme inequality, unemployment, catastrophic health facilities, debilitating trade unions, crisis-ridden conditions of labourers, miserable farmers, distressed young members of the society, and so on. Inequality has increased up to such an extent that 0.1% of the total population of America own 20% of the total wealth of the country. Health care facility is significantly inaccessible to poor lower and middle classes. In the name of medical facility, insurance companies are being benefited. Almost 2 lakh 40 thousands people have lost their lives due to Covid-19. These miserable conditions are not the byproduct of one regime or administration. There has been a long tradition since Reaga

The United States of America has elected its 46th President and first ever women Vice President in its entire history of the republic starting from its "tryst with destiny". Political power is so significant and insignificant; attractive but momentary. If it is used for the protection of week over strong or to ensure justice for every member of the society, then, it's the greatest achievement. Our world doesn't ask for any Alexander or Napoleon. We need a few benevolent administrators, justice and peace loving sages, who personify the Platonist ideal, like "philosopher king". The best governor governs less,  nevertheless leads from the front. The greatest leaders are the responsible leaders, who don't like credit to his or her name rather love to see his or her people happy, just, and peaceful. "A leader is best when people barely know he exists", in words of Lao Tzu. Pandemic is one of the toughest challenges of the humankind, which needs to b

Sectarian violence could be understood in context of its origin, structure, and implications. Naturally, violence has something to do with violation of ethical standard of life. Human being is supposed to be a rational animal, who is able to appreciate what is the value of autonomous life and free will. To use a Kantian metaphysical category; human being, though is integral to nature, has capacity to transcend its limitations, so as to overcome the ramifications of ergotism, inclinations, passion, greed, desire, and so on. Human being as a legislator of moral law is supposed to write his or her own law, which is not supposed to be guided by external heternomous limitations. To choose something, motivated by reward or due to fear of punishment is no choosing in the lexicon of Immanuel Kant. Such act remains too mechanistic and determined by the causality of nature. Though, I don't accept his reductionist approach towards nature, which was, of course, guided by Cartesian and Newtonia

अहं का कैसा भ्रम है? शायद, कुछ शब्दों, कुछ विचारों से निर्मित हुआ है। व्यक्तित्व का कैसा बोध है? वो व्यक्त करने की विधा में उलझा पड़ा है। सहिष्णु कौन है? शायद कोई नहीं; हर कोई ख़ुद में और ख़ुद के होने को संघर्षरत है। शान्ति कहाँ है? प्रकृति के विशाल ह्रदय में; जो हर अस्तित्व के आंतरिक व बाह्य जगत में विद्यमान है। समाज क्या है? प्रथा से निर्मित व्यवस्था है।  स्वतंत्रता क्या है? जीवन का सर्वोच्च शिखर! क्या समाज व स्वतंत्रता एक साथ संभव है? निस्संदेह! गर समाज का प्राथमिक इकाई सोचने व व्यक्त करने को स्वतंत्र हो, ऐसा समाज ही स्वतंत्र माना जा सकता है। न्याय क्या है? अन्याय की परिभाषा से निर्मित विचार-संग्रह, जिसे कई भाषाओं में पिरोया गया है। अन्याय क्या है? असमानांतर व्यवहार। दंड व पुरस्कार का अनियमित वितरण, और ना जाने कितने मापदण्ड बनाए गए हैं। कई बार अन्याय परिभाषा से उपर ह्रदय में महसूस होता है। मापदंड क्या है? इस जगत के सारे मापदंड मनुष्य द्वारा निर्मित व्यवस्था है। प्रकृति का सत्य हमारे मापदंडों से प्रभावित नहीं होता है। हम अपने ज्ञान का डंका पीटते रहते हैं, जबकि हमारे ज्ञान से प्रकृति के

अर्थ को पुरातन दर्शन में राजनीति से अलग नहीं देखा गया था। आधुनिक मापदंड पे अर्थशास्त्र का जन्म एक कठोर विज्ञान के रूप में हुआ, जिसके दर्शन और समझ के लिए अंकों की समझ होना सर्वोपरि माना गया। चाणक्य का राजनीतिक दर्शन अर्थ के बहुआयामी प्रकृति को दर्शाया था, जिसमें राजा का कर्तव्य, राज्य का कल्याण, सुरक्षा, न्याय, व्यापार, कूटनीति, इत्यादि सम्मलित थे। धर्म, अर्थ, काम, मोक्ष एक दूसरे को पूरक बनाते थे। बिना नीति के राजनीति को समझना और जीना असम्भव था। प्राचीन भारतीय दर्शन में विदुर, शुक्राचार्य, वृहस्पति, आदि का जिक्र होता है जो नीति के विद्वान समझे जाते थे। उनसे विचार-विमर्श करके ही राजा निर्णय लिया करता था। अर्थ को आधुनिकता ने वस्तुओं का विज्ञान बना दिया, जिसका संबंध व्यापार, कर, लाभ-हानि, उत्पादन, वितरण तक सीमित है। एरिस्टोटल के समय अच्छे जीवन की परिकल्पना वृहद थी जिसमें जीविकोपार्जन में सफलता और आर्थिक संवृद्धि एक पहलू मात्र था। एक अच्छा वक़ील, कलाकार, एवं व्यापारी का होना ही अच्छे जीवन का संकेत नहीं देता है। अच्छे जीवन की संकल्पना मनुष्य के आर्थिक, राजनीतिक, नैतिक, एवं वैज्ञानिक पहलुओं को

The etymological progression of "imagination" begins with Latin 'Imago, Imagin, Imaginary", then in French, it was known as "Imaginaro", before in English, it was known and accepted as "imagination". One central thread of this evolutionary aspect of the word imagination is "image". What is the concept of image after all? It was originated from Latin "Imago, Imaginem", in French, "Imagene", before it evolved in English as "Image or Imitate". Image is defined as "piece of statuary; artificial representation that looks like a person or thing". A similar signifying word is "Phantasma" in Greek, "Fantosme" in French, and "Phantom" in English. Which is defined as "illusion or unreality".  In a way, it can be easily deduced from etymological investigation of imagination that it is a mental apparatus of image making process; which produces fictitious, imaginary, and

In search of a book without words, I dare acquaintance with unknowable, I like to visit a silent evening, than a phonic exuberance of herd! Celebration all around, for what?  To hide the tiresome, fragmented, painful life. I know a learned-serious creature, Who is wanderer of sky, But ignorant about own self. Who knows too much, But feel too little. O champion of words, A saint of rationality, For transmission of worldly skills,  You tear apart the solitary life of trees. For little selfish gain, You play with the destiny of all species.   What? You care for knowledge? For what? Utility and power? What power is endurable?  Against the creative art of nature? O exaggerated spirit, Are you living wisely? Rather carrying mountains of ego, And myth of progress, development, and rationality? O self-proclaimed enlightened spirit! Where are love and care, In your language of morals and justice? O professional creature, a technician, a nay-sayer, You own everything? At what cost? For exchange

What is the first moment of struggle? Perhaps, world is manifestation of inner struggle. The first struggle begins in the moment of wishful future: a struggle from being to becoming. All wars are invented to assuage inner struggles, however, inner peace cannot be achieved in the language of struggle or through the language of struggle. If goal of being is struggle to survive like Charles Darwin hypothesised; struggle to reach on top in the competition of name, game, and fame; struggle for fickle identity; struggle against present; struggle for the nostalgic glory of history; struggle for unknown future; struggle for moralising possibility of justice and development; struggle for peace, virtue, and morality; struggle all too struggle; then, can there be peace in the language and through the language of struggle?  You may argue in favour of dialectics to justify antagonist binary of thesis and anti-thesis like Hegel and Marx did; the struggle between two autonomous-opposite ideas for the

ख़्वाब भी आते थे, कभी-कभी डरा कर जाते थे, सपनों के सहर में अक़्सर मेरा आना जाना हुआ करता था। जिस दिन से सपनों ने हकीक़त की शक़्ल ली है, सुबह की हवाएँ अब अज़नबी नहीं रही, और शाम भी काफ़ी जानी-पहचानी सी लगती है। आजकल के गुफ़्तगू में कुछ गिने-चुने शब्द मिल जाते हैं, जिसे ज़ुबान पर बस एक बोझ लिए ढ़ोता हूँ। कभी हँसने-रोने का जी तो चाहता है, पर आज के मौसम में मखौल की क़द्र कहाँ है? बड़े गंभीर लोग हैं, ऐसा लगता है मानों पूरे जड़-चेतन को सर पे बिठा रखा है! सपनों को देखने के लिए वक़्त तो लगता है, आजकल वक़्त मुट्ठी भर रेत सा है। शायद किसी मशीन के ख़्वाब में आज का सच क़ैद है, जहाँ से सतरँगी ख़्वाब के दीदार में वक़्त तो लगेगा, कहते हैं, इतिहास लौटकर फ़िर से आता है।

 बिहार के चुनाव में हर दिन सुनने को मिल रहा है; इस जाति का इतना वोट बैंक है। हर जाति की अपनी एक पार्टी है। चुनाव में शिक्षा, स्वास्थ्य, रोजगार जैसे मुद्दों का कोई स्थान नहीं दिख रहा है। विचारधारा की बात तो करना भी विचारों के आदर्श मूलक अस्तित्व पर सवाल उठाने जैसा हो गया है। लोकतंत्र के जन्म और विकास में जनता को संप्रभु माना गया था, और उससे विचारशीलता की अपेक्षा की जाती रही है। पर लोकतंत्र का जातीय स्वरूप जो बिहार के चुनाव में दिख रहा है, विचारशीलता के मानदंड पर सवाल खड़े करता है। जाति की संरचना में उलझे नागरिक लोकतंत्र के मूल्यों को किस हद तक समझ पाए हैं? राजनीतिक दलों के लिए काम काफी आसान हो गया है। वो हर क्षेत्र में जातीय समीकरण के हिसाब से टिकट वितरण कर रहे हैं। उन्हें मालूम है कि मनुष्य भावनाओं की कठपुतली है। सोचने समझने की शिक्षा उन्हें कभी दी ही नहीं गई। अपने सामाजिक पहचान को कब तक ढ़ोया जाएगा? क्या राजनीति का एक मात्र मूल्य पहचान की राजनीति है? अमेरिका में भी पहचान की राजनीति हो रही है। मैंने लोगों को कहते सुना है कि आदर्श किताबी बातें हैं। धरातल का सत्य लचीला है। इसकी बुनियादी सत

The secret to preserve or rather nurture happiness, love, and peace is not to over-emphasize its necessity. Only an indifferent soul is the best lover of life. In ancient time, religious institutions were dominant force to preserve sacred and divine; their active zeal for sacred and divine cause culminated into "descralization of attitude". Human beings lost their faith in sacred and divine, rather ritualistic part of religion replaced its ideological foundation. Similar attitude could be traced with respect to virtue and morality. In the very foundation of its branches immoral possibility is inevitably realized. Nietzsche beautifully explains this law of opposites: "Morality as attitude- is opposed to our taste nowadays. This is also an advance, as it was an advance in our fathers that religion as an attitude finally became opposed to their taste, including the enmity and Voltairean bitterness against religion" (Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil). Probably, the best

Modernity was the invention for the tradition of repetition and habit. The western habitude of jurisprudence, obsessed with habit and repetition, chose to establish the foundation of positive science of law. Religious interpretation, the biblical narratives of just and good life were too fragile for newly emerged Protestant ethics for worldly salvation, as explained by Max Weber. For a repetitive set of laws were instrumentally warranted for the sake certainty in the transactional attitude of the "economic man" (homo economicus). Law originated from the imagination of pattern, a repetitive and continuous reality. The foundation of natural law was shaky, uncertain and unpredictable. For a higher priest or a philosopher was required to be consulted in the process of knowing what nature has to offer and what truth is concealed from the senses of a being? Discovery of eternal or divine law was a serious business, for authority was consulted. Modern man was afraid of too much uniq

Every word is an empty signifier. When a word like politics or ethics is used in commonsensical sense, one takes it as certain, as if something is there, which can be defined as such. To refer Derrida, it is "metaphysics of presence",  which is known as logocentrism, is taken for granted. A term such a politics has no fixed meaning. Words are never meant to signify any fixed reality. It is always already absent in its presence, just like an arche-type of difference. History of philosophy has been obsessed with a question, "who experiences the world?" Is there any fixed identity in me? I have never been familiar to myself. How can I be a fixed "I"? Fixation and definition are just like an amusing act by logician, lawyers, and mathematician. They take their being for granted, as if, being has been implanted in the world to experience deceit and insurmountable sorrow and fear of unknown. Being is an interpretative function, which remains and effaces itself in

आज से कुछ शताब्दी पहले डेनमार्क में पंथ की धर्मान्धता से झुझता हुआ एक दार्शनिक का जन्म हुआ था। उसका नाम था सोरेन कीर्केगार्ड। कीर्केगार्ड को भीड़ हो जाने से भय महसूस होता था। भीड़ का मतलब अपनी आवाज़, अपनी पहचान को किसी मशीन के हवाले कर देना, जहाँ वो मात्र एक कल-पुर्जा सा रह जाए। नितज़्चे के दार्शनिक विचार ने पूरी दुनिया में आधुनिकता के प्रादुर्भाव को सामने रखा था जिसे "डेथ ऑफ गॉड" से नवाजा जाता रहा है। धर्मान्धता से झुलसते मनुष्य की आवाज़ ज़िन्दा करने का सार्थक प्रयास था नितज़्चे। हर  ईश्वरीय व्याख्या में वर्तमान से दूर जाने की चेष्टा थी। ज़िन्दगी को भूल जाने का संकल्प था, और जिस दुनिया की कल्पना में ज़िन्दगी को भूल जाने की चेष्टा थी उसे ग्रीक दार्शनिक प्लेटो ने "प्योर आईडिया" से नवाजा था। और जिसे सेंट ऑगस्टाइन ने "सिटी ऑफ गॉड" की संज्ञा दी थी। उसी यूरोप में हेगल ने इतिहास की टेलिअलोजिकल व्याख्या की थी, जिसके विकाश के अन्तिम बिंदु के रूप में हम फुकुयामा के "इतिहास समाप्ति" की घोषणा को समझ सकते हैं। इन दर्शनों में मनुष्य को भीड़ हो जाने का डर था। और भीड़ की

Portrait Source: innerself.com We listen and communicate with dead people. They live in us, in our languages, concepts, history, societies, literature, mythology, and so on. They talk to us in the technology of language, in fact, we talk to them in their language; we carry on our identity and the concept of identity, thanks to their ingenuous gift. In the pursuit of our blaming gesture, history and society blame to each-other. History responds our presence with their glorious misadventure and ridicules our present societies, its mediocrity, baseness, and its all too normal abnormalities. Contemporary societies are always already in transition; visit its past with glorified vision to select a few dots, suitable to current necessity, but rejects many painful stories, tragedies, cruelties. History has been a source of legitimacy of contemporary societies and vice versa; cultural mythology must be the father of civilization. What makes civilization possible in the first place? Against whom

People like to say, "stop judging me!" What does it signify? This statement appears in the process of judgment about judgment. Judgment as a process is usually attached to decision making activity. Decision is taken only when ambiguity emerges or confusion clouds the mind. When conflict is apparently visible in form of choices; decision must be a progeny of choices.  The whole question of "being" is answered in the language of choices, for decision making activity has a central role to define and unite the characteristics of being. It won't be outrageous to say that everyone is a judge who decides a way to adopt and about a means to neglect or denounce. Every judge is a moral or aesthetic being. Judging is an art of reaching over conclusion from preliminary sensation and experience. One has to decide about taste, distaste, morality, immorality, beauty, ugliness, good, evil, just, unjust, and so on. The act of deciding is an act of choosing between choices. The m

Doctrine of Basic Structure has been subject matter of contention since Kesavananda Bharti case. Many argue that this doctrine is not in line with the democratic principle for a republican state like India. One of the arguments is generally advanced that it is abstract, vague, and ready to be misinterpreted in many ways, particularly this doctrine endows unlimited powers to judges, which cannot be checked by other organs of state. It is often argued that basic structure must be defined once for all time. Strangely, no society is able to define what is their core ethos. Ethical dimensions of each society are as evolutionary as life and death of each and everything. Ethics is as organically dynamic as the planetary systems or the expanding universe. There is no single definition of what is a good way of life. There cannot be, in fact, a single unifying definition. The quest to define each and everything is the highest misadventure one may imagine. It's like a mountain of sands; the m

Better follow your heart and soul It will lead to peace and joy The moment you lead a path of mind You win the world at the cost of loosing self Better ignore the violence of words The moment you take it seriously  You burn in shallow heat of ego and passion  Better let the emotions channelised  In the service of life-energy  The moment it transforms into a passion to compete You suffer each moment in conflict and fragmentation  Better choose your own way, your own destination  The moment you carry the ambition of crowd You loose your freedom forever And it won’t return back Better listen the song of conscience  There is no better law humanity has ever crafted The moment you ignore your inner-voice You surrender your own being for servile existence

It is generally understood that words are like a empty vessel. The moment a writer picks a few words to enunciate his or her feelings, words become free to be interpreted as per the perceptual background of a reader. Roland Barthes' The Death of Author reflects on the enunciated domain of text, which remains free from the imaginative cage of the author for the open possibilities of its significance. Interpretation is really a serious task, a playful activity, the first condition for epistemic freedom. I'm compelled to write this little know to express my sublime feeling for a transformative work in many ways. Authors in this marvellous work have composed the poetics of systemic thinking, which is missing in the rigorous pursuit of analytics. Not a single epistemic domain is missing in this visionary craft. I want to be a reader for the work which is created with lots of love and passion. Only love transcends the boredom of official routine. The moment a passion is reduced to wo

What resists the death except life and art, remarked by Giles Deleuze. His thematic expression is unmatched and unparalleled in the craft of art in philosophy. Michel Foucault once remarked that the last century would be known as Deleuzean. There are various themes and colours in the enunciatory leadership of French philosopher, Giles Deleuze. But what has impressed me the most is his philosophy to understand philosophy, art, and cinema. He loves to see philosophy as a creative art to construct and decimate concept.  Term such as "Philosopher" has etymologically evolved from Greek, which is translated as the "friend of wisdom". Friend has a huge significance in the exploration of new ideas. That was the reason why dialogues were preferred as a medium of creativity and construction of concept. For democracy is the conducive factor to lead towards unceasing inquiry. Deleuze explains the necessity and urgency behind the development of philosophy as the necessity to rai

Those who don't have questions rely on unbounded answers of authority. Revelation was invented as a full stop for inquiry. Relying what big people say enslaves and dulls an inquisitive mind. Ready-made answer is the most illusionary product of our culture. The reality of our universe is approachable by the tool of three questions; what, why, and how. Modern science has restricted itself to how question only. Inquiry could be invigorated with a simple question of "why" without relying upon what a great man had said once upon a time. Those who desire to craft footnotes may continue searching authorities for validity. There is a difference between validity and truth. Every valid thing is not necessarily real. It is, in fact, a byproduct of human's thoughts. The whole culture of research has restricted search and inquiry. It is presupposed in re-search that the best ideas have already been searched and inquired. Our duty is only to carry them on in our texts, contexts, an

People often blame media for media trial. The origin of trial begins with our own fragmentary thoughts which anxiously blame others or at least like to avoid our own responsibility. Every socio-political, legal or religious institution is the mirror of what people think or like to do. Medium can't be blamed. The first change may be brought by our own conviction for the honesty, truth, and justice. The process of blaming is often underestimated. It is, in fact, a germinal base for avoiding the questions and its answers. Trial is essentially rooted in our culture. One likes to judge and this process doesn't start with self. It is often pursued to avoid or rather hide our own truth. We know not for the sake of extracting truth from falsehood; in fact, every limitation, dissection of truth-false dichotomy is the first step to efface the totality of truth. In modern paradigm, truth is not discovered rather invented and re-invented. There can't be a truth which is wishful or fanc

Picture's Source: Gettyimage K had a great gift of verbalising everything at the pretension of knowledge. He was fond of expression. But it seemed as if he had no question to answer. His friends used to consult him for their problems and he had the same old-school solution, though he was confident in expression, and this characteristic made him immensely popular. One day, a friend from the nearest town visited him and asked the solution about his dizziness, fear, and anxiety. K had all the theories to count on, from Freud, Jung, Adler to James Joyce and Jacques Lacan. He presented beautifully all the theories of psychopathology which made his friend anxious. He asked if these theories are any avail for someone? K replied, "These theories are the mirror of human's evolution, their problems and solutions. It will help you". His friend did not find any impact whatsoever of these theories upon him, except he felt the whole discourse very informative. He asked with amuseme

 कुछ धुँधली सी कुछ यादों सी वो शाम की ढ़लती आभा कई सवेरे हुए, अंधेरे हुए, पर वो रंग रही अभागा कई औघड़ देखा, कई रावण देखा हर मौसम में कई सावन देखा कुछ चलता गया कुछ रुक सा गया कुछ बादलों सा बरस सा गया चंद किस्से सही कभी अपने हुए कुछ किस्सों का साथी मैं बनता गया कुछ मिले भी नहीं और बिछड़ से गये कुछ बिछड़न में उनसे मिलना हुआ कई मंज़िलें मिली कुछ रास्ते मिले कुछ रास्तों की कोई ना मंज़िल मिली कई बहारों की गलियों में उदासी मिली कई बेचारों के छत बेसहारे मिले कुछ लिखता गया कुछ भूल सा गया मैं राही जो था बस चलता गया

हर विचार, व्यवहार के पीछे कोई वज़ह होती है, हर वज़ह में स्थित कोई सुलह होती है, जिसके दामन से ब्रह्याण्ड का जन्म हुआ था। हर बिखरे स्वरूप में, गहरे आकाश में, जीवन-रूपी असीमित ऊर्जा की धारा बह रही है। जिन्होंने इसे पदार्थ-रूपी देखा, उन्होंने पदार्थों की दुनिया बना दी। जिसने जीवन को मानव के केंद्र में रखा, उसने राजनीति बना दी। कल्याण और स्वच्छंदता कोई मनुष्य रूपी वरदान नहीं है, ब्रह्याण्ड का हर सूक्ष्म कण स्वतंत्र है। अहंकार का सृजन इस विचार से होता है कि सिर्फ हम हैं और हम ही हैं, जबकि सृष्टि में अहम का कोई स्थान नहीं है। ये नाम, वर्ग, पहचान एक कल्पना है, कोरी कल्पना, जिसके साथ संघर्ष में लीन ना जाने कितने दुःख उठाए गए हैं। संसार की सभी बेड़ियों में विचार का पहला स्थान है, जिसके क़ैद को भी सहर्ष स्वीकृति मिलती है। जीवन किसी विचार का गुलाम नहीं है, किसी संकल्प से बाँधा नहीं जा सकता, हाँ, स्वप्न में जीने वालों ने इसे स्वर्ग-नरक, अपने-पराए, और सुख-दुःख में बांट रखा है।

कुछ तुम कहो, कुछ हम कहें, कहने में क्या रखा है? बात तो विश्वास पे आ अटकती है। तुम्हारे-हमारे गुफ़्तगू से, कुछ कहानियाँ बनेगी, कुछ अफ़साने सजेंगे, कुछ सच दिखाए जाएंगे, कुछ झूठ बताए जाएंगे, इस सिलसिले में, हकीक़त और कल्पना के, सारे फ़ासले मिटाये जाएंगे, चलो अगर कल्पना की सैर पे ही चलना है, तो बात करते हैं!

  In the evolutionary movement of the human's history, negation is as real as affirmation. In every affirmation, the vast domain of negation is taken into the consideration, even if, a word about it is not uttered or described. In every act of negation or criticism, affirmation remains connected in the very action of criticising someone of something. There cannot be simply a valueless statement. Value neutrality is a fiction of the highest kind. What is value? Value is a choice or set of choices. One chooses to respect value means one exercises a choice to accept some and reject the rest of it. In the process of exercising practical agency, one remains in the trap of division and conflict. As long as choices are projected, there will be only a superficial freedom, the one, which is projected as the idea of laissez faire or social contract. As long as choices, the act of choosing, and the act of dissecting remain untempered, conflicts cannot be done away with. In that sense, critici

I wonder what remains as fact in our society? Everything has been reduced to image and counter-image. There are multiple versions of facts, each version is reproducing its own spectacularized domain. I wonder if producers of these images are not produced by image itself? The tragic death of SSR and the spectacle of media, so called social media have created a baffling cyclorama, whereas a sense of victimized sphere is evaporating in quest of finding a culprit to blame. Blaming is the easiest task to achieve. The process of producing image, counter image, and the whole narratives of re-presenting truth is producing everydayness of anxiousness and anxiety. Once upon a time, life was lived, loved, and felt. Now, everything is just a simulating experience. Simulcara is producing and sustaining itself. In that process, society has been completely removed from its domain of love and friendship. Everything- everyone is just a piece of sign. A distorted reality!! It's apt to quote Feuerbac

What is life if it is not in a "state of exception"? We live in the suspension of life. There is a fascinating articulation by none other than Carl Schmitt, who, in his Dictatorship and Political Theology, expounds this concept. The true intensity of law is realized in its suspension and its exception. Norm remains unrealised unless it is suspended in its realisation. Just like "state of emergency" is declared to suspend the juridical order so as to protect it from internal or external aggression. In the same line of reasoning, the freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right in normal sense remains in the Constitution without any realisation unless law like sedition comes into the picture, or the power of contempt comes at issue, in that condition only, the freedom of speech and expression is visualized in its full intensity. I mean, who talks about a norm, unless a fact of its violation becomes possible. Just like, who talks about life unless its suspen

व्यक्तिगत सफलता को मापदण्ड बनाकर सफलता का सूत्र नहीं गढ़ा जा सकता. पूरे समाज को साथ लेकर चलने वाला मनुष्य ही शांति और प्रेम को उपलब्ध हो सकता है. मनुष्य के इतिहास की पहली भूल थी "व्यक्ति" की अवधारणा का जन्म, जिसे स्वतंत्रता के नाम पे सिंचित किया गया. स्वतंत्रता की परिभाषा को "फ्री विल" के इर्दगिर्द बाँध देने की भूल ने मानव को संसाधन लोलुपता की ओर जाने को प्रेरित किया. मानवीय गरिमा की परिभाषा पदार्थवादी चिंतन के समरूप एक स्वेच्छाचारी दर्शन  का प्रतिबिंब बन कर उभरा, जिसके मूल में ही स्वार्थ है. फिर चाहे उदारवाद हो, नव-उदारवाद, या मार्क्सवाद, हर चिंतन के मूल में "शक्ति" और उसका पृथक्करण है. शक्ति भी ऐसी जो विलुप्त हो जानी है. बस कुछ समय की बात होती है. शक्ति-लोलुप मनुष्य अंधकार में भटकता है. जिस शक्ति की चाह में मानव आजीवन दौड़ता रहता है वो वास्तव में शक्ति है ही नहीं. वह तो मात्र कल्पनाओं में जन्मी मृगमरीचिका है, जिसके क़रीब जाते ही उसके खोखलेपन का एहसास होता है. बुद्ध के बारे में ऐसी अवधारणा है कि ज्ञान प्राप्ति के बाद जब वो अपनी पत्नी से मिले तो पत्नी ने पूछा

स्वाधीनता पूर्णविराम नहीं, निरन्तर इसकी सृष्टि है। यह नवजीवन की दृष्टि है।। कोई दिन भर का त्योहार नहीं, ये प्रतीकात्मक व्यवहार नहीं, गौरव-गान में सिंचित, ये कैसी आत्म-मुग्धी है? स्वाधीनता पूर्णविराम नहीं, निरन्तर इसकी सृष्टि है। यह नवजीवन की दृष्टि है।। आज भी पगडंडियों पे कुछ सुनहरे सपने सोते हैं, दो जून की रोटी को ना जाने कितने बिलखते-रोते हैं। जिस स्वराज्य के माथे पे बलिदान की अकथ कहानी है, घर कर चुका सदियों से जहाँ मानसिकता की गुलामी है। पंथ, जाति से बोध-गम्य मां भारती आज भी रक्तरंजित है, भ्रष्टाचार के दंश से कार्यालय देखो कलंकित है। इतिहास साक्षी है, भारत हौसलों की अनूठी कहानी है, विषम, विस्मयकारी परिस्थितियों में इसने कभी हार ना मानी है। दया, दानशीलता, प्रेम जिस देश की सांस्कृतिक विरासत है, धर्म, सत्य का मार्ग इसके रग-रग के वाहक है। अटल हिमालय सा सर ऊँचा तिरंगे ने आज ये ठानी है, पर-मानस के कालिख़ को ज्ञान के प्रकाश से मिटानी है। द्वेष-विद्वेष के गायक को आज मिले पूर्णाहूति, गंगा की वात्सल्यता से प्रेरित आओ गाएं प्रेम-स्तुति। खुला विचार धर्म-सम्मत व्यवहार, इस मुल्क की अद्म्य निशानी ह