The first time I read Siddhartha, I walked away with this morsel of wisdom: “truth is a pathless journey”. It liberated me from any religious dogma and Hesse’s words guided me in my own quest. The second reading also had something to say about my current preoccupation:

“When someone is seeking, it happens quite easily that he only sees the thing that he is seeking; that he is unable to find anything, because he is only thinking of the thing he is seeking, because he has a goal, because he is obsessed with his goal. You, O worthy one, are perhaps indeed a seeker, for in striving towards your goal, you do not see many things that are under your nose.”

My gut reaction to that paragraph was an image of mental chaos. I find Confucius’  statement more palatable: “If a mind is too open, everything falls out.”* Something I need to ruminate over before any further comments.

---

I reread the book because of a renewed interest in Buddhism: I recently discovered E. F. Schumacher’s Buddhist Economics and, also given the state of the world, have been contemplating moderation of wants and desires. Following are my initial thoughts that need further study. Note, I do not claim that Buddhism endorses or advocates any of the following precepts. I am no expert on Buddhism and might be construing the tenets, which is why I need further study.

1. Is Buddhism just as applicable today as it was in it’s inception? Convincing people that desire leads to suffering might have been an easy sell when majority of the population lived in poverty and struggled to satisfy basic needs. In today’s world where the realities are different, is the teaching still applicable? Were his original teachings just a coping mechanism for the harsh realities?
2. Given all the problems we face, is it not ultimately selfish to reject the world and seek nirvana?
3. The idea of the Middle Path is appealing but a hard to grasp concept. How do we decide what is extreme?
4. I find the Hinduism alternative of the four stages of life more attractive. It allows us to satisfy our biological and psychological needs. However, reaching the last stage might be incredibly difficult after a life spent fulfilling desires and creating attachments.
5. What would happen if we all decide to become monks? If music was banned, if progress was castrated? No A. R. Rahman? No Einstein?

*I am convinced that something similar was uttered by Confucius, but Google couldn’t corroborate. Anyone know the source?

Filed under: Philosophy, books by Anup
Posted on: May 18, 2009 No Comments »

In the true spirit of a scanner, I’ve picked up a new infatuation: photography. I truly hope this will grow into a lifelong love, so far I’ve enjoyed the process and results of this interest. Of course, timely encouragement and criticism will fuel my efforts in it too: my new photoblog.

I wish I could say that I’ve not updated my blog so far because I’ve been so busy with photography. While it has been a bigger part of my schedule, the true reason has been a lack of intellectual fodder. I just haven’t had anything interesting to say. That’s about to change. I’m going on a trip to Peru; reading a book of essays on photography, on travel and the brain. One of these is bound to strike a new though. Plus, I’m going to finally pick up one of Nassim Taleb’s books-which has raised many iconoclastic thoughts. So stay tuned.

Filed under: Philosophy, Uncategorized, books, photography by Anup
Posted on: March 6, 2009 No Comments »

Humility should be the defining characteristic of humanity. It is much needed after the egocentrism our species has inflicted upon itself in the past, especially since the Western Enlightenment. While enlightenment helped dethrone clergymen from the seat of purported omniscience, industrialization immediately flung human ingenuity in its place. We started seeing ourselves as the masters of our own existence—considered ourselves the crowning achievement of nature, and therefore capable of controlling a process that has been developing for over thirteen billion years. We are facing a period of environmental crisis across the globe and as Einstein said, it is insane to do the same thing over and over and expect different results. It is time we change our perspectives.

Three books I’ve recently read have unique viewpoints on our place in the biosphere:

The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. I’m struck by Darwin’s capacity for wonder and curiosity. He describes many elegant and simple ways in which flora and fauna have evolved. In addition, his keen observations give insights on how species are interdependent. Most importantly, however, this book is about the evolution of life on earth over billions of years—a time frame in stark contrast to the quarterly periods our corporations are concerned about.

The Ecological Life by Jeremy Bendik-Keymer. This book is an attempt to place the ecological struggles we are facing in a moral and philosophical context. Bendik-Keymer’s thesis is that to be moral you have to be considerate of the ecological environment, which he says, stems out of our humanity. One of the points he makes is that there is a long history of humanity’s relationship with land. A history that’s loosing it’s meaning in a corporate setting. He urges us to respect the knowledge of the often subdued “indigenous” cultures, which have been honing their knowledge of their ecosystems for centuries. For example, local cuisines that have been developing for millennia only to be supplanted by McDonald’s.

By advocating this viewpoint, I am not rejecting western science — its insights and contributions are too obvious. I am merely suggesting that cultures that have survived for thousands of years have proven that hey have localized solutions that work with the harmony of the ecosystems, and we shouldn’t be quick to replace them with synthetic methods that more often than not cause more damage than the benefits they provide.

Biomimcry by Janine M. Benyus. This is an excellent book replete with practical examples on learning from nature: agriculture inspired by prairies, energy efficiency of the plants, materials as tough as spider webs and just as environmentally harmless, cellular computing, redwoods as a model for economics and so on.

Our planet’s survival depends on our willingness to learn from mother nature and to live in harmony with her.

If all the insects on earth disappeared, within 50 years all life on earth would disappear. If all humans disappeared, within 50 years all species would flourish as never before.  Jonas Salk

Filed under: Philosophy, books by Anup
Posted on: January 19, 2009 No Comments »