Shree: Algorithm

 

Shree: Algorithm

there is a problem in being explicit. explicitness as a need of the intellect does not let ambiguity to exist. many dimensions of life, people, cultures, relationships, values affect us as patterns of existence and cannot be made explicit as a formula or an algorithm to confirm. in fact to make everything explicit goes against the nature of spiritual dimension. many times i do not know who i am and why am i here for and this is the fundamental search that one should allow oneself to bask in and accept this situation in all completeness. all feelings that may erupt is from this situation of human existence and in this situation ambiguity, haziness, fluidity, change, feelings - all have important roles to evolve us eventually.

explicitness depends on the ambiguity of collective values. because there is a 'public' there is a construct of private. because there are spaces and times where sharing occurs (under a tree or a street or seashore or the trek or communal eating and so on), there are alcoves for private existences. in the craze of making things explicit, we do not give acknowledgement to things which only exist without any reason and choose to erupt on their own accord or the silence that may exist. we have reduced our role to mere consumers who have no voice to add or discuss or refute or say anything else from the algorithm of power or confirmation or system. this has repercussions on dead outside spaces or common spaces or dead communal eating norms and so on, since now we have been sadly trained to confirm with instructions. if there are no instructions on existing, then we are at a loss of what to do (tragic application of logic!).

are we existing, schooling our kids, doing religion, going for treks, planting something, hearing something or somebody's tears (because 'it was expected'!), making careers, building relations as an algorithm? if that is so, then we are already 'dead'.

Hari Om.