मान्यता

एक और एक मिल के दो होता है, पर हम नही माने तो? एक और एक मिल के दो ही हो और तीन नही हो यह हमारी मान्यता है। सत्य भी है। पर हमारी मान्यता भी है। सत्य के ऊपर मान्यता की परत है। एक और एक मिल के तीन भी हो सकता है, सम्भावना तो है पर, हमने यही माना की एक और एक दो ही होगा। मान्यता पर निर्भर करता है। अगर यह कहें की मान्यता पर ही निर्भर करता है तो कोई बहोत बरी अतिशयोक्ति न होगी। हर एक परिस्थिति मे एक और एक दो ही हो यह कोई जरुरी नही है। अगर ऐसा हो तो जोरना सत्य हो जाएगा, फिर हमारी मान्यता का क्या होगा? हमने जो भी सत्य सीखे हैं चाहे वो सत्य हो या न हों उनपर मान्यता की मुहर लगाने के बाद ही सीखे हैं। कितना भी बरा गणितज्ञ हो, जो तरह तरह का गणितीय प्रमाण दे की एक और एक जुड़कर दो ही होगा लेकिन हम उस प्रमाण को नही माने, और नही मानने का जो भी मूल्य चुकाना परे वो चुकाएं तो फिर उसका प्रमाण दो कौडी का भी नही रह जाता है। पर मान्यता मष्तिष्क की उपज है। उस से सत्य का कुछ लेना देना नही है। सत्य भी एक विचारधारा है। की ऐसा है। हमने मान्यता दी है। ऋषियों मुनियों ने मान्यता दी है। स्थूल रूप मे मान्यता तो हमने सत्य की ऊपर भी लगाये है। इसका मूल कारन यह है की सत्य गौन रह्ता है। वह तुम्हे मानाने देता है। इस से सत्य को कोई फर्क नही परता है, फर्क तुम्हे भी नही परना चाहिए। अगर तुमने मान ली लिया की हम सत्य को नही मानेंगे तो वोही तुम्हारे लिए सत्य होगा। सत्य की अमान्यता भी सत्य हो सकती है। बशर्ते तुम ठिक से मानो. तुम ठिक से मानते भी नहि हो. मान्यता प्रगाढ होनि चाहिये. आगर मान्यता प्रगाढ नहि है तो वो द्वैत हो जाता है. और सत्य कि स्थिति अद्वैत है. इसलिये मान्यता ऐसि होने चाहिये कि उसमे शक कि कोइ गुनजाइश न हो.

बुद्ध का जीवन

बुद्ध के जीवन ने मुझे बहोत प्रभावित किया है। मुझे डर है की कहीं मैं बौद्ध धर्मं को न अपना लूँ। इतना प्रभावित किया है। सबसे बरी बात जिससे मैं प्रभावित हुआ वो यह है - बुद्ध थे तो राजकुमार। और वो भीख मांग के जीवन यापन करते थे। आश्चर्य है। की एक राजकुमार भीख मांगे। कपिलवस्तु की गलिओं मे भीख मांगता फिरे। सबसे अच्छा जीवन राजकुमारों का होता था। स्वर्णमय जीवन होता था उनका। राजा से भी अच्छा। राजकुमार मनुष्य जाती की पराकाष्टा हुआ करती थी, ऐश्वर्य के मामले मे। उनसे जादा ऐश्वर्य मनुष्य जाती की इतिहास मे किसी को नही मिला और आगे भी नही मिलेगा। तो बुद्ध जब सिद्धार्थ थे तो उनके पास जीवन का सारा ऐश्वर्य था। जितना ऐश्वर्य हो सकता था, था। ऐसा होता है, अगर तुम्हे अनंत ऐश्वर्य मिले जाए तो वो भी कुछ समाया के बाद एक कांटे जासी हो जाती है। तो फिर मन यह सोचने लगता है की ऐश्वर्य के बाद क्या है? तो बुद्ध (सिद्धार्थ) यही सोचे। ऐश्वर्य तो था ही उनके पास। काफ़ी ऐश्वर्य था। इतना जादा था की आज हम भी उतना ऐश्वर्य प्राप्त नही कर सकते। बुद्ध जब सिद्धार्थ थे तो उनको भी धीरे धीरे पता लगने लगा की इस ऐश्वर्य मे कुछ भी नही रखा है। क्षणिक है यह ऐश्वर्य। आज है, कल नही रहेगा। बस बात ख़तम हो गई। इस बात को समझने के लिए प्रगाढ़ चैतन्य चाहिए। नही तो जन्म-जन्मान्तर मे भी कहाँ समझ मे आता है। जब जब मनुष्य जाती ऐश्वर्य की चरम सीमा पर होगी तब तब वो सत्य का दरवाजा खात्खातायेगा। इसलिए राजकुमारों को खूब सत्य मिला। बहोत सारे राजकुमार ब्रह्मज्ञानी हो गए। महावीर भी राजकुमार थे, ब्रह्मज्ञानी हो गए। तुम जीसस की बात न मानो थो थोरा तार्किक है क्योंकि, तुम तर्क दे सकते हो की जीसस तो ख़ुद गरीब था, बकरी चराता था तो दूसरों को भी गरीब करना चाहता था। तो हम उसकी बात नही मानेगे। काफ़ी अच्छा तर्क है ये। पर, तर्क तर्क होता है। तर्क के माध्यम से सत्य कभी नही मिला है और नही मिलेगा। हालाँकि इस तर्क का भी काट है मेरे पास, पर फिर तर्क पर तर्क हो जाएगा। और इस बीच सत्य खो जाएगा। अगर तुम तर्कवादी ही हो तो तुम बुद्ध के जीवन मे कोई भी तर्क नही लगा पाओगे। जीसस के जीवन मे थोरा बहुत तर्क लगाने जी जगह है। तुम जीसस के जीवन मे थोरा बहोत तर्क लगा सकते हो। पर बुद्ध और महावीर के जीवन मे तर्क लगाने की थोरी भी जगह नही है। क्योंकि दोनों ही राजकुमार थे। दोनों ने ही ऐश्वर्य की चरम सीमा को देखा था और पाया की यह कुछ भी नही है। इसलिए वे सत्य की तरफ़ अग्रसर हुए। जीसस की बात थोरी अलग है। और शायद बुद्ध और महावीर के जीवन से भी जादा प्रगाढ़ है। क्योंकि जीसस गरीब था। गरीबों की तृष्णा जादा होती है। उनकी अकन्षाएं असीम होती है। उन्हें अभी ऐश्वर्य को पाना है। सत्य से उनका अभी कोई लेना देना नही है। जीसस के पास ऐश्वर्य नही था पर वो फिर भी समझे गए की ऐश्वय कुछ भी नही है। ऐश्वर्य न रहते हुए भी समझ गए। थोरा कठिन हैं। बुद्ध के पास था, तब वो समझे थे। जीसस के पास नही था, फिर वो समझ गए जो थोरा कठिन है। इस मामले मे जीसस की प्रगाढ़ता जादा है। मैं कोई तुलना नही कर रहा हूँ। बस मैं अपना दृष्टिकोण व्यक्त कर रहा हूँ।

Ramblings

If I write a better blog, that doesn't mean I am a better person. If I write a worse blog that doesn't mean I am a bad person. If I type good words, that doesn't mean that I am a good person also. If I type bad words that doesn't mean I am a bad person also. A bad person can type good words. A good person can type bad words. Even a rapist can talk sometimes on dharma and realizations. Possible. Highly possible. Because, words doesn't depict the clear picture of what's running into person's mind. No body knows what's running to anybody Else's mind. You just have a cognitive perception of the person. But in most of the cases that meets our requirements. Some people like writings. I don't like writing much. Playing with words is not my game. Arranging words to make beautiful sentences following the rules of grammars is not my game. I don't write English, I write shubhenglish. Lol. We have learnt some of bad things as a good things and some of good things as a bad thing. And this understanding is so strong that there is no scope of modify that learning. This may be the propaganda of the society. We have been taught some of the pathetic learning assuming that these are good learning. And vice versa also. And we learnt these so strongly that now nothing can be done. Because, those socialists and those educationist made those structure of teaching that met their requirements for survival. So, it's like imparting their ideology to the coming generations that meets their "known" ways of requirements of the survival. Word "known" is important here. Those educationists know the subject matter. But very little. They don't know the root. They know superficially. Little knowledge is dangerous. And even more dangerous is learning bad(some of them) as good and good(some of them) as bad. Which we did that as I said above. Because of their principles and ideology they imparted on us. This is how society makes sheeps. Which goes whole life following others. Haven't we done everything which others have done. Till today, I have not done anything which has not been done by anybody so far. The whole life has become like a copy-pasted from others. That is one reason I stopped reading books. Reading book is a form of copying. When you read a book, you copy the information therein the book into your brain. We call it as a learning. We have been taught that learning is always good. No. Not always. Some times it can be disastrous. This is what is the bad thing we have learnt as a good thing. Whole life is a copy paste. Even all those inventions and discoveries are copy-paste. Copy-paste at slightly subtler level which essentially doesn't look like a copy-paste. But, actually it is a copy paste. Because, those scientists get ideas from other scientist. Einstein takes idea from Newton, Newton takes idea from Galileo, Galileo takes idea from Kepler, Kepler takes idea from someone I don't know. That someone takes idea from other someone...So, those scientist keep on taking ideas from other scientist. If you grow up a scientist in a forest and don't give him books, don't tell him about Newton or Einstein then he cant make discoveries. Because, he can't copy now. But then, he will make an entirely new discovery. Which humanity would have never thought. He will comeup with entirely new dimension. Because, he has not copied anything. All of your learning including your greatest innovation can be mapped to already existing similar innovations/ideas. Even my this post you can map somewhere. I would have got these ideas from somewhere. It can be mapped to somewhere. It's not coming on my own. I did read few books, watched few movies, videos, the kind of friends I have, etc. So, it can be mapped somewhere. So, everything is like a copy-pasted from others lol.

If you have done anything which humanity has not done so far I would love to hear. In my case , I have not done anything so far which has not been done by anyone. And to my knowledge no one has done anything entirely new which was never done.

Hope this post meets the requirements of the title of this post - Ramblings.

Chess

Won this game. Click here to follow the game.

Game started in another variation of Sicilian defence e4-c5. On the 10Th move Nxc5 got a pawn advantage which made it an easy win. Black bishop at e3 helped a lot in defencing.

More on meditation

I described two meditation techniques in the one of previous post on meditation. In this post I will write about philosophy behind meditation and possibly few more techniques too. Let see how it goes...

As I said, if you understand then you don't need to meditate. For example Buddha understands. So, he doesn't need to meditate. Like you don't have to travel if you are at the destination. Meditation is like a journey whose final destination is the liberation from the cycle of birth and death. So, you don't have to meditate provided you understand. This is what is called Gyan Yoga. Gyan means you understood that - that's how it is. Now there is no scope of further analysis here. All analysis are done due to incomplete understanding. If you understand by 100% then analysis vanishes. It has to vanish. Gyan yoga is very high form of yoga. It needs very mature very ripe consciousness to understand it. Some people have that level of consciousness. They are born with that level of consciousness. Meditation helps you to rise you consciousness. It opens another doorway of the consciousness. The five senses you have is not the only senses in the entire universe. Meditation can open different dimension to you. It can levitate your consciouses to higher level. But, if you already have higher consciousness you don't have meditate. And also, the more you understand the more meditative you will be. Mind you, I am not talking of understandings you get by reading junk books. Those are different. Here, by understanding I mean understanding by the consciousness.

As I said - meditation is the journey. It's not the destination. It's a way. It's one way. There are many other ways. One way is bhakti. Athato bhakti jigyasa. In Bhakti you surrender to your lord completely. That's also a kind of meditation but usually they don't call it as meditation. Hinduism says God has two form - personal and impersonal. Personal means those whose images have been made. Impersonal means God whiteout image. I personally am the worshipper of impersonal form of God. This is topic of debate between personalist and impersonalist that who is supreme - Brahman (Impersonal God) or Krishna/Shiva/Ram (Personal God). Such debate doesn't interest me. But I personally feel Brahman is the highest God. Krishna/Shiva/Ram is not even parts of partial of Brahman. Even Ramakrishna paramhams ultimately realized that Brahman is the highest God. God with form is duality. That means two thing should exist. One is God and other is devotee. As at the time of truth two should exist. God and his devotee. And whenever two separate thing exists so what is the cause of their existence. Two things means a change. Means a difference. Difference between God and his devotee. So, what is the cause of the difference? How did devotee became devotee and not God? So, there are many unanswered questions at the time of duality. So, the idea is to marge them - only one will exist. Either devotee or God. Because if only devotee exists then God is merged into devotee and if only God exist then then devotee is merged into God. And that's what I call it as - existence. You can call brahman or anything doesn't matter. So, according to me existence is the only God.

So, if you meditate at the existence that will be the most effective. Because, everything is coming from the existence level. Initially you won't understand everything. Because, there is an ego. Even meditation is also kind of ego. Ego of meditating. But slowly and slowly the more you meditate ego will dissolve into the existence. Source of ego is a separate topic. One practical thing I want to state out here is - if you meditate you will feel god, and if you don't meditate for long time the effect of last meditation will decrease slowly and slowly. And finally it will become to same moron state. So, again you have to meditate and rise you consciousness. So, basically you have to constantly meditate. If you leave it in between it won't be helpful much. Because, your consciousness will again go down. But once it reach to certain level then it won't go down. For example water boils at 100c only. No matter how many times you boil upto 99 degree Celsius. To boil the water you have to boil 100 degree Celsius. Similarly in meditation you have to keep meditating unless the consciousness rise to a certain level. If you reach to that level then it won't fall down or more accurately the probability of it's falling is very less.

More on it later...

Mithila Society

Before, I write about Mithila in particular, lets first understand MY understandings about the society. Society is a strange word. Perhaps, in my previous post I mentioned that society can be treated like a living being. Whole society is one being. So far, we have only thought that human is one being. That is true. But society can also be treated like a being. A big human at the abstract level of which we are part of that bigger being. So, just like us, society takes birth, it grows like a child, then it becomes adult and mature more, then it becomes old and finally it dies. Because, every human being dies, so one day society will also die. Because, society is made of those humans. On an average a human dies in 100 years. But society won't die in 100 years. It can die in 100 generations, each generation of 100 years so almost 10000 years. It can die in thousands of years, in million and billions of years. Society has unknown ways of survival. At some point of time society may not want to survive. This happens particularly if the society has seen it's apex. It's very difficult to remain at the apex for a very long time. More on the society later...

Mithila is a very old society. Very old. From Ramayan days. Ramayan happend millions of years back. King Janak was from Mithila. His daughter name was Sita the wife of Lord Ram. So, mithila is a very old culture. So, it appears to me that this culture is old being now (the society as a being concept I described above). Mithila already has seen it's apex. King Janak was the apex of Mithila. And some more like Mandan Mishra, Vidyapati etc. I don't consider Gonu Jha as the apex of Mithila. He was just a slightly more clever person. Infact Mathils has instinct of cleverness. I consider Maithils as the most clever homosapience after Jews. I am not saying intelligent. Cleverness and intelligence is totally different. Somehow I feel the Maithil culture is drowing now...If you look at the state of the brahmins of Mithila. Pathetic I would say. All are meat eaters. It's very very difficult to find a vegetarian maithil. Infact eating fish is considered as holy in the Mithila. If you are going on a journey then a fish-meal can make your journey better is what is followed in mithila. When the society doesn't want to survive such type of rules are made. At least, Brahmins of mithila should not eat non-veg. Brahmins are supposed to cater the dharma. I have grown up in the villages so I got opportunity to look at the maithil culture with close proximity. My whole village is non-vegetarian. Except few pious people.

If you want to preserve your society even though society doesn't want to survive then protect your kids and woman. Because, both are delicate. If woman of a society starts marrying into another society then former society won't survive longer. This has also started happening in Mithila. Mithila already lost so many values. The paintings we lost, the art of making toys from sand we lost, making Gharonda we lost, hundreds of things we lost. Now you can't expect the girls of mithila to make Gharonda, particularly the city girls. Now they care more for Valentine-day than Gharonda. And there were many more things which I could not see, becuase those were lost. My dad would have seen those. Generations by generations mithila is loosing it's core value. And will loose more. I suspect 2-3 generation is enough to loose all the maithil values except the language - maithili/Angika. Language will survive more. Slightly more. Few months back I met a maithil girl and I thought we would talk in Maithili but she was speaking in American accent english (not even in Hindi). This is how the culture is lost. In nutshell - we have lost more maithil values, we will continue to loose more, if thing doesn't improve.

शब्द और सत्य

मैंने अबतक सत्य के बारे मे जो कुछ भी लिखा, वो सत्य नही था। वो सत्य के बारे मे जानकारी थी। सत्य को नही लिखा जा सकता है, कभी नही लिखा गया, कभी किसी ने नही लिखा। पर हाँ सत्य के बारे मे लिखा जा सकता है। सत्य को नही लिखा गया है, सत्य के बारे मे थोरा बहोत लिखा गया है। पर हम समझ लेते हैं की सत्य ही लिखा गया है। शब्द सत्य को नही व्यक्त कर सकता है। अगर सत्य शब्द मे व्यक्त हो जाए तो शब्द सत्य हो जाएगा। फिर सत्य, सत्य na रहेगा। शब्द की सीमा होती है, सत्य की कोई सीमा नही। शब्द की उत्पत्ति होती है। सत्य की कभी उत्पत्ति होती नही। शब्द का कारण है। सत्य का कोई करना नही है। बस है। मनुष्य जाती के इतिहास मे सत्य के बारे मे जो कुछ भी लिखा गया है और जो लिखा जाएगा वो पूर्ण सत्य के सापेक्ष कुछ भी नही है। रत्ती भर भी सत्य नही लिख गया है। सत्य शब्द मे उतरता नही। क्योंकि, सत्य की अनुभूति अपूर्व है। बहोत कम लोगों ने वैसी अनुभूति की है और उनलोगों ने उस अनुभूति को व्यक्त करने के लिए नए शब्द का निर्माण नही किया। क्योंकि निर्माण करने के लिए इच्छा टी होनी चाहिए। पूर्ण सत्य के समय साड़ी इच्छाएं विसर्जित हो जाती हैं। इसलिए सत्य को ठीक ठीक व्यक्त करने वाले शब्द के निर्माण न हो सका। क्योनी जिनको सत्य मिला we सत्य मे ही लीं रहे। तो जिनको सत्य मिला वे सत्य के लिए शब्द नही बना सके। और जिन्होंने शब्द को बनाया उनको सत्य तो मिला नही, तो वे भी सत्य के लिए शब्द न बना सके। दोनों ही न बना सके। न सत्यदर्शी न शब्ददर्शी। सत्य मे शब्द के लिए जगह नही है। इतनी जगह नही है की शब्द wahan ठहरे। इसलिए बुद्ध भी सत्य के बारे मे जादा कुछ बोले नही। बुद्ध बोलें तो कैसे। सत्य शब्द मे उतरता नही है। अगर तुम बद्ध से पूछो की सत्य क्या है। तो वो कुछ नही बोलेंगे। मौन रहेंगे वो। क्योंकि शब्द का प्रोयाग करते ही सत्य सत्य न रहेगा। किसी भी शब्द मे, किसी भी वाक्य मे इतना सामर्थ्य नही है की वो सत्य का निरूपण कर सके। हमारे पास जीवन की हर एक अनुभूति के लिए शब्द नही हैं। कुछ अनुभूति ऐसी हैं जो बहोत कम लोगों को हुआ है। किसी बुद्ध किसी महावीर किसी जीसस को हुआ। तो उन्होंने शब्द तो बनाया नही। वो कोई कवि या लेखक तो थे नही की शब्द मे उनकी रूचि हो। थोरा बहोत बताये। पूर्ण तो वो भी नही बता सके। बताने की भी एक सीमा होती है। जितना उनसे बन सका वो बताये। हम माने या न माने, पर वो बताये। घूम घूम के बताये। अस्तांगिक मार्ग बताये। शब्द उतना महत्वपूर्ण नही है. शब्द धूल की तरह है। जब घोर्रे दौरते हैं तो धूल उरने लगती हैं। वैसे ही जब सत्य किसी के ह्रदय मे प्रकट होता है तो शब्द बनने लगते है, फिर वेदा, उपनिषद बनने लगते हैं। फिर धर्म बनने लगते हैं।

Lost in chess

After long time I played chess with Nagaskaki and lost the gmae:(((( I resigned in 38th move. Started the game in sicilian style. Had nice pawn structure. But black was very strategic. Click here to follow the game.

Gvim vs Emacs

The holy war of text editor - Gvim vs Emacs. Which one is better? Difficult to say. Depends on your requirement. Vim is small and great. Emacs is large an great. Both are great. One is small in the size, other is large in the size. Gvim is GUI version of vim. If you want to quickly edit a file and mostly want to remain in the command mode - vim is the better choice. It's real fast. Default vim is much easier to use then default Emacs for programmers. If you do elisp programming in Emacs then you can do an anything you want. Because, elisp is kind of programming language. You can write functions in elips and bind to any suitable key you want. That is where Emacs becomes extremely powerful. However, if your job requires mostly to edit existing code vim would be better choice. Emacs is huge. Very huge. It's not only designed just as a text editor. Vim is purely text editor. Emacs can act like operating system. Lol. Emacs has everything. The main idea behind Emacs was to put everything into one editor so that user will never have to exit from it. You can send receive email through Emacs. You can read news inside Emacs. etc. So, Emacs is not just a text editor. It's much more than that. One thing I didn't like about Emacs is ctrl key. To type any command you have to press ctrl key. This is too much. However, you can always map them to functional keys but there exist only 12 functional keys. Hitting control keys always, it bugs(to me). Things I don't like with vim is every time switching between command and insert mode. Indent capability if vim is poor. Emacs is smart in indenting. Only problem I see with Emacs is the control key. In vim if you are in command mode you don't have to hold control key. Then any key can act like a command. That's not the case with Emacs. In Emacs to invoke a command you have to hold control key always. There is no way out except mapping (up to 12 functional keys). That is why Vim is great when you work in command mode. Working in Emacs is too slow as compared with command mode in vim. From undo point of view both are same. Both provide unlimited undoes and redoes. From block editing point of view Vim is slightly better than Emacs. When you select a block in vim it clearly highlights, whereas in Emacs you have to imagine the block. Goshhh! From shell point of view emacs is better. Working with Emacs can be enjoyable provided you write lots of elisp function in your .emacs file (which I don't have). Emacs has a viper mode which can act like vim. It can emulate vim. I used it once. Was fun using vim inside Emacs. Other way round possible? Emacs inside Vim? I think it would be good idea to make an editor which combines the properties of Emacs and vim.

About the creation of the universe, Hadron

Since, very beginning the humanity is trying to find how the universe was created and how big it is? And if created then why? What is the purpose behind it? Lots of scientist are spending their whole life to understand big bang, black holes etc. Making hardon collider to simulate it. But, unfortunately these scientists don't know the very nature of the existence. I myself am a student of science. I agree that one day science can find everything, every possible cause but except one thing - that's the existence itself. Except existence science can know everything. Science will never know the cause of the existence. No possibility. It's just there. No matter how intelligent scientists are working to find it. If billions of scientists trillion times more intelligent than Einstien are working to find the cause of existence for trillions of years still they will never know even the small trace of the existence. Only thing they can know is that it's causeless. Existence is causeless. Except existence everything has a cause. That science will find out. If earth exists it has cause - the Sun. If the Sun exists it has a cause - the galaxy. If galaxies exist it has a cause - the clusters. If clusters exist it has a cause - the cluster of clusters and so on... The phrase "so on..." is very important. It's approaching to infinite. So, the universe is actually infinite. Scientists say the size of the universe is the length travelled by the light since big bang till today. This is full bullshhhhh-it. A holy bullshhhhh-it. The length of the universe has to be infinite. If it is finite then what is there just after where universe ends? No space there? There is. Our consciousness may not go there but it exists. Yes there is a practical limit of the universe. And that's the distance travelled by the light since big bang happened.

One thing I can certainly state - Something like big bang had definitely hap pend - an explosion. A massive explosion in a random manner. If you look at the formation of the earth it's random. Random, rocks, random stones, random sands random lands. I don't see an symmetry in the mountains. It looks like it was broken, it was exploded. Otherwise you would see the symmetry everywhere. So, definitely the earth is created out of an explosion. Only an explosion can create such a random terrain. But if you look at the atoms and molecules it's very symmetrical. Anything symmetrical was created in a planned manner. Electrons move in a symmetric path. Therefore it's planned. Someone planned it. But the rocks are random. So, it came out of explosion. But the atoms within the rocks are symmetrical. So, someone planned. Planned thing will be symmetrical. Unplanned thing will be explosive. But again solar system looks symmetrical. So, there is a possibility that a random explosion can create symmetrical systems - such as solar system. So, it's certain that some explosion had definitely happened. But, can an explosion create anything useful? Lol. Ususally, explosions are always disastrous. So, big bang explosion was useful? Think on it...

Destiny

You know what is destiny? It was a beautiful word, almost as beautiful as the word God. But, unfortunately this word has been deprecated by the society. Infact, society deprecated anything which can inadvertently open the doorway to super-consciousness. Since, very beginning, from day 1, the society is against of anything which enables the access to super-consciousness. Jesus was crucified, such a lovely person was crucified. Socrates was poisoned. Society has sent pain to every extraordinary human. The core of the meaning of destiny is - Everything is happening by itself and you just have to observer it. We have not created the sun, the moon, the bird, the tree but, all these exist. So, who created all these? These are all created by the destiny. We should not have much take towards the creation of destiny - except observing it. Practical meaning of destiny is to observe what's happening around. We don't have to do anything and sun rises in the east automatically. These are all fixed by the destiny. We don't have to put an effort to make the sun rising in the east. It rises in the east automatically. It never forgets to rise. Lol. It's a miracle. Since it happens daily we think it's an ordinary activity, we don't acknolwdge it but, actually it's not. It's miracle. Look around you and everything is a miracle. Suppose, a blind man of age 70 years suddenly gets the power to see into his eyes. What will he see? He will see so many colors which he had never seen. The green grass, the blue sky, these birds flying. He won't believe it at first glace. He may become mad to see all these colorful diversification. We don't acknowledge these as a miracle because we see them daily. But, these are actually miracle. Which no magician or scientist can perform. Destiny doesn't mean palmistry or astrology. But, yes there is a correlation to some extent. Palmistry and astrology was invented so that people understand the real meaning of destiny which I described above. But, unfortunately they couldn't understand the real meaning of destiny instead they became heavily dependent on destiny. Destiny frees you, from the bondage of karma. Because, it's happening by itself. Childhood came and went. We never wanted to leave childhood and we left it. Everything has happened which we never wanted to happen. Nobody wants to die and everybody dies. This is fixed by destiny.

Philosophy and Practical

You do anything and it will become frustrating one day. I tried it. Enlightenment is the only thing which will never become frustrating or boring. Because, at the time of enlightenment "I" doesn't exist. Remember one thing- Either you exist or Truth exists. Both cannot exist together. No possibility. At a time only one will exist. Either you or truth. And mostly you exist. Because, truth is so subtle that even the slightest perturbation can wrap the truth. Can hide the truth. That's why society could alter the truth. You never know whose fault it is - it's a truth's fault or it's society's fault. Sometimes, in spite of so much knowledge and understanding about life you still don't know what's happening. I have become bored of knowing the things. Society taught us that the more you know the better you are. According to me the less you know the better you will be which society won't like. Some of the professors didn't like me for the reason I refused to know more. But when I was knowing more, topped in the school they liked me. But their liking was conditional. Anything conditional is ephemeral. Because, that condition can vanish one day.

Coming to practical...

The one very fundamental thing I wanted to state out here is - see, if you understand then you don't have to do anything. You are done. You don't have to do Pranayaam and meditation provided you understand. This called Gyan Yoga. No need to meditate on the Agya Chakra if you understood. And it's so easy to understand that you can't understand. Because, society has always prepared you to understand difficult subject. So, our ability to understand easy thing is lost. Look at the Ramanna Maharshi. He was not a Yogi but still his knowledge was of very high order. However, it's always recommended to meditate and pranayaam. There is no harm in that.

In Hinduism they talk about 7 chakra energy centers. Muladhar, Swadhisthan, Manipur, Anahaat, Vishuddha, Agya and Sahasrar. Eeach center has it's attributes. Meditation on these centers are very helpful. It's said if your Sahasrar is open then you are almost God. These centers are described in the ancient Yoga scriptures. However, as I said - you may not have to know all these once you understand the core of the existence. Because, these are just expansion of the existence. Existence is root. Rest are just details. So, I don't give much stress on Chakra meditation rather I have stresss on the existence. Know the root of the roots. Rest will all follow...