premature peace = there probably is a better technical term for it. But what I mean by 'premature peace' means that peace that is achieved before the real issue at hand is really resolved.
Examples of this is sometimes how people tolerate each other until apoint they cannot take it anymore. Two parties disagree with one another. They do not want to agree to disagree, but they do not want to feel like people who disagree. So they say something like "let us put aside our differences" and tolerate each other. Then, the critical point comes - BOOM.
This is a real danger for the pacifists of this age. We tend to prefer good reputation, and be well liked by everyone - and tolerate things we shouldn't tolerate.
I hate the whole 'premature peace' thing, and i have a general disdain for 'premature peacemakers'. I think that they are people who prefer a good image over a good deed - and this is one of the most hypocritical thing that people do. Appear noble, appear well mannered, appear everything that society approves - and in reality be a person who is full of theirselves.
'premature peace' is no peace - it is just delaying the inevitable. And normally, the inevitable is much worse than what the issue normally was. In the end, somebody has to clean up the crap that the earlier 'peacemaker' made - and being a REAL peacemaker in a messy situation often means that they have to do some dirty job that nobody wants to do. The REAL peacemaker receives no credit, while the earlier idiot basks in the praises of others.
(but then you might say, sooner or later, the public will realize the idiot. It is normally either "later" or "never". Trust me, the public is generally slow or stupid and they tend not to realize the obvious)
I love peace. It might not appear that way most of the time, but I do love real peace. I love it so much for myself and for others that I am unwilling to trade it for patronizing nonsense like "lets just concentrate on our similarities and forget our differences". I want to work hard on real peace, it might not work out. But I don't want to bury issues and create a timebomb for the next person.
Don't pass the buck. Take responsibility. Get real peace, not some poor imitation.
enjoy a beautiful song with me
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder
Poor Question:
Is Beauty is in the eyes of the Beholder?
Better Question:
Who do you want to behold you?
Who do you behold?
"Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful"
1 Peter 3
Peter the Apostle, Bible
Is Beauty is in the eyes of the Beholder?
Better Question:
Who do you want to behold you?
Who do you behold?
"Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful"
1 Peter 3
Peter the Apostle, Bible
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Sickness and Wandering Thoughts
I got sick. When I get sick, what goes through my mind is pretty interesting -
Everything around me smells differently (because I can't really smell when I'm sick)
Food taste differently since I can't really taste them.
The tempearature of the room feels different, it is either too warm or too cold.
My senses are slightly differnt as my whole body becomes a little more numb.
People treat me slightly differently because I am sick.
The world becomes a little more wobbly cos I feel dizzy.
Most of my time is spent sleeping, so the sense of time, of urgency is less.
I feel as though my mind is somewhat separated from my body.
I feel as though I am mind controlling my body - not quite the body that I am used to when I'm healthy, but because I am sick it really feels as though I am controlling someone else.
I feel as though I am somewhat less responsible for what I am doing because I am not me.
I start listening to emo songs that I would otherwise not listen to.
Walk slowly (since I cannot walk fast anyway) and notice my surroundings - how the pencil is on the table and how the cup is in the sink.
I say things in a more gentle way because I can't get as enthusiastic as I would like to be.
This whole "me" and "alter ego me" or whatever you would like to name it is not limited to the period when I get sick physically - but rather pretty much daily. When I face difficult situations in my life, I ask myself whether I should really treat it as "me" experiencing the tough things I am facing, or take them as something that is happening to the "body" I am experiencing. It is like, I am a steward of my body and of my life- I am the caretaker, the manager.
Some major religions and new age practices teach us to separate our body and our minds. They are 2 different entities, and we should deal with them as 2 different things. Whether it is partial separation or total separation - they might differ.
I attended a buddhist camp before, and they were teachng us how to do meditation. Something liek a 20 minute session I think. Of course, I am not like some big time guru, but the principle was to just focus our mind to be somewhat empty (but it isn't really empty because sometimes they teach you some chants, and I don't think it is possible to focus your mind on emptiness anyway - but well I don't know). Even if a mosquito is biting you, you are to focus on whatever you need to focus on, and shift your attention away from that tiny little thing. Focus on the mind, not on the body. Your leg might feel numb, but don't worry too much about it.
To me that is partial separation.
I haven't attend a Hindu camp before, but in Hinduism, this world is simply an "illusion" as they are merely temporal. I can't say more as to how the inner workings are, but some things I would like to note of perhaps (just perhaps) why this philosophy is appealing.
It is a mix of acceptance and denial of what is really happening. Pain does not become personal, rather pain happens to something you own - i.e. your body. Losses are much less personal. It is different from a more "personal" type of understanding.
For example:
With an impersonal philosophy, of you lose a pet dog, you tell yourself things like "I should be less attached to these things, pets are temporal, things come and go"
With a more personal type of philosophy, you would wonder if you would see your dog in heaven, and want to cherish the times you had together.
That is the impersonal philosophy, of course there is also the personal one. Loss is your loss. Pain is very real, such that you take it personally.
This personal philosophy is probably more natural to us. When we are cheated, we don't normally say that "The other person (who cheated) is not enlightened yet", we just simply feel betrayal. We feel hurt, we feel angry, and we feel sad - because the act commited against you was a personal act, and a relationship was severed.
People who takes things more personally generally feel more enthusiasm and sadness, while people who are less personal tend to feel less in every way.
People who takes things more personally are much more controlled and affected by the gains and losses of the present, while people who are less personal seem to set their minds of some ideal whether or not it is obtainable.
As you all would know me as a Christian, and perhaps you might be thinking I will be categorizing Christianity somewhere in the middle to make it looks very "balanced" to win it all by getting the best of both sides - I won't.
Firstly, I still struggle with this personal-impersonal thing, I wanted to brush it off as some mere personality issue. Much like how some people are task oriented and some people are more people-oriented. I don't think that the entire human understanding of the universe can be summed up in 2 simple categories.
Secondly, I don't think the Bible explains humans that way. While sometimes we are treated more like individuals, but because our bond with each other is somewhat so tightly knit and our fate has so much similarities, we are often addressed as a group. This is not some 50% personal 50% impersonal thing, but rather a 100% of both, which probably only makes sense philosophically and looks like nonsense mathematically.
Thirdly, I have read how some Christians who are in the "personality test" business try to fit Jesus into all the categories - and make him some uber-balanced man. In the DISC profiling, Jesus is All D, all I, all S, and all C. In the Carl Jung's test, Jesus is the "middle" perfect man - as though Jesus answered some personality test questions, and the scores show Him as some superman. God is Love, God is Holy, God is righteous. If Christians are to measure themselves, it should be along these lines. In the Bible, Paul is more argumentative, John is gentle, James is harsh, Luke goes into details, Peter is too blunt - Yet God's plan for them is not to make them into all robots, but rather making themselves who they fully are - just like Jesus.
I sometimes entertain ideas that all Christian should look like some finished product that is 23% gentle, 30% argumentative, 50% this and 12% that. This type of understanding which seems to prove as though we already know so much about humanity, categorizing them into nice compartments - I think it is a simplistic understanding of humanity at best.
But surely I must think a certain way to function - I can't just refuse to commit to belief and live. I don't quite think I will achieve some "divine balance" anytime soon, but I know I will be like Jesus one day, holy, righteous, and loving - and all these things will fade away, or perhaps they will fall into place.
There will be variety in heaven, and whatever that variety looks like, God will make sure it is a variety of perfection and goodness. Until then, my heart is not over troubled to search for answers as such, although me in the current illness of my mind has suddenly taken a greater interest in pointless blogging.
Everything around me smells differently (because I can't really smell when I'm sick)
Food taste differently since I can't really taste them.
The tempearature of the room feels different, it is either too warm or too cold.
My senses are slightly differnt as my whole body becomes a little more numb.
People treat me slightly differently because I am sick.
The world becomes a little more wobbly cos I feel dizzy.
Most of my time is spent sleeping, so the sense of time, of urgency is less.
I feel as though my mind is somewhat separated from my body.
I feel as though I am mind controlling my body - not quite the body that I am used to when I'm healthy, but because I am sick it really feels as though I am controlling someone else.
I feel as though I am somewhat less responsible for what I am doing because I am not me.
I start listening to emo songs that I would otherwise not listen to.
Walk slowly (since I cannot walk fast anyway) and notice my surroundings - how the pencil is on the table and how the cup is in the sink.
I say things in a more gentle way because I can't get as enthusiastic as I would like to be.
This whole "me" and "alter ego me" or whatever you would like to name it is not limited to the period when I get sick physically - but rather pretty much daily. When I face difficult situations in my life, I ask myself whether I should really treat it as "me" experiencing the tough things I am facing, or take them as something that is happening to the "body" I am experiencing. It is like, I am a steward of my body and of my life- I am the caretaker, the manager.
Some major religions and new age practices teach us to separate our body and our minds. They are 2 different entities, and we should deal with them as 2 different things. Whether it is partial separation or total separation - they might differ.
I attended a buddhist camp before, and they were teachng us how to do meditation. Something liek a 20 minute session I think. Of course, I am not like some big time guru, but the principle was to just focus our mind to be somewhat empty (but it isn't really empty because sometimes they teach you some chants, and I don't think it is possible to focus your mind on emptiness anyway - but well I don't know). Even if a mosquito is biting you, you are to focus on whatever you need to focus on, and shift your attention away from that tiny little thing. Focus on the mind, not on the body. Your leg might feel numb, but don't worry too much about it.
To me that is partial separation.
I haven't attend a Hindu camp before, but in Hinduism, this world is simply an "illusion" as they are merely temporal. I can't say more as to how the inner workings are, but some things I would like to note of perhaps (just perhaps) why this philosophy is appealing.
It is a mix of acceptance and denial of what is really happening. Pain does not become personal, rather pain happens to something you own - i.e. your body. Losses are much less personal. It is different from a more "personal" type of understanding.
For example:
With an impersonal philosophy, of you lose a pet dog, you tell yourself things like "I should be less attached to these things, pets are temporal, things come and go"
With a more personal type of philosophy, you would wonder if you would see your dog in heaven, and want to cherish the times you had together.
That is the impersonal philosophy, of course there is also the personal one. Loss is your loss. Pain is very real, such that you take it personally.
This personal philosophy is probably more natural to us. When we are cheated, we don't normally say that "The other person (who cheated) is not enlightened yet", we just simply feel betrayal. We feel hurt, we feel angry, and we feel sad - because the act commited against you was a personal act, and a relationship was severed.
People who takes things more personally generally feel more enthusiasm and sadness, while people who are less personal tend to feel less in every way.
People who takes things more personally are much more controlled and affected by the gains and losses of the present, while people who are less personal seem to set their minds of some ideal whether or not it is obtainable.
As you all would know me as a Christian, and perhaps you might be thinking I will be categorizing Christianity somewhere in the middle to make it looks very "balanced" to win it all by getting the best of both sides - I won't.
Firstly, I still struggle with this personal-impersonal thing, I wanted to brush it off as some mere personality issue. Much like how some people are task oriented and some people are more people-oriented. I don't think that the entire human understanding of the universe can be summed up in 2 simple categories.
Secondly, I don't think the Bible explains humans that way. While sometimes we are treated more like individuals, but because our bond with each other is somewhat so tightly knit and our fate has so much similarities, we are often addressed as a group. This is not some 50% personal 50% impersonal thing, but rather a 100% of both, which probably only makes sense philosophically and looks like nonsense mathematically.
Thirdly, I have read how some Christians who are in the "personality test" business try to fit Jesus into all the categories - and make him some uber-balanced man. In the DISC profiling, Jesus is All D, all I, all S, and all C. In the Carl Jung's test, Jesus is the "middle" perfect man - as though Jesus answered some personality test questions, and the scores show Him as some superman. God is Love, God is Holy, God is righteous. If Christians are to measure themselves, it should be along these lines. In the Bible, Paul is more argumentative, John is gentle, James is harsh, Luke goes into details, Peter is too blunt - Yet God's plan for them is not to make them into all robots, but rather making themselves who they fully are - just like Jesus.
I sometimes entertain ideas that all Christian should look like some finished product that is 23% gentle, 30% argumentative, 50% this and 12% that. This type of understanding which seems to prove as though we already know so much about humanity, categorizing them into nice compartments - I think it is a simplistic understanding of humanity at best.
But surely I must think a certain way to function - I can't just refuse to commit to belief and live. I don't quite think I will achieve some "divine balance" anytime soon, but I know I will be like Jesus one day, holy, righteous, and loving - and all these things will fade away, or perhaps they will fall into place.
There will be variety in heaven, and whatever that variety looks like, God will make sure it is a variety of perfection and goodness. Until then, my heart is not over troubled to search for answers as such, although me in the current illness of my mind has suddenly taken a greater interest in pointless blogging.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
