In order to be loyal to one's parents, one must observe obedience. Obedience, in a way that one must "obey" a certain way of "obedience". In other words, one must not just impose his/her own way of obeying his/her parents; he/she is to abide by a particular and authentic method which is: to submit CONSCIOUSLY to that of their parents' verdicts.
Consciously, for the fact that one must not conform or follow carelessly. Even of the fact that he/she is only a child, who is under his/her parents, he/she must be able to somehow hash out as lightly as possible such of their ruling; question what is needed to be questioned, clarify what is needed to be clarified but, in a soft manner. In other words, the child has also something to say about his/her parents' ruling, especially in the times where their way of ruling is unbearable for the side of the child.
But take note: "As lightly as possible". Even if one's parents are wrong, he/she, as their child, must be able to establish such respect to those of his/her parents. Respect, not to the extent that the child must tolerate such wrongdoing because it is his/her parents', but respect in the sense that he/she is able to address to them such inefficiency and incompetence as gentle as possible for they are still his/her parents, for one cannot deny the fact that it will really hurt them if one will not address such effectively. And from that of hurting them, uprises a tension between that of the child and his/her parents.
However, such practice of obedience however prohibit the freewill of the child. "Will" here is to be describe as one's individual preference which is even though bombarded by such controlling factor (example here is that of the parents') can still be managed to be pursued upon. It is what Nietzsche referred as "transcendence"; the ability to somehow transcend over an unendurable and unbeatable situation.
This notion of the will however, is not exercised, therefore, opposite to what is mentioned to be as filial obedience. If one is really to follow his/her will, especially in the case where one's preference is different to that of their parents', he/she must disobey his/her parents. And if he/she is to obey his/her parents, one must therefore let go of his/her will and submit to that of their parents'. But are these two, obedience and will, really antithetical to each other, that the presence of one cancels out the other?
No, for one can willfully obey his/her parents. To prefer to that of their authority wholeheartedly is the only way one can practice both one's freewill and obedience to parents at the same time. Well, it doesn't mean that once one is to submit to his/her parents, he/she is not free then, just as if one will defy his/her parents, he/she is automatically free. Therefore, to accept that freedom is not a thing that is to be given by such circumstances (ex: defiance against parents) to that of the person, but rather a thing that should be given by the person to his self (something to be seen whenever one prefers to see it even under such control), is a key to live a righteous life.
Friday, November 28, 2014
Thursday, November 27, 2014
"Tao"
"Confucius said, The Way is not far from man. When a man pursues the Way and yet remains away from man, his course cannot be considered the Way." [Doctrine of the Mean, 13]
I have observed that most of our brothers and sisters who are in constricted practice of their conservative kind of religious factions somehow forgets their human relationship with the other people. I know some of this people are really fastened to such of their belief that they tend to ignore the value of their fellow human beings. How can I say so?
I know this guy, a friend of mine, who was actually a member of a certain denomination of the Christian belief. He was totally clasped to the moral ideas he acquired by reading the Scriptures and listening to some of the group sharing. One day, he told me that I must change, for what I do practice is bad, and it will not save me at the end of the time. This thing he referred though as a subject for change is my habit in playing computer games. Well, I was ashamed, mortified and somehow humiliated for the fact that I am guilty of doing such. But how was it related to that of the idea of morality anyway? Nevertheless, I felt like I was detached from the other human beings. Such detachment really hurt me, for the fact that I am only a person, who is by nature, desires the 'sense of belongingness'; to belong and not to be rejected, especially by someone who I consider to be a friend of mine.
If we are to relate this to the idea of Way in the Ancient Chinese Philosophy, such moral ideas of my friend is different from that of the Way. Because although the Way signifies an idea of a moral that guides the people on what they ought do, it shall not be isolated to one's human relations, for it's primary goal is the harmony of the humanity, and not of any other "idea" or "virtue" of who-knows-what-it-is that is not of human concern. In the case of my friend, what he instilled was the idea of his belief, and not the idea of my value to him. Thus, is contrary to that of the Way, for the Way, or the "Tao", is not merely moral in essence, but also concerns about the human beings, especially their relation to their fellow human beings.
I have observed that most of our brothers and sisters who are in constricted practice of their conservative kind of religious factions somehow forgets their human relationship with the other people. I know some of this people are really fastened to such of their belief that they tend to ignore the value of their fellow human beings. How can I say so?
I know this guy, a friend of mine, who was actually a member of a certain denomination of the Christian belief. He was totally clasped to the moral ideas he acquired by reading the Scriptures and listening to some of the group sharing. One day, he told me that I must change, for what I do practice is bad, and it will not save me at the end of the time. This thing he referred though as a subject for change is my habit in playing computer games. Well, I was ashamed, mortified and somehow humiliated for the fact that I am guilty of doing such. But how was it related to that of the idea of morality anyway? Nevertheless, I felt like I was detached from the other human beings. Such detachment really hurt me, for the fact that I am only a person, who is by nature, desires the 'sense of belongingness'; to belong and not to be rejected, especially by someone who I consider to be a friend of mine.
If we are to relate this to the idea of Way in the Ancient Chinese Philosophy, such moral ideas of my friend is different from that of the Way. Because although the Way signifies an idea of a moral that guides the people on what they ought do, it shall not be isolated to one's human relations, for it's primary goal is the harmony of the humanity, and not of any other "idea" or "virtue" of who-knows-what-it-is that is not of human concern. In the case of my friend, what he instilled was the idea of his belief, and not the idea of my value to him. Thus, is contrary to that of the Way, for the Way, or the "Tao", is not merely moral in essence, but also concerns about the human beings, especially their relation to their fellow human beings.
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
My "mother" (parents) knows best...
"The Master said, In serving his father and mother a man may gently remonstrate (argue) with them. But if he sees that he failed to change their opinion, he should resume an attitude of deference (submission) and not thwart (frustrate); may feel discouraged, but not resentful/annoyed (for they know the best)". Analects 4:18
You will see that this blog is credited merely to my mother even if this is to talk about both of the parents, and which includes my father. There are two reasons why I did so.
First is that, my father died when I was still young. I was 3 back then when he left this world. I can't even picture him out; what he looks like, how he is as my father, how he is as a husband to my mother -I don't know! Only his preserved old pictures was my link to his identity. Although my mother fondly say that I am totally like him (Despite of the fact that he looks like a celebrity which is totally not of my case). His attitude, his way of thinking, his way of handling situations, and all the others were somehow attributed to me. Such things then eased me out and somehow made me not miss him, for he is just like me and there's nothing to worry about. I'll just look at the mirror, or maybe see the way I live my life, and by doing so, I see him. Thus, because of his physical absence, I cannot share his being a parent of mine to you.
(Enough of the drama though) Now, second is that my mother acts as both, mother and father (she can even act as my grandparent, a teacher, a sister, a girlfriend, a bestfriend, or even as myself; a replication of me). She's indeed one hell of a woman, so to speak. She's so incredible that I can see her as what Nietzsche referred as "übermensch" or an "over-man" for the fact that she was able to withstand such toil which is to become an efficient single-parent. Therefore, I can rely on her as my parent, which is the subject of our today's discussion.
Now, to start with, few people nowadays tend to look at their parents as their idols or what have you. They see the latter as exemplars for them to follow. But unfortunately, as what I have said, they are only few in number. How about the most of the people then? Well, let's just say that they do not follow or obey their parents as they should. Contrary to that of the few, they see their parents as an obstruction to their will as a person. Why is that so? Because of the fact that people nowadays, like to explore and do things even if they are just brought up by curiosity. And their traditionally-oriented parents will prohibit them; not necessarily and merely because the parents know that it is harmful for their children but because, sometimes, it is new to them and they don't have any idea or assurance of what it could bring to their child. There are a lot of "what-ifs" in their mind and their children cannot blame them for they are just concerned. What they want their children to do is to just stick to the tradition, which is somehow familiar to them and therefore, proven and tested.
That is why I used the word "best". Yes, our parents know what would be the best for us in accordance to what they know as the "best". They consider things to be the "best" because they had experienced or somehow had an idea that such thing is totally the paramount of a certain matter. But as contemporary children will answer, "It is just their idea of "best", not our's, we are living in a totally different generation to that of our parents". These children see things now as diverse to that of the past, forgetting the fact that these generation they called their's was brought up by the generation of their parents, or simply by the past.
Therefore, we must obey them; we are to follow their orders for they live in the times which made your today. What they say as "for your own good" is really meant by them, and not just a lame catchy phrase that most of them say to their children. If you ask me: How did they know it was for your own good? C'mon, they know the best.
You will see that this blog is credited merely to my mother even if this is to talk about both of the parents, and which includes my father. There are two reasons why I did so.
First is that, my father died when I was still young. I was 3 back then when he left this world. I can't even picture him out; what he looks like, how he is as my father, how he is as a husband to my mother -I don't know! Only his preserved old pictures was my link to his identity. Although my mother fondly say that I am totally like him (Despite of the fact that he looks like a celebrity which is totally not of my case). His attitude, his way of thinking, his way of handling situations, and all the others were somehow attributed to me. Such things then eased me out and somehow made me not miss him, for he is just like me and there's nothing to worry about. I'll just look at the mirror, or maybe see the way I live my life, and by doing so, I see him. Thus, because of his physical absence, I cannot share his being a parent of mine to you.
(Enough of the drama though) Now, second is that my mother acts as both, mother and father (she can even act as my grandparent, a teacher, a sister, a girlfriend, a bestfriend, or even as myself; a replication of me). She's indeed one hell of a woman, so to speak. She's so incredible that I can see her as what Nietzsche referred as "übermensch" or an "over-man" for the fact that she was able to withstand such toil which is to become an efficient single-parent. Therefore, I can rely on her as my parent, which is the subject of our today's discussion.
Now, to start with, few people nowadays tend to look at their parents as their idols or what have you. They see the latter as exemplars for them to follow. But unfortunately, as what I have said, they are only few in number. How about the most of the people then? Well, let's just say that they do not follow or obey their parents as they should. Contrary to that of the few, they see their parents as an obstruction to their will as a person. Why is that so? Because of the fact that people nowadays, like to explore and do things even if they are just brought up by curiosity. And their traditionally-oriented parents will prohibit them; not necessarily and merely because the parents know that it is harmful for their children but because, sometimes, it is new to them and they don't have any idea or assurance of what it could bring to their child. There are a lot of "what-ifs" in their mind and their children cannot blame them for they are just concerned. What they want their children to do is to just stick to the tradition, which is somehow familiar to them and therefore, proven and tested.
That is why I used the word "best". Yes, our parents know what would be the best for us in accordance to what they know as the "best". They consider things to be the "best" because they had experienced or somehow had an idea that such thing is totally the paramount of a certain matter. But as contemporary children will answer, "It is just their idea of "best", not our's, we are living in a totally different generation to that of our parents". These children see things now as diverse to that of the past, forgetting the fact that these generation they called their's was brought up by the generation of their parents, or simply by the past.
Therefore, we must obey them; we are to follow their orders for they live in the times which made your today. What they say as "for your own good" is really meant by them, and not just a lame catchy phrase that most of them say to their children. If you ask me: How did they know it was for your own good? C'mon, they know the best.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
The "goodness" prevails...
"...Raise the upright, put them over the crooked, and you should be able to caused the crooked to become upright..." -Analects 12:22
As what our popular belief says: "The good always prevails over the bad". When the first one is given the authority over the latter, the first one will somehow change the latter. But if you have the latter (the bad) as the authority over the first (good), it is not sure that you will have the first change into that of the latter.
Now, why say so? It is because when the authority is really good, or let's say upright, such can diminish the presence of the bad in the crooked community. If it can't, then it is not really good; maybe it just presumes that it is good but it is not for real good. And when the authority of such community is not really good, it is impossible, or to safely say, hard for the community to somehow become upright.
Nevertheless, good people, that is put into authority over the corrupted, which could have outnumbered the first one, can still be able to persist and somehow change the devious majority for they are indeed good. And as we know it, "goodness" prevails.
As what our popular belief says: "The good always prevails over the bad". When the first one is given the authority over the latter, the first one will somehow change the latter. But if you have the latter (the bad) as the authority over the first (good), it is not sure that you will have the first change into that of the latter.
Now, why say so? It is because when the authority is really good, or let's say upright, such can diminish the presence of the bad in the crooked community. If it can't, then it is not really good; maybe it just presumes that it is good but it is not for real good. And when the authority of such community is not really good, it is impossible, or to safely say, hard for the community to somehow become upright.
Nevertheless, good people, that is put into authority over the corrupted, which could have outnumbered the first one, can still be able to persist and somehow change the devious majority for they are indeed good. And as we know it, "goodness" prevails.
Monday, November 24, 2014
Everything's "old" now...
Before, I used to have this collection of "nuggets of wisdom"; statements that are somehow influential and powerful enough to catch one's attention. I collected such statements, hid them inside my journal, not because I don't want to share it to the public, but rather I want to save it for the years to come, when such statements can be then named after me.
Yes, "ME", for I want to be known for something. I want everybody will look at me and say "Wow! That's one hell of a person.". I want the other people to see me as a creator of something new, something that has never been discovered before, something that will change the way things are now; for that something, is definitely new. In short, I want to impress others; I want them to admire me and thank me for making up something that will brought up a change in our world. That's why I hid them, because I want them to be credited to me, and not to anybody else.
But then I realized, which was somehow reiterated to me in the concept of the importance of the tradition; the significance of the old, that there is no such thing as "new" in this world. Somehow, something came from somewhere or someone in the past, and it can never be a "new" thing for it existed already before, (or maybe even before that 'before'). Well, maybe forgotten, maybe unacknowledged, maybe unknown, but there was.
That's why, if we are to create something new, we must look back to the past; every nuke and crannies of antiquity and history, for what we might see now as something "new", might actually be something that is already "old and familiar".
Friday, November 21, 2014
Eager-learner
"...I only enlighten those who are eager to learn and arouse those who are bubbled to give their own explanation..." - Confucius
Students of today's generation, whether we accept it or not, are only obligated to go to school, and are not really eager to do so. Obligated, in the sense that it is only in respect to one's 'want' or 'need'. Maybe he/she wants to have an excellent job with an indubitable high income, or maybe he/she needs to, because it enables him/her to sustain such of the needs of the family he/she could have. Or it could be other's 'want' or 'need', like your father wants you to graduate or like your mother who needs you to finish studying for it will somehow decrease the risk of her heart ailment.
To make the long story short, they are not eager to study. They just want to finish studying because of this and that, but they are not really into learning; they simply don't learn anything at all.
But when a man is really eagered to study, to learn more, and to be critical, it will really become a great form of education. Because in that way, a student will not rely only to what the teacher is offering in his/her discussions, activities, etc. In other words, the student will not be subservient; a yes-man. Subservient, is when a person submits to what the other is saying, no matter what are the consequences, as long as he/she was told this and that, he/she, like a shitty dog, will believe or follow. Indeed shitty, -passive! But when a student will come up with new ideas, even if it is right or wrong, as long as it is not only what the teachers give, thus, there is indeed an education.
Why waste time and effort (and money) to a thing you thought as "education" that is actually not at all education? Right?
Thursday, November 20, 2014
The Opposites
"The Master said, The gentleman calls attention to the good points in others ; he does not call attention to their defects. The small man does just the reverse of this."
I believe that every matter in this world has both a bad side, and a good side. Like the coin, it has a head, and a tail. Such presence of two opposites makes a matter somehow, neutral. Thus, there is really no 100% good thing, or a 100% bad. That's why one cannot impose a truth that a certain matter is indeed a good thing or a bad one, simply because it's just a matter of perspectives and biases. If one defines a certain matter as good, it doesn't make such matter really good. Maybe, for that person who defines, but not for everybody.
Now, A true person (gentleman) must look to the brighter sides of these things made up of two opposites. Since, no matter how awful such is, it still has a good side that would somehow compensate such downsides. 'Cause again by nature, we people, are good; we are of equal goodness in us. But our practices makes as different; unique, or simply deviant in a way. Simply, as what the Scriptures said: [That] "We are all unique yet fundamentally equal!".
A gentleman prefers to look at the good points because he is thinking for the common good; the good of all. Such of a person sees the bright side of a thing because he knows that everybody will benefit from it. How about the small man? Why do they prefer to look at the defects? This is because they are too selfish and insecure; what they wanted is for their own good only.
Let us all be "gentlemen" of our own ways; So I say to you, be an example you want others to be!
I believe that every matter in this world has both a bad side, and a good side. Like the coin, it has a head, and a tail. Such presence of two opposites makes a matter somehow, neutral. Thus, there is really no 100% good thing, or a 100% bad. That's why one cannot impose a truth that a certain matter is indeed a good thing or a bad one, simply because it's just a matter of perspectives and biases. If one defines a certain matter as good, it doesn't make such matter really good. Maybe, for that person who defines, but not for everybody.
Now, A true person (gentleman) must look to the brighter sides of these things made up of two opposites. Since, no matter how awful such is, it still has a good side that would somehow compensate such downsides. 'Cause again by nature, we people, are good; we are of equal goodness in us. But our practices makes as different; unique, or simply deviant in a way. Simply, as what the Scriptures said: [That] "We are all unique yet fundamentally equal!".
A gentleman prefers to look at the good points because he is thinking for the common good; the good of all. Such of a person sees the bright side of a thing because he knows that everybody will benefit from it. How about the small man? Why do they prefer to look at the defects? This is because they are too selfish and insecure; what they wanted is for their own good only.
Let us all be "gentlemen" of our own ways; So I say to you, be an example you want others to be!
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Looking back...
"The master said: He who by reanimating the old can gain knowledge of the new is fit to be a teacher".
We are now living in the times of fast change. Technologies, innovations, discoveries, inventions, and all other products of this thing called "modernization" are now prominent in this progressing world of ours. Progressing, for the fact that most of us now are only thinking of what we will become, to where we are going, and not to what we were used to be in the past.
This is indeed a sad story; we seem to forget the fact that our history is indeed important, for what we are now is because of what we were back then. The past shapes the present. Thus, the very answers to our current questions are found in the past. In other words, the past is the supplement that will somehow fill the missing pieces of our present life.
For example, when we do have a check-up with a doctor, we need to fill up this kind of form where we can find a list of illness/diseases that are for us to indicate whether we acquired it lately or not. Just like in my physical examination for our field work, I was given this form and I marked those infirmities I had in the past. Yes, in the past. Now, why is it needed to indicate such past ailments? I mean, I am fine now, and such ailments are not present in me anymore (except Amoebiasis though), but why is it still needed to mark those "past" things? This is because, it will help the physician/doctor to know more about our medical conditions, to advice us on what to do now, and to prohibit us on what to do not now. In my case, it is whether I am to join the field work or not. Hence, the past (ailments) really matters in the present (field work).
Most of you might think that such example is somehow weak for the fact that the past referred here, happened only recently; not like those of the ancient times that happened hundreds and thousands of years ago. Well, here is another example: The issue of the color of the skin. The 'black' people are still somehow discriminated and detached from those of the 'white's and other light colors. The first are somehow oppressed and subordinated under the rule of the latter. But the question is, why is it?
As of our Asian Civilization teacher: History will tell us that it started from the Ancient India during the 3rd century B.C.E. There were these people who were called: The "Dravids". They were dark-skinned; their palms, soles, teeth, and eyes were the only white things in their body. These people were the natives of the Southern India, who are still there nowadays. Given such title, natives, they are expected to be respected by those of the other kinds. But actually, they weren't, instead they were subject for subordination. They were entitled as "demons", for they constitute this dark aura present in their skin. As we can see in ancient literature, especially those involving the Indians, these Dravids somehow appear as the antagonist, the bad guys in the story. What is it then with the Dravids that they were oppressed? What did they do? Did they do something that would somehow result to such? Well actually, it is because of them being the minority during that time. They were only few compared to those who were non-natives. According to some study, they also have practices that were identified as inhuman like cannibalism, etc. Thus, there is no question for them not to be separated from the others.
Such conflict then lead to the formulation of the caste-system. There were then hierarchies lead by the superiors called Brahmins. Then many years later, the black people tend to realize that that life of theirs is unfair. And so they needed to fight back to such oppression.
Then Mahatma Gandhi came out of the picture, followed by Martin Luther King Jr. who entered the very halls of the issue and made himself the "king of civil rights" by making the whole world realize what they have realized; to feel what they feel. There began protests against the black-and-white detachment, and so on and so forth. You see, it happened a long time ago, but still it is still present nowadays. Therefore, past here is really of a bigger matter in dealing with the present matters. Guess what, if we are not to know the antique Dravids, would we have any idea how this all discrimination thing present today began?
Now, about the teacher stuff mentioned by the Master: We are all teachers here; we teach, advice, give information, and all other things that teachers do commonly. We might not be aware of that but it is true. We are not aware that even just by stating one's name is an act of teaching. In other words, to be human is also to be a teacher. Hence, to look and to revive such notion of the past in order to build up something new is not only a duty of a licensed teacher, but instead, it is also for us people, human beings who are capable of instructing others and at the same time, capable of being instructed. Who says a teacher cannot be instructed? Think again.
The point is, we must treasure the past for the present like how we treasure the present for the future. For we don't know, what we might do today will become something big for tomorrow. Although it is also important to cherish the present because as what they say, "Now, is the youngest you will ever become and the oldest of what you have ever been". But this, I tell you, your present will still be a past like it was a future before. As the hands of the clock move, your present, turns to a past. So look back, and use these "past" things for the betterment of your present, and later on, of your future.
We are now living in the times of fast change. Technologies, innovations, discoveries, inventions, and all other products of this thing called "modernization" are now prominent in this progressing world of ours. Progressing, for the fact that most of us now are only thinking of what we will become, to where we are going, and not to what we were used to be in the past.
This is indeed a sad story; we seem to forget the fact that our history is indeed important, for what we are now is because of what we were back then. The past shapes the present. Thus, the very answers to our current questions are found in the past. In other words, the past is the supplement that will somehow fill the missing pieces of our present life.
For example, when we do have a check-up with a doctor, we need to fill up this kind of form where we can find a list of illness/diseases that are for us to indicate whether we acquired it lately or not. Just like in my physical examination for our field work, I was given this form and I marked those infirmities I had in the past. Yes, in the past. Now, why is it needed to indicate such past ailments? I mean, I am fine now, and such ailments are not present in me anymore (except Amoebiasis though), but why is it still needed to mark those "past" things? This is because, it will help the physician/doctor to know more about our medical conditions, to advice us on what to do now, and to prohibit us on what to do not now. In my case, it is whether I am to join the field work or not. Hence, the past (ailments) really matters in the present (field work).
Most of you might think that such example is somehow weak for the fact that the past referred here, happened only recently; not like those of the ancient times that happened hundreds and thousands of years ago. Well, here is another example: The issue of the color of the skin. The 'black' people are still somehow discriminated and detached from those of the 'white's and other light colors. The first are somehow oppressed and subordinated under the rule of the latter. But the question is, why is it?
As of our Asian Civilization teacher: History will tell us that it started from the Ancient India during the 3rd century B.C.E. There were these people who were called: The "Dravids". They were dark-skinned; their palms, soles, teeth, and eyes were the only white things in their body. These people were the natives of the Southern India, who are still there nowadays. Given such title, natives, they are expected to be respected by those of the other kinds. But actually, they weren't, instead they were subject for subordination. They were entitled as "demons", for they constitute this dark aura present in their skin. As we can see in ancient literature, especially those involving the Indians, these Dravids somehow appear as the antagonist, the bad guys in the story. What is it then with the Dravids that they were oppressed? What did they do? Did they do something that would somehow result to such? Well actually, it is because of them being the minority during that time. They were only few compared to those who were non-natives. According to some study, they also have practices that were identified as inhuman like cannibalism, etc. Thus, there is no question for them not to be separated from the others.
Such conflict then lead to the formulation of the caste-system. There were then hierarchies lead by the superiors called Brahmins. Then many years later, the black people tend to realize that that life of theirs is unfair. And so they needed to fight back to such oppression.
Then Mahatma Gandhi came out of the picture, followed by Martin Luther King Jr. who entered the very halls of the issue and made himself the "king of civil rights" by making the whole world realize what they have realized; to feel what they feel. There began protests against the black-and-white detachment, and so on and so forth. You see, it happened a long time ago, but still it is still present nowadays. Therefore, past here is really of a bigger matter in dealing with the present matters. Guess what, if we are not to know the antique Dravids, would we have any idea how this all discrimination thing present today began?
Now, about the teacher stuff mentioned by the Master: We are all teachers here; we teach, advice, give information, and all other things that teachers do commonly. We might not be aware of that but it is true. We are not aware that even just by stating one's name is an act of teaching. In other words, to be human is also to be a teacher. Hence, to look and to revive such notion of the past in order to build up something new is not only a duty of a licensed teacher, but instead, it is also for us people, human beings who are capable of instructing others and at the same time, capable of being instructed. Who says a teacher cannot be instructed? Think again.
The point is, we must treasure the past for the present like how we treasure the present for the future. For we don't know, what we might do today will become something big for tomorrow. Although it is also important to cherish the present because as what they say, "Now, is the youngest you will ever become and the oldest of what you have ever been". But this, I tell you, your present will still be a past like it was a future before. As the hands of the clock move, your present, turns to a past. So look back, and use these "past" things for the betterment of your present, and later on, of your future.
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Jiàoyù
Now, I ask you: What can you say about the educational system here in the Philippines? Or maybe, in your city? Or perhaps your very school?
As what John Dewey said: "Education is not a preparation for life; education is life itself". By focusing to his definition of education as "life" itself, we can presuppose that all of us, living, are subjects for education. As long as we are able to breath, our hearts still beat and pump blood, as long as our very organs are not hindering our existence, we are indeed given the right for education; rich or poor, able or not, young or old, etc. This is because, by means of education, one can prove that he/she is living; living the very life of life, for that is education.
Yes, no matter who the person is, where that person lives, the person's history, status, category, or any other social matters of a person, as long as that person is living, he/she is privileged to be educated.
As what the Master said: "From the very poorest upwards -beginning even with the man who could bring no better present than a bundle of dried flesh -none has ever come to me without receiving instruction".
What the Master was telling us is that, everyone of us is merited with the right of education (receiving instruction). All the people ranging from the poorest among all to anyone that situates above, deserves to be taught. What the Master pertained as the man who could bring no better present than a bundle of dried flesh, is not literally of such of a man. What he was trying to serve as an example is the person who clearly have nothing that even such of a shoddy matter (dried flesh), which they consider as something that can be acquired by any person in the society, seems to be so hard for him/her to give.
Indubitably, education is the real torrential flood; the deluge that no one of us can escape from. Again, no matter what constitutes you, as long as you belong to the term called "everybody", you are to receive instruction, or simply education.
Indubitably, education is the real torrential flood; the deluge that no one of us can escape from. Again, no matter what constitutes you, as long as you belong to the term called "everybody", you are to receive instruction, or simply education.
Monday, November 17, 2014
Let's talk about love...
Most of the people nowadays, believe that there's no such love that lasts forever. Yes, maybe because they had been in such context; the heartbreaks, mistrusts, broken promises, etc. Name it and they already had it. With that, they tend to discourage lovers that even if the latter do have romance, sweet "call-names", longest relationships, gifts, kisses, flowers, -even love itself, they will still go apart. It is like, for them, every sweet "I love you" follows a sad "Goodbye".
This issue of everlasting love's inevitable end is somehow the tension my girlfriend and I have been dealing of. I mean, I believe we do have the proper ingredients for a perfect relationship; trust, loyalty, respect, obedience, and all. We do things in appropriate measures; we do understand each other's differences and weaknesses and we do treasure our similarities and strengths. In other words, as far as I know, we are indeed "perfect". But nevertheless, people around us somehow impose that even if everything seems to be impeccably fit for us, we will still end things up between us. It's like no matter how or what, things will still wane between us two, like a torrential flood; no one can escape such terror.
Well, perhaps, as what Confucius said: "One must not lose hope. What prevails is a problem that can still be solved". Even if everybody and everything around us is able to prove that we will not last forever, we must still be able to hope that someday, as what fairy tales tell us, there is still going to be a "happily ever after". Like Confucius, we are strong enough not to flee such indubitable trepidation coming to our way, for actually it is dubitable; Well, who knows? Right?
What I am trying to say is that, it is not the lengthiness of this "forever-love" that stretches out more than a human being's lifespan which makes it's occurrence impossible; for it is actually the lovers' wrong actions which makes it unachievable. As what Confucius advised us: "When it is obvious that the goals cannot be reached, don't adjust the goals, adjust the steps". Hence it is really not the idea of believing a life-lasting love that needs to be altered, for it is the incorrect action steps of the lovers that needs to be so because these are the ones that somehow hinder the situation. Like Confucius' dream of peace and order, such dream is not the problem, it is the people's chaotic and messy way of life which is. If only the Way was embraced by the people, as what he said, there is no need for him to change things.
Going back, yes, it is really a hard time to have somebody to love; you are somewhat obligated to do efforts and stuffs, you tend to make decisions as if they were of life and death situations, you make yourself do difficult things, you make yourself worry, sad, depressed, stressed, stretched and all other painful things that you can ever imagine.
But when both of you will not only endure these things mentioned, but will also take the very risk that no matter what others will say; that even if it is imposed that your separation with each other is, let's say, the truth; that even if you know that you will still go back to what were both of you was before, -strangers, and still both of you sees it as something worth trying for and will choose to be with each other come what may, you know what dear, it is definitely LOVE.
This issue of everlasting love's inevitable end is somehow the tension my girlfriend and I have been dealing of. I mean, I believe we do have the proper ingredients for a perfect relationship; trust, loyalty, respect, obedience, and all. We do things in appropriate measures; we do understand each other's differences and weaknesses and we do treasure our similarities and strengths. In other words, as far as I know, we are indeed "perfect". But nevertheless, people around us somehow impose that even if everything seems to be impeccably fit for us, we will still end things up between us. It's like no matter how or what, things will still wane between us two, like a torrential flood; no one can escape such terror.
Well, perhaps, as what Confucius said: "One must not lose hope. What prevails is a problem that can still be solved". Even if everybody and everything around us is able to prove that we will not last forever, we must still be able to hope that someday, as what fairy tales tell us, there is still going to be a "happily ever after". Like Confucius, we are strong enough not to flee such indubitable trepidation coming to our way, for actually it is dubitable; Well, who knows? Right?
What I am trying to say is that, it is not the lengthiness of this "forever-love" that stretches out more than a human being's lifespan which makes it's occurrence impossible; for it is actually the lovers' wrong actions which makes it unachievable. As what Confucius advised us: "When it is obvious that the goals cannot be reached, don't adjust the goals, adjust the steps". Hence it is really not the idea of believing a life-lasting love that needs to be altered, for it is the incorrect action steps of the lovers that needs to be so because these are the ones that somehow hinder the situation. Like Confucius' dream of peace and order, such dream is not the problem, it is the people's chaotic and messy way of life which is. If only the Way was embraced by the people, as what he said, there is no need for him to change things.
Going back, yes, it is really a hard time to have somebody to love; you are somewhat obligated to do efforts and stuffs, you tend to make decisions as if they were of life and death situations, you make yourself do difficult things, you make yourself worry, sad, depressed, stressed, stretched and all other painful things that you can ever imagine.
But when both of you will not only endure these things mentioned, but will also take the very risk that no matter what others will say; that even if it is imposed that your separation with each other is, let's say, the truth; that even if you know that you will still go back to what were both of you was before, -strangers, and still both of you sees it as something worth trying for and will choose to be with each other come what may, you know what dear, it is definitely LOVE.
Friday, November 14, 2014
Awakening...
After contemplating with my learning in today's session in my Ancient Chinese Philosophy class, I was bothered by the question:
"Why has the Way not prevailed?"
Of course, that is because there is something or someone that/who hinders such to happen or exist. This thing or person is maybe of heinous nature; brought up by wickedness and evil that is probably more influential than that of the Way. Such would be seen in the pugnacity of the people in the society/world; there are conflicts, tensions, clashes, skirmishes, quarrels, etc.
But according to the texts: "The border guard tells us that this is not due to the people's evil intent."
Well, if not. what is it then the reason why?
As what is written in the passage: That is all because of the monotonous and careless toleration of the people who were living subserviently without a keen awareness of what’s happening around them. It is not the wickedness of the unscrupulous ones that disallows the existence of the Way but rather the taciturnity of the ones who could have been the role models of goodness and decency.
"It is instead because they have been asleep and, therefore, needs to be awakened. They have been taking things for granted. They have been careless and, in their carelessness, have not allowed the Way to prevail."
"It is instead because they have been asleep and, therefore, needs to be awakened. They have been taking things for granted. They have been careless and, in their carelessness, have not allowed the Way to prevail."
Such idea of carelessness can be best pictured in Napoleon Bonaparte's words, saying: "The world suffers, not because of the violence of the bad people; but because of the silence of the good people.”
Therefore, It is for the Chun Tzu to wake up his fellow people, and not to fight back the evilness of those deceitful ones. Not to become a lethal sword, but a bell; a wooden bell, that will somehow, awaken the very individuals of his society; unchaining them from the subservience and apathy they once have in their hearts and somehow encourage them to have some of that thing called "sensitivity".
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Reflective thinking; The "me" in everything...
In studying the "The Spirit of Chinese Philosophy" of Fung Yu-Lan's book, I caught myself stucked in the discussion of the reflective kind of thinking. It was said that: "This [the] kind of thinking is called reflective because it takes life as it's object". In other words, when one is to think in a reflective manner, his/her life, and all that constitutes it, is the main basis of his/her thinking.
It's like a person's life (all that are life-related matters of him/her) is the "mirror" that "reflects" his/her way of thinking. If you are to think reflectively, you are the only one who can do that, for you alone are the one who lives that kind of life you have. Mine as well, I am the only who one who can think reflectively on my way, because I am also the only one who lives the life I have. It's like what Ferriols said: "If you want to see something, you must see it for yourself". Why? Because, again, it is only you who can look at it that way; your way. If I am to see it, and I am to tell you what I saw, I am not telling you what you see, but of course, of what I see; you may disagree or maybe agree but not totally. That's why to think reflectively, one must use his/her OWN life as the object, not any other else's.
I would like to end this with a quote from Bertrand Russell's Value of Philosophy, and I quote: "If the study of philosophy has any value at all for others than students of Philosophy, it must be only indirectly, through its effects upon the lives of those who study it. It is in these effects, therefore, if anywhere, that the value of Philosophy must be primarily sought".
It's like a person's life (all that are life-related matters of him/her) is the "mirror" that "reflects" his/her way of thinking. If you are to think reflectively, you are the only one who can do that, for you alone are the one who lives that kind of life you have. Mine as well, I am the only who one who can think reflectively on my way, because I am also the only one who lives the life I have. It's like what Ferriols said: "If you want to see something, you must see it for yourself". Why? Because, again, it is only you who can look at it that way; your way. If I am to see it, and I am to tell you what I saw, I am not telling you what you see, but of course, of what I see; you may disagree or maybe agree but not totally. That's why to think reflectively, one must use his/her OWN life as the object, not any other else's.
I would like to end this with a quote from Bertrand Russell's Value of Philosophy, and I quote: "If the study of philosophy has any value at all for others than students of Philosophy, it must be only indirectly, through its effects upon the lives of those who study it. It is in these effects, therefore, if anywhere, that the value of Philosophy must be primarily sought".
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
"Yi" v.s. "Li"
Question: Will you do a thing because you are ought to do so? Or will you do it because you are to gain something from it?
According to the Analects: "The superior man comprehends yi (righteousness); the inferior man comprehends li (profit)" (Analects, IV, i6).
After brushing my fingertips to my book of Fung Yu-Lan, hoping that I would somehow came up of something worthy of discussing for; I finally, I mean "randomly" came up with the thing of the distinction between Yi and Li; righteousness and profit.
RIGHTEOUSNESS then, according to the book, refers to the "oughtness" of a situation or scenario. While PROFIT, refers to the benefit one will have if he/she is to do a certain thing.
Given here is a situation: You are walking by on a street, let's say, in your way to school. Suddenly, there came a stranger, a man of, let us say, luxury and wealth for example, who by then dropped his wallet. Assumed that he was not aware of such happening, you picked it up and saw a lot of money inside it. Now, you returned it, yes, but, is it because you think it was the right thing to do? or because you expect something in return, maybe of a money reward or maybe a blessing from God to compensate such decent act of yours? Now obviously, the first one refers to Yi (righteousness), while the latter is to Li (profit). Yes, what you did is good, but, is it righteous? or for the sake of self-proceeds? Good, in the sense that you returned it without filching the money inside, but again, is it righteous or for the sake of profit making?
To end this, I would like to share what happened next: After reading my book, I suddenly picked up a piece of paper inside my pocket. I crumpled it and decided to slide it under a table. But actually, what I did with the paper is that I slid it inside my book, and made from it a bookmark. Do you think I did it because to just slip it inside the table was not the right thing to do? Or did I do it for my own good which is to have a bookmark? Well, are these two, Yi and Li, really antithetical to each other that the presence of one cancels out the other?
Coincidence, isn't it?
According to the Analects: "The superior man comprehends yi (righteousness); the inferior man comprehends li (profit)" (Analects, IV, i6).
After brushing my fingertips to my book of Fung Yu-Lan, hoping that I would somehow came up of something worthy of discussing for; I finally, I mean "randomly" came up with the thing of the distinction between Yi and Li; righteousness and profit.
RIGHTEOUSNESS then, according to the book, refers to the "oughtness" of a situation or scenario. While PROFIT, refers to the benefit one will have if he/she is to do a certain thing.
Given here is a situation: You are walking by on a street, let's say, in your way to school. Suddenly, there came a stranger, a man of, let us say, luxury and wealth for example, who by then dropped his wallet. Assumed that he was not aware of such happening, you picked it up and saw a lot of money inside it. Now, you returned it, yes, but, is it because you think it was the right thing to do? or because you expect something in return, maybe of a money reward or maybe a blessing from God to compensate such decent act of yours? Now obviously, the first one refers to Yi (righteousness), while the latter is to Li (profit). Yes, what you did is good, but, is it righteous? or for the sake of self-proceeds? Good, in the sense that you returned it without filching the money inside, but again, is it righteous or for the sake of profit making?
To end this, I would like to share what happened next: After reading my book, I suddenly picked up a piece of paper inside my pocket. I crumpled it and decided to slide it under a table. But actually, what I did with the paper is that I slid it inside my book, and made from it a bookmark. Do you think I did it because to just slip it inside the table was not the right thing to do? Or did I do it for my own good which is to have a bookmark? Well, are these two, Yi and Li, really antithetical to each other that the presence of one cancels out the other?
Coincidence, isn't it?
Monday, November 10, 2014
The evil is inside...
"Fan Chi, while strolling with the Master among the Rain Dance altars, said, "May I ask how to overcome wickedness?" The Master said, "An excellent question! If you attack your OWN evil rather than the evil of others, won't you overcome wickedness?"
- Analects 12:21
It was just this afternoon when me and my friends were attending this meeting of the team leaders in our NSTP field work. After such meeting, we had this peewee snacks prepared by the NSTP office; a Jolibee burger sandwich and a drink. Considering the fact that my friends and I were somewhat hungry for having such (*insert description here) meeting, we immediately approached the stall for our shares. But then, the saddest thing happened: We realized that such peewee snack is really of a minuscule amount to feed our grumbling stomachs. We then shared this telepathic communication using our eyes and then, ZAP! We grabbed more food in the said stall like a ninja. We rushed to the elevator, ran, and looked for a place to hid ourselves while enduring the guilt for doing such sinful act.
After which, I then realized that it was not my fault. I mean, they contributed something to let me do such depraved act. If they didn't snatch more food, well how could I possibly do so? I may have done it, but without them initiating it, I don't think I will do it. In short, they are the ones who are to be blamed and must be the ones who should work out their characters. Well, for the sake of the greater good, we must unravel their exploit.
Like the thing with the Analects above, we must overcome wickedness at all costs for the good of the many. But how? Am I right in focusing the guilty spotlights to them?
Then I realized that if I am to prevail goodness against evil, I must deal with my OWN evil, not of the other's. Not in the sense that I am insensitive enough to tolerate such of their evil businesses. But, it is just that before their's, mine first. And maybe, after attacking such of my own evil, I would somehow try some efforts to deal with their malevolence.
And also, if we are all to deal with our OWN evil, yes, all of us, is there still any chance for wickedness to somehow succeed?
- Analects 12:21
It was just this afternoon when me and my friends were attending this meeting of the team leaders in our NSTP field work. After such meeting, we had this peewee snacks prepared by the NSTP office; a Jolibee burger sandwich and a drink. Considering the fact that my friends and I were somewhat hungry for having such (*insert description here) meeting, we immediately approached the stall for our shares. But then, the saddest thing happened: We realized that such peewee snack is really of a minuscule amount to feed our grumbling stomachs. We then shared this telepathic communication using our eyes and then, ZAP! We grabbed more food in the said stall like a ninja. We rushed to the elevator, ran, and looked for a place to hid ourselves while enduring the guilt for doing such sinful act.
After which, I then realized that it was not my fault. I mean, they contributed something to let me do such depraved act. If they didn't snatch more food, well how could I possibly do so? I may have done it, but without them initiating it, I don't think I will do it. In short, they are the ones who are to be blamed and must be the ones who should work out their characters. Well, for the sake of the greater good, we must unravel their exploit.
Like the thing with the Analects above, we must overcome wickedness at all costs for the good of the many. But how? Am I right in focusing the guilty spotlights to them?
Then I realized that if I am to prevail goodness against evil, I must deal with my OWN evil, not of the other's. Not in the sense that I am insensitive enough to tolerate such of their evil businesses. But, it is just that before their's, mine first. And maybe, after attacking such of my own evil, I would somehow try some efforts to deal with their malevolence.
And also, if we are all to deal with our OWN evil, yes, all of us, is there still any chance for wickedness to somehow succeed?
Sunday, November 9, 2014
Getting started...
Ni hao! Welcome to my Ancient Chinese Philosophy Class Daily Blogs!
Here, we will be experiencing a MAJOR throwback to the antique times of the Red Dragon's way of thinking, reasoning, questioning, living -philosophizing!
We will be also encountering the primeval touches of principles, values, lessons, teachings, norms, moral views and many more that were carried over from the Ancient times of our beloved center of the Orient. We will also be facing the very words and thoughts of the masters of the said certain school of Philosophy like Confucius, Lao Tzu, Mencius, and many more! And lastly, here, we will also be inculcating our very knowledge to the Ancient Chinese beliefs like Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and the others that will somehow help us in seeking the real essence of the Chinese Philosophy and together we will define it and be able to compare and distinguish it from the Western idea of loving one's wisdom.
I hope you will check out my latest blogs. For any questions, clarifications, add-ons, corrections, and the like, you may address such matters in my gmail account: a.noyaba@gmail.com or visit me on facebook: www.facebook.com/Rex.Noyaba.
Zai Jian!
Here, we will be experiencing a MAJOR throwback to the antique times of the Red Dragon's way of thinking, reasoning, questioning, living -philosophizing!
We will be also encountering the primeval touches of principles, values, lessons, teachings, norms, moral views and many more that were carried over from the Ancient times of our beloved center of the Orient. We will also be facing the very words and thoughts of the masters of the said certain school of Philosophy like Confucius, Lao Tzu, Mencius, and many more! And lastly, here, we will also be inculcating our very knowledge to the Ancient Chinese beliefs like Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and the others that will somehow help us in seeking the real essence of the Chinese Philosophy and together we will define it and be able to compare and distinguish it from the Western idea of loving one's wisdom.
I hope you will check out my latest blogs. For any questions, clarifications, add-ons, corrections, and the like, you may address such matters in my gmail account: a.noyaba@gmail.com or visit me on facebook: www.facebook.com/Rex.Noyaba.
Zai Jian!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)