We always suffer in the material realm as this is precisely what constitutes us as being in the world.As we have previously remarked to exist is to suffer in some ways or other. There is no such thing as having a complete freedom from suffering.That would not be the way of the world as one knows it.Either we are made to suffer via nature or be the cause which brings about suffering. It seems as if due to partiality, and ignoring or denigrating of the other, one is so subjected when there is direct human involvement mainly. Let’s explore this aspect.
As soon as one awakens, we espouse a certain way of being and with time this is taken as the norm and hence the beginning of existence as a partial view. This partiality makes one address the other often in derogatory terms as if the non-me is an an alien. That such prejudice is deeply rooted is all too obvious in the way one relates to others.It is very much that the other is seen as the problem whereas the I of one’s being has all the credentials to be whilst either denying the non-me having any such value in life. It reflects the way of one who may use condescending language to put it politely whereas one is only too aware that adopting a certain idiosyncratic view often would relegate the other to the dungeon in one’s view thereby a certain l self-imposed-do-what-one-wishes licence emerges for oneself whether verbally and or otherwise through actions. Needless to comment both of these are are not positive and if anything certain become the ingredients to keep downgrading and or doing anything within one’s power to subjugate the weaker party since the actor sees the self as the stronger one whether in thoughts or deeds.
Or there is no need for the other to be. The world view of such a partial way of being is precisely to keep placing oneself on a pedestal at the same time as denigrating of the other. There is a sense of forgetting essentially who one is. All is viewed as per a superficial way of being based on one’s partiality.
This partiality in practice may mean that one immediately sees oneself as black, white, Indian or other Asian or sees oneself as being part of a group due to a way of being seen based on physical appearance. Defining ourselves thus, the individual then develops attachment to that and verily lives as per the diktat which such a confinement imposes on oneself.
Another group happily sees itself as Atheistic, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, Sikh or similar other. Seeing the self along these lines creates barriers without quite trying to understand the basic nature of one’s being….. in that one is simply human after all and the rest is imposition. Yet one happily lives in the way so described.
Another way of seeing oneself is to live as per the confines of nationalism where one sees the self as Russian, American, French, Indian, African or Japanese and so on. Again by doing so, one lives as if all the others within that group so categorised are homogeneous. This is verily far from reality since one only needs to consider the diverse political views within a nation to realise how divided one is anyhow.
Others sees themselves as young, middle aged, old and so lead a certain type of existence…. a mere acceptance as being part of such a group essentially reflect the way one acts whereas the fact always remains that one continues to adopt a certain lifestyle based on acceptance of one being so and so.
There are others who see themselves as women, men, gay, transvestite and happily lead a way of life based on how one sees the self via sexuality.
Likewise, there are other social and or cultural or educational divisions. In this way, we suffer from the social, cultural, educational malady or similar prejudice. Once, such a view is adopted, partiality in a negative sense may manifest itself based on an ism …..which may result in violence of the verbal, mental or physical type.
One may become racist, a few ageists, some sexist, one or two turned into fundamentalists whilst others just carries over their prejudice as a barrier or simply not according being to the other with the latter objectified in essence. There is a sense of forgetting how one has emerged in this world. Not as a controller but of one who cries out for help from the other in the first instance and verily relying on goodwill of others. Yet through the passage of time, that same person who once was the mercy of others albeit one’s parents suddenly seek to impose and nurture negative vows based on some ism of any form.
It is not a question of realising of the the fact that there are inherent problems in adopting a view or an ism. It is to be alert that in spite perhaps of espousal of a certain mode of being, one begins to see the defiance in being so. More importantly is it possible to be move above and beyond the limitation of a certain view to just see?
Is it possible to do so? Or is one a mere victim of being in the world in that whatever one does, there a every chance to succumb to the idea of partiality unless one seeks to develop authenticity and verily prepares to be in dialogue with the other rather than creating barriers?
The question remaining to be asked is who am I finally? What this ‘I ‘ of my being? That is why we keep saying that a realisation of who one is remains a primordial query whilst trying to query on the who am I? And more importantly, what is my relationship with the other? Is it possible to get out of this mode of partial thinking or is it the case that we are condemned for ever. Who knows?