What you sow is what you reap

You may not want to accept it, but what you are is of your own making. Not in the "you're the master of your own destiny" sense, but in the sense that your past actions (perhaps not in this lifetime) have put you in the position that you currently are in, be it good or bad. To be sure, there are other forces that are at play too, but the strong believer in the law of Karma that I am, I can't but think that the presence or absence of even those forces are influenced by your actions.

Say you're going through a tough time in life. It may be someone who's just making your life miserable at your workplace; or it may be a real big problem in your personal life. You can be sure that there's something you have done in your past, perhaps not to the same people who are currently causing your problems, but some others. Contrary to popular belief, I feel that life is always fair, and we get what we deserve eventually, one way or the other.

That doesn't mean that we need to be fatalists who will do nothing to improve their own state of affairs, and bemoan the fact that fate has chosen them for her victims. No, not at all. You ought to do what's in your power - to the limits of your code of ethics - to pull yourself out of your current, undesirable state. Finding excuses for wallowing in self-pity is most certainly not what I'm advocating.

However, if you finally find yourself defeated in your pursuits, either by a human agent, or by an unkind Providence, the thought that what happened to you was nothing more and nothing less than what you rightfully deserved, may help in reconciling yourself to the defeat, and getting on with the rest of your life. In other words, it could serve as a resting point in the long and often tiresome journey of life; a theory that will kick in and explain events when other theories fail.

But - make no mistake about this - your pain will entirely be your cross to bear!

Gainsaying Gift-giving and other things

Of late, I find myself agreeing with The Luddite's views on many things, the latest being the obligation that people find themselves in to gift something to others. As I read through the article, I kept nodding and thinking to myself, "Yes, yes, that's how I feel. Exactly." I find a lot of social customs quite affected and unnecessary, especially ones that are anachronistic.

Table manners, for instance. Apart from the fact that we are conditioned to like people who know their soup spoon from their dessert spoon, there's very little to be proud about having impeccable table manners. As long as we're able to eat a table without making a mess at the table, it should be quite okay to use one spoon where table manners mandate use of another. These artificial rules are usually perpetuated by the snobs who consider such things to be the mark of gentlemen / ladies. As if being a gentleman has got anything to do with the way one eats one's food at a table. Such superficiality turns me off!

Gift-giving is another. I prefer to give gifts only when I genuinely feel like doing so, not because I am expected to. That's why I've come to hate attending weddings in which I am not exactly a friend of the bride or the groom. I mean, am I any less a person if I fail to get a gift? Is not friendship the greatest gift one can give another?

I like my gifts to be valued, not forgotten and thrown away the moment I step out of the wedding hall. That's also why I prefer gifting people in person, and not in a social gathering.

For two people with such extraordinarily different backgrounds, I am beginning to think of Tony Long as a kindred spirit.

Who is The Practical Idealist? Where did he come from?

I think I've wandered far enough in my blogging career to warrant a brief explanation about the choice of the name under which I publish this blog.

I call myself a practical idealist for two reasons:

1. I’m an idealist at heart (often the cause of many an angry moment for me)
2. I realise that I can’t go on forever trying to be true to my idealistic impulses in a less-than-ideal world, and so I compromise on those values at times.

Today, in my errant online wanderings, I came to know that the term “practical idealist” was originally used by Mahatma Gandhi. According to Wikipedia, it is “a philosophy which holds it to be an ethical imperative to implement ideals of virtue or good. It further holds it to be equally immoral to either refuse to make the compromises necessary to realise high ideals or to discard ideals in the name of expediency.” I wouldn’t have quite defined it in this manner, especially where it suggests discarding ideals in the name of expediency. You could say that not letting go of my ideals has often come in the way of my progress / success in life, but that’s the way I prefer it. I’d rather not be successful if success means compromising on your beliefs.

Of course, I'm not in the same league as the Mahatma, and have no illusions about it; I hold him in too high a pedestal to even compare him to me. It's just that he interpreted Practical Idealism as something, and I interpret it as something else.

For the record, my first exposure to the term “practical idealist” was in a book by Linda Goodman many, many years ago :-)

Related Article