It would be interesting to debate who that someone is. Is that "someone" people like us in our midst who control other people. I doubt it. People who group together to control other groups of people like the CIA controlling the fate of Iraq at one point in time, are only attempting to control the fate of those people. The CIA controlls the fate of Iraqis as much as I control my luck while gambling. If you notice fate and luck used in the previous sentence are both words which are an attempt to describe the future. This future cannot be controlled by people. It is at mercy of.......hmmmm...lets call it.. life. This life happens to be a multidimensional entity. I do not know how many dimensions it has but it certainly has one more dimension to the reality of this world. Imagine a person of two dimensions trying to cross a line on a piece of paper. Impossible. He would have to jump in to the third dimension to make it across the line. Similarly a grand building in three dimensions is reduced to something less grand in two dimensions. It would hardly be fair to say that one knows the building completely by only seeing it in two dimensions. It is a denizen of the three dimensions and it would best be served for the matter of description if it was seen in its dimension.
Following the same example it will be unfair to describe life by remaining in the limitedly perceived dimensions of the reality. Hence it is not possible for people living in this dimension to know the reality of our situation until and unless they make a "jump" into the other dimension. The dimension where life extends out to unseen.
I believe that it is that dimension that is the origins the millions of impulses that govern human souls. These impulses are the raw power which make people do things that they do. What determines which impulse reigns in a person at one time and change the course of history at one time in a particular fashion is unclear. Possibly the hypothesis would call for further dimensions to explain the control of the impulses. These impulses are the Jinnat as we know it.
So I would think that it is not people amongst us who control us. It is those impulses. What and who controls the impulses is another interesting matter which can be discussed at length.
The biggest flaw of the chess board example is the fact that there is an assymetry in it. There is a lop sidedness just in terms of the strata of experience. On one hand there is the soldier experiencing panic. On the other hand there are the leaders experiencing panic. That makes a nice statement about "Ik hee suf main kharay ho gaye mahmood o ayaz":) The third stratum should be the balancing stratum. That balancing stratum is missing. If it can be made in to an abstract stratum which could balance it well.
Other thoughts about numbers of the chess board and chess pieces coming up next. I will also talk about the introduction, development, climax and resolution.
T
Posts
2 comments:
i agree completely with the third dimension... but in order to establish a third dimension hints its existence have to introduced from the word go... and considering that the third dimension under discussion is too ummm... paranormal... so to say... people still cant relate to it... its going to be the scope of probably a completely different project to encompass or introduce that to people... i find that the only way to even vaguely hint at a 3rd dimension is by taming it down to concepts that people are already aware of... hence the taming down to a chess match... where the pieces take themselves seriously... while they are being played by puppeteers who sit amongst us...
thinking about the third dimension though... just kind of tough to spell it out in this context.
Na lalay!! I am more and more being compelled to believe one thing. All media that has been successful has been a reflection of the existential question. I think the existential question varies in different archetypes that are embodied in the life of different people. Archetype meaning an overarching unconscious direction of life that governs a person's passage in time. For example an archetype of the trickster is a very famous one. The trickster plays the fool but offers wise insights in to the lives of people. Inability to function as part of the mainstream because of the keen intellect, the trickster maintains its contact with the world with jokes and humor. The dark humor/ or light humor that is a hallmark for you does not get portrayed in this particular incident of the chess game. If you remain bounded by the second dimension you run the hazard of remaining in the realm of the ordinary. Now ordinary is not bad but you SHOULD know going into it that it is ordinary and not expect a little cute kitten to start roaring like a lion when you let it free in the jungle. A cute kitten has its place and it might be that a cute kitten is required here. I leave that up to you.
Post a Comment