Sun in my eyes was not the sun on my eyes..

My heart went out to the sun today. What with being eclipsed and all. Went out. Chanced a gaze. I was scared a bit after all the radiatio gyan my mom uploaded on me. Didnt see the sun . He, even as he was half hidden, was blazing with all glory. All I saw was blinding light. Came back in, sat on my bed. Just closed my eyes, to rest away the lights invasion. And there he was.. on my eyelids, half hidden, half shining, with all his vulnerability and all his glory. The sun, and all these people like him, so intimidating in all public venues, in formal direct dialogues.. somehow tricks us to believe (or is it, make us realise) they do not want and let themselves be held, in the dark alley of submission and privacy.

The containing flesh; the liberating flesh

I realised something today. Focusing on your body. Focusing intensely on it. Being aware of it, rather than being a detriment to detachment , can actually aid it. It's like, one minute I am so unconsciously conscious of the breathing me, heart beating me, the seeing me, the hearing me... (I say unconsciously conscious coz, it's such an integral awareness that I dont even realise it's there) And in the next moment when I become conscious of the heart bearting, the eyes seeing, the ears hearing, suddenly that awareness of my body, takes the 'me' out of the bodily activities. And suddenly am this extra me, watching the body.

I say, if I am a liquid in a container, it's the awareness, the contemplation on the container, that is the easiest way to find my contained self's existence, rather than contemplating on the wide wide world outside. (Atleast for me, that hasn't worked much.)

Indeed With each discrimination is born a new identity. And the most basic one, gives the most basic one.

Different time frames in one body?

Time is indeed relative. It's been proved too. With that experiment witn meons or muons or something like that. So, that being so, what if our mind and our body cells are living in two different time frames?? I mean, just look at the speed at which we withdraw our feet when we step on something sharp, or the speed at which we recognise a face in the crowd. By the time that happens a millions neurons would have fired! Each neuron readying those vesicles of neurotransmitters, releasing them, those neuro transmitters, moving to nearby dendrites, asking them to send more vesicles forward to convey the message.. So these cells gotta be in a higher time frame! where our 1 s is like a 10 min or something of theirs. Or maybe greater! I have no proof. It's just an instinctive insight. But even if we go by the logic path. Time is defined by change. When there is no change. There is no time. It is for certain that, many many many changes happen in a cellular world compared to the organism world in a given time period of the organism world. So all those changes must mean more time would have been experienced by the cellular world components.
Just imagine! What if eternity is closer when one is a cell in our own body than when we are the body?!!

problem with just problem solving

These kids in school have so much to study! Guess I did too. I still do! what am i saying. So many questions to answer. Eternal problem solvers. Eternal conceptual problems solvers. That would have been ok, if we were the problem finders too. Someone thinks some thing should be a quesstion, puts it up and we, the kids as well as the adults solve them. As answers are given to questions that were never asked by own selves, boredom sets in...

I wish there would be some new teaching techniqie that'd come up.

Something that presents to say Unnikkuttan, just one sentence in the beginning, as he sits to study Mauryan History, say. From nowhere, a young lad name Chandragupta came and built an empire that'd stand the test of centuries. Then he should ask. Where? When? How? What was he like? What was the odds of that happening? and so on.. Then the programme will give the answers, and finding gaps, asking for info to fill in those gaps, Unnikkuttan will learn.

problems can be owned, knowledge can be enjoyed only when we get to find them too na. Or how do we have a citizenry who questions along with performing?

Evolutionary logic of the thin fad

Naked Ape by Desmond Morris is one cool book. Reread it. Gained by the new trains of thought it provided. Train of thought, very much influenced by my passion and success to lose a few kilograms of body flab. If for centuries men went behind women with wide hips, big breasts and flawless skin, it makes a lot of sense, evolutionarily as these could have been possible guarantees for good fertility, child rearing capacity in a woman. And similarly tall, big, brawny, hairy men must have been loved by women too . Tall- for the larger vision range, big anf brawny- for the offense capability, and hairy - for the camouflage (:-D!! who knows). hee hee. But why I am elaborating so much on long long ago trends is that, I really wanna enter into a serious ponder on why suddenly men lost their interest in wide hips and butts and boobs!

ofcourse if there is a suggestion of ponder, it is but a facade to present a theory! :-) and here it is.

Human kinds must really be at it's end. As in, the resources and space is running out. More family is a maladaption indeed for the modern day mom and dads. Less fertility is indeed more adaptive. So maybe, it's the need of the times, that the huma genes are facilitating. By changing, and there by programming men to be attracted to skinny women with teeny tiny hips and breasts that could fit in a contact lens case! I know am exxagerating. But if one looks through the popular divas and actresses, one can actually see a reduction in voluptuousness. People often say that's only because of increasing health consciousness. But though there are studies saying obesity is unhealthy, there is no proof that a thin body is more healthy than a moderate constitution.

So is the case with women. Now metrosexual, mauve, light green type men are more appealing to women than the mountain man type dark brown , maroon type ones. A little less the masculine virility and a little more the accomodating companiability.



PS: Here is a sculpture of a woman from Mauryan times. It's not that one is beautiful than the other. It's just adaptation logic. To be thin. And desire thin. Follow it and get more mates :-P. So unthin women go go exercise. But hey also know k? That you just were born in the wrong century and that you'd have probably had warriors running after you and artists sculpting and painting you, having that body that you have!