On Unhappiness

It all started when Krishnendu and I sat down one night to discern what happiness is! Some very old questions that popped in our minds were – what is the ambit of ‘Happiness’; what is ‘Unhappiness’ then; what is the correlation between the two!! Whatever I say, whatever I theorize hereinafter, I must admit that the continued pervasion of life with ‘strife’, ‘conflict’, ‘misery’ and the like leads (rather misleads) to the conclusion that Happiness does not exist at all. However this theory is not a general one regarding happiness as such… this theory essentially explores ‘what if’ the a priori assumption of non-existence of Happiness is true. The purpose of this exercise in particular does not concern Happiness in fact but merely attempts to find a logical conclusion of death in a system in which Happiness simply does not exist & life is essentially a treatment in Unhappiness.

Like any other theory, this one also has a couple of assumptions – these are the ‘a priori’, which we assume as true. The veracity of these assumptions can and I promise shall be debated at some later time. (To give away the truth, I myself have serious questions as to their correctness, but nonetheless it doesn’t concern me here.)

The Assumptions

1. Happiness does not exist
2. Unhappiness permeates Human Life

The Definition of Variables

I. ‘L’ is the variable for individual human life which can exist in either of two states – when one is alive & when one is dead. Therefore,
a. L = 1, shall imply that an individual is alive
b. L = 0, shall imply that an individual is dead

II. ‘U’ is the variable for individual human unhappiness which also can exist in either of two states.
a. U = 1, shall imply the existence of unhappiness
b. U = 0, shall imply the cessation of unhappiness

III. Both ‘L’ and ‘U’ denote the state of the variables and not their quantity.

What might bother someone is the practical reconciliation of emotions usually experienced and termed as ‘Happiness’ within such a framework. It is to be noted that happiness is only relative unhappiness. To explain, suppose ‘A’ is possessed with 2units of ‘U’ while B has 3units of ‘U’. This would effectively imply that A is happier than B because A has lesser quantity of unhappiness than B. Hence Happiness is only relative Unhappiness!

The Principle

The value of ‘U’ shall be ‘1’ ONLY IF the value of ‘L’ is ‘1’

The Explanation and Implications

The principle is significant as it stands. There is certainly the possibility of drawing corollaries from the same – however it is important to avoid a few logical errors while deriving one.

The Principle DOES NOT imply that U=0 when L=0. Had it been so, it would imply that with the cessation of human life effective happiness increases, since U is reduced to non-existence.

However, due to ‘ONLY IF’ operator in the Principle, ‘U’ shall come into existence only when L=1. Hence any study of ‘U’ shall be subject to the fact that ‘L’ remains as ‘1’. Therefore if L=0, then ‘U’ does not come into play at all.

To further explain, when ΣL=0, there shall be no perception of ‘U’ or ΣU at all (where Σ represents the function for the entire humankind). In such a situation there shall be no concept of either ‘Happiness’ or ‘Unhappiness’.

Hence, it CANNOT be claimed that death breeds happiness! That is, cessation of human life shall in no circumstance lead to decrease of relative unhappiness!

Wrenched

I knew it, just never realised it... A few things are granted to you just because u hav been a successful actor..one who can put up a show of bravery and courage.. U might lose a lot on the way, but u stand tall to gain some at least.. And when u pull down that curtain u again gain a few things, like the throbbing of a true soul that cares, but u also lose out on some accounts.. The gifts that were allotted on the assumption of the 'act' are somewhy taken back.. These are the moments u actually do not feel like going back to explain the the thin line that exists between the act and the person.. It might sound defensive but can't really help, that it must be proper to at least give a thought that it is actually the same person playing both the roles.. It is just too hard to distinguish between the two characters and discard one as the unreal..

I know now, once the gift had been taken back, that it was meant for the other me which could at all prices maintain the outer facade... Perhaps it will do that from now on.. But only perhaps coz moments of desperation loom large... I guess it is just time for me to finish this play and start a new one.. But do not know for sure whether the time is ripe.. My job is over.. Just groping for the restart button..

A word of gratitude to you and to all those who made the play a success..

Datta, Damyata, Dayadham,
Shantih, Shantih, Shantih....

Today

O King in what form do you appear today,

Amidst the kingdom of my heart,

The lakhs of moons and suns die of shame beneath thy feet.

All the pride crumbles as it cedes;

My whole body and judgement is plucked like the strings of the veena.

A blissful affliction flows in the breeze today,

As all the flowers of the garden take refuge at thy feet.

My unblinking gaze fails to take note of this world

When I stare within at the reigning bliss.

The Poltergeist

The belief had turned into faith. I kno it now; there is sumthin uncanny and mysterious in my laptop. Perhaps a ghost! Yes! A ghost. Everytime with whatever problem it is taken to the service center, it wrks perfectly, never allowiun the problem to be detected. This is irritating. The problem wid its screen, which almost had been stifling me for the past month, simply vanished when it was sent to the service center at the oder end of the city – can be nuthin else bt a poltergeist.

However a ghost perhaps resides in every corner of our lives – in our thoughts, in our beliefs, in our understanding, in our world perception, in our mutual relationships, at our sides, here, there, everywhere. That is perhaps why there is a perpetual lack of stability in this world – a fidgety ghost perhaps pervades us all or else only me at least.

Seated in Court Room No.5 of the Supreme Court of India, my belief is getting strengthened. The matter that is being argued is abt some taxation matter and hence extremely boring. However it is interesting when it seems that the poltergeist of instability has pervaded this court room as well. Justice Kapadia himself it seems had delivered a judgement before, which was on a very similar fact situation – that is the basic contention of the petitioners and thus he prays that the same be applied here as well. However today he is adamant on the contrary and therefore the clash of arguments, sections and subsections – the unstable mantle of justice – the poltergeist playing.

The dance of instability stretches far beyond this court room. The lack of certainty is acute. The relationship which yesterday it seemed was filled with the promises of hope, one which I could clutch along to sustain, seems today to be of much lesser weight. It is not that in a matter of A vs. B, one party has to be at a fault alwz. If B refuses to accept the bond of a relation even A cannot help the situation. How long can one possibly wait! Even if one wishes to, the normal sensibility of a human being prompts him to move on. There’s no space to think abt certainty, nor abt stability – helpless at the game of the spirit or that of the ghost. The mind and the heart yearn to maintain the status quo of the matrix that existed yesterday. Somewhere seated in the soul the witch-master continues to chant, to tame that excited poltergeist – we continue to hope. The shadowy cloud might be for a span that’s temporary, beyond it there mght be light, and there might be Hope.

Perhaps this is why relationships do not have a reason; do not have a rule. They do not require one. In the sway of our expectations and hope, whatever seems apt, as we keep a hand on the heart, it is declared to be so.

I feel this is where the answer to all ‘uncanny’ness lies. No rule, no stoppages, no reason, no bindings, hence to come close and give a name to a relation has no direction of its own. Consequently there is no check on drifting apart and being torn to pieces altogether. Just to float on the ‘wings of poesy’ is hence what a relation is. A or B, neither is thus at fault, none had the responsibility to be bound or binding another. Relationships hence are the imprints of cacophonous tumult of uncertainty in the mind of an individual or a mismanaged nation/notion at the level of thought. What has its birth in the depths of perception (notwithstanding any rule or scheme) gives rise to the unstable sensation of ‘like’ or ‘dislike’. Hence it is ephemera, a reflection of uncertainty.

I believe that therefore, it is true that a ghost keeps dancing within us day-in and day-out. Without abiding by the rules of addition, subtraction, multiplication or division, it calculates the non-‘sense’ within us. Being kaputt, it shies away from the world, never revealing itself…… but only to some chosen witch-doctors…… just like my laptop……