IN THE NAME OF GOD

LIFE

Preface

In many occasions in my life, I was thinking about life. Sometimes I wrote about them but not seriously. While talking with some friends, I noticed that the ideas seem new and exciting for them, that I decided to write a book gathering those ideas, both for talking to new friends and also managing my mind, that at the end what I think about life. In the book already in your hand, you meet different ideas seeming irrelevant to each other. Yes, they are irrelevant, just they all are attempts to illustrate the notion of life. That's because the subject is so general, though one can think about it in many different aspects. Sometimes also it seems that the idea is irrelevant to the subject. In the case, be a bit patient. I need those explanations in order to open to the subject and they are needed to be discussed as the basis.

In the end, you will read in this book different ideas seeming familiar to you that may remind you of the names like,

Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, Nitchze, Etc. Just like you, I have been inspired by these philosophers ideas. Sometimes I mention their names and sometimes not. In the case I don't mention the name, don't assume that as literature fraud. I just avoid ruining the structure of the book, though I have tried the book be self-contained and that the reader needn't be familiar with those philosophers. I wish the book makes you feel both better, and that you have met something new.

Hamze Bagheri

“ The Child was searching for somewhere asking them, all were silence”

Chapter one: Life as Dialectic

2500 years ago in Greek, Aten, a man lived by the name of Socrates. He was accustomed to talking with people about so simple notions. Friendship, Justice, Love etc. Words that all thought they know what they mean, but he thought there is more than what it seemed.

The way he discussed with people was special and somehow rashnalate in a special way he called it the dialectic. For instance, he asked someone:

What is justice?

The man answered:

Justice is to return everything that is appointed to you unspoiled trustee.

Socrates said:

What if your friend lends you his sword and wants it back when he is not sober and it is possible that he kill himself at the moment. Is this justice to give him back his sword at the moment?

The man answered:

By definite No, this is not justice.

Then societies said:

Then justice cannot be to return what people has appointed to you. Then what it is?

The process of his discussion as you see was that he asked a question from a person. The person answered the question. Then Socratic criticised his answer and demanded him to give another answer. Then the man gave another answer and Socratic criticised the answer and so on. In this way, he claimed that together they could approach the true answer to the question, the truth.

He also has a hidden purpose of this method of discussion he called dialectic. Suppose that you go into a tribe dwelled in some tent. No civilization, no clothes, no sign of progress. But when you talk to them and learn their language, you find out that they have five words for the word “house”; or they have equivalent words for TV, Satellite, Camera etc. They say that, "like a Camera" and you ask what is the Camera. They say Camera is Camera.

It seems like once they have been civilized, that once they had the technology.

Socratic thought so about all humans. He believed that human before the birth was in the above world and in there they have learned everything, but at the moment they came into this world, they forgot everything. Thus for him, to learn is to remember. Once he discussed with a child about geometry and the child could utter the four principles of Ughelidos Geometry through dialectic. Socrates dialectic was an experiment to discover the truth that, as if human knows more than what it seemed. That while dialectic and surgery of the language and the words, it seemed that they contain more information than it could be cumulated and structured just through the ordinary usage of them in the society.

The simple way to think how a language and words shape and develop is that at first there is no language. When the society shapes, in order to transfer information and for communication people needs words and language. That's the way it works. The first human when was thirsty said “water”. In order to say he/she wanted that. Gradually the needs to transfer information expanded, thus the language expanded.

In this way, the language has developed based on practice and our practical needs in communication have developed it. That language goes from earth to heaven.

But Socrates didn't believe so. He thought that language comes from heaven, and we use that gold in banal uses. Like a man who uses a golden rock in order to break hazel, and doesn’t know the real value of the object.

That love is what the world moves because of, and we just see a shade of that in our relationships. That justice is what the universe works based on and we use the world just for happenings between us. We can see the idea also in Greek myths that from Chaos four gods were born. Night, Shadow, Earth and Love. There is a god of love later was born, that they refer to the emotion between couples to him. That's like the god is dependent or shadow of the old god of love.

Socratic loved language and the words because serging the language and the words, he founded as if they are more loaded for the purpose of ordinary use in the society and life. As if they are about things more fundamental and we use them for explaining what happens in our life. But they are about the universe. And as we use them for a purpose, in fact, we remind the great notion. And that the subject we explain by the word, is just a shade. Sunset, flower, anything beautiful, remind me of the beauty. That a theater reminds me love or sadness, because it contains that, a bit. That the shade of life reminds us the truth.

That's the way he searched for the truth he called it "Dialectic". As if life is like a dialectic between the human and the universe, the world. Let’s call it existence.

That’s like the existence asks human:

What is life?

And human answers. Everyone answer in his own way and write his own story. One says:

Life is to laugh and joy and please, nothing else.

Another one says:

Life is to try so that everyone who now mock you bows you the day.

Another one says …

Everyone gives an answer. The answer is deep in his mind, hidden in all he/she does. The answer is the way he/she live, the purpose he/she tries for if any. The reason why he/she lives, if any reason. Then the existence critics the man.

“you are wrong because…”.

You are wrong because you soak pleasure, but you get to suffer. You are wrong because, you soak respect, but you obtained humiliated. You are wrong because …

The existence critic contains no words, and the man has to interpret that by himself. Also, he/she have to judge the existence first, whether that's a wise, or just a mad, chaos.

Those men who answered Socrates where sure that he understands. That he is not mad. That he thinks. Of course, they would not discuss with an ape. That they answered to Socrates questions and pondered in his critics was because they had preassumed that he has a wise.

What about life. Is it wise or the life is just chaos. The thing happens to us are just by chance. Maybe you do wrong and success or you do right and lose.

We do not have to assume that the life is chaos to accept that there is no wise behind that. Maybe it just ruled by some rules like a machinery, and the rules are not at all care who has stood upon the court.

Wise and understanding, discipline or chaos; what is the nature of the existence?

The way we think about existence also may be hidden within our answers. That how we think about the world. I have considered that many people while talking about themselves and explaining who they are and why they are who they are, the first talk about the world, or after they uttered who they are they say the world is so. As if they say, I am so because the world is so. Barely people say, the world is so because I am so. Anyway, if the world would be as the man says, the world would be so many things that cannot congregate. Someone says life is cruel, another says, life is kind and generous, just wish a wish etc. As if they are just talking about themselves, and they see themselves in the mirror of life or their dreams.

Let's back to the topic. There are different ways to think about the existence. And also as if there is no distinct border between the man and the existence ahead of him. We named existence what that happens to us or more precisely, the wise, rule or chaos behind that. But anything happens to us inside. May you get to a purpose but you feel bad inside, or may you lose and feel great. So weard the existence talk to us. And some believes that the existence not at all talk to anyone. No one discusses with an ape. But for some, life is the doom to discuss with an ape for a lifetime.

The man makes mouths at the ape, and the ape also at him, and a long time passes mug and making mouths. Suddenly the ape becomes serious and hits on the man's face. And again mugging and again hitting on the face. The man that assumed life an ape and also himself.

Or just like a true dealer. Know the rules and follow the instructions, you will get it if it is possible. A man true to them true with him and false with them false with.

Or not. that the existence understands, that there is a meaning behind what it says.

Maybe we are the three men at the same time, an ape, machinery, and human, more or less. A bit we think that the chance was not with us or was and just it. A bit we think that's just normal, good or bad. Or maybe there is a reason for that, and nothing happens arbitrary and randomly and there is a wise behind all things.

That's a hard complicated dialectic, life is. To utter who you are and wait for the existence, the life answer. And it tells you that's wrong because…. That's the time you must prepare for another answer or just persist on the answer you have made before. Whether the pain means I am wrong, or that's just the way and a true man must tolerate. Or whether I am right with the way that I have succeeded and everything is ok, or the answer is in the way?  How one will be able to understand truly what the life says if it says any? And how to answer the true answer is there is any? To be the third, the guilty one, the judge and the punisher. That's the matter of life. The life critics, and you must prepare for another answer even to answer that I persist. That the time to ruin a character and rebuilt another one. Each answer is to ruin and rebuilt, to die and reborn, On and on till death.

Sometimes it tells nothing. Like a man sit before the curtain, waiting the one at the other side break the silence, just tell something. And she says nothing, and the man too. And this is silent. Sometimes nothing changes and we just wait for that. I pondered about the situation called limbo, and at the end I guess I got the secret of limbo. The man has hidden something.

Once I thought that maybe it is not just the matter of life, but history. That's like to consider history as the life of nations or all humankind. That's like the existence of history says:

What is history?

And the nations says:

History is ….

The answer will be the architecture of an age. They say:

History is slavery.

The existence critics:

That’s wrong because…. Misery occurs, suffers, catastrophes. And all get that is not what they wanted, what they dreamt once.

Then the nation answers:

Yes, Feudalism is the right answer.

And the history critics and answers:

Wrong because …..

Capitalism, different religions, customs, traditions, ways of life etc. They come and goes, and something remains.

Many of those once were believed has gone, and some has remained. Some virtues, some beliefs, something.

That a man must be honest. That you must try hopefully. That the God is kind. They are the cumulative remainder of our predicacors answer to their life. Their answer to the history.

Because the existence doesn't erase our answer. It doesn't reject all blind. It critics, and maybe part of the answer remains in the next answer. Just like Chrismas that has endured through all these ages. Like Noroz that there are some thousands of years, my people celebrate the renewing nature at the beginning of each spring.

Life looks like a dialectic, also the history. This is the way humans changes, also the nations. Who knows, maybe nature also critics itself.

No dianasors are wrong, let it be something else, something that …

Socrates believed that people know the truth, and when they came to the world, with the first glimpse they have forgotten everything. And he tried to remind them, hoping that they know that.

What is what the life tries to remind me. As if it hopes on us, trying to remind us what that once we knew.

This remind me an story in Quran. The story of creation of Adam. The story tells:

Then God decided to create Adam. He told that to the angles and said them, I want to locate a king in place of myself on the earth. when I done with his creation, bow to him all. The angles told him:

Why you want to creat something that bleeds on the earth. The God said:

I know something that you don’t.

Sometimes I think, what is what I have forgotten.