Oneness: Time-consuming or Time-saving?
One is a number smaller than two. Who does not know that? Ask anyone, I bet everyone will have the same answer. But let’s admit that it’s far simpler than this question which catches us all unawares, and then fumbles us – which is heavier, a kilo of concrete or a kilo of wool? But does this unit – the state of being one – mean less work, I repeat less work for one? Hang on, you know, there are at least two sides to everything.
I’ve always been a bit of a loner. I’m not a recluse, though. I was an introverted child then. I’m an introvert man now. I was a taciturn child in days of yore. I’m a reserved man today. Someone who speaks only when spoken to, that’s me. But I listen and think a lot. Maybe my premature hair loss bears this out. This also explains why I make comparatively few first moves in nightclubs and bars. But there have always been adjustments, even in hair loss. Hairs uproot themselves from the scalp, unasked. Then they appear on my face, untimely and uninvited; mind you, it’s not unnecessary because I’m interesting. By facial hair, I’m of one religion, by birth another. Because of hair loss and for security reasons, I may follow Guru Nanak soon – a Sikh convert!
Back to business – I’m alone and have been so for some time now. Every time I meet a new person I’m asked: “So you’ve your family here.” I reply, “No, neither here nor there, I’m alone.” “Oh, then you have a great time. It must be easy, convenient and exciting for you.” This question and this answer both by the asker – a perfect usual combination! With first-hand experience of having lived alone for couple of years now, I would have second thoughts to divorce the question and the answer even if marriage is an antidote to lifelong loneliness. But I deny it’s easy. There are as many convenience as inconvenience.
Every so often there is a tug-of-war between food and rest, or rather unkindly between hunger and laziness. But it’s time-saving. I do not discuss what to cook. I do not discuss what to brew. Thanks, people do not have to haggle over the price here. And thanks, I do not have to discuss and decide what and how much to buy when. It’s convenient I can sit anywhere I want. If I’m not in, the bathtub is empty. If I’m anywhere other than in the washroom, it’s vacant. If I do not do laundry, the washing machine is unused. So I do not have to queue up. I stand up before the dressing table. Somebody there looks where and how I look and then decides what and how I wear. And I agree. Of course, I do not have to fight over the remote control for TV. I make decision, I execute it. Time saved. This is one side. I like it.
I can’t have my cake and eat it. This is the other side. I do not like it, but I have it. It’s time-consuming. I wake up late. In the time I can ready myself, shove down some pieces of food and then take leave, I can only set the kitchen in order. What do I do? Self-pity reigns, and it’s time-consuming. I cannot play seesaw when I am alone. Lift this side, that side falls; lift that side and this side falls. Push from here, that side falls; push from that side, and this side falls. The next best alternative is to give up and forget, but how long? Inconvenience is prolonged, mutuality desired; but how long?
So, one is a smaller quantity than two – no doubt. If the state of being single does not always mean less expense, I can also say the state of being one is not time-saving. That said, oneness is not necessarily loneliness for loneliness is my modus vivendi. And oneness or loneliness is certainly a fancy-free lifestyle.
Tshering
‘Oneness’ could also mean two or more persons with common goals and interests…
Commented by Tshering
Dawa Tshering
It could indeed. In fact, my first choice was ‘loneliness’. I thought over it a bit, and then told myself that it could mean wrongly I’m lonely. I’m alone but never lonely. So I replaced it with oneness. By oneness, I mean the state of being 1 in body, and not in thought!
Who wouldn’t love to have and work towards common goals and interests? But tell me who would not be tempted both by greed and need to divert and follow his/her own way, putting self-interest over and above common, family, organization and national interest. That’s why the cracks in all these bodies, unsurprisingly.
Commented by Dawa Tshering
Tshering
Oh Lord! I’m not implying that we should promote ‘oneness.’ I’m just pointing out your use of this term – whether it’s been used appropriately. If my opinion matters, I would say, “In as much as we are individuals, we are family, community and society members as well as citizens.” We can have individual interests, but there’s no escaping living interconnected to everything else around us.
Commented by Tshering
Dawa Tshering
Good Lord! Neither have I understood so (that you are for oneness). Your comment surely made me look at the possibility of the word in question being understood in two different ways once again. What I wrote in response to your comment – By oneness, I mean the state of being 1 in body, and not in thought! – is a postscript to the write-up just in case some readers, if there are any, misunderstands it.
Frankly, any comment from any reader will matter as much as it will not. Yes and no but ‘no’ will overwhelm ‘yes’, I’m afraid. Yes, because it’s proof that somebody reads what I write whatever may be the subject. I’ll like it although I’m more or less indifferent.
No, this blog is not a commercial undertaking. We/I’ve no axe to grind. Our blog title says it all. Yes readers or no readers, for that matter yes comments or no comments, this blog is always yes. Come rain or shine, http://www.cholachorus.com will survive so long as the bloggers.
Commented by Dawa Tshering
Tshering
Dawa, I understood perfectly what you meant by ‘oneness.’ I was just sharing with you another meaning to it….that’s all.
Wo ho! Don’t you think your last two paragraphs on your last comment are a bit unfair. Speaking for myself, I do not read and comment on your blog for nothing. It matters to ME that you’re NOT indifferent to my comments.
In all honesty, I do not argue for the sake of arguing. I respond to your blog posts genuinely from my heart.
Today, your comment has confused me utterly, but I know all this will be crystal clear by tomorrow at the start of a fresh morning.
A very good night to you and Lakey
Commented by Tshering
Dawa Tshering
A very warm and good morning to you, our regular and engaging reader:
I do not know what you dreamed about last night. Whatever you dreamt of and whatever we believe it’s a forecast of, I’m afraid I resolutely remain still indifferent. What did you dream of? Does this reply-comment confirm your dream? I wrote this and hit the hay. It was a very good sleep. Thank you.
So far as your first paragraph is concerned, I contend that I’ve already answered you, and answered affirmatively, in my first reply to your first comment, haven’t I?
Unlike you, I argue for reasons as well as just for the sake of argument. I enjoy both. But I ensure that my argument just for the sake of it is not injurious and fatal. If it looks to be one or if my contender construes it to be as such, I abort it then and there. I see it as immediacy. I do not care if abortion is illegal.
I do not know if I write from my heart or head, but when I write I write with my fingers and my fingers are mightier than both. It’s only tautology that they outnumber both. Because we are all interconnected, indifference is my sine qua non, paradoxically. If not indifferent, I’d have married every beauty!
Lastly but seriously with joke aside and whatever said and done, I go on record that I sincerely respect you and your comments. It’s not because of who you are to http://www.cholachorus.com, but it’s because of who and what you are to the bloggers. Be assured that you’ve one more respectful student. I admit I’ll not always be a compliant student. I prefer to tread on two-way street, not disrespectfully, though. I pray this does not confuse you further. By the way, I like confusion. We are all monotonous save confusion!
Have a nice day!
Commented by Dawa Tshering
Tshering
Thanks, but I’m not the type looking for respect…how can I when I myself do not easily respect unless deserving…you got me wrong again…i like argument but i cannot understand indifference…
Commented by Tshering
Dawa Tshering
I get wrong as many times and as much as I can call myself a human. At least on one account we run parallel – I also do not respect anyone who either expects or demands respect. Just like you I consider myself honest only as and when I respect those who deserve. You may not look for respect but my respect for you shine on you. If such respect blind you, please deflect.
Not a philanthropist nor a bodhisattva yet I’m not indifferent to pain and suffering. But once again I’m indifferent to comments irrespective of source so that no comments hold sway over me! I also like argument, but only those arguments premised on facts, figures, principles, etc., and certainly not those tinged with emotions!
Commented by Dawa Tshering
Tshering
‘Emotions’ aren’t bad…but managing them intelligently is essential in our day to day dealings or even arguments…..and I’m curious as to whether our Buddhist ‘compassion’ is devoid of emotions…
Commented by Tshering
Dawa Tshering
Emotion isn’t bad altogether, I agree wholly. All of us will be always crying if no one is angry even sometimes. That way emotion is a necessary evil. If no one or nothing is irritating, who or what to be patient with? Did Ashi Nangsa say this? I’m unsure of myself.
Again, I’m delighted to agree with you that “managing them [emotion] intelligently is essential”. This is well and truly so because many of us, needless to say, end up victims of our own reckless and uncalled-for outburst of emotions. This is true as much of positive as of negative emotions. There are examples of both aplenty. No longer unheard-of, presently a girl fights lawsuit to determine the paternity of her newborn baby that she could not, for many reasons, discard immediately after birth; a group of teenagers spend one or two nights at the “Center Box” after a drunken brawl at a local nightclub. Just a few of many cases you and I know very well and come across more often than not.
That’s why management of emotion is all the more essential. That’s why it’s imperative that we know that the management of emotion is at all times inclusive of , what I might call for want of a better term, the WHEN factor. We all have emotions – love, anger, joy, sorrow, etc. Depending on how and when we use, the latter taking precedence over the former, emotion could be either make-up or blemish. Emotion is mostly packaging. We know the product fully only when it’s too late. In a nutshell, emotion can and does obscure the substance.
Curiosity killed the cat. I don’t know when, where and how. Neither do I care who will take care of the dead body. For me pussy cat, black or white or for that matter of any colour, is eerie and sinister. I heard (I’m not sure if I recall rightly) that in Buddhism dogs enjoy higher place than pussy cats. Animal discrimination just like a mild sex discrimination?
Well, long story shot, how can Buddhist compassion or Christian compassion or Hindu compassion or Islam compassion be without emotions! I’m bemused by your audacity to wonder if our “Buddhist compassion is devoid of emotions”. As you know very well, compassion is emotion; but emotion is not always compassion. Love is okay, it’s attachment that’s not. So said the Buddha I’m told.
Commented by Dawa Tshering
Lakey
Someday, the two of you should sit together, collate and compile all your comments and churn a novel out of it! Might be a bestseller, who knows! Just kidding. I see this as a demonstration of power networking and effective engagement, which I suppose is one of the objectives of putting up a blog!
Commented by Lakey
Dawa Tshering
Please arrange a meeting. You’ll be the scribe and scribbler. My share of the proceeds from the bestseller will go towards your son’s upbringing!
Commented by Dawa Tshering
Gaki
Love this piece Acho! keep writing
Commented by Gaki
Singye
Anytime you expect the realtionships to be directional, oneness is more time saving.;-)Otheriwse, lifes more sweet, beauthiful , intersting and complete if you have someone to share (two).
Live without love(relationships) is no life at all!!!!
Commented by Singye
Dawa Tshering
I wish all relationships were full of love!
Commented by Dawa Tshering