Are you happy?

Are you happy? If you honestly answer this question, with no politically or intellectually correct formulations and formulae, I believe there is some reason to read on.
What is this something outside each one of us which seems to pull us so much so that you want to cease to be yourself, and be subsumed in some other identity; yet not be willing enough to absolutely forego the individuality or ‘ego’? You always wanted to be something else. You are not satisfied with what you are at any point of time. There is something which tells you about something further, just across the mountain, something like a promised land, something like a mirage which keeps moving even as you advance.
Now, one could argue that this is the innate urge for perfection. Conversely, it could be that shameless materialist within you seeking something outside all the while, without realizing that peace and contentment is within you. You can subscribe to any of these views depending on your ideological presumptions, philosophy of life and inherent biases, but the question remains unanswered: are you happy? If your philosophy of life doesn’t give you happiness or contentment, what worth is it to you…or is your Philosophy of Life for mere academic consumption?
Ultimately isn’t every shade of philosophical thought a pretext to rationalization of life? Rationalization, justification and reconciliation of ones urges, needs, selfish deeds, motives and all those subtle unexplainable elements which determine human behaviour is cleverly secured through ‘philosophy’. This is not to denigrate philosophy but to try and understand the utility of philosophy.

Coming back to the question; are you happy… the answer would be predicated by what philosophy you subscribe to. The sad fact is that the dominant philosophy of popular culture is one that values ‘success’ as its desired goal or objective which incidentally is hammered into the cognitia of everyone from childhood. Success here would connote not mere materialistic success but a wider entity. Consequentially, a subscriber to popular philosophical thought would see the terminal value of success as the sole rationalization of his life and deeds. And resultantly, failure signifies a breakdown of philosophy and hence lack of rationalization of life and effort. With the breakdown of rationalization of the apparatus of life, one ends up being discontented and unhappy.

Now, how common is success? Life is not so generous. Not more than 2% of all human effort would result in success if one seriously thinks of it. To those who felt 2% is pessimistic, let me suggest that even 2% is quite an overestimation. Of all the cumulated desires, urges, wishes, aspirations and the resultant efforts indulged in by an average human being, is it not true that bulk of these go unsatisfied? And in such circumstances, should a philosophy that has as its terminal value an attribute available only for 2% be the norm? What about the 98% which seeks to rationalize failure? The popular philosophical thoughts of the day give him no room for rationalization or justification of his failure. He is doomed. He is sad. He is discontented.
To be happy, you need a philosophy of life that justifies and accepts failure, if not eulogize it. To put it bluntly, winners do not need to philosophize. It is the losers who need a philosophy. A philosophy which ignores 98% of humanity is not worth its name.




(The snap is of a school child in Katekalyan, Dantewada enjoying her mid-day meal. She was happy.)