To be or not to be

First of all, let’s be honest with ourselves about one thing … Don’t claim you’re not afraid of dying, when everything you do proves that you are. Man is generally afraid of the unknown, and that’s the least cause for people to be afraid of death. To you, death is really the unknown. You do not know when you will die or where you will go when you die. This is natural because you do not know why you have to die.

We come to this life, not by our choice. Before we were born we did not exist, and nobody asked us if we wish to be born. Before we came to be, we were not. Can you imagine what it’s like for you not to be? Not to have ever existed? It’s a great blessing; your very mere existence itself is a blessing, isn’t it? Try to imagine yourself nonexistent and you will understand what I mean. You did not come to life by your own choice; neither will you leave it by your choice. Your birth and your death are not optional to you. So if it wasn’t me who decided my birth and my death, then how can I claim that it is I who should make up a definition for the purpose of both such events in whatever way I like? It doesn’t make sense, does it?

To claim that human existence has no absolute meaning or purpose is to claim that it is the same for you to exist and not to exist, and that it is the same for all humanity if it never even existed. It is to claim that whoever made the decision of bringing you and the rest of the universe to existence, had no purpose for such a decision whatsoever.

But do you accept such a claim? If you do, then why do you think it is that you are still searching for the meaning of life, why are you not really satisfied with anything you have read on the topic so far? 


Do philosophers know the answer?


You probably wonder right now, what about everything that philosophers taught us? Whenever you look in books of philosophy or works of thinkers and prosperous writers you will find a number of definitions none of which would satisfy you. Some writers will be intelligent enough to go around the question of the meaning of life by detailing certain deeds that you do in your daily life, and giving them value the way they are. It’s as if he’s saying, your life is cool just the way it is, it is justified by whatever you do with it, so don’t bother with questions no philosopher has ever managed to answer, or even wishes to answer anymore. If there is a single definition that any of those thinkers believes to be the truth, then what is the point in there being so many other definitions? Why didn’t they all agree to that single definition celebrating it as the truth? Do they not believe that everything must have only one value that is true, while all other values are false? In what way will the unseen and unperceived be different from the seen and perceived in terms of absolution of the value of truth? In other words, who gives you – the philosopher - the right to claim that just because you cannot see something, you are free to assume any value or theory for it and claim it to be the truth? Are they not even worried that perhaps life does have only one meaning that is true and absolute, and so does death?

Didn’t it ever occur to you that perhaps even those mighty and noble thinkers you take for granted do not know the meaning of life?


The “wisest” of those thinkers have decided to neglect metaphysics altogether, restricting their knowledge to that which they can see and sense, and making you believe that your life is a resultant of a set of accumulative effects of chance that delivered you the way you are. They believe that whatever you choose to believe is irrelevant, because nothing is absolute, and the meaning of life is only a mental construct or an individual conviction that everyone constructs the way he sees fit for himself. Well... let’s not talk philosophy much longer. Those guys (the philosophers) really have nothing to offer in this area. They no longer believe in the absolute. They no longer believe in the unity and singularity of the truth, and that those questions must indeed have a single particular consistent answer that is the truth, while everything else is false. We need to understand what the word “truth” means before we start looking for its value.

Yes we may construct false notions about anything that exists or that does not exist, but this is the relative nature of man. Existence is absolute, but human notion is relative.

If I related to a piece of information that holds that X = a, then that to me would be the truth value for X, in reference to me and to my source. It is what I know, and what I know is the truth for me. But is it by necessity the absolute truth? Is it not possible that what I think is the truth, is actually not the truth? If as a human, I think or “know” that X = a, is it really a necessity that this is the true value for X? Absolutely not; I simply might be wrong, just as wrong as the source to which I refer and relate.


Many philosophers build on a view that life is chaos and that no order whatsoever lies underneath the process of existence. Others would admit order and procession but would concern themselves with the way such order relates to man; their theories come in that area. Hence, they all give themselves the freedom to destroy the absolution of the truth and turn it into an imaginary value that exists only in the human minds. My question to you, the non-philosopher, is do you really find such an idea reasonable or acceptable? Can you really not see order in everything around you? Can you not see perfect order in the animal kingdom? Can you not see perfect order in the water cycle or in food chains? Can you not see perfect order in day and night? Can you not see perfect order and ultimate purposefulness in the “design” of the atmosphere? Can you not see perfect order in your own body, and in your own two hands? Are you not amazed by the way your own body works?

It is amazing that the more knowledge most scientists would acquire about nature and the way it works, the more rudely and arrogantly they would insist on denying the undeniable. If it wasn’t for the supreme order in nature, none of those scientists would have even acquired any material to turn into written laws and theorems, just making them scientists… you know what you know, you have what you have, and you are what you are because nature is a perfect design, not because it is chaos. Chaos can never be put in standard laws and rules that cannot be breached. Chaos is purposeless and unrestrictive; absolutely contrary to what we see in nature.

I dare any philosopher to give us a clear, reasonable, and acceptable definition for death and its purpose.

However, I’m not talking to the philosopher, or to the scientist here. I’m talking to you. What do you think? How do you feel? Do you really think existence is chaos or disorder? If you do, then I’d have to ask you not to carry on with this article.


Cause and purpose


Order is purpose. System is purpose. If there is any lesson we have learnt from our study of nature and of the way life works, it is causality. Nothing takes place for no reason or cause. Every action is an effect that results from a cause. Everything exists the way it exists in nature because if it didn’t, the entire process will fail. This is what we call purpose. The purpose of the sun is to give us warmth and daylight. The purpose of the atmosphere is to give us the air we breathe, and to protect us from harmful cosmic hazards and sun rays. This is how it goes. Everything is there for a reason. The proof for that simple fact is just in imagining what things would be like if that thing did not exist, or if it did not exist in this exact same way. This is purpose; cause for creation and infliction of order.

So, what is our purpose then? Can we presume that all systems in existence are obviously designed in such a perfect flawless way to serve very specific purposes, all except for us, the humans? Can we claim that humanity is the only system in existence that does not have an absolute purpose of existence in the midst of all such absolute perfection? What then will be the meaning or the point in everything that exists around us?


This is why we so strongly need to feel valuable, effective, and justifiable. It is a human instinct in man to need to establish a feeling that his life has a meaning and an impact. You are here to do something. You may not know it yet, and you may not know it at all, but you do acknowledge that you’re here to do something. However, what you may not know is that regardless of what you will choose to do, and take for a meaning for your life, and all human life, there is something you are required to do, the same thing all humans were created to do. That thing is what justifies life being the way it is, and that gives meaning to both life and death.

You will die after you have done a certain set of deeds that define what we call your destiny, this is another issue. The question here is about what it is that you are supposed to do, not what you will eventually end up doing. Your notion of that thing you’re supposed to do in your life is by necessity a relative notion because such is the case with all human knowledge. Philosophers would urge you to hang on to whatever you see fit for you, as long as you’d stop bothering them with inquiring for absolutes. You’re a good doctor, then good for you; this must be the purpose and meaning of your life.

Well, actually it is not. It is your destiny. It is how circumstances of your life (that philosophers would call chaos) were planned to drive you through. But is being a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher, all that humans were created to do? Are those purposes or causes? Is this the only choice we were made on this earth to take? The choice of a career; a way to make a living? Why does there have to be a career and a troublesome process of work and effort in the first place? Why is all order and system designed in such a way that renders us in constant need for motion and work? Why do I have to work, is a question that is more important to you than what will I choose to work. Why am I here? And if I’m here to pick a career and do the best I can with it, isn’t this what everyone would naturally do as naturally as they would east, sleep and drink? If I’m here to find myself a way to make a living, isn’t this what every sane human being would instinctually do by necessity? What’s the point in dying then? And what’s the point in having to do and having to work in general?

What benefit will I make out of that, when one day I will have to leave it all behind after all? What’s the point? What’s the purpose of deed and doing?

You believe, when on your deathbed, that what you did with your life is all you were supposed to do. But what makes you so sure? What makes you think that you have fulfilled the purpose of your being in this world, and that you have fully understood the meaning of life, and what everything is all about? What makes you so sure about what will happen to you next? How, in the light of such supreme order and mastery in creation, consistency of purposefulness, causality, functionality and meaningfulness, do you suppose a question as fundamental as this question would be left curiously unanswered in such a way? Do you find this very fact itself to make any sense?

I think not …




The man who is set free is nothing but a freed man - a dog dragging a piece of chain with him. [Max Sterner, "The Ego and Its Own."]


If ultimate freedom is really the truth about what you are supposed to do with your life, then why is there such an annoying thing inside of us that we call guilt? Why is there responsibility? Why is there obligation? Why is there need? Why is there weakness deep in every one of us as much as there is strength? Why do we need to learn? Why do we need to be brought up as little children? Why do we need to love and be loved? Why do we have to move and do work? Why do we have to change from one status to another all the time? Why do we always have to submit to rules? Why does there have to be rules, in concept? Why does there have to be justice? Why does there have to be a reaction equal to the action in all cases?

Why does there have to be care, worry, fear, trouble, agony, pain? Is it not a fact that the need to defend oneself against all those things, and the need to keep oneself safe all the time, is itself an obligatory cause that denies the root concept of freedom? Is it not a fact that life is all responsibility? Who said you are free? Are you not obliged to get out of bed in the morning? Are you not obliged to go to work and make a living? Are you not obliged to learn and obtain knowledge in order to do anything whatsoever? Are you not obliged to believe in what you have learnt? Can you claim you do not believe in anything at all or that you are belief-free? Is it not an obligation that you have to take care of your kids and your family? You love to do it that’s another issue, but can you deny its being an obligation?

Yes you are free to choose. But in fact you are free to choose only the kind of bondage and slavery you will stick to. You are free to choose the type of cage you will spend your life in bondage to. In all cases you are a prisoner in this life, in this limited plane of mortality, whether you like it or not, whether you admit it or not. Do you not see in a lustful man who runs after his desires, a pure slave to those desires? Do you not see a gluttonous man as a slave to his stomach, and a womanizer as a slave to his genitals?  He loves that slavery, and he refuses to admit it for slavery. But does this change the fact that he is a slave? And does this change the fact that whatever kind of slavery he chose for himself, he will love it and will find it satisfactory?

This is the broader concept of freedom and the broader concept of slavery. You may say right now, I hate to be a prisoner and I hate to be a slave. If I felt I’m a slave I’d reject that slavery. Did we not just say that you may not even feel it is slavery? Yes you hate to be confined in four physical walls that you can see, hear, smell and touch … but what if you cannot? What if a human enslaved you, threw you in a golden cage, and bestowed various kinds of pleasures, food, drinks, women, joys of all sorts and kinds, would you really hate that slavery? On the contrary, you will love that master, you will even worship him if he told you to. So man does not refuse the concept of slavery in its absolute meaning. Man refuses only the forms of slavery that he believes would captivate his needs and basic desires. And he has all the right in the world to refuse such kinds of slavery.

Freedom is not an illusion. This is not what I’m getting at. It is just not the way most people view it to be. All you have to do is look deep within yourself and your own life to see this meaning.

Every man who is happy with his life is happy with those slaveries he chose for himself, and is satisfied with those he did not have a choice with. He is not happy for his freedom, because he understands the nature of responsibility and bondage that it means to be in life and the nature of work and effort he has to do to earn this happiness; he is happy with the bondages he has chosen for himself. So who are we fooling? How do we neglect the need to understand why we were given the freedom to choose a kind of slavery? If all life is slavery then there must be a right kind of slavery among all those slaveries regardless of how “fun” they may seem to be. To choose the right kind of bondage is the reason why we were given a choice in this life. The question of choice in life is basically: who or what will you choose to become a slave to?

Will you be slave to your genitals? Will you be a slave to what pleases them? Will you be slave to any other part of your body and the desire to accommodate it? Will you be slave to your children and their desires? Will you be slave to your boss at work? Will you be slave to your dreams in a prosperous career? Will you be slave to money? Will you be slave to the desire to dominate others? Will you be slave to the desire to be famous? Will you be slave to another human tyrant who is himself a slave to his fleshly greed? Who will you bow in respect and glorification to? Who will you beg for mercy, help and support? Who will you refer to as the source of all wisdom, perfect knowledge and complete guidance? Who will you turn to? Whose advice will you listen to? Who will be first in your life? Who will come second, third and fourth?

Who will you take for a god? Which god will you enslave yourself willingly to? What is the meaning of god? When I enslave myself to a man, fear him ultimately, respect him ultimately, and love him ultimately, doesn’t this make him my god? When this is how I feel towards my genitals, do they not become my uncrowned god? Is it not a fact that you may actually have more than one god in your life? Which god deserves this ultimate level of obedience, love, respect, and glorification for which all life is created? Is it not a fact that the natural instinctual desire to take a god is itself a feat destruction for the concept of freedom as philosophers sought it? You need to take yourself a god, whether you know that or not, and whether you admit that need or not. You do have a god that you honor ultimately, and serve with absolute faith, whether you recognize that fact or not, and whether or not you do view it as a god. Who will you honor, respect, glorify and ultimately fight for when it goes down to this? You have been made to see and admit your humbleness in the face of all such a majestic existence… and that instinct my reader, is not free of purpose; nothing is free of purpose.

This is the only meaning of our primary freedom of choice as humans in this big prison of life. What god will we submit to? Whose laws do we agree to empower upon ourselves? What knowledge will we rely on, refer to and take for granted as the absolute truth? This is why there is this apparent freedom… this must be what justifies choice in this format of life that we live in. There must be one answer that is right and that is the truth for each and every one of these questions, otherwise, life would have absolutely no meaning.



OK … let’s take it further….