The Zahir : The emotions that I experienced
I just completed reading the book by Paulo Coelho “The Zahir”. It is a fantastic story of an individual’s journey of discovering himself. This book has created two very powerful reactions in me. One of complete agreement to what the author has to say. The other of disagreement because it raises in me several unanswered questions that I have come to know as valid questions in these 31 years of my life.
In this book the author explains how he had to loose his inhibitions, his past and all the boundaries set by society in order to find true love and discover himself. His theory is based on a constant, that the society and human history teaches us the norms of “good” or “bad” the “normal” or the “abnormal”. We use and follow rules blindly, The rules set by history of the civilization that we now call our own. His construct is based on his belief that in order to be able to enjoy life to the fullest and help others to enjoy life to the fullest, a human mind has to break away from the bounds of society and norms and feel the free wind of independence. Then and only then can one love unconditionally and passionately.
Reaction One: Just to give an example, I understand and agree to where the author is coming from and I understand the reality in his thoughts. For example, ‘the institution of marriage having originated from the need to make food available for all’ this is a radical idea that is so unique and possibly true.
Indiscriminate copulation in the ancient man’s tribe caused a high birth rate and therefore the pressure on the adults to find food and shelter and protection for the weak babies which in that time and place was an extremely daunting task. So the wise and powerful decreed that a man / a woman can only copulate with one chosen person of the other sex. This helped bring down the birthrate and hence the pressure on the ancient human nomadic tribes to provide for the weak babies.
That norm, which then was a necessity metamorphosed to become a taboo as civilization developed. To the extent, that today anything outside a monogamous marriage is a crime. But, honestly how many among us who have been in long-term relationships or marriages, can cross our hearts and say that we have never for once since the beginning of our relationship felt attracted to another individual sexually or otherwise!! Yes, we are living in denial of our capacity to love. What was once a necessity has today become an inhibitor to the extent that it has led highly accomplished human societies to discriminate based on gender and sexual orientation. Today the purpose is more to control a human mind’s unlimited ability to love than food.
Reaction Two: The second reaction which was strong and undeniable when I read this book is of confusion. The human mind is capable of unconditional and unlimited love. This is from the author. However what do we understand when we say love? Is it just copulation? Is it just the need to be “myself” with a loved one? Is it the need for individuality? Is it as the author says accepting anything and everything that the other person has to say or do?
What about the love that a mother feels for her new born after having gone through the intense pain of child birth?
My point is, why do we make sacrifices? If it is not for love, then for what? If we were all driven by the need to be just ourselves and do what just what we individually want to do.. then why or what will compel our loved one to follow us or to find us?
Individualism is great, but if driven too far, individualism that the author speaks of can cause more wars than love. No two human beings are alike. Some like the mountains more than the sea. Some like red more than the blue and some like running verses swimming. All out needs and wants are different. If the meaning of love is to accept and want individuality, it will invariably lead to conflict of wants and then more war.
Individualism is good from a very personal perspective. However, can we put ourselves in the shoes of parents and still say that individuality is the only thing that is important for love? What about the noble cause of sacrifice for another? What does a poor mother feel when she eats a bite less in order to give one fulfilling meal to her child? Does she tire of doing that? Ever? Will I tire of ever being proud when my child comes home with A+? Is this not a game of give and take? Is this not natural? Is it something that is decreed by society? Is this dependence making me less perfect in my love for my child?
These are questions I am not sure I have the correct answer to. The whole concept of what is “correct” gets somewhat warped. Which I think is the overall purpose of the author.
My personal take: It is important to respect individuality however love is not a function of individuality. It is a function of giving up ones individuality for another.
Individuality is like putting a lock on a door and saying “from here on it is my territory and I am the only one who will decide who gets in” . To me, the ‘lock and key’ is the point of origin of all communalism. It begins from “my room” to “My house” to “My language” to “My region” to “My culture” to “My country” and “My religion”
The day we will be able to get rid of all these “locks & keys” and agree that there is nothing that is every going to be “mine”. That will be the day we will experience unconditional and unlimited love universally.
Other blogs on this book that I read :
http://elevation02.blogspot.com/2007/04/zahir-by-paulo-coelho.html
http://pinoymomsnetwork.com/2007/07/07/try-reading-the-zahir-by-paulo-coelho/#comment-4205
In this book the author explains how he had to loose his inhibitions, his past and all the boundaries set by society in order to find true love and discover himself. His theory is based on a constant, that the society and human history teaches us the norms of “good” or “bad” the “normal” or the “abnormal”. We use and follow rules blindly, The rules set by history of the civilization that we now call our own. His construct is based on his belief that in order to be able to enjoy life to the fullest and help others to enjoy life to the fullest, a human mind has to break away from the bounds of society and norms and feel the free wind of independence. Then and only then can one love unconditionally and passionately.
Reaction One: Just to give an example, I understand and agree to where the author is coming from and I understand the reality in his thoughts. For example, ‘the institution of marriage having originated from the need to make food available for all’ this is a radical idea that is so unique and possibly true.
Indiscriminate copulation in the ancient man’s tribe caused a high birth rate and therefore the pressure on the adults to find food and shelter and protection for the weak babies which in that time and place was an extremely daunting task. So the wise and powerful decreed that a man / a woman can only copulate with one chosen person of the other sex. This helped bring down the birthrate and hence the pressure on the ancient human nomadic tribes to provide for the weak babies.
That norm, which then was a necessity metamorphosed to become a taboo as civilization developed. To the extent, that today anything outside a monogamous marriage is a crime. But, honestly how many among us who have been in long-term relationships or marriages, can cross our hearts and say that we have never for once since the beginning of our relationship felt attracted to another individual sexually or otherwise!! Yes, we are living in denial of our capacity to love. What was once a necessity has today become an inhibitor to the extent that it has led highly accomplished human societies to discriminate based on gender and sexual orientation. Today the purpose is more to control a human mind’s unlimited ability to love than food.
Reaction Two: The second reaction which was strong and undeniable when I read this book is of confusion. The human mind is capable of unconditional and unlimited love. This is from the author. However what do we understand when we say love? Is it just copulation? Is it just the need to be “myself” with a loved one? Is it the need for individuality? Is it as the author says accepting anything and everything that the other person has to say or do?
What about the love that a mother feels for her new born after having gone through the intense pain of child birth?
My point is, why do we make sacrifices? If it is not for love, then for what? If we were all driven by the need to be just ourselves and do what just what we individually want to do.. then why or what will compel our loved one to follow us or to find us?
Individualism is great, but if driven too far, individualism that the author speaks of can cause more wars than love. No two human beings are alike. Some like the mountains more than the sea. Some like red more than the blue and some like running verses swimming. All out needs and wants are different. If the meaning of love is to accept and want individuality, it will invariably lead to conflict of wants and then more war.
Individualism is good from a very personal perspective. However, can we put ourselves in the shoes of parents and still say that individuality is the only thing that is important for love? What about the noble cause of sacrifice for another? What does a poor mother feel when she eats a bite less in order to give one fulfilling meal to her child? Does she tire of doing that? Ever? Will I tire of ever being proud when my child comes home with A+? Is this not a game of give and take? Is this not natural? Is it something that is decreed by society? Is this dependence making me less perfect in my love for my child?
These are questions I am not sure I have the correct answer to. The whole concept of what is “correct” gets somewhat warped. Which I think is the overall purpose of the author.
My personal take: It is important to respect individuality however love is not a function of individuality. It is a function of giving up ones individuality for another.
Individuality is like putting a lock on a door and saying “from here on it is my territory and I am the only one who will decide who gets in” . To me, the ‘lock and key’ is the point of origin of all communalism. It begins from “my room” to “My house” to “My language” to “My region” to “My culture” to “My country” and “My religion”
The day we will be able to get rid of all these “locks & keys” and agree that there is nothing that is every going to be “mine”. That will be the day we will experience unconditional and unlimited love universally.
Other blogs on this book that I read :
http://elevation02.blogspot.com/2007/04/zahir-by-paulo-coelho.html
http://pinoymomsnetwork.com/2007/07/07/try-reading-the-zahir-by-paulo-coelho/#comment-4205
Comments
Keep up the great work on your blog!
Ian
I'm also a big Paulo Coelho fan and I don't know if you heard about his blog
http://www.paulocoelhoblog.com
I've started as a fan and now I'm collaborating with him and thought that you would like to enter his universe.
Check the blog, if you want, or subscribe to his newsletter
http://www.warriorofthelight.com/engl/index.html
You'll see a community of warriors of light sharing ideas, dreams and most importantly following their personal legend.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"Love will never separate a man from his personal legend."
See u there and have great day!
Aart
Take care and keep up the good work :)
I read the book "The Zahir" and others of Paulo Coelho.
Perhaps the human must be unlearm and them learm a new life.
This was my favorite sentence of your review. And then the series of questions.
One of our colleagues, Jack Beach, talks about transformational leadership depending on coming to value collective interest over self-interest.
In my own case, I am self-absorbed, I admit, but in service, I like to think, to others' gaining comfort from my expression of my journey; when others learn of my experience and can relate to it, perhaps all of us feel less alone and more like a community of humanity.
we are all driven by what we like the most. Sacrifices, Setting examples,etc. are emotions that makes one feel happier at times than any material pleasure. Its all about 'me', its all about what makes me feel Happy.The moment a person no longer enjoys making sacrifices he will stop doing any.''The Zahir'' and its description of Individualism is a blatant truth.
The feeling of a Family, its security, the nostalgia of moments spent together are often so dear to us that we refuse any external source of Love even if we are living in the past and none of the moments exist anymore in our lives.
Its all about what one thinks, one feels, one understands and one likes- can we still refuse individualim?