@khuram
Guru g, tussi te bunker buster attack kar ditta, koi dassay rabba mein karhay passay jawaan, mein manji kithay dhawaan?
Well, Mr. Ootpatang, I was missing the onboard presence of a fugitive enemy, but you have proven your self a good replacement of Mr. Deputy Commissioner. (Mr. Deputy Commissioner! If you are being informed directly or indirectly about my combat with Mr.Ootpapatng you can contact me to have a round table conference for the negotiable solution of the matter or you can also join his army. Since I’m still hoping your onboard landing)
Well Mr.Ootpatang, again I’m having a series of conflicts with you. Here it goes.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Khuram
I am not equating 'emotins' with 'be-hoshi'.
|
I’ve not mentioned ‘be hoshi’ any where. I mentioned ‘josh’ and I think you can better differentiate between ‘be-hosi’ and ‘josh’.
Quote:
|
If a boy loves a girl and the boy also has the option of marrying some other more rich and more beutiful girl ... then 'practical' approach would be to opt for that more rich and more beutiful girl. The emotional approach here would be to remain loyal to the beloved. If the boy really loves then he should prefer emotions to practical aspects and so should remain loyal to beloved.
|
Totally disagree to the practical approach, and emotional as well. In my opinion emotional approach will be to ‘try to have his beloved through any way available’. While practical approach will be to find those hidden ways and strategies by which he can have his beloved. As far as the element of ‘wealth’ you mentioned, is not considerable, as ‘impossible’ has already mentioned in her titled post that ‘money’ can’t know the value of ‘love’. In your mentioned case, if the guy leaves her beloved for the purpose of wealth, then it means he’s not loyal. Or in other words there’s no love, and where there’s no love there’s no debate on ‘hosh’ and ‘josh’. But I want the description of your statement where y you said that, while in love a person should prefer emotions (josh) on practical aspect (hosh), and by preferring ‘josh’ he should distinguish between negative and positive consequences. I’m of the opinion that if a person goes after ‘josh’ he cant find better way outs of the problem, so he / she should not follow ‘josh’, instead he / she should be very practical in finding all the possible ways to have his/ her love.
Quote:
|
I am not talking of such be-hoshi type emotions as one should tear up his clothes and go to deserts and jungles in order to prove the intensity of his love. One shall prove only one's madness in this way. And if his beloved is really going to be impressed by his lover in this way ... Then I can say nothing for this case. Both should be married in mental hospital --- of course without the consent of their respective families.
|
Well, I didn’t ask for any justification of ‘be-hosi’. As I mentioned earlier I wanted the role of ‘hosh’ and ‘josh’. And I’ve described my opinion above.
Quote:
|
But at the same time .... I do accept that such cases are really among the rare beuties of otherwise very miserable world. We should expect few percentage of such cases because otherwise social life would become just mechanical.
|
Quote:
|
In general, the emotions, about which I had talked were not any be-hoshi type emotions... those emotions were just 'selfless' type emotions which were directed towards 'loyelty' for beloved .... EVEN AT THE COST OF ANY MATERIAL BENEFITS.
|
Again you are trying to baffle me in word’s perplexity (w.r.t an old post). But I must say that you should exclude this ‘be-hoshi’ from your list, See we are talking about rationality. And rationality is possible only in the absence of ‘be-hoshi’. If you still disagree then edit your post on Iqbalian philosophy of love in the thread “Why didn’t scientific revolution happen in Islam? By Pervaiz Hoodbhoy”
Quote:
|
Intentions also can be changed over time.
|
Not intentions, preferences change over the time. If the ‘temporary intention’ changes then at least I don’t categorize such phenomenon as intention. Actually intention is a strong determination. And strong determination is not influenced by time. So if the determination is detoriating, that can’t be placed in the list of ‘intention’.
Quote:
|
I had shown in my previous post that in case a person finds it impossible to marry his beloved and so decides to remain unmarried for the rest of his life... in this case there is no real sacrifice. This is just a form of self punishment ... and in some cases can become emotional blackmailing. Some emotional unsuccessful lovers even go for the option of suicide. What is any sacrifice in suicide decision? It is just self punishment and emotional blackmailing. nothing else.
|
Ok the case of emotional blackmailing is considerable, but you said that remaining unmarried is not a valid sacrifice. But at the same time in one of your post you mentiond
Valid sacrifice would be that when one rejects a better option in favour one's lover. So here your definition of valid sacrifice is becomes invalid. Se, a person has a better option to marry some one else and have a good life, but he’s denying such good option to remain loyal with his beloved.
Quote:
|
Sacrifice only means surrender of a better available options in favour of beloved... When one rejects extra material gains and remains loyel to one's beloved, only in this case one really sacrifices something. This is same situation as giving superiority to selfless emotions over materialistic practical advantages. Even this type of sacrifice would become invalid if lover makes show of such 'sacrifices' before beloved....
|
As I mentioned your definition of sacrifice as ambiguous above. But I think one should keep himself attached to some other constructive activity, rather than denying the options. I’d like to quote Amjad Islam Amjad
jo mil gya ussay yaad rakh, jo nahi mila ussay bhool ja but I’m not fully agree with it as well. No doubt, person can’t forget his real love but he can keep himself attached to some constructive activities so that he can use his abilities for the benefits of others (if he don’t want to do himself he should do something for others)
Quote:
|
So real sacrifices may remain completely unknown to beloved...
|
Quote:
The sacrifice by the beloved would be that he/she should acknowledge those sacrifices which were never told to him/her ... I mean should understand at his/her own. Even if does not understand ... act in such manner as if he/she is acknowledging the (may be unknown) sacrifices of lover.
This would be the sacrifice by the beloved...
|
Again its ambiguous for me. please give a logical explaination.
Regards