Wednesday, June 29, 2005

the garden - part 2

Maybe it's good to have money and the things money can buy, but it's good too, to check once in a while and make sure that we haven't lost the things money can't buy.

For those who are fortunate to be in a relationship, I suppose that should make them the happiest people, whether or not it's totally complete. When two become one, loneliness is just a vocabulory of the past. And this is happiness, for happiness is not so much in having as sharing. And being happy does not have to mean that everything is perfect but rather, the mutual readiness to look beyond the imperfections. Throughout my life, I have learned that a relationship is like glass. Sometimes it's better to leave them broken than try to hurt yourself putting it back together.

If only I had realised that it's also like a garden... and again, it takes two to tango. But I guess the happiest people don't necessarily have the best of everything, they just make the most of everything that comes along the way.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

kias kisah

- bukankah hati manusia bagaikan perigi, makin dalamnya ia, makin sukar dilihat airnya...?

+ mungkin juga hati ibarat bara yang lebih mudah dihilangkan kehangatannya apabila apinya sudah tidak lagi menyala...

- tapi perlukah kenyataan dikaburi khayalan, lantaran tidak semua kenyataan beriringkan perkataan... ibarat jasad yang tidak dilihat nyawanya

asad dan nyawa bukan semestinya harus bersama... tidak seumpama sekam dan api

- sekam dan api kan terbakar. Tidak bagaikan karam berdua lemas sorang...

+ bagaimana dengan kunang-kunang yang hanya berkelip di malam hari...?

- akan teranglah malam

+ dan kiranya gerhana?

- kalau tahu bulan kan gerhana, siapkan lilin teranglah malam...

+ mari bertumbuk padi jadikan empeng, lantaran pipit hendak bertenggek ke ranting...

- begitu mudah berbicara? umpama layang-layang bertali benang, putus benang berganti tali...

+ apakah harus bertanam tebu di pinggir bibir...

- batang senduduk dahan berpintal...

- mungkinkan banyak duri namun tidak sama duri selasih... ?

+ haruskah mencari rebung di tanah seberang...?

- banyak orang menanam pulut, saya seorang menanam padi...

+ ingat, awan berarak putih berseri hilang di balik awan petang...

- aneh juga tebu seberang, dari perdu sampailah ke pucuk...

+ mungkinkah tali layang sering putus terajunya...?

- ketam rencung tak pandai menyepit...

+ apakah harus bertanam kelapa di tepi pantai...

- perlukah ombak di laut meniti buih...?

+ tidak seia rotan akar yang panjang berjela...

- hilang tebing limpahlah aur...

+ nampak rendang pohon belimbing...

- di batang buruk sarang tekukur, tempat bersarang semut api...

+ sayang galah hujungnya tirus...

- bagai diulit permatang hati...

+ pergi ke perigi mengambil timba, timba terletak di pohon lada...

- tiup api embun berderai, niat hati tak hendak bercerai,

hilang sahabat boleh dicari, hilang kekasih merana diri...

rasa & raga

Sudah lama saya tinggalkannya. Sudah dua dekad. Selama itulah saya sangka saya sudah bisa melupakannya.

Namun sangkaan saya meleset kiranya. Jika inilah yang dikatakan lemah, lemahlah saya. Kalau inilah yang diandaikan rapuh, rapuhlah saya. Rupanya benar apa yang sering saya baca dan dengar. Hilang tak bererti tiada. Masa hanya ruang. Detik itu waktu. Segala yang mengisinya akan terus menjadi bayang. Tidak kan hilang. Maka pijakan saya tetap sama. Di tanah yang sama dengan segar angin yang tiada berbeza.

Berawal dari dua dekad yang lalu hingga larut dua dekad yang kemudiannya. Dan dia tetap sama. Mungkin saya sudah berubah. Dia jua. Tapi tidak hati dan perasaan. Sedekad mahupun dua dekad atau mungkin seabad lamanya, beginilah rasa dan raga saya. Lantas jiwa saya terus berdoa. Semoga dia jua sama.

boys do cry

Men who cry are brave because they just let their emotions flow. After all, a man is not made of steel. And men are just as vulnerable. And when a man is emotional, he normally expresses it through his anger. Perhaps it is healthy when a man can express his true emotions. And perhaps it is better for a man to cry than to show his sadness and pain through violence. And men is just as vulnerable. It's when men are forced to hide their emotions that causes more stress and anxiety.

I believe that it is not at all bad to show your true emotions. Human experiences emotions everyday. Although generally men are less sensitive and nature have given them more control over their emotion than women, they are still human. Thus, cry they do when emotion of pain and sadness reach to its limit and there no longer exist any room within to control. Everything has its limit and when that something reaches its limit, it bursts. And generally, most men don't cry again over the same thing, which they have learned how to control that same situation the next time it happens.

Why should one mask his feelings when that is what he is feeling? Why should a man stifle any tear when it should come in endless streams? Does showing emotions make one any less of a man?

the garden

I suppose the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. Love and relationship alike, is like a garden, one must take time to water, cultivate and pull out the weeds. For the fact that it is like a garden, one must ensure that he has the confidence in himself to ensure that the garden will remain a garden, and not turn into a bush over time. Maybe with this kind of confidence, he will consequently gain the confidence of others (in this case, his significant other).

In this process of nurturing the garden, we seek for resources. Books, consultation, experience sharing, may be of benefit, for later if not now. It's just like when you dig the well before you are thirsty. With some expectation that all of of us can be hurt, that some of us can, and some will, at times, fail, we prepare ourselves by accepting the simple rule - that we can take the worst, take the risk. Life is, after all, a risk. You love and be loved, hurt and be hurt. I believe that love may break, but I also believe that it never dies. Maybe it only changes shape.

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

a life to live

Life is a risk. Risk while living, loving, risk of leaving, losing, missing - a multitude of risks. In the solitude of our mothers' wombs, we are born into a world of multiplicity - full of people and no longer are we alone - alone we may not be, lonely we may be, for a solitude life sans love is no life. Some people seek love, some don't, but still it comes; for love is inevitable in one's life.

Love is thus a risk. A risk worth taking. As to every season, love has its own time, and its own reasons from coming and going. One cannot coerce it or reason it into staying. One can only embrace it when it arrives and give it away when it comes. Loving someone means giving him or her a piece of ourselves. And when that love is gone, it doesn't mean that we get that piece back but that we are forever changed by its absence.

When that love is gone, then begins the first step to recovery; and that first step is to acknowledge that the relationship is over. Let go of any grievances, try to end on a happy note remembering the good times. And we allow ourselves to grieve and cry. We never deny the sadness but instead realise that it will soon pass.

Most importantly, we do not make any decision or do anything that we may later regret. This is a highly emotional state that will pass. And of course, we start dating again when ready.

One should have no regrets for loving someone because the feeling of love for five minutes is greater than an eternity of hurt. And because life is risk, it is a risk we must take. For there's life to live, and live we must.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005


Polygamy has been practiced by mankind for thousands of years. Many of the ancient Israelites were polygamous, some having hundreds of wives. King Solomon (peace be upon him) is said to have had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines. David (Dawood) had ninety-nine and Jacob (Ya'kub, peace be upon them both) had four. Advice given by some Jewish wise men state that no man should marry more than four wives. No early society put any restrictions on the number of wives or put any conditions about how they were to be treated. Jesus was not known to have spoken against polygamy. As recently as the seventeenth century, polygamy was practiced and accepted by the Christian Church. The Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) has allowed and practiced polygamy in the United States.

Monogamy was introduced into Christianity at the time of Paul when many revisions took place in Christianity. This was done in order for the church to conform to the Greco-Roman culture where men were monogamous but owned many slaves who were free for them to use: In other words, unrestricted polygamy. Early Christians invented ideas that women were "full of sin" and man was better off to "never marry."

Since this would be the end of mankind these same people compromised and said "marry only one."

Actually there are three kinds of polygamy practiced in Western societies: -serial polygamy, that is, marriage, divorce, marriage, divorce, and so on any number of times; -a man married to one woman but having and supporting one or more mistresses; -an unmarried man having a number of mistresses. Islam condones but discourages the first and forbids the other two.

But, what about those who never marry...?

And, does polygamy only applies in the context of man and women?

old flame

Old flames die hard. On a more serious note, I suppose it's just extremely human to consider old flames and wonder whether the past passion between two people would today be an undying flame or perhaps just a weak flicker. We are not supposed to necessarily "get over this person," but rather, to allow the intrigue of the past spice up the present. After all, were there not assorted unhappinesses - "past pain" - which might be linked to past relationship? Perhaps historical perspective is never clear or entirely accurate, but often rose-colored and influenced by present desire.

so do we act abnormally? but, isn't the normalcy of behaviour more commonly judged from the extent of separation from abnormality? And when these two extreme characteristics are solely determined by the majority... thus what is left by own self...?

Sunday, June 19, 2005

the road not taken

The Road Not Taken - by Robert Frost TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel both And be one traveler, long I stood And looked down one as far as I could To where it bent in the undergrowth; Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, Because it was grassy and wanted wear; Though as for that the passing there Had worn them really about the same, And both that morning equally lay In leaves no step had trodden black. Oh, I kept the first for another day! Yet knowing how way leads on to way, I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I... I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference.


Suppose when we attach any sort of expectation to even our kindest thought, it ceases to be a gift and becomes instead, a debt to pay. No longer is it a blessing but rather a burden to bear. So, is this not the reason so many human relationships fail? What if our own expectations are attached to our emotions then the gift of love becomes only the tie that bind. When our loved ones fail to live up to our own expectations, the relationship tends to suffer. Expectation is the food which gives rise to yet a more demanding hunger. Perhaps it is an unconditional love that is the sweetness of Life that feeds your eternal-self.

in the eyes

So what is this thing with "beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder"? A man's meat may be another man's poison? It's like to the world you may be the one person, but to one person you may be the world? How can we resent life that has been created for ourselves? Who's to blame, who's to credit, but us?

I did write once in "the habits" on my observation that it's the human nature, or is it Malaysian nature, to like, to admire, to adore foreign products. Or maybe it IS human nature to be attracted to those not really had or possessed by them? I mean, how many people actually see a watch on someone else's wrist, or a shirt on someone else's body and think that it's nicer than what they're having? Or to go to the extreme, to having the slightest idea that their girlfriends or their wives are not as beautiful as their brothers' or friends'?

I suppose unless we believe in ourselves and maintain that certain level of confidence, nothing splendid would have been achieved except by those who dared believe that something inside them was superior to circumstances.

So back to beauty lying in the eyes of the beholder, we possibly have been living a democratic life, so much so that we succumb to the voice of the majority. So what the majority says is what we tend to believe. This is probably true because in "The Clan of The Cave Bear" (a book of which i cannot seem to recall the author which was later made into a movie starring Daryl Hannah), the beautiful girl (Hannah) is the ugliest creature among them...

Saturday, June 18, 2005

the nicks

At one time, we had a small pool of opinions about nicknames. My friend Dileque had said that nickname is just a name given to make it easy for us to remember someone rather than the lengthy true name; while there are also those who have their nicknames to sound ‘glamorous’; and those who have them to hide their identity for certain reasons. He quoted internet chatting as one of the reasons. He was agreeable that the nickname must be accepted to be used by its owner - the person the nickname is given to.

I had agreed simply because a nickname is supposed to be a name given in derision or familiarity, like an epithet, it should thus be condoned by the person the name is given to. Any other name that such a person is being branded to is therefore just a label which he may even not pander to having. live and let die

Passion must not cease to exist. Because things done out of not just interest but passion, and love, gives nothing but from itself. For it possesses not, nor would it be possessed, for love is sufficient unto love. And don't think of directing the course of love. For love, will direct the course.

Through my life, I come to realise that to a certain point something that we, or rather i, might not have realised about before. Perhaps time and experience be the factors. So i happen to read somewhere about what surprises most about humankind? And that the answers are that men get bored with childhood, they rush to grow up, and then long to be children again. And that they lose their health to make money and then lose their money to restore their health. And that by thinking anxiously about the future, they forget the present, such that they live in neither the present nor the future. And that they live as if they will never die, and die as though they had never lived.

And my friend Camus had said, "life itself is an illusion and thus it is full of dichotomy. The dualism keeps the mass unconscious of the present moment. The trick is to transcend the illusion and experience each moment as if there is nothing else to life. Now, you are beginning to see reality. Morpheus would be greeting you, 'Welcome to the real world, Neo!' And you wished you hadn't taken the blue pill. Or was it red?"

he's not asleep

They have been married for two years. He loves literature, and often posts his work on the net, but nobody ever reads them. He is also into photography, and he handle their wedding photos. He loves her very much. Likewise with her. She has a quick temper, and always bullies him. He is a gentle man, and always gives in to her. Today, she's being "wilful" again.

Her : Why can't you be the photographer for my friend's wedding? She promised she'd pay.

Him : I don't have time that day.

Her : Hmph!

Him :Huh?

Her : Don't have time? Write less of those novels, and you will have all the time you need.

Him : I...someone will definitely recognize my work some day.

Her : Hmph! I don't care, you'll have to do it for her.

Him : No.

Her : Just this once?

Him : No.

Negotiation's broken.

So, she gaves the final warning: Give me a Yes within three days, or else...

First day. She "withheld" the kitchen, bathroom, computer, refrigerator, television, hi-fi... ...Except the double-bed, to show her "benevolence". Of course, she has to sleep on it too. He didn't mind, as he still has some cash in his pockets.

Second day. She conducted a raid and removed everything from his pockets, and warned, Seek any external help, and you bear the consequences.

He's nervous now.

Night. On the bed. He begs for mercy, hoping that she'll end this state.

She doesn't give a damn. No way am I giving in, whatever he says. Until he agrees.

Third day. Night. On the Bed. He's lying on the bed, looking to one side. She's lying on the bed, looking to the other side.

Him : We need to talk.

Her : Unless it's about the wedding, forget it.

Him : It's something very important.

She remains silent.

Him : Let's get a divorce.

She did not believe her ears.

>Him : I got to know a girl.

She's totally angry, and wanted to hit him. But she held it down, wanting to let him finish. But her eyes already felt wet.

He took a photo out from his chest. Probably from his undershirt pocket, that's the only place she didn't go through yesterday. How careless.

Him : She's a nice girl.

Her tears fell.

Him : She has a good personality too.

She's heartbroken, because he puts a photo of some other girl "close to his heart".

Him : She says that she'll support me fully in my pursue for literature after we got married. She's very jealous, because she said the same thing in the past.

Him : She loves me truly.

She wishes to sit up and scream at him : "Don't I?"

Him : So, I think she won't force me to do something that I don't want to do.

She's thinking, but the rage won't subside.

Him : Want to take a look at the photo I took for her?

Her : .....!

He brings the photo before her eyes. She's in a total rage, hits his hand away and leaves a burning mark of a slap on his face.

He sighs.

She cries.

He puts the photo back to his pocket.

She pulls her hand back under the blanket.

He turns off the light, and sleeps.

She turns on the light, and sits up.

He's asleep.

She loses sleep.

She regrets treating him the way she treats him.

She cries again, and thinks about a lot of things.

She wants to wake him up.

he wants to have a intimate talk with him.

She doesn't want to push him anymore. She stares at his chest. She wants to see how the girl looks.

She slips the photo out. She wants to cry, and she wants to laugh. It's a nicely taken photo of herself. A photo he took for her. She bends down, and kisses him on his cheek.

He smiles. He is just pretending to be asleep.

an open book

How can you read my mind like an open book? Are you given a block of marble and later, the tools to shape it into your sculpture? Or do you possess that fascinating powerful idea which is absolutely meaningless until you choose to use it? Or are you a testimony of what many philosophers and psychologists have stated that a very important relationship betwen our feelings toward others and the way we feel is by thinking of other people, putting our thoughts to dismantle whatever blocks that are causing our anxieties?

But seriously, human beings do have the ability to read minds and connect to each other on the spiritual level, beyond the limitations of the external forms.

Measurement of a depth is not by choice rather by calculated anticipation. Basically it's admiring your wisdom. Nonetheless, men, just like women, are as unpredictable as weather that's what they say. Being human, there is a combination of feelings, emotions, mood. Sometimes, we'll kiss someone and know that that's the person we'll be kissing for the rest of our lives, without having to understand what's on his mind. Maybe it's a process of learning, trying to understand each other.

Friday, June 17, 2005

the habits...again

The "7-habit" is not the definite answer to being a highly effective, successful person for the fact that one should not be confined to reading (in this case the bestselling book) and adopting the practices just because he or she wants to believe that the idea of it may be THE contributory factor to his/her being effective and successful.

What is of utmost importance is one's self trust in oneself. Reading the book for instance may be of help (the line where I wrote - "for the idea, yes, this 7-habit may do you some favour...") for one would need to be awaken from within to come to certain realisation. When I quoted Ralph Waldo Emerson on "walking alone...", it was to tell that one should not be doing things just because the others are, just to be on par with the more cultured groups (hence the example of Dome Cafe, imported goods etc...).

One should do what one believes in, perhaps with certain guidance from certain sources because that is what he or she believes. I am not against the ideas by Mr.. or rather Dr... Covey, for all the 7 good habits he listed I agree, and I, in a way or the other, practise some of them, nor am I fully agreeable to it. And the fact that it's an idea or maybe life principle to help make everyone successful, true, and the fact that it's also to generate some returns, monetary and non-monetary, is also true. That brought me to touch a bit on happiness.

While happiness is a man's main aim in life, in modern world like today, can happiness surface without some other elements attributing to it? Such as money? That may be subject to arguments. To me, and from my observation, material seems to slowly prevail over others in today's world of the so-called globalisation and liberalisation.

the habits

Actually i did attend this 7-habit thing which lasted for a few days (can't really remember) some time in 1996. And now I've forgotten almost all of the contents. And I did read the book too - participants were given a set of the book (which was already a bestseller then.. one objective of Covey's achieved), the 7-habit file, the 7-habit note book (seems like kinda Star Wars or LOTR merchandise) and so forth which I really can't remember now.

The speaker then was obviously not Covey himself, it was some Malaysian (a Chinese, for the fact that there are not many Malay speakers - what more if these courses or seminars are conducted in English) - though we may have many Malay preachers whose ideas are more or less like Covey too, example- Dr Fazillah Kamsah. About the whole seminar and the idea from Mr Covey's brain? I suppose it may help, depending on the individual. One can attend as many seminars/talks/courses as one likes and read as many books/magazines/articles as may be available in the bookstore, but it's still in him or her to initiate whatever change there needs to be. For the idea, yes, this 7-habit may do you some favour.

For the real you as a highly effective and successful person, this definitely is not the answer. One's success, to me, lies in his or her own self trust. Because if I can recall correctly, Ralph Waldo Emerson quoted: "Self trust is the first secret to success". Just because the market talk may "prove" that 7-habits of highly Effective people is good, this does not provide any testimony of assurance. I would remember what Alan Ashley-Pitt once said, "never let you be afraid of walking alone. The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further than the crowd. The man who walks alone is likely to find himself in places no one has ever been".

From my obeservation, I sum up an opinion, that may not be right - that Malaysians generally are followers. Malaysians always prefer foreign products, from coffee to ice cream, clothes to designers, music to films, almost everything you can think of. Perhaps local ones lack class and quality, but if Malaysians do not believe in themselves, who would? And how do you explain the packed Dome cafe at KLCC (not for the number of customers, but for the low turnover of customers who are there to sip a cup or two of coffee and be there for more than two hours)? Of course there are people who go there purely for the good taste of its Cafe Vienna, but what about those who want to be there to be seen? Is being seen at such cafes or bistros a sign of prestige or is it just to look prestigous, and not mind being pretentious? Do we as Malaysians, lack self esteem that we want to be preceived to be on par with those of the developed nation? Do we have to do things they do, study the things they read, adopt the ideas they formulate, so that we'd be at the same "level" or do we do these because we ourselves like what we are doing? Because we ourselves want to learn? Because we ourselves want to study? It all boils down to our intention and motive, and this intention, this motive, needs to be one which is a result of honesty, not to anyone, but to ourselves. Perhaps there will come a new breed of Malaysians, different from who we have now.

As many may notice, what we have now are politicians, corporate leaders, academicians, professionals, who, simply said, love to pontificate. Let me not elaborate further... So, what I am writing now, I have no conclusion, perhaps someone may wish to come out with one. Yes, there's something more, about our main purpose in life? Is it the power, the status, the money...? To me, it's the happiness. Whatever that you think may lead to it, explore it, because happiness is not an accident, nor is it something you wish for. Happiness is something you design.

penetrate the unexplainable

What explains this extraordinary turn of events? For several decades, men tried so very hard to penetrate the unexplainable. For several decades, thinkers and intelligence agencies steadfastly refused to directly specify whether, or under what circumstances, space exploration would benefit humankind. Is it merely to study the being of other creatures in another planets? Is it to share the space in which planet earth is gaining full occupancy, like the imaginary yet illogical Men In Black movie?

This brings us to thinking, is it at all that crucial for this study? Or is it more of a culture? That men should be so much advanced to be recognised, to be looked upon, to be developed? I am no scientist, nor am I a thinker, far more than a genius, but I would want to think as a layman, who happens to gain some knowledge here and there - and a person such as I would think that men research and analyse things that are far beyond their sight, be it visible and invisible, because of the need to improve lives. And this very motive should remain. And this motive is to achieve another motive, that is to ensure a better living of humankind.

You don't advance yourself to destroy others. Hence, a strategic ambiguity. I suppose in this case, ambiguity is better than clarity...

the tears

TAd: I guess the amount of tears comes with the person's age

Camus: How do you explain new born babies crying buckets of tears? Perhaps the co-relation is parabolic in nature

TAd: Perhaps it's nature's way of ensuring survival and instinct as babies and elderlies may not be able to fend for themselves...

Thursday, June 16, 2005

my loyalty

I have certain degree of devotion and loyalty towards my alma mater, but I do admire your loyalty, and it does bring me to thinking, that these traits are not developed in ease and quiet but through experience of trial and suffering for which the soul be strengthened and ambition inspired. You in fact inspire us, for there are facts we can't deny because if we deny, we confess all. i wish all the best and though my love for my playground may not seem very obvious, i do love, and i do know that where there is love there is pain...

losing the tradition

Looking into this issue in a more focused way brings about an idea of what constitutes success. On one side there is a party that intends to re-create the "brains" of Coleq as a rational machine for the maximum equal satisfaction of actual human desire. Coupled with this desire of personal achievement is the personal jealousy that may have been indirectly implanted within oneself.

Perhaps this is the only permissible public goals that may call for equality and the like. Perhaps the person at the helm of an institution should not forget to remember that an institution is an institution, what more if it is built upon tradition; and not change it into some human institution that is deprived of human voices.

Having mentioned this, true success would mean establishing traditional goals and institutions that excludes from the public sphere, traditionally conceived as legitimate objects of public concern. Ignorance of traditional values would only constitute a fundamental defeat of future victory. The authorised party today seems purely liberal, and becoming more self-centred, as is with many quarters in the world today.

It is thus understandable should one, particularly if he was in that position before, to be sentimental about certain breaking events such as this. The facts that were brought to our attention in fact touch deep to our sensitivity. What I can assume, from my simple point of view, is that the enforcement party is either doing what he thinks is right, or in line what some think is right, or in line with some personal vengeance that might have arisen of traditional jealousy, for jealousy is the grave of affection. Having had the power in hand, the settings of policies by asserting their objective authority, seems to prevail.

On that front, success is thus measured by academic excellence - which is totally wrong. After all, the education system in our country is currently not right. Passing examinations seems to be the ultimate measure for success. It is thus very very saddening to learn that there is a breach of potential leadership penetration by one whom should be the thinker of future generation.

I personally believe that tradition is a fruit of culture into all aspects of life, the extension of civil rights to make correctness a duty in almost all settings that are not utterly private, and the centralization, ideological uniformity and propagandistic nature of mainstream education and life as a whole; or our old folks wouldn't ever have thought of the saying, biar mati anak, jangan mati adat.

originally posted in on Tue Oct 12, 2004 6:07 pm


- Apakah yang paling dekat dengan diri kita di dunia ini?

+ Orang tua
+ Guru
+ Teman

- Semua itu benar. Tetapi yang paling dekat dengan kita ialah MATI.
- Apakah warna kesukaan saudara?


- Kenapa merah?

+ Kerana pada zaman dahulu, orang Roman percaya bahawa warna merah adalah petanda pertarungan.

- Itu sahaja?

+ Kerana warna merah adalah lambang keberanian di negera India.

- Saudara mahu menjadi berani? Dan saudara mahu bertarung? Tidak takut mati?

+ Ya, orang-orang Rusia menggunakan bendera berwarna merah sebagai simbol semangat dan kemenangan mereka menggulingkan Tsar mereka. Itulah asalnya bagaimana merah menjadi warna penganut komunisme.

- Jadi, kerana ini semua, saudara memilih warna merah sebagai warna saudara? Dan saudara tidak takut mati?

+ Kenapa saudara terlalu ingin tahu?

- Perlukah saya beritahu sebabnya?

+ Perlu.

- Saya tidak ada sebab untuk bertanya.

+ Setiap perkara yang berlaku dan dilakukan ada sebabnya.

- Tidak semua.
- Saudara percaya pada gerak hati yang dipanggil naluri?

+ Saya pernah mendengarnya.

- Saudara percaya ia wujud di dalam diri?

+ Saudara ganjil.

- Mungkin aneh lebih sesuai.

+ Saudara membosankan.

- Ganjil dan membosankan mungkin saya. Tapi saya bukan ganjil dan membosankan.

+ Sama sahaja.

- Tapi tidak serupa.

+ Siapa sebenarnya saudara?

- Saya yang mengetahui tentang hidup.

+ Dan tentang mati?

- Dan tentang mati.

+ Jadi apakah hakikat hidup?

- Saudara terpelajar. Saudara tahu hakikat hidup.

+ Mungkin saudara lebih mengetahui?

- Saya memilih untuk tidak berbicara mengenai hakikat hidup. Saya tidak mahu berfalsafah.

+ Falsafah satu usaha untuk mencari kebenaran. Kalau kita cuba mencari erti hakikat hidup, maka ini adalah falsafah.

- Sekarang saudara berbicara mengenai hakikat hidup. Lalu kenapa saudara memilih merah sebagai warna saudara?

+ Apakah kaitan warna merah dengan hakikat hidup?

- Saudara juga yang mengatakan bahawa merah lambang keberanian, perjuangan, pejuang.

+ Salahkah saya mengaitkan ia dengan keberanian dan perjuangan?

- Tidak salah. Tapi saudara lupa untuk turut mengaitkan ia dengan keyakinan, cinta, kasih sayang.

+ Perlu?

- Saudara rasa?

+ Tiada perasaan zahir dalam diri saya.

- Saudara tidak takut?

+ Takut apa?

- Mati.

+ Kematian itu biasa.

- Menjadi luar biasa bila dialami oleh banyak orang, dalam waktu yang sama, dan dengan cara yang sama.

+ Maksud saudara?

- Saudara faham maksud saya.