Islam : The Untold Story

For every religion, they believe they are the parents of all other religion. This is a paradoxically view, but there is no authoritative evidence as to which was first(*story). 

Here is a wonderful documentary, studying a very ancient and huge religion - Islam.

In this controversial and ground-breaking documentary, historian Tom Holland who is taking the chance to enter the risky waters, suggests that we have absence of historical evidence about the beginning and rise of the Islam. Muslims believe that from the very beginning, the great Arab conquest were all about Islam. But in the 7th century, you can barely find a new religion called Islam anywhere in the historical records.

Even Mecca may not have been the real birthplace of the prophet. The earliest biographies we have were written nearly 200 years after the prophet's lifetime. This is a world founded on stories of Mohammed.

It is not suprising that the program received a torrent of complaints after the broadcast.

Click for more info.

The Limitation of God

Profoundly many. I am not sure of any square km on this planet where you can point out and say, hey look, the God has done things correctly here.

The reason I am an agonistic-atheist is one simple fact. The existence of sorrow. I know it may sound as a lame argument, but given a suitable thoughts, this ought to be the greatest attack against the imaginary friend.

As a child I used to ask my parent, why some people are happy and rich and smart and good looking, while the other completely ugly, sluggish, and bad. Why do some people keep their doors open for happiness while some others struggle to push away the pain? My parents use to tell me, this all is Karma. The fruit of previous life. They said, these people have done something wrong, very wrong in their previous life, and hence they are suffering in this life. So that they would again get a fresh chance in next life, and then at that time, they would probably do well. Initially, I subscribed to this illogical answer. For at that time, the words of elder where the only source of truth to me.

But now I realized, it’s a stupid concept. Firstly nobody ever has proved that ‘multiple’ life do exists. You could have seen it on Aaj Tak, but that was just a TRP. In religion too, this concept of multiple life differ for door to door. In Hinduism, we have seven life, whereas in Christianity, only one. That’s the reason most western country’s people have multiple marriages in one life span. While for Hindus, we have seven lives to enjoy the heaven of feminine.

You might be aware that good and bad are subjective and not an objective concept. That is, something  good for you, may be bad for me and vice-verse. And we have no way to decide the most good and the most bad. So does God have objective explanation of good and bad? Or does he decide based on his mere fantasy.

People generally say that happiness and sorrow are the two sides of same coin. They  say, suffering is mandatory and inevitable. Then comes the next big question, who decide who suffers?

What kind of God created a world like this? There is more suffering and struggle than joy and happiness.  I hear 70 girls’ been raped daily, 100’s of elderly brutally killed by youngster. I see a mother cheeks swollen red by the slap she gets from her own son. I see father raping his daughter with the same penis which was crucial to give birth to her, I see Osama Bin Laden living for 60 years, whereas a 16 year old girl getting into coma for the bullet she received just for starting a female literacy camp in Pakistan. I see murderers enjoying free air, and millions of kids in African desert dying daily for single drop of water. I see corrupt politician earning billions of dollars in their life time, and then I see innocent farmer ending their beautiful life just for 600/- Rs they cant pay. What a irony. 

Is this how an intelligence god creates the world? Is this the best design he can ever do? *^%$$^&#.  Did the almighty god who created the vastness of universe, who created billions and billions of galaxies in which there are trillions of stars and planets, can make such a stupid design mistake? If he was a sole maker of this world, why didn't he crafted a more thoughtful world? Why didn't he formed a world where there is no sorrow and only happiness. You may find this as stupid idea, but for a designer, who has made the world from bits and scratches, he could have well planned it nicely. He should have made the law of universe in such a way, so as to make everyone happy and to have everyone satisfied. He seems to me as an unskilled designer after all. And if he did this kind of mistake in design purposely, what kind of God he is. 

Think about it… 

Life arises from non-life

Life arises from non-life.

This is a rather a bold statement. But not so challenging. Many researchers and scientists made great leap to understand the reason for the wonderful lovely and fabulous play-station of life we have on earth. Not all succeeded, but surely all advanced.

We need to initially make clear the difference between evolution and origin of life. Darwin Theory of Evolution explain how so many variety of organism and species exist. Why do we have so many difference kinds of life-form. Ranging from trees to lion, man to rat, etc. So evolution is not the theory we need to look towards when we want to study how life exactly originated.

Succinctly speaking, evolution is just three things. Survive, survive and survive. No matter what it take. The unit of evolution is genes. This is a very important phenomenon and must be understood very keenly. This unit of survival, the genes, wants it copies to propagate and survive. If a particular individual fails to reproduce and deliver its offspring, he is so sure to end his legacy there and there. His genes won’t play in the orchestra of evolution. We all evolved from same ancestor. We all are cousin. Not me and you, but you, me, the stray dog, the dolphins, Osama Bin Laden, Tom Cruise and everyone. We all came from the same root. Such a beautiful reality.

Let me give you brief about the theory as to how life originated on this planet. This theory is based on a process termed as Abiogenesis. This process helps us understand how a non-living thing can turn into a living this. In order to be called life, anything needs to qualify for three criteria – grow, multiply and mutate. That what all life’s on this planet is all about.

Abiogenesis explains how this might have happen ‘chemically’ and thus forming this fuzzy cream of life. This process is not so complicated, but rather difficult to explain. But let me push you done this. For life to be formed we need to understand what it takes to make one. Speaking of protein, oxygen, DNA would be useless here. All of these are the products of life, rather than ingredient of life. So we need to look on other planet and in the vastness of space to find out what all material was already available. We found that organic material are quite common everywhere.  Secondly, we should accept the fact that initial life has to be very simple. So no mitochondria, no DNA, no nucleus, no ribosomes, etc.

Life started with simple fatty acid. The pre-biotic life contained simple fatty acids. Under the action of pH, and constant cosmic condition, these fatty acid formed vesicle, or a container. These containers were permeable(permit able) to small organic molecule. So here we have a container and some organic material in it (a very minute resemblance to modern cell).  Now when the vesicles, moving around did encounter any free fatty acid, it used to take it inside itself. So eventually, the size of vesicle started increasing. This is due to pure thermodynamic process. It’s quite logical that if I go on increasing the content, the size/volume would gradually increase. This process can be compared to modern time eating and growing.  Now when the size of vesicle increased, it started to break apart due to natural physical forces (winds, water, earthquake, rocks, etc.). Now when the division occurs, no content of the vesicle are lost. It’s a pure conservative division.  So here we have, just using natural process, something which grows and divide. You can call it life right away, but it’s better to wait rather some more lines to complete.

There are numerous nucleotides. DNA and RNA are made from nucleotide (or at least, it plays important role in formation of DNA and RNA). In order to form a nucleotide, all it takes takes to form one is self-polymerization. This process of polymerization is chemical process. Monomer can self-replicate. It is just a covalent hydrogen bond which they need to form. Now the vesicles can only take-in monomer and not polymer (simply because polymer is bigger is size than monomer).  Once a monomer enters the vesicle, and start polymerizing, it forms a polymer and now it cannot escape from the vesicle. This is easy to understand. The entry to the vesicle is confined by size. If the entry door size is 2*2, we cannot remove a package of 5*5. Now these polymers can be considered to separate itself from each other (not from the vesicle). As a when more and more polymer enters the vesicle, the size of vesicle increases.  Now the vesicle with more polymer will now start taking away lipids from the vesicle having less polymer (again pure thermodynamic). It’s interesting that we have found out competition among these vesicles. This is the origin of competition.  A vesicle which contains monomer which can replicate faster would grow and divide faster, eventually increasing in number.  Thus aroused (natural) selection.

Now it’s easy to know why Mutation + Natural Selection = Increased Information.  Thus we have derived a rather beautiful and considerable explanation as to how the early life originated.  Once initial simple life was created, evolution took the charge of setting up the drama of life of which you and I are part. In billion and billion years of evolutionary times, some trait of these polymers would have been selected, some getting rejected, just to increase in size and number. That is what life is. I used to think this a radical event. But now researcher claim that if we give enough time to any planet (with all the resources and condition), life is bound to arise on it. On some of it, life would have being created like a soap bubble and in a matter of moment, disappeared never to come back. On some other planet, there might be earth like habitat believing like we human do; that they are alone is this vast cosmic arena. On some other planet, which would have been billion and billion year older than earth, life would have born, survived and perish due to some internal war, or rather a cosmic fight. We don’t know it yet, we want to know...

THE MISINTERPRETED GOD

Recently I got into an argument with my friends (that’s the only reason we make friends I guess :-D). They think that my view of being atheist or agnostic or non-believer is mere my ignorance. They suppose that reading some books on atheism or watching some documentaries has made a ‘temporary’ impact on my thinking. They feel that I don’t understand a bit of this universe and anything within it (who does?). They believe that the cosmos can only and only be deduced with law governed by religion, science and myths.

I would like to clarify. Firstly, whenever I get into any argument (or conversation :-D), almost every time we end up discussing whether the mythology stories are true or not, did Rama existed or not, was there ever someone called as Jesus, who was Prophet Mohammed and many more question. Trust me; this is not what we intent to talk on. I have a simple claim, ‘God doesn’t Exists’, or probably a quest, ‘Does God Exists?’

Now some people relate the mythological stories with God, some of them related Ayurveda, some relate Kung-Fu, some related Mahabharatha. So every believer has a way of building his platform of thoughts to convince himself that ‘this is this, and so God exist’. But when we keep a clear opinion, we find that even tough (in the worst case scenario), if Mahabaratha, Ramayana, Words of Bible, Quran, and all the myths ever written are as truly precise and accurate as they are, it doesn’t get even close to prove that any supreme being ever existed.

Consider for example, Hindus claim that they have invented number systems, medicine system, astronomy, astrology, etc. long back (even before Aristotle, Pythagoras, Descartes, etc.). Fine agreed. But what does it prove? Man has been quite smart since at that time. They were precise and accurate even without any tools are equipment. Some people also claim that people of that time exhibit mystic power, or they might have owned a technology more advanced than us. Let me consider all this true (even though I doubt most of them). But does this prove God exist?

The definition of God follows – “The creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the Supreme Being. In certain other religions) A superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity”.

Our mythological literatures can give answer to the question ‘Why God exist?’, but not to ‘Does God exist?’. I believe every event ever happened in this universe is possible the best that can (that’s a gut feeling, nothing else). I believe, all good and bad, right and wrong, and almost anything that ever occurred is logical. We cannot point at particular thing and say, ‘this is bullshit’. So even the existence of religion (and they claiming the existence of God), is very well logical. But been logical, it doesn’t mean we don’t have authority to question it back.

I hear people saying, just as God is an idea or hypothesis created, so is Science. Religion and Science both are creation of man. Just as I follow Darwinism, they follow Rama-Charita. Just as I listen/read to Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, they listen to Surdas, Bible, Prophet, and Sage. But this is where the line is drawn. Science is based on fact. Religion is based on fate. And it is very necessary to realize this important difference. You may ask, how good science is, it hasn’t even yet given us all the answer to the beautiful questions we have in our mind. Where do we come from? Why are we here? What are we supposed to do? Where are we going? But friends, science never claims anywhere to find the answer to these questions. Science is like a baby. It is evolving and growing with time. It is more important to notice that science is a self-correcting authority. If someone discovered that the universe is finite, or that the earth is flat, and after some generation we found it out to be inconsistent with the observable and measurable fact, what did science did? It corrected itself. It is never ashamed of its failure. Rather it is doing a very unambiguous duty. Religion on the other hand, wants itself to be untouched. Religion claims it knows everything, even though it hardly knows anything.

I just want to convey that it is very (in fact very) difficult to prove the existence of God. The existence of God should not be an axiom consider by religious people, rather a quest whose answer would lead us to greatest horizon of human knowledge and privileges.

Lesson learned. Or Lesson taught.

Yesterday was a different day for me. Just moving around the Tim-Berners-Lee invention couple of weeks ago, I came across much forgotten website called karmayog. Over there I saw a session which was to be conducted in Pune on Saturday, 28^th regarding ‘Involving men in Gender Equality’. I was free of work as it was Saturday. I planned to have a visit.

The session was undoubtedly great. I got to know enormous about the framework of ‘Gender Equality’. I realized why it was really necessary to include men when it comes to Gender Equality. I encountered variety of statistic, which was still unknown to me. The dignitaries and the speakers were master of their fields. I loved to hear them speak about their work, experiences, the challenges, and their accomplishments. It sound pretty curvy(J) when you here such thing. At the end, there was a panel discussion and then a QA session.

Now for people whom have been to my blog or at least know about me do know my religious view (for the kids in school for first day, see the blog name on the address bar above…. Yes, I am an atheist.). The moment the session started, I was very curious about one word – religion. I was very keenly listening to every word the speaker, the audiences and the host said. None mentioned religion (although some did mentioned ‘caste’, but it was not close enough). I mean, everybody was looking at all the reason why the cruel relationship of inequality exist between and in the society, but what I felt  is everyone was hitting the symptom’s rather than cause. I noted the speakers saying the family system, the education system, the media, etc. are all influencing the evil of gender inequality. Where is the religion? Doesn’t it play an important role when it comes to gender discrimination? People don’t point fingers on things they love.

For me the main cause of specific gender inequality is the structure of our religious book and the way it is written (purely two-faced). We can undoubtedly say that they we are superior to women when we have little or just little knowledge of mythology and religion. They may very well say that they respect woman, but then they consider them as something lower. This behavior pattern is the very same we keep towards nature. We know she is superior, elegant, smart and worth respecting, but at the end of the day, we selfish human are screwing her up day by day. So what religion says is that women are great, they are vital for existence of life, but they are not up to man. Man is superior. He can hunt, he can kill, he can burn himself in sun, but bring bread to home. He can fight with the army to save his family, he can build the house, break it, and build a new one.

When you see religion, I see women in long big black cloth sweltering in sun walking down the road. I can only see their eyes (although sometimes every that is blurred). I see them walking like a prisoner, who have now taken a choice of living that way. Generation after generation, if you do the same thing again and again, it gets into your DNA, and then it becomes a part of individual. I can see a Hindu women taking cover on her face (less brutal than earlier, yet brutal) when she is out of house or in front of some so-called respectful elder. Women are not allowed to speak about family matter not because they choose not to speak, but it’s in the religion, that women should not do anything. She should cook and clean and serve. Women can deceive men (stated by Ambrose (339-97): "Adam was deceived by Eve, not Eve by Adam... it is right that he whom that woman induced to sin should assume the role of guide lest he fall again through feminine instability." ). Women has to maintain her credibility either physically, mentality or spaciously. She has to be pure (funny word) when it come to her virginity, although the guy can touch and sleep and do whatever he want for his lifetime, but girl should be pure(funnier this time). I can go on with examples. Many examples.

I can’t stop writing when I start writing. God doesn’t want you to treat men and women equally. He has not put this in your plate. If you do it, you disobey his commands.

My only argument is when we talk about bringing gender equality and all other equality in our life, we cannot accomplish this goal when we have a blood running in our body which is undoubtedly  deeply religious.

How could you say that men and women are equal when I still hear about Sita sacrifice, when I still see crawling women in Burkas, when I still say the God is my Father…...

Social Suicide - The Thinking Atheist.

Don’t know if it’s true or not, but I haven’t felt the way these people do(might be because not many people are aware of the fact that I am the 'side-walker').
I am very touched by the mere fact that when people decided to live their life in a way they want to, other fellow being start torturing them, forcing them to feel distress and thrown-away. This is absolute murder of freedom. But guess what, that the maximum support of our society we can expect. The human-social  web is been moulded and melted in a way, so as to not let people have a vivid idea regarding anything.
 

I am very touched by the mere fact that when people decided to live their life in a way they want to, other fellow being start torturing them, forcing them to feel distress and thrown-away. This is absolute murder of freedom. But guess what, that the maximum support of our society we can expect. The human-social  web is been molded and melted in a way, so as to not let people have a vivid idea regarding anything.

 But this is the taste of adventure I guess. When people refute you, what they actually do is motivate you to move one with your ideas and thought. The problem is, many of us give up while walking the journey

The difference between Bhagat Singh and Ajmal Aamir Kasab

Before I jerk my words, I would like to mark it clear that I don’t shadow any kind of social-mentality. My entire lifetime (although I am still 23 – the age of miracle!!) is dedicated in getting to know something and trying to chase non-discriminated knowledge. I don’t trust something just because someone says it. I like to question. So I asked this profound yet very necessary question on the time –Do Bhagat Singh and Ajmal Aamir Kasab walk on same page?  Make sure you understand what I am asking. I am not comparing a national hero and a terrorist. I am comparing the act of these two people. Asking this question, expresses my response. I don’t find any difference between the two. Morally, no difference. Legally, yes a lot. I am regretful for people who have lost countless beautiful things in this world. It was not your mistake, neither theirs. I was not the part of the incident, I was a onlooker. I can feel the pain, but at same time I am compelled to think. My view would not harmonize with yours. By writing this, I don’t intend to say Bhagat Singh was wrong or undeserved or unjust, I am just not comfortable that whole world is running behind the bullet rather than finding the gun. But trust me, I got to speak.

We would study this situation with respect to the subsequent questions about Bhagat Singh and Ajmal Amir Kasab. We would be very brief when we answer these questions. The questions go like this:-

Who are these people? What have they done? Why did they do it? What did they achieved?

Who are these people?

“Bhagat Singh (28 September 1907 – 23 March 1931) was born into a Sikh family which had earlier been involved in revolutionary activities against the British Raj, as a teenager Singh studied European revolutionary movements and was attracted to anarchist and Marxist ideologies. His grandfather, Arjun Singh, was a follower of Swami Dayananda Saraswati's Hindu reformist movement, Arya Samaj. His father, and uncles Ajit Singh and Swaran Singh, were members of the Ghadar Party, led by Kartar Singh Sarabha and Har Dayal.  To avoid getting married by his family, Singh ran away from his house to Cawnpore.”

“Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab was born in Faridkot village in the Okara District of Punjab, Pakistan, to Amir Shahban Kasab and Noor Illahi.[8]His father is a dahi puri vendor[9][10] while his elder brother, Afzal, works as a laborer in Lahore.[10] His elder sister, Rukaiyya Husain, is married in the village.[10] A younger sister, Suraiyya, and brother, Munir, live in Faridkot with their parents.[10][11] The family belongs to the Qassab community. He left home after a fight with his father in 2005. He had asked for new clothes on Eid, but his father could not provide them, which made him angry. He then became involved in petty crime with his friend Muzaffar Lal Khan, soon moving on to armed robbery.”

You could find much more details about them when you could Google. For now, we just need plain information. Let’s try to investigate the condition of both these personality. Before they were born, they weren’t under question. Now when you see Bhagat Singh, he was from a bright family. A family which was very discipline kind-of as well as cultured. When you see his family background, we calculate that his previous few generations were already involved in the revolutionary acts. His upbringing was concentrated and concerned with a feeling of doing something for his country. He was motivated by his surroundings.

Moving on to Kasab, he was born in a family of no significance importance when it came to the society. He was just another kid born on this planet. No special motivation, no special education. He was surrounded by agony and fear. Born in Pakistan, he was true to consider that his nation is ‘bad’ as the world say. Then you see, at a young age, he was forced to be a labor, he was never been educated.  He left his father, just because he was not provided with new cloths for Eid. The moment he got into the umbrella of various group of people who were fighting for the agony of Muslim people, he got his aim in life. And with this aim, he also was sure for his family future (they would have been provided with Rs.150,000). What else do we need?

So Singh was a highly motivated boy. He wanted to fight for his nation. Kasab been the same, but with a different eye also aimed to fight for his people. They started their journey in almost same way, but on a different route.

What have they done?

In most literal way, they killed someone. More elaborately, Singh killed 1 high profile British officer John P. Saunders, an Assistant Superintendent of Police. He was actually intending to kill Sir John Simon, but some miscommunication made him hit the wrong target. On the other hand, Kasab killed maximum 40 people (166 were killed by 10 people, so let’s not blame him for all). Is killing bad? You bet it is not. There are hell lots of killing going on. The intend is what which matters.

Why have they done it?

Doing is acting. It is a process of making something which is buttered in our thoughts or words to come into picture. For common people who don’t want to think a lot, and who are easily and highly manipulated by emotional and personal attribute(and that’s what make us human, the instinct of feeling sorry), the reason why both the personality have done the things may very highly differ. Like they will argue, that Singh died for nation, Singh never killed so many innocent people, that Singh never went to foreign land and created destruction, etc.

Will we take each contradiction one by one. The first one, Singh died or sacrificed himself for his nation and land. Kasab also did it for his nation and people.  It really doesn’t matter if it was not our country, it is his nation his belief, and he did it. The second, Singh never killed so many innocent people. Define innocent people. For me none are innocent. We all people are at the stake of our authority whether it is our family, our state, our nation. Been an Indian, I am part of everything of this country. The good, the bad.  Giving an analogy, If a man is running naked on a road in Mumbai, and if that become international news(hopefully it won’t), and if I go to America someday, then I should not be surprised if people ask me ‘Hye bro, I heard that a man was running naked in your country, really???’. I am not separated. If somebody hates our nation, then they would not care about how ‘good and innocent’ people stays at that particular land are. Also, John P. Saunders was an innocent man. He was just doing his duty, that’s all. Even he had family. So the emotional situation was equal on both side of the game.

Some argue that Singh only killed 1 man, whereas Kasab killed many. Does that matters? I was recently listening to lecture of famous political philosopher Micheal Sandel. He gave a very profound example of this situation. He actually proved that number of people doesn’t matter. What matter is where you find the morality of the act. And again, we are sure, each of our participants considered their act to be moral (different way of thinking).

That said, let me put this thing in a very succinct words, what independence was for us 66 years ago, is the same for the terrorist now(trust me, they are fucked big time!). Like we Indian wanted to get rid of maltreatment and wrong done by the Britisher, in the very same way, people (whom you call terrorist) are trying to get rid of the damage that has happened to them(and trust me a hell wrong has happened to these guys). The only difference is when a non-Muslim fights for something, it is called revolution. When a Muslim (or any other non-majority clan) does the same, its termed terrorism.

Blaming someone terrorist and making an arbitrary world of terrorist won’t really solve the problem. We can very well give away the duty of being truthful to family, to our friends, to our nation. But we can’t defeat ourselves. People whom we call terrorist are just people who have difference way of thinking.

Let me end this with some lovely verses:-

“Mama,I am crying,

Please feed me, I am dying,

Can’t you hear me mama, I am crying,

Let me bite your nipple to make you feel I’m trying.

Ouch you fool, you made blood come out me,

Mama, I was hungry, I was just trying, and I was just trying…..”

How I survive without God?

                                                 How I survive without God?

I used to think, why people love and support and admire the phenomenon of God? Slowly fiddling in my mind, I found the actual reason behind it, flexibility. Believe me, it is more difficult to take your ass to work, rather than sit in the corner temple/church and pray for the almighty lord to help you.

See what happens. I been an atheist, occasionally meet young people who believe in God (I do meet old people too, but it is seem problematic for me to even argue with them. They have lived with the fact that God exist for almost their whole life, and I find it unpleasant to separate them now!). What I consequent from these young educated crowds is the following. I would like to relate it in form of small dialogue.

Sudhendu-  Hi Russ, what is your say on God? Do you believe in it?

Russ- Yes I do, I admire him. I don’t visit temple so much, but I worship the lord in my mind. He is my savior and almighty friend.

Sudhendu- So you believe that there was a almighty God who is omniscient, omnipresent, who created the universe? Made all stuff in it, now keep track of what all of us do, what is our past, future. Listens and answer your prayers?

Russ- No man. That’s bullshit. We all know Big Bang, we all know Darwin’s theory of Evolution. I don’t believe in that God. We have studied science dear. What I believe God is, he is a kind of energy. Energy is something nobody can see. But it is always present. Same is with God. God is my supported. He is my imaginary friend at the time when it is quite difficult for me. When all my friends and fellow betray me, I go to him. I imagine him and that makes me feel ‘not alone’… and Blah Blah….!!

So this is what I conclude from this, people like Russ, are at their ease. They don’t give a fuck about the God. They just visit him as we all visit the saloon, only when your problem is getting big. These people don’t follow any rules put forward by religion, they are at their own when it comes to wardrobe, they follow no traditions, they will do bad (but won’t tolerate any), etc. In the dictionary, we call these people pantheist. Those who believe that God is energy.

My suggestions to these people are very simple. You guys are not a theist. You just consider your God as a supporter. And this is not wrong. We human are always in need of support. But now the truth. Watch my words. If you are in problem, you talk and ask for support from your imaginary friend (doesn’t really matters whether he is there or not). So for you, that’s the last resort. You never have been beneath that level. You have never ever imagined a way after that. But guess what, that’s not where the road ends. Just for a second, just for a second, if you give away the belief of God, and you are sad. Just then you will find somebody. Somebody who is more powerful than anybody, resilient that the God of yours. You will find ‘yourself’. And a real you, not somebody as imaginary as God is. Start taking responsibility of yourself. You are worth it. Give away the idea of some friend(you are shit alone, trust me!!). this is how I am, this is how I survive. And mark me, I love it!!

At last, just ask yourself, whom do you trust the most, God or yourself??