Of course that the Universe is one representation of multitude. What is the traditional sense to be in this multitude? It is never answered. You are one person. You see the multitude of everything. And your place is of what significance? It is not that you must be significant but it is that your individual sense is not considered. All this was talked about in the school who wanted as much as it was possible to hear from the pupils concerning the famous question about significance of the life. This significance is not spoken about and when it is really spoken, it is very big curiosity to know what the schoolgirls and schoolboys have to say on it. Well because we live in the rich environment where there is all what is in fact a facility we do not feel any need to question what is the significance of our lives because it is thought in advance that the mankind of modern times is simple successor of the clear and intelligent progress of the humanity related to development and science. And it is hard to say that if the material welfare who people think to own without any merit but normally and thankfully to the history, the progress, the famous industrial revolution, all sorts of miracles, the science, hard work justifies the lack of any concern, worry, and classical thinking and classical approach and the initial puzzle over the existence. There is no puzzle because it is clear what is the life. It is one thing. But to resolve the mathematical exercise in the school is not possible without preparatory learning. So the sight and brain see everything and it is not possible to know something what is particular. Why then the simple watching towards unreachable stars by pure vision is just one activity awarded by nothing and nobody although it is alone in itself revelation? The revelation is to see something simply. But the awards are given to the concrete and useful achievements. Now it is the question how one individual can find the normal relationship between the enigmas and phenomena with his apparent fact to simply exist and to have a right to be left alone by the others environmental phenomena? The rules, the prejudices, the law, the people. What is the mystery of the silence over living? Who supported this 'silence over living' from the earliest eras of any kind of life and later on of more and more organized life? Normally, when you have something and enjoy it is as if you already lived all your life. You do not need to think and to rethink. For example when man and woman love each other and kiss each other is there anything to say? There is nothing to say and there is nothing to think. But if you ever think that your right as the conscious person is to refuse the speechless and useful way of living and working you would possibly find your self in the moral question and something more, the moral concern. Do I have the right to refuse to live in the practical and useful way as the speechless robot? I don't speak about the wonderful thought that the way of life of the pure physical character is described as robotical but I speak about right to refuse speechless living. But it is not at all a kind of political speech or anything else what is the question but the understanding of what is the life and what is the significance of life, what is the mystery over silence over living and the fatal misunderstanding between what is done and what is said.

Copyright © 2005 Gacina Bozidar