Probably the image (and the philosophy) which has made a lasting impression on me was when I watched Gandhi, the 1982 film famously brought alive by Ben Kingsley. My friend, who had been in India several months before, showed me the house where Gandhi lived, and told me how in his death, Gandhi only had steel rimmed glasses, a pair of sandals, a Zenith pocket watch, an eating bowl and a plate as his worldly possessions.
Could one live like Gandhi? It may be extreme. But his philosophy remains, we should not own more than what we need.
Last night I decided to take an inventory of the stuffs I own (excluding household furniture, kitchen utensils and appliances, personal care products, and books):
- 5 pairs of work pants (1 pair from 2006, 1 pair from 2008, 3 pairs from 2010),
- 2 pairs of jeans (both from 2007),
- 10 work/casual tops (All from 2010),
- 5 pairs of baju kurung (3 pairs from 2010, 2 pairs from 2011),
- 3 pairs of running/hiking pants (2 pairs from 2008, 1 pair from 2011),
- 3 pairs of pyjama pants (2 pairs from 2009, 1 pair hand-me-down),
- 2 pairs of skirts (both from 2009)
- 10 t-shirts (3 from 2011, 2 from 2010, the rest from 2009 or before),
- 2 cardigans
- 20 scarves (2 from 2011, 10 from 2010, 6 from 2008 or before, 2 gifts)
- 3 pairs of socks (2011),
- 1 pair of running shoes (2011),
- 2 pair of work shoes (2011),
- 1 pair of flip flops (hand-me-down),
- 1 handbag (hand-me-down),
- 2 backpacks (1 hand-me-down, 1 from 2011),
- 1 suitcase (hand-me-down),
- 1 laptop (a gift)
- 1 iPod (a gift)
- 1 DVD reader (a gift)
- 1 handphone (from 2008)
- 1 speaker (hand-me-down)
- 1 headphone (gift)
- 1 wallet (gift)
- 1 belt (from 2010)
- 1 blazer (from 2007, rarely used)
- 1 winter jacket (from 2009, only used overseas)
- 1 cap (from 2009, used for running)
- 2 watches (gifts)
- 2 bracelet (gifts)
- 2 cloth bangles (from 2010)
- 1 pair of glasses (from 2007)
- 1 box of pins and brooches
- 5 ethnic purses/bags (4 souvenirs from friends/colleagues, 1 from 2009)
- 2 canvas tote (gifts)
- 3 jewellery boxes (gifts)
- 1 2 men-tent (from 2010)
- 1 sleeping bag (from 2007)
- 1 rechargeable camping lantern (from 2009)
- 1 P1 4G Wiggy (from 2011)
- 1 classical guitar (from 2009)
- 1 guitar stand (from 2009)
- 1 guitar tuner (from 2009)
- 1 aboriginal art (from 2009)
- 2 pieces of thimble (from 2009)
- 3 pieces of Etsy artworks (from 2009)
- 1 prayer mat (hand-me-down)
- 1 pair of prayer shawl (gift)
- 1 scientific calculator (hand-me-down)
- 1 tumbler (from 2011)
Trying to make a living, and trying to make a "life" are two different things. Living, shopping, owning stuffs, are all different and separate things, and it's a philosophy I'm continuously trying to learn and embrace as I grow older.
How much stuffs do you own? Are they all needs and wants? How do you distinguish them?
9 comments:
3 box full of jewellries ka? huhuhu, bahaya kalau perompak tahu
Pojan, thanks for your concern. Unfortunately, semua jewellery boxes tu kosong.
1 ada gula-gula Sugus my niece letak (and it's still there), 1 ada extra butang from all my shirts, 1 ada bracelets kristal yg dah dibawa ke valuer and confirmed tak berharga. :p
And those jewellery boxes are small (about two inches) usually given by my friends who visited India. Examples here.
Yati tak ada barang kemas, so any pencuri yg berhajat nak mencuri dkt rumah will be sorely disappointed. Unless they want to steal books or DVDs.
:)
huhuhu...kami pun tak ada smpan barang kemas lepas kena rompak dulu
Pojan,
Ini masa TV kena curi ya? What happen if everyone starts to live like Gandhi? Maybe pencuri pun tak ada nafsu nak mencuri. :p
That 1982 Gandhi movie was the subject of one of the most heated debates my classmates had in World History class back in high school.
I think one of the outcomes of that discussion was: To live by Gandhi's phylosophies, you'd have to be Gandhi.. ^^
It also gave me a median outlook. Rather than owning what we don't need, I tend take the phrase living within one's own means very seriously.
:)
Kak Sofie,
Some people consider owning (a couple or more) RM5,000 handbag or driving RM 0.5 million 75-ton piece of steel/alloy to get from point A to B worth of 15 km as living within their own means too...
It's subjective really, and Gandhi's philosophy is two-pronged, "what the millions cannot". It's as much about us as about other people too.
I am still learning. :)
Ah yes, every idea has its extremes. Though on the whole, I think the average person takes living within their own means as living life simply, without the grandiose details.. ^^
The problem I have with the what-millions-cannot statement is the fact that it transfers the poverty blame on the earning masses far too easily.
Sure, we the ones with means have the social responsibility to help the ones without. It's not rocket science; it's a matter of morals and conscience, and how they are manifested throughout society depends on the individual.
But what of those without means? what are their responsibilities? are they not accountable for their own lives? rarely do I see these kinds of questions raised, because honestly, it's a lot easier to get someone to let go of something then to ask someone else to earn it..
And this is the main opposing point in our Gandhi movie debate: how unfair it is to ask those with means to live without when clearly, they have worked hard to be in the position to live with.
Like I've said before, I'm not for superfluous spending, but let's face it, every human being on earth works so that they could afford something. For you it may be the occasional caramel macchiato; for others, a collection of pricey handbags.
The point is, neither of you should be blamed for wanting or having them.. :)
Ah, Kak Sofie, let's not turn this into 'what I do is better than you" debate. It is far from my intention to do so when I write this post.
When I speak of the millions, I certainly do not think of the average millions who feel like (insert: government, rich people, NGOs) should provide for them just because.
I was thinking of those without real choices.
And as far as everyone is accountable for their own lives, I'm every bit an advocate for that - because once we accept that we are responsible for our lives; the blaming game, the excuse, they all stop.
PS: RM12 caramel macchiato turns what is a necessity for me in Sydney ($3 ONLY) into indulgence in Malaysia. Same can be said for those who indulges in RM4000 Macbook as opposed to those who chose it for economic reason ($1200 in Sydney). Really, if we want to go on, this goes beyond the rights of the rich vs. poor debate...
My point exactly!
On both sides of the spectrum there are wants and needs, but how we define these depend on our personal outlook, environment, upbringing..
I'm not saying the poor shouldn't be helped, or the rich have the right to reap and keep all that they sow. What I meant was, there should be middle ground to everything.
All-out philanthropy is great; Ghandhi is an amazing person for being capable of it. I guess all I'm saying here is that it's probably not for every man..? Because I doubt every man can discount his posessions as easily as Ghandhi can..
What was that phrase you used? "How to have have your latte and drink it"?
I think it's a nice phrase. To me it's like saying, "You can get whatever you want in life because you've earned it, BUT you should do a lot of other good things too! ^^
Post a Comment