Here and now

How far should one go in the here and now to ensure (insofar as such things can be ensured) that the future is rosy (or rosier, rather)? Or is it wiser to have a rosy here and now (insofar as however rosy you can make it) and think about the future when it comes to here and now?

If one thinks of heaven and hell and such afterlife concepts, my personal answer does not require much thought. I am all for here and now, and if there do exist such places as god's and satan's abodes, I will consider them whence I have crossed the bridge between life and death. Also, even the idea of heaven and hell perhaps does exist in all mythologies and religions, but does not necessarily share the same relationship with death. Hinduism and Buddhism (which I anyway regard an off-shoot of Hinduism, and even more so, a refined rip-off from Jainism) talk about reincarnation and such, something that takes away the idea of eternal suffering in the lakes of fire in hell as satan's minions shove hot pokers up your backside (as in Christianity), or perpetual bliss cavorting carnally with the hoors in jannat (as in Islam, and it makes me wonder what it prescribes for women who go there).

Hinduism and Buddhism have their prescriptions of bad things to follow bad actions in a human life time, and they are not necessarily pleasant, but they at least remove the idea of eternity (which seems pretty ludicrous anyway), and also of association with guilt (this is strictly a crime of Christianity, referring to its favourite son as the sacrificial lamb of god. If any other religions use it as well, I do not know of it.). Also, in Hinduism, for instance, most of what you suffer for your bad actions happens to you in this earthly realm itself, though not necessarily in this life time.

And what about within the lifetime? You know, the idea of karma coming to bite you in the butt when you least expect it. As for me, I ALWAYS expect it, as a rule. It's like, if it weren't for bad luck, I would have had no luck at all, so screw karma. But hey, that's just me. In general, should we allow that fear to rob us of our small pleasures that we may get out of doing not entirely malign things? Or to prevent us from doing what we feel like doing because it feels right at this moment, even though it may upset some other people (which frankly, is their problem, not ours)? I mean, if the intent is simply to cause someone harm, then there could be grounds to argue against your proposed course of action, but if that is an unavoidable side effect of something that is seemingly good for you, should you not do it? Should it stop us from playing harmless pranks (that some morons always take too seriously)? Or from taking risks?

None of this negates the concept of planning simple things like saving this month so that you can take a holiday the next. And if you conflate such things with what I was saying above, then go away and don't bother coming back. Material things accumulate or deplete tangibly, and hence this discussion won't be required, because the results are visibly self evident. You behave thriftily and you have a pocketful to spend later (or if you are a miser, then a horde to look upon and foolishly smile about). You spend more than you earn and you find yourself in trouble (and if you do it regularly, you deserve to be begging naked on the streets). Unless of course, if you get robbed or are a robber yourself.

My stance is evident. Hedonism, here and now. Makes life simpler to live by drastically reducing the concept of morality. And intent, though useless entirely for most inter-personal relationship issues, is my bench mark for deciding right from wrong. About the only thing I mind is having lost the almost innate malice I harboured once (even if I didn't act on it always)...