echoing silence

I don’t believe in an interventionist God
But I know, darling, that you do
But if I did I would kneel down and ask Him
Not to intervene when it came to you
Not to touch a hair on your head
To leave you as you are
And if He felt He had to direct you
Then direct you into my arms

Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms

And I don’t believe in the existence of angels
But looking at you I wonder if that’s true
But if I did I would summon them together
And ask them to watch over you
To each burn a candle for you
To make bright and clear your path
And to walk, like Christ, in grace and love
And guide you into my arms

Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms

And I believe in Love
And I know that you do too
And I believe in some kind of path
That we can walk down, me and you
So keep your candle burning
And make her journey bright and pure
That she will keep returning
Always and evermore

Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms, O Lord
Into my arms

–

Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds

faith is a full circle. one outside faith can never really argue with
faith because faith never leaves that circle. and faith can never argue
with reason & logic only.

heart still do matter of course. but it shouldnt collide with reason.

respecting other peoples belief system or code of moral
standard is human nature. we respect whatever brings moral values
such as justice and honor, etc. so long as it advances human interest
-regardless of whether it is for the glory of a supreme being or not.

there really is no problem with other people’s perspectives different
from ours as long as it does not harm the next person in any way. fine.
well & good.

but by this, religion would just simply mean a guide for moral
standard. and ethics and morality can exist without religion.
since man is a rational being, he can choose morality simply by
understanding the fact that it brings forth goodness. goodness brings
forth productiveness which leads to progress, hence the propagation of
life. harm can only result to destruction and eventually leads to human
extinction.

if religion is a means for turning us into good people well, there are
other ways inside the bounds of reason & logic that can make us so.

love…

for one, it cuts across all barriers in any form.

"FOR I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified."
-Paul of Tarsus, I Cor. ii. 2.

THE WORLD’S 16 CRUCIFIED SAVIORS (BEFORE CHRIST):
   1. CRUCIFIXION OF CHRISHNA OF INDIA, 1200 B.C.
   2. CRUCIFIXION OF THE HINDOO SAKIA, 600 B.C.
   3. THAMMUZ OF SYRIA CRUCIFIED, 1160 B.C.
   4. CRUCIFIXION OF WITTOBA OF THE TELINGONESIC, 552 B.C.
   5.  IAO OF NEPAUL CRUCIFIED, 622 B.C.
   6. HESUS OF THE CELTIC DRUIDS CRUCIFIED, 834 B.C.
   7. QUEXALCOTE OF MEXICO CRUCIFIED, 587 B.C.
   8. QUIRINUS OF ROME CRUCIFIED, 506 B.C.
   9. (AESCHYLUS) PROMETHEUS CRUCIFIED, 547 B.C.
  10. CRUCIFIXION OF THULIS OF EGYPT, 1700 B.C.
  11. CRUCIFIXION OF INDRA OF TIBET, 725 B.C.
  12. ALCESTOS OF EURIPIDES CRUCIFIED, 600 B.C.
  13. ATYS OF PHRYGIA CRUCIFIED, 1170 B.C.
  14. CRITE OF CHALDEA CRUCIFIED, 1200 B.C.
  15. BALI OF ORISSA CRUCIFIED, 725 B.C.
  16. MITHRA OF PERSIA CRUCIFIED, 600 B.C.

when i was a christian and even when i was already attending bible
classes, i was made to believe by the assesrtion of preachers that ONLY
jesus rose from the dead. it’s an statement of belief and the assertion
that jesus is THE one and only TRUE god because, as they say, was the
only one to have ressurected despite other claims.. so they say.

yet the long history of belief systems tell otherwise. Quexalcote of
Mexico, Chris of Chaldea, Quirinus of Rome, Prometheus of Caucasus,
Osiris of Egypt, Atys of Phrygia, and "Mithra the Mediator" of Persia
did, according to their respective histories, rose from the dead after
three days’ burial.

jesus’s ressurection is the hope of the christian’s rapture (and
ressurection). it is the corner stone of the whole christian faith. he
is the firstborn, the first to rise from the dead. i too used to
embrace this.

"the silent bourn, whence no traveler ever returns," and laying
aside the moldy cerements of the dead, again walking forth to mortal
life, to be again seen, recognized, admired, and adored by his pious,
devout and awe-stricken followers, and thus present to the gaze of a
hoping yet doubting world "the first fruits of the resurrection."

At the annual celebration of the resurrection of the Persian Savior
"Mithra the Mediator," more than three thousand years ago, the priests
were in the habit of exclaiming in a solemn and loud voice," Cheer up,
holy mourners; your God has come again to life; his sorrows and his
sufferings will save you." (See Pitrat, p. 105.)

now, with the facts about other claims for the savior title, how can
christianity be so different considering jesus was the last of them?
(and i hope there are no others).

link to world’s 16 crucified saviors or christianity before christ>>
  http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/kersey_graves/16/

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."
-Benjamin Franklin

back in the barrio about 100 years ago, a young girl  named maria felt totally madly in love with this pretty boy named pedro. she had only seen him once; at the dance during their barrio fiesta yet she knew right then that he was meant for her.

she had heard pretty awesome stories about this pretty fellow pedro - eldest son, pride of his father. industrious and smart, a loving kuya and with a smile that made every girl’s heart melt. and so maria’s feelings grew stronger each passing day for the guy she never had any chance of talking to for he was from another barrio.

one thing maria didnt realize was that pedro’s interest was already set on her from that single and brief moment their eyes made contact at the dance.

now pedro is a sepak takraw enthusiast. and this month-long fiesta celebration brought him back to maria’s barrio a week after to play for the inter-barangay takraw championship match.

maria’s heart leapt upon hearing this wonderful news. and the sudden glow upon her face was surprisingly undeniable. her lips were arched to an incontrollable smile that everyone in the neighborhood just can’t help but notice. everyday she’d watch pedro play.

the festivities was about to finally end at the "gabi ng parangal at pasasalamat".

that night was a magical moment for maria for she was the one to present the medal to pedro for being the most valuable player. that event brought the two of them the closest..physically. it made maria’s feet a little bit shaky and the palms of her hands a little bit wet. but the joy in her heart was the only thing she was ever aware of.

the parangal ended up with a dance - again - and the two of them danced for the first time and for the longest time. and maria just didnt want the night to end. she wanted to be in pedro’s arms for the rest of the night and hopefully forever.

soon after, they were married.

the fairytale ended and reality stepped over.

after a year, pedro started beating her up. went home always drunk and spent his entire sunday in tupada or sabong loosing the entire money maria made the whole week from her labada.

as
it turned out, all the good-ol’ stories about the pretty boy pedro of before were imaginings of cute little girls enthralled by pedro’s good looks. and the fantasized stories grew "bigger and brighter" as more and more girls giggled each time pedro passed by.

only now, it’s too late for maria.

—-

"do not let your passion cloud over your reason"

-an advise to alexander the great

of course i only made up that story above. but the point is, the heart is never a realiable source for reason and understanding. there is this saying, "emotions can be deceiving" and they often are. that’s why we validate things around us, things we are uncertain of. or even things that we think we’re already certain of which was my case.

if i say i honestly believe in my heart that ive talked to superman last night and he told me that i should tell other people about him and that he is coming back to save mankind, you will say i am delusional.

but then you can only say i am delusional if you honestly believe that i honesty believe in what i am saying.

otherwise you can only call me a liar or a prankster.

that would be the same case for a terrorist who planned of bombing a commercial building in the belief that he is fighting a holy war in the name of allah. he too, wholeheartedly believes he was sent by his god through the koran and mohamed’s prophet and that he is sent on a mission.

the tibetan monk’s wont go down the mountains as much as possible for they found inner peace in the monasteries where they believe they are continually purged into total enlightenment by the words of buddah.

if the heart is the basis for god, then every god is true and real to each individual who thinks so. and the truth about god would be relative.

but then the condemnation of another god between each individual would again arise and the trouble again begins.

"Question with boldness even the existence of God; because if there is one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blinfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson

i am an individualist. an objectivist. an atheist. best of all i am pinoy.

like arch. howard roark of ayrn rand’s "the fountainhead", i share the same view of architecture.

i am an architect for the single reason that i want to see where my imagination would lead me, where that imagination would give birth to a tangible realisation called architecture.

whether this realisation of imaginations should benefit others or not is to be my burden not yours and not theirs.

i am an admirer of talents and human achievement.

i am good in my field but there are others far better than me and i am happy for them. they are an inspiration to look up to.

i am architect.

my grandest imagination is to be able to change the present landscape of the philippine housing projects especially for the pinoy middle class. to be able to design a shelter suitable for a typical filipino family which is not only less expensive but durable and beautiful. different.

imagination? maybe.

but imagination is the drive that makes me an architect.

what drives you?

hmm… lets see… ill try to perk up that certain part of our thinking and make it running just a little bit more than it already is. maybe, if we push a little bit more of what we already have in mind then maybe, we can come up with something.. and something better for the benefit of architecture and most of all of our own.

frank lloyd wright was the one to give name to what american architecture is (or was?. he INVENTED it by inventing the prairie house. he defined american architecture for the americans and for the world. how? he studied the behavioural aspect of the typical american family.

what does this have to do with us being filipino architects. how about defining our behavioural aspect as well.

bahay kubo… is pinoy architecture about the form? the facade? the physical aspect? or would be within the behavioural aspect of the occupants. financial aspect will certainly be of great consideration. availability of LOCAL materials will be another. climate also.

bahay kubo before because we were farmers. behavioural aspect was there, financial aspect was there, availability of local materials was there.

today.. even farmers no longer live in a bahay kubo. meron na lang bahay kubo sa tupana, sa palayan. pansamantalang pahingahan  ng mga magsasaka. but where do they RESIDE? they have a better house. better in the sense that its a little bit stronger than the bahay kubo.

there is beauty in a bahay kubo.

but there is also another side to a bahay kubo. pardon me if you will, but doesn’t a bahay kubo mean poverty? the bahay kubo was born  out of poverty. i thnk i would be right to assume that no farmer of today would forever want to live in a bahay kubo for the rest of his life. he dreams of a better life perhaps not of his anymore but of his children’s.

today.. who are most of these children? it is a fact that a rapid number of youngsters are turning out to be call-center agents. how is bahay kubo suitable for them?

another one.. those that are a little bit older than the yougsters are who? OFW’s. they’re number are also rapidly growing. this is even the main reason why residential condominium buildings are rising in  the metropolis.

i believe architecture is defined by the needs of the time, and that is why any civilization is best described by its architecture. architecture is built on the premise of the need of current situations. i think mr. leandro locsin gave that to us.

architectural progress also relies on the present and upcoming materials and of course… technology.

i would like to believe that what the filipinos need for our kind of architecture of today depends on what we are now and what we want to be in the near future.

like language, architecture constantly changes.

why were there bahay kubo and ifugao huts?

because we were once farmers and hunters.

this farmer has no financial means to put up a sturdier kind of dwelling and so he opted to use what he has from his surroundings. nipa, bamboo, coconut tree and rattan to tie them up.

once this certain farmer, through his hard work, earned a little more than he used to, will improve on his bahay kubo little by little. and up until he sent his child to school and finishes up a course and finds a job, you’ll find that his bahay kubo once has now concrete hollow block soccalo walls.

not the same case in the batanes though. the literally described bahay na bato is… because of we all know what - year-round typhoon.

what was filipino architecture?

our ancestors brought them to us

what is filipino architecture, what it will be?

i think its up to us and the younger ones to best describe them for the whole world… like sir leandro locsin did

my point of view is this… to define what philippine architecture is is to know who we are and what we are… then…now…and tomorrow.

—

pamamahayag ng isang malaya at matayog na kaisipan lamang po. munting pagbabahagi tungo sa progresibong pamumuhay.

let’s think progressive. not regressive.

mabalos!

I
love architecture more than I love my wife.

Shhhh.
Don’t you ever let my wife know about it or I’ll be sleeping on
the sofa for the Nth time and forever, to the agonizing company of
our kissing-sucking maniac residents called “pesteng lamok.” Of
course I was just kidding.

But
what does architecture mean to you? How much do you love
architecture? Emotions are non-quantifiable therefore it is difficult
to explain the extent of its actual value. Like love and hate,
passion and rage, we can only calculate the extent of their effects.
And by “effect” means after or while an action was done or is
being done. We can measure emotion only by calculating, more or less,
the action’s implications.

Vincent
Van Gough, the great painter, was never called great while he was on
his canvases doing his paintings, which were never called
“masterpieces” while he was yet alive. The people around him
never noticed the extent of his emotions exerted on his paintings
until he committed suicide. Only at a later time after his death did
they realize how much he wanted to cope up with his frustrations by
setting them free into creating a different world through the
scribbling of his fingers. His art is now called “finger painting.”

Architecture
is also an art. But unlike any other art, architecture is the “mother
art”. The others, like painting and sculpture, are created as the
resemblance of Man or as visual representations or interpretations of
Man. They are something like the impressions of the expressions of
Man and or His environment. In the case of Van Gough, his work was
the representation of his own world through his own eyes. Such is
painting, sculpture, music, poetry and literature.

Architecture
however is not meant like Man. It is meant for Man. It
does not imitate Man for his glory or downfall. It provides for Him a
literal “world” through his glory or downfall. It provides for
Him a resting place. It provides for Him an activity place. It
provide for Him an entertainment arena, a sanctuary, a protective
covering from the forces of nature. This world that is architecture
is what we call shelter. Simply put, architecture is Human
Shelter.

"…Architecture
does what no other art can do:
All other art forms recreate some
portion of the world - a single human figure, or a two-dimensional
scene on a canvas.
        Only architecture can create a total
environment, one that literally surrounds the viewer. Architecture
creates a man-made, idealized world - an environment created by the
architect to fit the kind of life he sees as proper to man.

    Architecture conveys a view of man indirectly, not by projecting
an image of man himself [as sculpture, painting and literature do]
but by projecting a proper environment for man to live
in."
    –Sherri Tracinski -The Intellectual Activist,
April 1998 

For
its entirety, architecture must serve to satisfy Man’s needs. This
burden – or the love of it – becomes the responsibility of the
Architect. How he creates a world of shelter for his clients will
determine the extent of his love for architecture. His work will be
the measuring tool for his emotions, his feelings toward
architecture.

        “An
architect is creating, not merely an object,, but a        whole universe
for us to inhabit.” -Arch. Claude
Megson

       Shall
I create a functionally perfect house or shall I intend it to
mesmerize the passersby? Shall I disregard the two (function and
beauty) and make it to last a hundred years for the next generations
to talk about? We were often taught that form must follow function.
But Vitruvius, declaring architecture as a package deal, seems to
have known better. And so did Frank Lloyd Wright.

    “firmitatis.
utilitatis. venustatis.” (commodity. firmness. delight) -Marcus
Vitruvius Pollio

        Form
follows function-that has been misunderstood. Form and function
should be one, joined in a spiritual  union. -Frank
Lloyd Wright 1908

         Space
planning is very important. It is the spaces within that determine
the functionality of the “shelter”. Design now applies to the
manipulation of the solid entities that define the spaces (i.e. walls
and ceilings). It is through these manipulations that we are able to
beautify our shelter. But beautification doesn’t mean just adding
up ornaments. Its beauty must define the spaces. Each solid entity
must serve its own purpose of defining the spaces within otherwise it
will just become an add-on, a mole (the male’s nipples? I really
haven’t quite figured out what they are for). Ok fine, mole is
enough.

        “If
there is no meaning then you’re just yanking.” –Arch.
Claude Megson

For
the love of architecture, let me not be a mere designer. For the love
of architecture, let me not be a mere builder. For the love of
architecture, let me not be a mere planner. For the love of
architecture, let me pour my heart out into it. For the love of
architecture, let me be an ARCHITECT.

this are my
posts & replies in the Friendster groups’ Filipino Architetcs’
topic thread on renewing PRC licenses and the IAPOA-R.A. 9266 thing…

this is my stand. this is Objectivism

(you might also want to view the whole thread by pointing to this link: http://www.friendster.com/group-discussion/index.php?t=msg&th=719914&start=0&

Sat, 08/25/07 08:13 AM
i
have this grudge against those people who "invented" this iapoa thing.
its a total discrimination and exploitation and blackmail.
 
it’s not right to force people, us architects in particular being
professionals at that, into participating in "groups" if one doesn’t
want to. it’s blackmail! they’re ‘forcing" us to have this iapoa
membership by threatening us of taking away our RIGHT to OWN the plans
we’re suppose to submit to the government.
 
they will discredit our rights just because we don’t have this iapoa
number. what for? i mean our prc license are nothing if we dont have
this iapoa ek ek. what’s the use of taking the board exam and getting a
license if this iapoa will just scrap it away?
 
  this is anti-human and immoral. to apply FORCE to us is IMMORAL!!! IAPOA IS IMMORAL.
————————

Tue, 08/28/07 01:01 PM

kung ito ay iringan lamang at pataasan ng ihi ng PIA at UAP, ano naman
ang kinalaman ng mga LISENYADONG ARKITEKTO (ng PRC) na minarapat na
hindi umanib sa anumang organisasyon?

bakit kelangang takutin itong mga indibidwal na ito at ipagkait sa kanila
ang kanilang SINUMPAANG karapatan dahil lamang sa hindi pag-anib sa organisayong ito?

unang una, ang tinutukoy ko po rito ay mga LEHITIMONG Arkitekto sa bisa
ng SINUMPAANG tungkulin na ipinagkaloob ng PRC mismo. ito ang sinasabi
kong ibinabasura lamang ng IAPOA sa halagang P500!

karapatan ng bawat indibidwal na umanib sa mga organisadong grupo. NGUNIT karapatan din ng isang indibidwal na HINDI umanib.

ang kanyang hindi pag-anib ay hindi nangangahulugang hindi nya na pwedeng itaguyod ang kanyang propesyon.

ang pag-anib sa mga grupong ito ay hindi rin nangangahulugan na hindi
ka na magiging magaling na Arkitekto. maaaring makakapulot ka rito ng
ibang impormasyon subalit hindi lang ito ang pamamaraan sa pagningas ng
ating kakayahan at pagkalap ng impormasyon.

ANG AKING PANAWAGAN:
sa mga gusto ng IAPOA (pagsapi sa UAP o PIA), karapatan nila ito at malaya silang maging miyembro.

subalit sa mga minarapat na huwag ng sumali sa kahit alinmang
organisasyong ito, ay sana nama’y bigyan din ng kalayaan sa kanilang
piniling desisyon. huwag takutin at huwag nawang tanggalan ng
karapatang maging ARKITEKTO dahil lamang sa di pag-anib sa mga grupong
ito.

ang mga ganitong pamamaraan ay pagtanggal sa karapatang maging malaya.
tayo po ay nasa malayang bansa. may malayang kaisipan, may malayang
pananaw. bukod sa lahat, may kalayaang mamuhay ayon sa ating sariling
pasya at di dahil sa dikta sa atin ng iba.

OBLIGASYON ng
GOBYERNO at BATAS na pangalagaan ang mga karapatang ito at hindi ang
baliin at agawin sa kahit sinupaman -propesyonal man o hindi!
———————–

Thu, 08/30/07 12:33 PM
FREEDOM IS ABSOLUTE. when it’s not, when it’s twisted, it’s no longer freedom.

The concept of freedom rests on a government limited to the
protection of individual rights. The law should not try to force people to act morally. Its sole purpose is to promote individual liberty,
and by doing so, create the conditions necessary for someone to live
his life. We should be free to live our lives however we as individuals
see fit, with the one rule that we cannot use physical force against other people.

Everyone should be free from coercion by others. Each person can then
make their own choices in life, and follow through with them. If
someone else disagrees with how you’re living your life, they’re free
to say so and even try to persuade you to act otherwise. But they cannot force you to.

Freedom exists when there are limitations on government, limitations imposed by the principle of individual rights.

Philippines
is a republic, under which government is restricted to protecting our
inalienable rights. You are free to criticize your neighbors, your
society, your government–no matter how many people wish to pass a law
censoring you.

The job of the government is to protect our freedom. This is the very reason Marcos was ousted. We do not want a dictatorial kind of policy!
———————–

Sat, 09/01/07 07:10 AM
there is a big difference between FREEDOM and ANARCHY.

to IMPOSE is to dictate and therefore does not spell freedom. and in
this case the enforcement of a twisted law under the guise of the so
called "new architecture law".

true, what can we do now that
it is already in effect? what else but to SUBMIT or else you LOOSE your
right to implement your concept into reality. another building
conceived in the mind yet trampled upon by this dictatorial "LAW".

what a waste.

it’s a wonder why many people "RIDE" on the fame
or talents of others just to make it tick by joining groups and sucking on some other people’s ideas.

in a free world "LAW" means the SAFEGUARDING of FREEDOM.

to IMPOSE by the use of "LAW" is called "DICTATORSHIP"! and that, we don’t want.

and what we mean by the ABSENCE of LAW is ANARCHY. another thing that we don’t want.

FREEDOM IS ABSOLUTE! no buts

the
poem was forwarded to me by a friend whom i’ve never met (as yet) but i
consider her closer to a part of my life than some people who would
like me to believe they are my friends. she’s a solid christian and
living it the way she believes how a christian life should be.
nevertheless, it doesnt affect our respect for each other (hindi ba,
ate patti? :D)

to any christian, the phrase "the purpose driven life"
is synonymous with coka-cola or lady’s choice mayo. one can not deny
the fame that made this book what it is today. for this, my admiration
to the talent the author, mr. rick warren had exerted.  to me, this is how one becomes
immortal; to leave a legacy for the next generations for whatever reason - or purpose for that matter - they may be.

of
course i can not agree a hundred percent with mr. warren. but this very poem below, i can say i
agree with the majority of what was stated. others are debatable
dependeing on our beliefs (or non-beliefs) and/or philosophy.

but the 3rd to the last stanza (i highlighted it in yellow) caught my attention… and i couldn’t agree more. for one thing, rick warren saw the very core of atheism. way to
go, rick!

The Purpose Driven  Life

Don’t associate with people you can’t trust.
Don’t cheat.  Don’t  lie. Don’t pretend.
Don’t dictate because you are smarter.
Don’t demand  because you are stronger.

Don’t hurt your kids because loving them is  harder.
Don’t sell yourself, your family, or your ideals.
Don’t  stagnate.!
Don’t regress.
Don’t live in the past. Time can’t bring  anything or anyone back.
Don’t put your life on hold for possibly Mr/Mrs  Right.
Don’t throw your life away on absolutely Mr Wrong because your  biological
clock is ticking.

Learn a new skill.
Find a new  friend.
Start a new career.
Sometimes, there is no race to be won.
Only  a price to be paid for some of life’s more hasty decisions.

To terminate  your loneliness, reach out to the homeless.
To feed your nurturing instincts,  care for the needy.
To
fulfill your parenting fantasies, get a  puppy.
Don’t bring another life into this world for all the wrong  reasons.

To make yourself happy, pursue your passions and be the  best of  what you can
be.
Simplify your life. Take away the clutter.
Get rid of  destructive elements: abusive friends, nasty habits, and
dangerous  liaisons.
Don’t abandon your responsibilities but don’t overdose on  duty.

Don’t live life recklessly without thought and feeling for your  family.
Be true to yourself.
Don’t commit when you are not ready.
Don’t  keep others waiting needlessly.

Go on that trip. Don’t postpone  it.
Say those words. Don’t let the moment pass.
Do what you have to, even  at society’s scorn.

Write poetry.
Love Deeply.
Walk  barefoot.
Dance with wild abandon.
Cry at the movies.

Take care of  yourself. Don’t wait for someone to take care of you.
You light up your  life.
You drive yourself to your destination.
No one completes you -  except YOU. <<<where is god here?

It is true that life does not get easier with age.
It only  gets more challenging.
Don’t be afraid. Don’t lose your  capacity to  love.
Pursue your passions.

Live your dreams.
Don’t lose faith in  your God. <<< ??? after that stanza?? i can’t figure it.
Don’t grow old. Just grow YOU!

When you give someone your  time, you are giving them a portion of your life
that you’ll never get back.  Your time is your life. That is why the greatest
gift you can give someone  is your time. Relationships take time and effort,
and the best way to spell  love is T-I-M-E because the essence of love
is not
what we think or do or  provide for others, but how much we give of
ourselves.

Rick  Warren

madla’y bigkas lagi’y "magpakatotoo ka",

pilit hinahanap tunay mong mukha,

kamumuhian ka nga nila’t lahat

pagkat anila’y sa katotohana’y ika’y salat.

…

ngunit ako’y matagal ng binabagabag

damdami’t isipa’y tila baga tinitibag;

pagpapakatotoo sa ganang kaliwa, 

o ang sa kanan: ang tamang gawa?