In reading your linked blog, I understood the idea, but perhaps you could improve the way you structure and clarify your ideas. I think you need to work on separating the ideas you're writing within a single sentence, and using grammar and punctuation to dictate the flow for the reader. Readers need cues to pause, digest an idea, then keep reading further.
Your paragraph:
I have questions not the answers. Maybe a way to reach the solutions but the fear of it all falls apart. When my old classmate committed suicide after her transition, it was said that it was her own karma by someone. Is it true? Is it your bad karma the way you are born? Is it bad karma to be yourself? I didn’t perceive Gita in that way but maybe others received the karma theory differently from me.
Some of it is a little confusing and needs clarity. This is how I might reword it at any rate. Rewriting it below actually helped me understand the ideas you were trying to write down.
I have questions, not answers. I might have a method to arrive at a solution, but fear of it all makes it all fall apart. When my old classmate committed suicide after her transition, someone blamed it on her karma. Is karma really the cause? Is it bad karma to have been born into a body you don't identify with? Is it bad karma to want to be your true self?
I didn't think of Gita in that way, but perhaps other people have a different definition of karma.
Is this what you were trying to say?
Looking at your first paragraph below:
When I walk, the land passed by keeps calling back to remind me what left behind. Those are not just footprints but more; Those footprints might not survive long enough but am I gonna disappear like them too?
This is how I would interpret and rewrite it myself.
When I walk, the land passes by me, calling back to remind me of what I left behind. Those are not just footprints, but a trace of my existence left in the sand. They may not survive long if the water washes them away, or the wind flattens them, but will I disappear like them too?
