Otis

Great!

Thank you, Manitou, for this open and excellent share!

I like very much the analogy of the gardener, because he is the one who cultivates, but never forces, the direction of the plant. He may help to support the tomato plant with stakes, but he will never ask it to produce a different fruit. I think it's also worth keeping in mind that we are not just the gardeners, but the plants themselves. As the plants, we do need some humility in our conceptions of what the "right" gardening is. Thankfully, other wise gardeners have written books on the subject, but the individual plant is not an academic exercise. I can take good advice, and see how it fits, but I still need to let life itself be my principle guide, not method. I need to be willing to make mistakes, or I will only be dwelling within the confines of someone else's philosophy. I need to learn to trust my own guidance, or I will always live a second-hand life. As a plant, there is, within me, all the instructions on how to grow. It's built into the system. It's important not to let the concepts of "right" overwhelm the internal guidance, which is the path that nature has designed for me to grow by. Trust that nature knows better, than my thoughts ever will.

Excellent! The distinction I make for myself is that I am always following, never leading. I am not the "teacher", not the one who declares what is true and what is not. I am merely the one who does all the listening, all the paying attention. I am the student of my own path. Rather than decide a path, I listen to the path that calls me down it, and I enjoy the experience of traveling it. And that's it. The least deciding, the least controlling, the least planning possible. To emerge as my life, I cannot second guess and rationalize my relationship with the world. Rather than thinking my way through relationship, I can be the relationship, be the caring, even be the world. Let the unfolding flow of life, including where I'm at, be the authentic ground for spontaneous action. And trust that I do not need to figure out life, before I live it. Of course, to do this, I must be willing to see life as mystery. If I decide that I have it figured out, then I am only relating to my concepts. I have to be willing to be unjaded before experience, if I am to truly pay attention to that experience.

Aaron, in my early 20s, sometimes I'd try to cut my own hair, think I was saving some money. I always decided to do it when I was tired, probably because it was such an obviously bad idea, that I'd see right through it, when fully awake. It was always a disaster. Make a mistake here? Ok, balance it with a mistake on the other side!

What do you mean, in this context, by "willful ignorance"? I mean, I was willfully ignorant about the reasoning behind the May 21st end date, even though it could have been the most important thing to know. I saw it as silly, and so didn't bother, but that was certainly "willful ignorance".

I've received some great words of wisdom from crazy homeless people.

Is there a lesson for us, in here somewhere? I hope so. The followers of the good Reverend claimed that they could see the impending rapture, because they had some "special vantage point" from which they were able to view the true workings of the universe. Of course, they turned out to be a bunch of loonies, who talked themselves into believing they were on the inside track to truth. How different is it when a Taoist or Buddhist claims some special vantage point, from which they can see the true workings of the universe? Are these Xtians to be ridiculed, but our own self-proclaimed enlightened Bums are seen as authorities?

Pure speculation, but what if dark energy is the very thing that was responsible for the big bang, in the first place? Maybe it's the force that spreads out, just as the other forces gather together.

I think it could also be said that it is not gravity, but mass, which warps space. Gravity is just the by-product, another way of defining "curved space".

Yeah, I've likewise found that new freedom sometimes leads to some clumsiness in my system (physical and emotional), because the other, habit-bound systems freak out a bit, when things open up.

I don't know Dr. Ellis, but this is a pretty fair summary of my practice. I also have some intermediate steps about re-connecting to my breath, re-centering, etc., as necessary. I guess I wouldn't call it "minimizing emotion" as much as "minimizing the control that emotion has over my reactions".

More great insight, Cat Pillar. It sounds like you're doing important work!

Sweet. Thank you.

Nice, Stigweard. I also highly recommend hand-balancing, which of course, changes the entire dynamic of upper and lower.

Yeah, this is part of why I started the "Other People" thread, because this has been a tricky one for me, as well. Why should I do all the work? Don't they have some responsibility in this as well? And then, of course, realizing: it's not a question of whether they have responsibility, but a question of: what do I have the power to change? And yes, I can ask someone else to change (or at least to meet me halfway), but the more powerful changes are all within myself. That is where my true agency lies. (Besides, the story of "their responsibility" or "what's fair" are just that: stories. There's no divine judge to intercede on my behalf, and set things straight, so the stories are next to meaningless). So shifting my response does not have to be the same as being dishonest with myself. It can be just improving my skill in interacting with the world. The fact that "the world" in this case is represented by another person, doesn't really change the issue. What I have control over is my willingness to practice new skills of meeting others with honesty and care (plus my willingness to forgive myself and others, when either doesn't do or say what I'd prefer). As I said, this is a tough one for me, as well. I wish you the best, in finding a balance that works for you.

In improv partner dance, she does not surrender to me, nor I to her. Instead, we both surrender to us. That is: neither of us is trying to make something happen, nor are we trying to guess what the other needs. We are merely being honest and caring, at the point of connection. And from that springs beautifully integrated dances. We become one self-balancing being. In other words, neither of us is right or wrong. There is no correct method that is designed for the specific two of us, at that specific moment. What works for us, is being true to where we're at, and caring for the other's well-being. I think that connecting to life is the same way. Try to force a change, and bruising happens. Trying to outguess life, or letting it run me, is a disaster. But being honest and caring in the way I meet life, transforms me, and transforms interactions. The world and I become one self-balancing being.

I think that self-identity is pretty much just a trap. You will never be what someone else says you should be, because their fantasies have nothing to do with who you are. (Nor can you live up to your own fantasy, because that's not you, either). You don't need to have an identity, just live a life that's honest and caring. Everything else flows out of that. All of the energetic/Qi practices are suggestions, based upon what works for the largest amount of people. But they are not "what is". Only you are "what is", and therefore you are what's true, not a concept or method. Live someone else's concept, and forever be a stranger to your path. Live your own truth, and your path will reveal itself to you. And if you live as your path, then "you", "your life" and "your practice" are the exact same things.

These sound like very worthy goals. There's a lot of service that takes place, within them.

What a fantastic concept: the beauty of the imperfect! In an era of hyper-heightened airbrushed aesthetics (Playboy, Cosmo models, TV stars, etc.), it's easy to overlook the beauty of the real. Even here on the Bums, I think certainty is often valued over thoughtfulness, sound bites over nuance. Ideals can be so tempting to believe in and strive for, because they define value in our culture. But ideals are also traps. With an ideal, the imaginary "perfect" is the only thing that lives up to expectations, and anything less/different is seen as lacking. Therefore, the world is always lacking, is always wrong. Wabi sabi sounds much more appealing. Perfect = "what is", and any way that we can improve on "what is", is just gravy.

My first thought is about the role that women have played in human history (warning: gross generalizations ahead). Men have had all the default power in most societies, so women have had to use a different strategy to find their power. "Behind every great man is a woman", pulling the strings. Men compete, struggle, prove themselves, and sweat. Women, on the other hand, have learned how to take advantage of the man's need to feel powerful, masculine, accomplished. Men seek approval of a woman, and the woman uses that to get what she wants. How does she do that? Not (just) through challenging and contradicting (which is the male's dominion), but by strategic surrender, flowing in such a way as to redirect the man's energy in the path of her choosing. So, what a great lesson, to learn both from masculine and feminine strategies, to be able to challenge, when useful, and to surrender, when appropriate. Also, children's survival in society has always been via the strategy of "I'm cute, so don't kill me". When you don't have power, it sure helps if you're cute (unless you're in a Catholic boys' school). Fighting and forcing take a great toll, in the form of energy, time, and emotional peace. Sometimes fighting may be the best possible route, but that situation is probably more rare than it seems. My urge to fight has rarely brought me anything more than some temporary satisfaction (and it's always a contaminated, jumpy, adrenaline form of satisfaction).

Yeah, this deserves its own thread. The whole "I'm straight, don't get confused" worry is a deep-seated one, at least in me. I learned awfully young that the single worst insult you could get, was to be called a faggot. That is still, among grown men, the easiest way to start a fight. So it's no surprise that this story still wields power over small motor tasks, like eye contact. It's so automatic, that it's easy to tell myself that it's the right choice, that I'm avoiding trouble. That's part of why I did the whole male prostitute on Rodeo Drive prank, to baptize myself by fire. If I present myself in drag, acting as effeminate as possible, then I have nothing to avoid. I have no "oh no, they might think that...", because of course they think that. So there's nothing left, but to make peace with my projection of their thoughts.

Right now, I am drawn to face what I previously avoided. This includes not only meeting others eyes, but also looking in the mirror, which I was (unconsciously) phobic about, for the first 40 years of my life. In particular, I am drawn to look, while surrendering any story that comes up. So when I hear in my head: "they're going to think I'm looking for approval", I realize it's just my story, and nothing that exists in life. In fact, if I see something on their face which matches my inner judge's thought, it is very likely just my projection, because of my fear of their judgment. It is tiring, to look, when my habit is pulling me away from looking. It's tiring at first, at least. But that is because the habit is so desperate to try to get me to look away. With practice, meeting others' eyes has shifted from being something new and weird, to being a natural place, from which I am able to smile at others, without judging myself or them. It's uplifting, rather than draining. That's a good sign of freedom, for me.

Manitou, thanks for making this topic. Just a couple of years ago, I started waking up to all the stories that I had, which kept me from making eye contact. One story was: violence was going to happen, because I had made eye contact with someone. That's the story I most hear from others, when they talk about their own reluctance to make eye contact, but the story doesn't match my experience, since I started consciously connecting eyes with others. I don't think I've ever had anyone treat my eye contact as a real threat or challenge, and usually the response is the opposite: a smile. At worst, the other person feels they have to look away (but that's not my problem). Other stories I have still hold more influence over me. "She's going to think I'm a creep." "He's going to think I'm gay." Or just this vague I'm not supposed to. Or maybe: I'm giving them my power. Of course, I give away my power most, when I'm not able to meet others eyes. Looking at someone else is the best way to tell what they're up to, so the one who feels forced to look away, is at a disadvantage. I think the part that most rankles me is the "forced to" part. Looking away is such an automatic response, that I really have to stay vigilant to the habit. One thing is for sure: the world has gotten a lot friendlier, since I started becoming conscious about meeting others' eyes.

Kate, I applaud your questions, and your interest in finding balance in this situation. Steve, fantastic rant! This is pure awesomeness!