Filed under Notes on 30. June 2007 » [3]
And indeed they do. A week ago, the hard drive in my laptop gave up the ghost. I had everything more or less backed up, so suffering was kept at a minimum, but it reminded me of how we always expect things that work to stay the same. If things are going well, in our judgment, we feel that they should continue going well. And if things are going badly, we want them to change.
Although it may sound overly dramatic in relation to the hard drive failure, and really it has nothing to do with that as such, but there is one thing we know for certain: things change. That is the law of the world of form and time. Things change; either for better or for worse, as we perceive it. Things go wrong, things get better. It is an endless cycle of growth and dissolution, same as the cycle of birth and death, the sea and the seasons.
And despite it being such a well established pattern, a fundamental law of nature pretty much, we are still surprised when things change. We try to control how they change: pushing things along when we're dissatisfied with the current state of something, and then resisting change when we finally get things to be as we want them to. Pushing and pulling, attempting to manhandle the universe according to our personal preferences.
This stubborn way of approaching things can go on for a long time, and even after a lifetime of having little or no control over things a person may still keep resisting the inevitability of change. Sometimes, and you can see it very clearly in old cats and dogs, after years and years of change from this polarity to that, there comes a point of surrender to what is. Not a defeatist shrinking back from life, but a recognition that what is simply is as it is. Pithy enough for a bumper sticker, and as simple as simple gets, but seemingly near-impossible for most people to realize.
Surrendering to what is — it is a way of being in alignment with life. You can still act and attempt to change things, but only when there is no attachment to the result of that action are you in alignment to what is. The default attitude of our conditioning is to argue with what is, hoping in some way that the world will feel guilty and change things back, but in order to be at peace with the law of continuous change, or birth and death, growth and dissolution, one must step back and allow things to do as they will. Taking action if needed, but in a humble way that more resembles a suggestion than an order.
And maybe that is a good way of looking at it. We can make a suggestion, but never issue an order to the universe. Knowing this, we are at peace with the world.
Filed under Notes on 7. June 2007 »
If we look at the thought patterns of the ego, most if not all of them are characterized by a tendency to want something other than what already is. Whenever the ego is not completely preoccupied with future-projection and fantasy, and actually takes a moment to stop and look at what is, the usual attitude is to think that “this should be different.” There may be a fleeting pause here and there of thinking that the situation is finally perfect, but the major flaw in how the ego works is that no situation or configuration of events can ever satisfy it. Nothing is ever enough, because the sense of lack is built into the structure of how the ego operates. Which means that whatever content is added, sooner or later there will be a need for more.
Saying yes to now, yes to what is, can be a powerful way of snapping out of this habitual attitude of “no.” Complete acceptance of what is signals the death of the ego, because the ego thrives on having something to resist. It feeds on complaining about what is, feeling offended by what is, being angry at what is, and simply being against what is whatever the cost.
However the idea of accepting what is can be misinterpreted, and the ego can, with great subtlety sometimes, twist it around for its own purposes in order to remain in control. There are two main aspects to this misinterpretation; to mistake the yes for a no in disguise, and to mistake what is for a story about what is.
The former has to do with equating acceptance with resignation, of saying “yes” with an attitude of resistance and underlying negativity. In this way the yes to now is seen as being defeatist, something along the lines of saying “oh all right then, I accept that I am fat and miserable. C’est la vie.” Which might look like acceptance on the surface, but in reality it comes from an attitude of negativity and resistance that has absolutely nothing to do with saying yes to what is.
Which leads to the other aspect, namely the mistake of thinking that you must say yes to a story. I remember Eckhart Tolle taking a hypothetical example of an unemployed actress working as a waitress. She had a story about how she had failed as an actress, and how she must now do something that she resents while being deprived of what she really wants. This is the story of a personal self and a certain configuration of concepts, and has nothing much to do with reality at all. So the mistake in this case is thinking “okay, I accept that I am a waitress because I failed at being an actress.” Which is not really accepting what is, because none of it is real and so has very little to do with what is. The only reality it has is as a current of noise running through the mind, which you can then accept as part of what is at this moment.
So now there’s the usual concern; if you give up resisting what is, will anything ever change? In the above example, will she now just be a waitress for the rest of her life because she said yes to what is?
This is yet another misconception, or rather just another aspect of the big misinterpretation of what it means to say yes to what is. The truth is that things can only really change when you accept what already is. Saying yes to now might seem passive, a resignation to leaving things stagnant, but in fact it is just the opposite.
To realize what the words are actually pointing to, it may be helpful to play around with them a little, even if only just to shake the old thought patterns loose to make room for a clearer interpretation. For example, contemplate the idea of dynamic acceptance of what is, describing an attitude of saying, “this is what is; now what can I do with it?”
This is also vulnerable to misinterpretation, because the ego can go into the pattern of seeking the next thing and projecting into the future, but at least it shakes things up a bit. When you think of it in this manner, you go from the habitual stance of being in resistance to what is to being aligned with it. Approaching the present moment with an attitude of asking “what can I do with this?” gets you beyond the old pitfall of thinking “this shouldn’t be as it is.”
It is important to keep in mind when practicing this that the focus is on the process and not the outcome, because otherwise the ego will jump right in there with future projection and attachment to results. Asking “what can I do with this?” is not about what you can get out of it, or what you can achieve through it, but what you can do with it.
Saying yes to what is is about aligning yourself to reality. You see what is, accept that it is already so, and then go from there.
Everyday Wonderland is a weblog on the subject of spiritual awakening, creativity, enthusiasm, inspiration, and generally everything having to do with the higher levels of human consciousness. The author is Helgi Páll Einarsson, 24 years old and currently living in Iceland. He likes books in the morning, making things, and taking long walks.