Finding Peace Inside the Contraction
Encontrar la paz dentro de la contracción
A student describes an inner conflict of warring thoughts and a persistent heart contraction, and the teacher explores how identification, resistance, and the avoidance of life's complexity sustain the struggle.
Finding Peace Inside the Contraction
A student describes an inner conflict of warring thoughts and a persistent heart contraction, and the teacher explores how identification, resistance, and the avoidance of life's complexity sustain the struggle.
There's a fighting happening inside, and it causes a lot of stress. For example, when you say something in the meditation, it starts to turn into something, and then something else doesn't like it turning into that. It causes a lot of stress because of all this fighting. But it doesn't feel like me. I don't feel like I'm involved, maybe unknowingly.
If there's fighting, you're involved in it. You're talking about it in the third person, as "it." I understand you can take a perspective where all of this is appearing, but there is something you are getting involved in. Can you refer to it as "a part of me"?
No, it's quite clear. It's not me. We're talking about the mind's identification, because the mind identifies with things. When you say something and it gets taken into an idea...
The mind doesn't identify on its own
The mind is not identified. The mind doesn't identify; it is "I" that identifies. I identify.
But there is a disagreement with what's being interpreted.
Let me see if I understand you. You disagree with what the mind is interpreting.
I don't feel like it's me disagreeing.
Then what you're talking about is all thoughts. There are thoughts about interpretation, and there are thoughts of disagreement. If you're not identified with them, what's the problem?
The problem is that the interpretation is taking things and turning them into something.
It's only going to cause a problem if you are in some form believing or identifying.
If I'm in the identification, then why is there disagreement with the identification?
When thoughts start to feel true
I don't think you're disagreeing with the identification. Somewhere in the complexity of your thoughts, there are interpretations, opposing interpretations, disagreements, thoughts upon thoughts upon thoughts. But at some point, you are attributing to some of those thoughts a form of reality, a form of possible truth. That is where the struggle and conflict arise.
If it's all seen as thought, just thought, and it doesn't matter, there's no problem. But when something starts becoming "true" and it's just thought, there will be some form of identification with it. There will be some form of "I" that chooses one thought over another. That is where identification gets activated.
For example, I could be imagining cutting my hand off. That could be a scary or crazy thought. But if I'm thinking of it because I'm writing a comedy script for a gore comedy skit, it's not serious or real or scary. However, if I believe in the reality of cutting my hand off, if there's some involvement in it as real, it's going to be difficult, scary, troubling.
That's what I'm trying to show you. There are thoughts that say things are black, and other thoughts say no, they're white. And others say they're gray. And others say they're neither. This is the mind. But if there's a disagreement, which is just thoughts opposing each other (which is naturally what the mind does), and there's stress and struggle, it's because you are attributing some form of truth or reality to some of it. You're getting engaged in the truth or reality of it, instead of just seeing it as what in Buddhism they would call monkey mind: just more thoughts.
So I thought that by saying it's the mind's interpretation...
It's not the mind that identifies. We identify with the mind. I identify with thoughts.
Observation versus disagreement
For example, you say something in the meditation. Very quickly the mind turns it into an idea, a customized interpretation of what you just said. And I'm aware of the mind hearing what you're saying. Being aware of it means I don't take what the mind tells me you just said.
If you disagree with the interpretation, that means either you are observing and just noticing interpretation, or, if you're disagreeing, you're choosing a side.
I'm disagreeing because I'm not taken by what the mind suggests.
It depends on what you mean by "disagree." Disagreeing could be "I notice it is an interpretation," but I don't necessarily have to disagree. "Disagree" has a connotation of "something else is true, and I know what that is."
I think this is the point where I really get stuck. The mind just in an instant turns anything you say into something less uncomfortable.
That's not what's uncomfortable. What's uncomfortable is that you want it to stop. There's a desire for that not to happen, and there is somehow an attribution to the interpretation as being, to some degree, real, something other than thought. Otherwise, it's just thought.
I get really stuck at this point.
It's very common. You're working on something that's naturally tricky.
It gets thicker, more intense. Just now in the meditation you said something, the mind interpreted it, and it just feels sickening. The mind keeps turning it into something it understood, or I understand but I don't understand. So this is a fight.
The difference between struggle and humor
Depending on how you notice this, you can either fight with it, have it be a difficult experience, or it could be funny. What would be the difference? The experience is the same, the thoughts are the same. But if you're wanting them to stop, wanting them to be different, wanting something to not be what it is, then you're going to fight with it.
At some point, there is an identification with what's coming up. There is an interest in something being different, or in some thoughts happening and others not. Whereas you could see this whole thing and it could be funny. "Look at my mind. Look at me being tempted to want to understand something I can't understand." That could just be noticing the habit of thoughts. And it could be funny. It could be: "This is happening nonstop. Wow." No emotional reaction, no stress, no struggle.
The struggle happens when you're wanting that to be different, wanting the mind to do something it's not doing, or to do what it's doing but differently, versus letting the mind do whatever it's doing. And the way we can do that is by seeing it's all just thought.
The thing is, it becomes a reaction if I'm in the identification. What you're saying and what I'm saying, that's our reaction. Is that not the case?
You're getting involved in the struggle to interpret correctly, to know or not know.
I don't trust it. I don't even know. Now it's confused me about whether I even understand what you're saying.
The value of not knowing
It's better to assume you don't, and that you don't need to. So we go to this not-knowing, and the not-knowing is the mystery of what is here. All you can see is that what's appearing are thoughts. All of the thoughts that are appearing are only thoughts. There is no truth to it. The ultimate understanding is the realization that you cannot know. You cannot understand at that level.
That's why I have this sense that this is like a death, and that's what I'm dancing around. But I don't have an opportunity to just meet it. It feels like it's dancing around the edge.
If you're noticing that on a regular basis, you are meeting it.
But it feels like if I were meeting it fully, I would disappear into it and it wouldn't be there.
That's a story. It's more mysterious than that. All you can do is be aware of it and get as close as you can. But there's an edge you can't willingly jump off. That's not in your hands. It's not in the hands of what you know yourself to be, not in the hands of the "you" that can do something. What's in your hands is to do what you're doing: get close to it and do all you can. But you can't willingly jump off that edge through your own personal will. What can be done is to keep seeing, keep looking, and keep looking from as close as you can.
Strategies can only take you so far
Maybe there's a desire to have a one-pointed focus on what to approach it with, because I have so many methods right now that I'm jumping around with.
That's my point. All of that is going to take you only so far. All of those are strategies, and that's ultimately not going to work. All strategies are about changing what is. There's a lot that needs to be changed, but there's a point where we just can't change. We can't end something that's not real; we can only see that it's not real.
If you want a strategy, I would recommend the strategy of letting that anxiety, that sensation, be there, even if it's going to be there for the rest of your life.
I feel like I've done that one, because it's literally been here for years and I've lived with it.
But you're still trying to get rid of it. It's the first thing you brought up.
Yeah, definitely. There's definitely not a full surrender. But I've had periods where I'm like, "Okay, this is here and I'm not touching it and I'm not trying to change it." So I've tried that on, even though it doesn't stay.
As a strategy, to see if it ends. You tried it for a couple of months, it didn't work, so you moved on to a new strategy.
This reminds me of something Francis Lucille points to. He says: if you're welcoming a friend, you have a big smile, you open the door, but behind your back you're holding a bat. The minute your guest is a little distracted, you knock them out. It's a strategy of "I'm welcoming the sensation, I welcome it for a month, and as soon as I have a chance I'm trying to get rid of it." That's not a true, honest welcoming.
So it points to the same thing: really, if this were there for the rest of your life, can you be okay with it? Can you just live your life and have that be there for the rest of your life? But if we approach that as a way to get rid of it, then it's not genuine. It's going to mirror back to you the subtle ways in which you are actually more deeply resisting.
Non-dual practice versus therapeutic practice
The challenge I have with that is that I still do my non-dual practice. I still want to do inquiry, and that's what's there. I don't want to feel like I'm avoiding it, and I don't want to feel like I'm just sitting with it.
I hear you, but if the non-dual practice is about getting rid of that, it's not a true, deep non-dual practice.
I wouldn't say it's about getting rid of it all the time. When I'm engaged in the practice, it's about curiosity, going deep, wanting to meet it or learn about it, like a child that's crying and asking for my attention.
That's not a non-dual practice. That's a therapeutic healing practice, which is very valid and valuable. But a non-dual practice is about understanding the nature of reality and the question: who or what am I?
I've been given so many different non-dual practices. That's just one of the many things I've heard. Recently I've just been asking, "Who is afraid? Who is feeling this?" I like that one.
All of these are different ways you can approach experience. But ultimately, a non-dual practice is not about what's being experienced. It's not about changing the appearance. Everything you describe around anxiety, the heart, and fear: all of that is appearance.
I'll be the first to say that I'm not a non-dualist or a non-dual teacher in the sense that it's my only approach. It's one of the ways in which I work. But right now, if you're bringing your commitment and devotion to truth and non-dual practice, I have to say: with regard to this experience, this sensation, this fear and anxiety in your heart, the non-dual practice is not about that experience. It's about understanding the nature of this reality and the nature of what you are. I do understand, though, that it's also valuable to approach the experience you're having from a non-dual perspective.
Discovering peace within the contraction
From a purely non-dual perspective, I'm able to be in peace and silence. I can remain there and notice the contraction. There's an understanding that while this might not be non-dual practice, it's part of the non-dual path to work with shadow along the way, because that's what helps release seeming obstacles to knowing. I think it's all part of it, and I think that's what you're saying too. But one of my questions is: how much should I remain in just the peace and the presence versus going in to work with the contraction?
The peace that I would talk about, what I call peace, you can't go in and out of. When you say "how much to remain in the peace versus..." that's not what I would call peace. Let's call it a lowercase peace. The peace that I speak of, you can't come in and out of. It's just not possible.
My experience is it's always here, but it's not experienced if I'm identified with thought.
There's a good point there. Then see why it's not. That I would recommend as a non-dual inquiry. When it seems like it's not experienced, where is it? How does it appear that it's not there?
The heart is contracted.
Exactly. So if you approach it as "this does not have to go away, this can be here for the rest of my life," see if you can discover the peace directly in spite of this contraction in your heart. I think that's where the crux of it is. Some part of our experience we are saying no to. Depending on the person, it's very different. For you, it seems to be something of this contraction. It doesn't matter; we don't need to understand what it is. But when that's there, the peace is in there. They appear to be exclusive, and you know this because you say, "Well, it's always there, but it's not experienced."
So make it your practice to recognize how it appears to not be there, if it's supposed to be there, if you know it's there, even when the contraction is there. Allow the contraction in your heart to be there and recognize more and more the peace that is also there. Bring that through the contraction, not as something you're doing, but simply seeing the mutual existence of both. One is a sensation, a phenomenon appearing: contraction, fear, pain. The other is the knowing of the peace that is there. Experience them simultaneously.
That makes sense. I'm feeling that right now. The peace just got really loud and the contraction got really quiet. I guess that's the experience: they flip.
That's great that you can see that right now. Whenever that contraction is there, instead of trying to have it end or get healed or resolved, just let it be there. Because what if it's divine will for that to be there for all of your life? Otherwise, there's a subtle interpretation that something is wrong with it, a subtle belief that it shouldn't be there.
It's where I'm led once I get taken away in thought. I'll identify with thought and then notice that, and I come back to what's under it, and it's this contraction.
Growing up and waking up
That's great. You're shifting from identification with thought into a sensation, and then you've already recognized that there is a peace present. You said at one moment it's not experienced, but if you can see through that, see that it actually is present and directly known, therefore experienced, while you're meeting that contraction, just have both of these be present simultaneously. That's all you need to do. If the contraction resolves, it resolves. And if it's there, all you do is meet it with that deeper knowing, that deeper relationship from that peace.
Would you also recommend still doing inquiry?
I would recommend the inquiry be more total, more into "what am I, what is the nature of this reality." You seem to be already doing quite a bit of work on the emotional level, shadow work. That should keep going; it never ends. But then have the inquiry be more total: what am I? What is the nature of when I am and this reality? Where is it appearing that I am separate? Where is it in my experience? And when it's subtle, it's going to be some form of "no" to some kind of experience.
I can feel it moves to my belly too. That's the other spot it goes: heart contraction or belly contraction. And then I just allow that to be there and it dissipates.
What I have found is that we can get overly focused on resolving sensations. That's valuable when we haven't done emotional and shadow work. But once we're able to do that work, we just keep it going. It's valuable forever: body-mind, emotional, shadow work. But then we meet the more and more subtle ways in which we are believing something that is not. And that has to do ultimately with the answer to the question "what am I, who am I."
From that perspective, we don't focus on the sensations. The appearance of contractions or blockages is not that important. I often describe this as two parts of the work. One is growing up, which is the healing, the shadow work, the contractions, the meeting of sensations. The other is waking up, which is fully not getting involved in the appearance of body, mind, sensation, world. But these both work together.
How do you know when to do one or the other?
At first through dialogue, but then intuitively you will start to recognize when one is an avoidance of the other, when one is being called for. It's your own intuition.
Shadow work is more than just feeling
When you say shadow work, do you mean just feeling it, or a bit of digging?
A lot more than that. Just feeling it is one aspect of shadow work. But it's also about the stories we have around ourselves and our relationships, our relationship to the world, all of the maps and multiple maps we have around how to function and how to live. All of that has an aspect of shadow work. "What am I in service to?" There's a whole realm of work at the level of psyche, of mind, of psychology and emotional work.
But getting into beliefs just felt too mental for me, and never-ending. So I went more to somatic healing work.
That's just better shadow work, but it's not one or the other. It's the right balance. There are also going to be narratives and maps and thought systems around how to live that will have shadow aspects, paradigm belief systems. They are two sides of the same coin. If you're only looking at the stories and narratives and not the emotional sensation space, you're just scratching the surface, and it's very intellectual or mental. But the same thing can happen if you're only looking at the sensations: you're not addressing the beliefs that are the roots of those sensations. We have to believe a mental map or narrative story in order to produce an emotion, and vice versa. It's both sides of the same coin.
Do you feel like it's enough just to have awareness of what the beliefs are? I'll kind of hear them and name them, and I don't really do much else with it. I don't know what else there is to do.
The question around "what do I want, how do I want to live, what am I in service to" is important. Consider those questions to be at the soul level, as if it's the universe asking and answering. The universe as you. Usually we consider those questions from quite a small perspective, and that perspective is very limited, part of an egoic body-mind mapping. The question should go much deeper. It should be asked and answered from a place where we aren't limited, where what we are lives through this body-mind but is not limited to it.
For me, that answer has always been love. And then I see how much of my thoughts and behaviors are not aligned with love. Almost all of them. So I just go back to trying to remain as the love, as the presence that those arise in.
I feel the inclination to go more into the world, because I understand that at a deeper level the answer is as simple as love, service, truth. But then the "how," in what forms: that's much more involved. It requires all of our aspects, all of our imagination, creativity, energy, body, mind, soul. And aligning all of our thoughts and beliefs, working with all of that, clearing all of that. Because the question is always: "And now what? And now what?" What do I want now? What am I in service to now? And to have that come not from a limited perspective, not from a small interpretation.
Effortlessness within effort
I was hoping that I don't have to figure all of that out as a separate self. My hope was that I could let love live me. If I focus my energy on seeing through the illusion of the separate self that's trying to perfect every thought and behavior to align with love, that feels like impossible work. I want to be in this effortless unfolding.
You just revealed your attachment. This wanting it to happen through you effortlessly: there's a choice there.
True effortlessness is like peace. It is experienced in the peak of effortfulness. And you said "you as a separate self," but you're not a separate self. It's really up to you to live that, to create, to choose. You're delegating to a higher self, but you are that higher self.
This is where it gets very confusing. Different teachers say different things. "There's no doer, there's no one to do anything, when the separate self falls away it's just effortlessness." That's how this whole thing is being sold to us.
I understand that, and I understand how confusing it is. It should be confusing, because we will always interpret things. Anything that is spoken is not truth. When something is spoken of as effortless, or "there's no doer," it doesn't mean there isn't the experience of effort. It's that you recognize, in the peak of what is effortful, it is effortless. There is an effortlessness. Because otherwise you would always be choosing something that's effortless, avoiding effort. And that's very dual.
It reminds me of when I play music and I disappear. I've disappeared into the music and it's playing through me, I'm just improvising, but there's some engagement. I have to be really present. But then that feels like a flow state. So what's the difference between non-duality and people who try to get into flow states and live that way?
Flow states and permanent effortlessness
I can speak from my experience. In the past, it used to be entering and leaving flow states. The flow state is when we, through practice, can enter to some degree, often quite deep, a state of disidentification. But it's a disidentification that is, in a sense, controlled. We enter it in certain moments based on a practice we've trained. And then, as soon as that practice stops (sports, music, whatever it is), we go back into identification. In a way, we taste the true effortlessness, but only in a controlled setting.
The effortlessness in non-duality is the same, but it becomes permanent. Not in the sense that "now I am doing no effort," but that I can go to all the extremes and peaks of effort, and effortlessness is also there, just like in music.
When you're able to experience that peak of music, creativity flowing through you in improvisation, where it might seem much more true to say "I'm not doing this, it's happening through me," that's the tasting of non-doership. But you've practiced, and your whole body and mind is in extreme doing. And yet there is the knowing that there's an effortlessness, and something is being done through you.
In a non-dual realization, you can see that this is happening all the time. And it's not some "other" that is doing through you. It's not a higher self doing through you. It's everything. It's the universe. But it's all "I." And at that level, "I" doesn't make any sense. So it's better not to put words to it. But it's not that there is some higher power, some higher entity, that is known to be the one acting.
That makes sense intuitively, not intellectually. I've had many glimpses of non-dual reality. I've also had an experience where the self was gone for about a day. The contraction of the separate self was just gone. I remember thinking, "What if this comes back?" And I was like, "It's not possible to come back. It was never here." And then it came back. That was very sad. But I saw through it, and I can relate to how you're describing it.
Just don't delegate to some higher entity. It's absolute, total responsibility. It's just that that which is responsible, that which is the nature of "I," is not what it appears to be. It's not limited. It's not body-mind. It's not thoughts.
Responsibility beyond conditioning
Responsibility for me feels like thought and belief around what I'm supposed to be doing.
That wouldn't be responsibility, because if it's thoughts, then it would be programming, conditioning, culture, history. Then there's a delegation of responsibility onto culture, conditioning, social norms. True responsibility is: what to do right now that is the highest, most loving thing that can come through you. You can't rely on social norms, culture, past history, conditioning. You can only rely on the mystery of "I," of you, of the highest that you can invoke within yourself. Not you as a limited person, body and mind, but you as the totality.
This is where it's confusing, because it's always a thought that tells me to do things. If I'm not listening to the thought, which is the conditioning, then I just sit and do nothing.
The thought isn't telling you to do things. You choose the thoughts. The thought is saying "you could do this" or "you should do this," but ultimately something is aware of the thought and responds. If that which responds is always automatically obeying thought, then there is conditioned behavior. Then you are operating from identification and limitation.
But if I have awareness of the thought...
Then you have total responsibility to choose what moves through you and what doesn't.
My choosing appears as a thought: "Well, I could do this or I could do this." And then that becomes efforting.
Until there is deeper and deeper wisdom. You can tap into your experience in music, because at first you have to effort: hear the note, figure out what note it is, find it on the instrument or in the voice. It's a whole process. But the more you are in mastery, the more the choosing just happens, and it's the right choosing.
When you are awareness, you notice the thoughts, and you're more able to discern and distinguish the right thought, the right action, because you're also familiar with what the wrong ones feel like. There's an intuition, a knowing, a wisdom: something that's in service to limitation or not, something in service to fear versus love. The more you stand from the position of "I am not limited, and I will be in service of love and not fear," the choosing that starts to happen is like the flow of music. The right notes just happen.
So there won't be a discussion around it.
I wouldn't say "discussion." What I'm referring to is that there are thoughts of options. Sometimes they're not even necessary; it's like driving a car, where you're not thinking about pressing a pedal. It's just happening. But when something is more complex, that's what the mind is useful for. The appearance of all the options can be looked at and contemplated and seen for what they are. "This is a thought that is fear-based; that's not important. This is something more beautiful, loving, creative that I am drawn to." And then naturally the choice happens, and the choices that are happening move more in the loving direction versus the fear-contracting direction.
So there could still be thoughts about choosing, but not a sense of a chooser. Because contemplation means there's choosing and thinking back and forth.
The words are tricky because of how we interpret them. By contemplation, I mean there's a looking, a seeing, that can take a period of time. But if there's a lot of complex churning, usually there's a stuckness, and that starts to diminish. The thinking is still a valuable function; it's just that the mind is now free to be more and more useful.
It's not an absolute thing, because it's the operating of body-mind. It becomes more and more aligned and in service to what we're in service to. And it starts to be experienced more and more as naturally just occurring, happening, flowing. But it's not like some other entity is moving us like a puppet. It's more mysterious than that. I think you've described it in music: it's just coming through, coming from you don't know where, appearing and happening through you, and you are completely in the middle of all of it. But you can't say you're doing it and you can't say you're not doing it. It's both.
If I look closely, that's the experience now. Who's talking? This is just happening.
And it can just go deeper and deeper. Keep noticing what you are wanting to be different, what there is a "no" towards. At the level of something fundamental (I'm not talking about situations in life where it's appropriate to say no). It's this deeper thing where we contract around.
That makes sense. That's the "no" that shows up, full circle, back to the heart.
Simplicity within complexity
The mind still gets confused. I just want simplicity so badly. Simplicity is peace for me. I don't want to hold too many methods or practices: "Okay, now we're doing shadow work, now we're doing inquiry, now we're just feeling peace." I just want one, one-pointed focus.
Obviously there are preferences, but that can very quickly turn into a pushing away of something. We are very complex beings. The human body-mind is extremely complex. The mind is extremely complex. To try to avoid the complexity is going to put us into a struggle.
What I recommend is to try to avoid complication, the unnecessary getting tied up in knots, but welcome the complexity. If you can go into the complexity, the infinite complexity of millions of cells and neurons and thoughts, all the infinite possible combinations of creative thinking, you can go into all of that and then find the simplicity in it, find the simplicity in the nature of what we want, of what we are. That can help navigate the space of complexity.
There is a simplicity, and I think intuitively you're drawn to it, and it's correct. What I speak of is very simple. But then the way we relate and work and function and choose and communicate needs the complexity, because of the nature of what we are. There's a simplicity at the heart of it.
It's similar to effortless and effortlessness. You will find the true effortlessness in the middle of the peak of effort. You will find the simplicity in the middle of the complexity, at the heart of it. That's the "not two" aspect. It's both. You don't find simplicity by fighting complexity or by rejecting it or avoiding it.
I've definitely been avoiding it. I've been like, "Okay, no more thought, just do nothing." And my body loves that because it's so exhausted from the mental exhaustion. Rejecting everything and doing nothing feels good.
That's a kind of coping, because it's not the complexity of thought that's exhausting. It's what I refer to as complication: what happens when we get into the complexity with an agenda and it gets very tense and complicated. That's exhausting. But the mind could be operating at a very complex level and it could be effortless. This I know from experience, and it was very surprising to me. I thought it was all about the mind being stopped and slow and calm, that that's where weightlessness, peace, well-being lived. And it's not.
The contraction and going into life
That's good news, because I also want vitality, to live a fun life.
What do you want? If there's something in life you're saying no to, that's going to be a contraction. There's a fear of something; that's going to be contraction at the heart level. If you want life, abundance, vitality, joy, fun, you can't say no to complexity. If you say no to complexity, life becomes constrained and limited. The mind becomes a struggle, trying to function only in a simple way.
It's when I'm trying to do the living part that the contraction gets so much stronger. I guess that's the resistance to it, the fear of it.
That's why my sense from the beginning, when you started sharing, is that it has to do with going into the world, life in the world. There's a deep, valuable wanting, a longing to live. What is it you want to live? When that is really met, that's where something can surrender at a deeper level.
I always notice it's the fear of not being safe. That's the big barrier. And so I find safety in the peace, and then I'm in peace and don't want to do anything. It's a loop.
That's a very temporary safety. It's not the kind of peace and safety you want, you're longing for. It's just not going to satisfy. It's about finding that safety in the middle of life, at the fullness of life, and noticing that it's there no matter what happens.
My nervous system is so sensitive that life is overwhelming. I hide a lot, and I've noticed it's been a hindrance. I still go out and try, but for little bits, and then I have to go back and rest for a long time. But I like the idea of going out into the world, experiencing the reactivity, and noticing that the peace is there in that moment.
Discover the safety and the peace in the world, in the experiencing, in following the desire for abundance and life.
It's so intense. I have these energetic convulsions, almost kundalini-like, and the fear gets really intense. I'll be shaking when talking to someone because they're triggered and I'm feeling their trigger. It's so intense.
It's all through that. Not through avoiding that or trying to manage, control, or resist it. It's through that. And through more and more understanding, at the level of wisdom, how to go into life. That's the sense I was getting from the beginning around that contraction. Going into life is the direction.
That makes sense. Even though it's exhausting, maybe I should try to do it more and really sense the peace.
Find the ways in which you work without exhaustion. Find the edge where there's a newer vitality and energy, because you're meeting the challenging aspects in a deeper, new way. And sometimes you need to rest.
The body feels like it needs to rest all the time. Doctors say it's chronic fatigue syndrome, mold exposure, a long list of reasons.
All of that is useful information and may help with something. It might help you find different ways and ideas. But it's a lot more mysterious than what the medical system understands. They will help with some aspects.
I find it doesn't really help much. Life just keeps pointing me back to stillness, and that's where all my answers are for everything.
And then, once you find that, find the answers in the stillness and life. In the movement, in the abundance, in the complexity of life. See that it is also there in the dancing and the chasing of wild dreams and the playful creativity. There is not a "no" to any of it. There's just a discovery of what playful exploring of life you want and what you're not interested in. Sometimes it's effortful, and sometimes it's complicated and painful. But if it's coming from this deeper sense of love and peace and well-being, that doesn't go away. We bring it to the intensity, to the challenges.
I think I got confused with that, because I just didn't want to be drawn to life or getting something. Everything I discovered was trying to get something, so I stopped doing everything.
You can ask and answer that question from a different place. How to go into life without it being about getting something. How to go into life as giving something, enjoying something, loving something.
I have resistance around the giving, because I don't have energy to give. I'm tired.
That's not what I'm referring to by giving. Just the question: what is in your heart and in you to live, to want? The deeper desires. The deeper soul, universal level of creativity and life exploration, versus the one that's all about separate self, "me, me, me, what I need to get, my fears, what I want to avoid, what I need to be okay because I'm not okay." Once we're able to work through that and dissolve it to a significant degree, then it's important to not be avoiding life.
It's been clear for me for a while what those deeper desires are: authentic connection and community, creativity and expression. But when I engage with it, I discover how everyone's in their ego, it's such a mess of trauma and triggering, and then I bow out. That's just what keeps showing up.
Very welcome. It's always very relevant, I think, for anyone.