Thanks so much for posting this reminder! Timely for me -- it’s so easy to focus on various projects and causes, then become frustrated when progress or a hoped for outcome seems a long way off. Yet it is helpful to think that, ideally, we all come into life with a unique mission. So long as we are carrying out our mission and applying our particular talents, life can feel meaningful and fulfilling, whatever the external circumstances. The task is to work with one’s abilities and circumstances the best one can - not to control the outcome.
Thanks for this reminder! I'm kind of an "HSP" (highly sensitive person) who can feel burned out by overly resonating with the plights and problems of others. As the article suggests, that probably happens when insufficiently mindful -- so there's some additional incentive to stay on it!
Last night I attended the “Wednesday” that went with this reading and had something to share, but then balked and simply passed when the mic came to me. It’s sort of an irony - the share was to be about how I’ve found it increasingly difficult to share in recent months.
I’d been feeling bad about that, but in retrospect, this reading and the ensuing comments suggested a new interpretation. Though I’ve always pretty much been a left brain-dominant person, after attending Wednesdays for several years, the experience for me is less and less about the words and more and more about simply *being* with you all.
Not that words are unimportant, but they are simply pointers to reality (and often crude ones at that). Lately, just give me the reality.
There are two ways to interpret the concept of “nothing” in this context - and I think we often confuse them in the West. “Nothing” can mean “the absence of anything” or it can be read as “no thing” - i.e., a phenomenon that cannot be limited, narrowed down to, or identified with any particular subset.
As applied to the self, I like the latter interpretation because it’s expansive, opening up a range of greater possibility. I dislike the former because it basically negates one’s own existence. I don’t think that is what we were put here for. In spiritual circles however, people sometimes fall into a mindset that denigrating the self is somehow the “holy” thing to do.
And there is a mathematical precedent for the above! One formal definition the number zero is not “the absence of anything” but “the sum of all positive and negative integers”. In other words, zero is not nothing or a particular thing, but essentially everything.
That’s how I like to view the human spirit.
Well, this is one of those sentiments that I agree with in principle, yet struggle with in practice. This may just pertain to me, but I'm also driven by a sense I'm here, given the gift life, with a mandate to contribute something meaningful to the whole enterprise before passing on. I'm not sure that I've done that, and I'm not sure I've even found my proper niche where that can be accomplished. In that sense then, death seems like a looming, ticking deadline - what if the potential is not realized in time?
I guess the standard answer is to simply be appreciative of the small things - whatever is - and to not be attached to any particular "big" thing. Yet unrealized potential always seems sad to me.
Anyway, I'll be interested to hear other's thoughts.
Upon first reading this letter by Rilke, I griped: "Jeez, I feel like I've been 'living the questions' for decades! When am I going to get to live some of the answers?! (grumble, grumble)"
However, upon hearing it read again for the evening, my perspective began to expand. A logical follow-on thought to the above might be: "Well, are you asking the right questions?" (But that also makes me want to grumble.)
Finally, I remembered an idea I'd seen in several books ("The User Illusion", "The Secret Teachings of Plants" - and I suppose Wittgenstein's "Blue" and "Brown" books) - that words, that language, is not reality but merely a pointer to reality. When an experience - or for that matter, a *question* - has been reduced to words (and a mental concept is usually also expressed in words), then you are no longer dealing with reality. You're working with a limited model of reality - sort of like using a map, rather than being in the actual terrain that the map points to.
So that was my ultimate take-away from the Rilke piece: Don't become preoccupied with your verbalized questions. Just be present to the experience. Live it, flow with it - and try to appreciate where it takes you.
The thing I found most interesting in this piece was the little exegesis on the word “suffering”. Note that a literal interpretation of the word does not necessarily imply something bad/negative - it simply points to something to “bear up under”. It could be something good! (Recall the King James translation of Jesus’ request to “suffer the children to come unto me”. I’m sure he wasn’t suggesting they be made to crawl over broken glass.)
In that light, life itself is something that we bear up under, when we are fully engaged with it. It is noteworthy that in contemporary usage, the word “suffer” has become synonymous with ongoing pain - you know, that grim ethic which portrays life as primarily ongoing struggle and torment.
Yet by our individual and collective choices and actions, we create the world we live in. Why not choose to “bear up” the things that are happy and loving?
Reminds me of a similar observation that I also find this helpful, by psychologist Karl Pribram, and his holographic model for brain functioning. Things are stored in the brain in a manner similar to a holographic pattern (not localized in particular cells). Emotional experience happens (both positive and negative) when something disrupts or doesn't fit the established patterns (e.g. something desirable or aversive happens that you weren't expecting). I guess the message is to not be too attached to your "patterns" :-)
On Nov 8, 2022 Bill Miller wrote on Two Stonemasons, by Simon Senek: