A few weeks ago, I was talking with Michael Taft, and one of the topics that came up was that for a meditating person it’s very hard to start navigating life when you are on the personal development spiral that meditation puts you on and also states of consciousness and healing and etc., etc.
In a sense what David Chapman is trying to solve is also something very similar to this.
I heard that you are working with the question “What is the appropriate level of engagement with a person or situation?”. I’m curious what’s your best resource on how to answer or navigate that?
First, let me give voice to the flip side, and say "For most people it is very hard to start navigating life when they are not able to access the developmental states and healing modalities that meditation puts you on..."
I have to see it as the same process in order to "do my job." Which took a while, because for a time I thought that everyone must take up a formal practice. Then I saw that formal practice could be a blockage for some people. This was a tension I lived with for 6 or 7 years.
For me the rsolution was to think of "navigating life" not as the challenge for the person, but as a partner in the process. Like how you can kill a plant if you try to over-manage it or expect it to follow *your* plan. In reality I don't know "what direction is *in the right direction*", all I know is that movement is necessary because movement is life and stasis is death.
Movement means constantly letting go of idenity, ultimate goals, ideas of what "success" looks or feels like, and allowing the movement of life to propel you, and inviting surprise. To allow life to be a partner in the adventure!
Having said that, some parts of the "path" are more adventurous for me, so that is where I lean into when I meet people. I can understand Michael and David that way... they are on their path, the same path -- whatever -- (if you want to use that sutra term) but are living different adventures.
One counter-argument of how Musk is making X more free speech than other platforms are, is because he refuses to follow government & court orders to ban certain people or posts from X, while the others do the bans silently and obediently.
I think with standing his ground about that and legally battling with EU in the process, he saw something and got scared and that's what motivated him to go to full on meme-war pro Trump and against Harris.
On another note, I'm not able to contribute much to other parts of the conversation because of the terminology that most of you are using, which I haven't learned, but that's ok. I'm still learning it a bit in the process. The second part of the call was particularly interesting!
A few weeks ago, I was talking with Michael Taft, and one of the topics that came up was that for a meditating person it’s very hard to start navigating life when you are on the personal development spiral that meditation puts you on and also states of consciousness and healing and etc., etc.
In a sense what David Chapman is trying to solve is also something very similar to this.
I heard that you are working with the question “What is the appropriate level of engagement with a person or situation?”. I’m curious what’s your best resource on how to answer or navigate that?
First, let me give voice to the flip side, and say "For most people it is very hard to start navigating life when they are not able to access the developmental states and healing modalities that meditation puts you on..."
I have to see it as the same process in order to "do my job." Which took a while, because for a time I thought that everyone must take up a formal practice. Then I saw that formal practice could be a blockage for some people. This was a tension I lived with for 6 or 7 years.
For me the rsolution was to think of "navigating life" not as the challenge for the person, but as a partner in the process. Like how you can kill a plant if you try to over-manage it or expect it to follow *your* plan. In reality I don't know "what direction is *in the right direction*", all I know is that movement is necessary because movement is life and stasis is death.
Movement means constantly letting go of idenity, ultimate goals, ideas of what "success" looks or feels like, and allowing the movement of life to propel you, and inviting surprise. To allow life to be a partner in the adventure!
Having said that, some parts of the "path" are more adventurous for me, so that is where I lean into when I meet people. I can understand Michael and David that way... they are on their path, the same path -- whatever -- (if you want to use that sutra term) but are living different adventures.
Have you read David Chapman's last few posts? He's murdering philosophy and he's very effective at it! I'm curious what do you think about that?
I haven't read him in a while. I'll take a look today. Thanks for the heads-up! Anyone who is murdering philosophy is a great hero to me!
One counter-argument of how Musk is making X more free speech than other platforms are, is because he refuses to follow government & court orders to ban certain people or posts from X, while the others do the bans silently and obediently.
I think with standing his ground about that and legally battling with EU in the process, he saw something and got scared and that's what motivated him to go to full on meme-war pro Trump and against Harris.
On another note, I'm not able to contribute much to other parts of the conversation because of the terminology that most of you are using, which I haven't learned, but that's ok. I'm still learning it a bit in the process. The second part of the call was particularly interesting!
Always nice to see you in the group.