During the Monday morning discussion on Adyashanti’s August ’07 retreat (file 1-14), they get into false dilemnas life appears to present. Seemingly impossible conflicts or decisions. “Should I be at my mothers deathbed?”
“In the end, you will always do the thing you wanted to do most.” “No exceptions.”
“I can’t dictate and you can’t dictate what you want most.”
Whatever expectations, should’s, complaints, and background story you have. I should or shouldn’t do this, etc etc. What you do is what you wanted. “It tells you, that’s what you wanted to do more. More than your screaming mind.”
“Consciousness in it’s undivided state, always moves towards the good.” We see this in retrospect though. The internal arguement comes from the remaining fear and resulting need for control.
This is really quite profound.
“…you will always do the thing you wanted to…”
If you don’t seem to be, that’s just the mind and story. Driven by fear or driven by truth, it is always what we want. So why all the fussing?
Davidya
Pingback: Meaning, More or Less « In 2 Deep
That’s a hard one to sit with, especially when the “shoulds” involve other people, such as my kids. Somewhere there’s an awareness, though, that things play out the way they’re supposed to, and that what might look “wrong” can actually be the right thing, or the thing the other needs to learn about. In any case it’s not my business to figure out or even to understand. Sure is contrary to societal beliefs, though!
“Consciousness in it’s undivided state, always moves towards the good.”
“…you will always do the thing you wanted to…“
There is a dichotomy. Identified with the mind, what we want is what conditioning and memory and genetics and provocation–a billion conditions–wants. There really isn’t any volition, except possibly the choice to awaken.
In consciousness, it seems to work differently. “I” still don’t have volition; if “I” get out of the way, consciousness flows, always, towards the greater good.
Either way we do what we want, but the “we” is different.
Hi Moekends
I’m planning to write some more about this as it’s intriguing to consider.
In the discussion, the questioner asked about being at his mothers deathbed. He had conflict about it but in the end was there and said it was one of the most profound moments of his life. Adyashanti indicates that there is nothing that has to be done but that if it’s in the highest good, you’ll probably be at the deathbed. When it arises from Self, what we want is the highest good.
I’ve often found that although my expectations or sense of should dictated certain behaviour, how it played out was often different. As you say, something to learn or a better good. Relationships are a powerful dynamic, and kids especially so. We usually have all kinds of shoulds with kids. But they have their own life that may not have anything to do with your ideas of it. I certainly got that one a few times.
I’m not sure I’d agree with the second to last sentence. Certainly understanding at the time may not be forthcoming. But in retrospect, it’s often possible to get a sense of why.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Hi Karmarider
Yes, the “we” changes and that changes everything. Self moves through us all the time, recognized or not. It is our very life. We may have stories about what’s happening that says it’s me deciding and wanting, yet behind that it’s a much bigger me than we realize.
Then we’ll have fears and resistance that pushes against this and wants something else. Then we have different experiences and consequences. Some learning.
The dichotomy is really only because you think there is right and wrong. That what you want is not the common good. But when it isn’t, it is action within whole. While the action echos out across the universe, it does not have any real effect on the common good. The flow of love merely ripples a bit. The storm is only within itself, around the person. The common good continues.
It’s such an egoic idea that we think as a person we could ever do anything that might “hurt” God or the flow of love.
Thanks for your response. It drew out something interesting.
Hi Davidya
When I said “In any case it’s not my business to figure out or even to understand.” I was referring to the kids’ lessons or experiences that they need to undergo. You put it clearly when you said “But they have their own life that may not have anything to do with your ideas of it.”
I find, though, that getting caught up in the whys of their lives doesn’t serve any purpose; I have enough on my plate to worry about with the hows and whys of my own experience. (I’m not talking about psychological whys here, as in why is my child angry for no apparent reason and how to deal with it – these are daily parenting issues.)
For example, I’ve long since given up on trying to understand why they needed to be born with us as parents, with all our particular flaws. All we as parents can do is do the best we can, and have faith that the family environment/dynamics is what they need (from a spiritual perspective), or they wouldn’t be with us. It’s just another way of saying that it’s all good, whether we as egoic individuals can recognize/see it or not.
To paraphrase Katie Byron, all I can do is mind my own business and stay out of God’s.
Thanks for the discussion. I look forward to the next installment!
Hi Moekends
It gets more so as your kids age and leave the nest. I recall how it became clear we were not in charge during the first pregnancy. So many things I expected to teach them, but they would not be taught. (laughs)
Yes, it is all good. You may one day come to know why. There is often a kind of dance with other souls where we trade roles or repeat the same roles. It’s easier to work things out with people we know.
You might enjoy the link to “Your Souls Plan” on Final Bleep post. Its an article that talks about family dynamics and history.
Pingback: Why Do I Choose This? « In 2 Deep
Pingback: Mantra, Mantra « In 2 Deep