All we need to do with those moments is forgetting them. More to that, everything around us is arranged to help us in forgetting. Almost effortlessly we can get back to our comfort zone. Forgetting and feeling comfortable again.

All that is there is showing us our dual nature. We have the comfort zone, the one that we are used to. Our individual life, our comparative reality. Filled with anchors, hanging on to our identity. With the need to permanently define and redefine ourselves. And there is our life manifesting in a different direction, our existential reality, the so called “inner life”. Where we have less to hang on to, and what is showing up unexpectedly. Quite disturbing. Showing our inadequacies.

The contradiction in which these two “lives” that manifest in us are contradictory only at first. Obviously they are part of our nature and it is desirable to find our peace with both, to find the balance between our natures. They are both part of our human nature, having this contradiction as its major trait.

Our forgotten hidden nature comes to the surface with the taste of discomfort. It was neglected, it was buried and forgotten, so when it shows up, it is always unexpected. It brings contradictions, it conflicts with our life so far. But only through facing the discomfort, through accepting it we can get started in the search for ourselves.

“In this search perhaps there is a risk of oscillating between an imbecilic bliss (which would be deliberately ignoring the discomfort) and a kind of masochism (giving it undue importance – has it not been called by some, metaphysical anguish?).” (1) I have found these excellent thoughts of Jean Vaysse to be sharply pointing out a warning to be considered here. If you just take a moment to remember for ex. the Stakhanovist practicer of esotericism (or what). Whose behavior may be understandable at the first encounters with inner nature. Strange in its struggle and definitely counterproductive (sic!).

What to do then? By “doing” we can only mean finding a proper approach. Understanding brings change. Jean Vaysse continues like this: “The only right attitude, a difficult one to be sure, is somewhere between the two – the recognition of the precise nature of our uneasiness and our inner conflict, such as they are, in the hope of resolving them.” (1)

The first encounters with our forgotten nature are never easy. As you’ve seen before, my take on this is that it is voluntary, it is a possibility. It can be approached by choice, by decision. Forget deliverance as something to be blindly hoped to happen. If a man wants to be fully himself, the possibility is there. But There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

1. in Jean Vaysse, Toward Awakening, p. 10-11.

The “eternal present”

When it comes to spirituality, the importance of the present moment is often overemphasized. I am sure you’ve heard it yourself may times. “Be here and now!” “It is just the present moment that it is important!” And other similar statements that slowly become part of the common knowledge. But what to do with the past and the future? Are those sequences of time completely irrelevant? How to disregard them? Is that possible? Remaining focused only on the present moment, all right, and then what? What then? The flow of time is involved again and again. Hard to get rid of it, isn’t it?

What to do with your past and the future?

This concept doesn’t lead you too far. If that would be so simple, I guess there should be so many people fulfilled in their spiritual quest. If you just count those who were telling you to do so… All right, then this is what I suggest: let’s switch to a different perspective. Let’s reduce the triadic approach (past-present-future) to a dual one: there is the present and the non-present. The non-present can contain both past and future. But the two protagonists are enough for now. Now let’s see about those two in details.

1. The Present

Being focused on the present is being focused on activity. Acting is possible only in the present moment. And the syndrome accompanying the emphasized present moment is called restlessness. Maybe not a syndrome, just an attribute.

2. The Non-present

Being oriented towards the non-present means being oriented towards the concealing and unfolding of events. Towards what happened and what might happen. This, as the other side of being focused on the present, of being active, is on the contrary, being passive. Drawing away from activity. Being inertial.

As they are, in their natural state, both orientations are contributing to the paradox of being obliged to play whether as active or as passive players. None of those two are leading naturally to a neutral state. Remember, we are in the context of self development possibilities here. Meaning we should have an other option, there should be another possibility to transcend the paradox.

Being focused exclusively on the present doesn’t seem like a viable solution. Even if you hear it all the time that the “eternal now” is all that matters. The rejection of sinking into an inertial state is more accepted, as on the levels of social or physical health an active attitude is more desirable.

The potential of a third approach

Now we seem to get back to a triadic approach. Not to the one of the three time sequences (past-present-future), but to one that presents the potentiality of a third state, beyond present and non-present. This third state should be the solution for the paradox of restlessness versus inertia. As it is not possible to get out from the context of time perception, both present and non-present will remain. Seemingly the solution is to get an equilibrium between those two sides. But how to get there?

There isn’t much left but to accept.

The magic word is acceptance. Since fighting any of those two would not lead anywhere, but increase their effect on us, there isn’t much left but to accept. Fighting restlessness will obviously lead to more agitation. Rejecting the non-present, rejecting the past, trying not to remember, avoiding it, but nevertheless denying the inevitability of what future holds, leads to fear, despair, depression etc.

This kind of acceptance is not easy to realize. It is not easy to understand it. There are so many facets of it that needs to be considered. Still, there isn’t much left in terms of options to handle our time. Consider this an experiment to approach your time in different manner. Just a possibility among many in your self-developmental quest.

The truth about not knowing

Just consider how ravishing it sounds in its simplicity to acknowledge the state of not knowing. But this works only if one says it about oneself. It never works if someone else does the honors. Can you imagine that? How would you react if somebody would tell you that in fact you don’t really know anything. Anything at all. Truth hurts. Mostly when someone else tells it to you. So, at least that much knowledge was left there. Knowledge of being insulted.

Awakening is the preferred term to denote the radical change required in terms of spiritual development. Usually it is pointing out the first phase of the unfolding of such a process. Then, it might point out different stages of the process. The concept can be tricky, as there is no linearity involved, not in the time and space as we know. But in the subjective time and inner space.

Letting go of the so obsessively embraced identity is a requirement. Mistaking ourselves for the things we gathered around us, holding on so tightly to our imagined self, sometimes even to our sufferings – needs to end. Some say, the ego needs to be destroyed. This one still goes beyond my understanding. I don’t get the combative mood here. I don’t see anything that needs to be destroyed.

Awakening doesn’t only mean that one realizes the worthlessness of the accumulated knowledge. But going even further. Realizing our nothingness. Also, realizing our absolute helplessness. When you start to understand yourself, at certain moments you get horrified. Then you decide to get rid of that horrifying part of yourself. But you can’t. Slowly you start to accept your helplessness, your nothingness. Only then you can see how you really are.

Changing the focus from what is seen to the seer

We use the term being awake generally to indicate that we are not sleeping. Awakening from sleep goes naturally, meaning that you are not commonly aware of how that happens. There might be exceptions. If we consider conscious dreaming, we might realize that it is possible to wake up voluntarily. How does that happen? The methods indicate that if you wish to end your dream and wake up, then you should focus your sight on one spot. That is supposed to make it happen. It is interesting to see, that what in fact makes the awakening happen is the change of focus not necessarily of your “eyes”, but you are in fact focusing on yourself. On your self. Reorienting your focus and amplifying your self awareness. Remembering yourself in a dream causes the awakening.

Why should it be different if we consider the spiritual connotations of “awakening”? Changing the focus, orienting it towards a less altering identity. Towards a self that seems different from the ones so deeply identified with its surroundings. To a more objective one. Seemingly the end of comparative reality can come to an end only through self remembering.

In straight accordance with your age, you are now in a distinct phase of your life where you are redefining yourself. Self-definition is an ongoing process, for as long as you live. Our lives are subdued to a historical presence and an existential reality. The historical presence is also subdued to live in a comparative reality. In every time sequence of our lives, the comparative approach is remodeling our identity. And comparative approach is dependent on the cultural, social and historical context. This dependency is what creates the frames for us, mostly in how we can manage to define ourselves. This self-definition needs to be ever reassuring in order to keep our balance. We live now, so is the actual context in favour of this need for self-definition? With all the progress of the modern world, is it easier today to define ourselves?

What actually started me to be preoccupied about this question was an interview a saw with Alejandro Jodorowsky. If you don’t know who this guy is, you should look around a little bit. The effort is worth it. His true art and expressiveness in all of his endeavours are extremely inspiring for all seekers of genuine self-transformation.

This interview is available here. I suggest you watch it all, for at least his unmistakable style. The part that is really pertaining to this topic starts at about 6:30. He is being asked about his ramifying artistic activities. His reply goes like this:

“Things have no definition now. Why should I have a definition?”

“… Because I’m an artist. I am not a zombie… In our civilization now we are becoming zombies. Doing only one thing, like a machine. But we are not in the old time… of the fixed telephone. We are in the time of the iPod. The telephone isn’t any more a telephone. [pulling out his mobile from his pocket] With that you can send messages, take photos, take pictures, listen music. What is that? What is the name of that? Is a telephone? Maybe not. If you use it like a telephone, is a telephone. If you use it like an e-mail, is another thing. If you use it to take a photography, is another thing. Things have no definition now. Why should I have a definition? …”

Being a fan of his movies (but not only), I consider him one of the very rare artists able to constantly actualize his visions, his message. And I guess, for that he needs to be able to constantly redefine himself.

His analogy with the mobile here, I find to be expressive for our present times, frames – social, cultural or historical. There are so many ways to express ourselves today, that maybe never were. But does this make it easier? Is it easier now to define ourselves?

If you consider blogging, – because this is what most of us are doing here, – this can be another way for self-definition. Blogging exposes our need to write about things we are interested in, for some or many of us even to write about ourselves. And this is not just a way for other people to find out about us, but a way for us to find out about ourselves. Why not, a way to help us defining ourselves, more or less consciously.

… the need for a strong ego …

I often hear that it is a requirement for spiritual development that you have ‘a strong ego’. Sometimes it is even aggravated by making it a necessity of such great importance that it is useless to start any spiritual practice without it. Why is this considered so important? Is it so that there should be no spiritual development unless having a ’strong ego’?

Giving it a second thought, the idea is not completely wrong. You must have seen people involved so much in some “spiritual” practice that they truly needed some grounding. On the other hand, I would not consider that – whatever they were doing – spiritual practice. Rather some form of escaping from their life. Nevertheless, the ’strong ego’ advocacy I tend to see as the other side of the coin. Usually it is propagated by disillusioned former “spiritual practicers”.

Comparative reality vs. existential reality

If spiritual development starts where personal development ends, which I like to call the moment/space of the soul, then this is where the ’strong ego’ theory is no longer valid. Spiritual development is all about neutralizing the influence of what previously you’ve built. So far, you’ve been searching your place in the world, coming up to expectations, building your identity. Your whole existence was marked by a comparative reality. All built up in time with great effort and a lot of energy invested. Now you will hardly let it go. But spiritual development requires you to turn towards an other form of reality, the existential reality.

Worse than the fear of death

Your identity is your own comparative reality. It is your money, your status, your charm etc. that you can hardly let go. Your identity is your biggest obsession. You do not want to live without it even for a second. Loosing your identity seems far worse than death itself. If there is the slightest chance to see your identity saved in some form after death, then you can deal with the fear of dying. But loosing your identity seems far worse. It is the biggest of all fears.

Spiritual development turns you towards existential reality. ‘Existential Reality’ is the label that is attached to the way reality really is. It is a positive existence. The spirit is always expressed or symbolized by light. Light has a positive existence. Darkness is defined in comparison to light. Darkness exists in a comparative reality, doesn’t have a positive existence.

So, just like that, your identity – that you hold on to even more than to life itself,- doesn’t have a positive existence. It must be strange from the point of view of existential reality how obsessed we are with it, how desperately we hang on to it. To something which is not.