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.

Obviously autodidacticism is very much present on many levels of our modern lives, in many forms. Learning languages for example, although you know that a teacher or a native speaker must show up at some point. I am not talking about this kind of self-education.

In what the common knowledge calls personal development, autodidacticism has reached nowadays its all-time high. By now, self-help can be considered not only an ideology, but also a movement. Behind this ideology there is a whole industry. Complete sets of business models are available in the fields of personal motivation, mind shaping etc. Scientific and pseudo-scientific explanations are there to serve the cause.

Authenticity is seemingly not a requirement

Autodidacticism seems to perform well here. Tons of books, audio-video materials, also courses and trainers are available. If those authors have reached the goals of personal success designated in their own methods – seems to be irrelevant. Most of those methods being popularized through global channels, it is somewhat understandable. You don’t really have a connection with the author. Your choice is just to follow the recipes and see for yourself if it works. Authenticity is present here just as the promise of future success and in the false form of convincing marketing. Actually your sole choice is to be a habitual autodidact.

Saturation and isolation

Currently the influence of this conviction is placing its marks on forms of spiritual development. “The Age of Masters is over” states Jodorowsky. And he might be very much right. Not that there is no more need for guidance and authenticity. But the habitual autodidacticism led to a psychological complex. This is what I would like to call the Autodidacticism Complex. The autodidact reaches a level of saturation and isolation where a misconception is installed. The misconception of being able to learn anything on your own. There is no room left for an outer point of support. Maybe support is too much, let’s just say point of reference. There is only space left for yourself.

How far should one go with autodidacticism?

It looks like a new religion was born and we did not even noticed it. Such an intensity in believing the infallible efficiency of the success recipe makes it resemble to what we used to know as dogma. The authoritarian presence of the teacher is also there, whether in person or by books, DVDs and nowadays on-line seminars. It is just striking how belief plays such an important role here. Just like in religion, except no god(s) are involved. Same old, maybe better, maybe worse. If this is where the revolt against the older world got us, then we got nowhere.

When I wrote the “How much of a secret is The Secret?” I felt that my biggest concern is “The lack of moral considerations” (see point two here). And this I still sustain. Maybe even more. I suggest you watch the videos (links below) and see for yourself about some secrets in details. See the reactions of “The Secret” ’s preacher to the simple question of “Do you feel sorry for those people?”. Quite shocking. Oh, and there is Bob Proctor involved as Schrimer’s close friend, who categorically denies any responsibility. At least he had the decency to say (under some pressure though) that he is sorry for the money loss of those people.

• David Schirmer Exposed – Part 1
• David Schirmer Exposed – Part 2
• David Schirmer Exposed – Part 3

His own words from his reply video confirms that he considers ‘The Secret’ part of his belief, saying that he was hurt in his beliefs. Much truth has slipped out.

(I first found the videos linked on Steve Pavlina’s blog)

[These days 'The Secret' arrived in my small Easter European country. I've heard it being advertised intensely on the radio, seen it on the local Internet portals. So, I am curious about the local reactions (although I might be able to predict a few).]

Update. Here is Part 4, thanks to the comment left by John:

• David Schirmer Exposed – Part 4