des mots sans histoire

I had a second chance

"des mots sans histoire...words without story. Words, ephemeral passengers on an inner journey, a journey toward meaning, a journey compelling me to share."
 
****
I had a second chance.
A chance I didn’t expect to have in this lifetime, let alone now.
 
I was part of my brother’s life for almost three months. I wasn’t a part of his since youth, when living under the same roof. Then, either too dumb, or caught up in my adaptive self to appreciate the moments, to nourish him. I cared, I loved him, but love is never better than the lover.
Only wish I were present enough, so that I could embrace the moments. Making sure the moments were not tainted by what I can control. 
Blinded by my adaptive self, I missed those moments, lagging behind, tainting moments and the relationships within. It hurts, as the relationships didn’t emerge from me. Don’t resonate me. Don’t resonate with me. My relationships in dissonance with who I am. Suffering.
Thus, as long as I am caught up into my adaptive self, I'll be a shadow of my Self. I will always lag behind, no agency, all will be suffering. All will be lived as suffering. I will be suffering. Affording only but suffering, the way I love will be suffering.
Love is never better than the lover.
It is thus our duty to be better beings, individuate so that our interactions, expressions better the community—so we can love better.
To love my brother better, I had to be better. Hence a life of cultivation. But cultivation doesn’t make you better. It affords you to move better, affording you to interact better, to relate better.The way I relate to ‘what-is-not-me’ defines who I am. A dance.
Things are not defined by what they are but by how they interact, how they are being interacted with. Thus, I am not defined by my adaptive self, but by how I choose to interact. Co-defined by what I am affording through the interaction, the relationship, with ‘what-is-not-me’. The quality of that relationship is the ceiling of the quality of my relationship to other beings. The ceiling of my ability to love.
Cultivating thus not a ‘what’ but a ‘how’, how I interact. It is not about changing what I am, what my shape is. As what I live as bliss or suffering is dictated by the ‘how’, not by what the ‘how’ is relating. Bliss, the absence of suffering, is a ‘how’. A balancing act.
The potential of falling into suffering is always there. Mitigated by presence and participating, connecting—daring to walk on the tightrope. There is a myriad of ways to live suffering. One to live bliss. Walking on the tightrope. The ‘how’, the only thing I can control.
Nothing is immune from suffering. All can be suffering. Cultivating how we relate gives us agency over suffering. Agency on how living is experienced, agency to not be suffering, agency to be better, affording bliss. A choice.
 
To be better at the balancing act, I must choose to live every moment. Crafting. Individuating. Dancing with ‘what-is-not-me’. Every frame of consciousness, every moment that consciously goes through your awareness, is an opportunity to interact, to dance. The friction of the dance, its resistance, warms me, smoothens me, makes me more and more malleable, so that my shape can move better.
The opportunities to be better are not infinite. The frames are diluted with time. Less and less, as we cement ourselves in our adaptive self. A shape in rigor antemortis. Missing out moments because we’re not ready to live, them. Life happens, whether you are participating or not.
I am grateful I was able to make better choices, affording to be more crafted, so that I can get closer to love my brother the way I long to. But to love him better, to change how we relate, our relationship, I must interact with him. Be part of his life.
I thus yearned for a second chance.
We all yearn for second chances, yet we take them for granted if we think there’s a third. An illusion, soothing our inability to change. Or is it fatality, not believing there is a second, let alone a third, that coerces us into being different? If so, we are not different, as we only behave as such if chaperoned by fatality. When we know there’s a third and make sure don’t miss the second, then we are ready, changed, crafted, yearning turns into longing, our shape moves. 
Only then can we make use of a second chance.
A second chance I didn’t expect to have in this lifetime, let alone now.A second chance to love my brother better.
I am not sure if this is the best I’ll ever do, but that is undoubtedly better than how I ever did.
Merci pour le moment,
悟龟
 
 
****
Affording: Affordance Theory, coined by James J. Gibson in “The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception”. John Vervaeke uses the term in his studies, as he explains in an interview with Curt Jaimungal on Theory of Everything (00:02:43)
Participating: Aristotle’s types of knowing, Plato’s anagoge through participatory knowing. Discussed by John Vervaeke in Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Ep.5 Plato and the Cave, as well as with Curt Jaimungal on Theory of Everything (2:18:00).
Co-defined: Co-identification & agent-arena relationship discussed by John Vervaeke in Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Ep.7 Aristotle’s World View and Erich Fromm.
Agency: The relationship between agency and suffering, suggested by John Vervaeke in in Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Ep.13 Buddhism and Parasitic Processing, is worth exploring.
'How': There are choices at a participatory level. Free will is experienced when moving from the Self, although ultimately might be determined by the movement of ‘what-is-not-me’. Determinism is only experienced when moving from one’s adaptive self. Thus relative free will might be experienced not in regards to ‘what does what?’, but how it is done, part of Stoicism as discussed by John Vervaeke at the end of Ep.14 - Epicureans, Cynics, and Stoics.
Thus, cultivating how one moves gives one agency on how moving is experienced. I am relating more and more to the idea of suffering being the absence of agency, also suggested by John Vervaeke.
Dance: The quality of touch cultivated in Contact Improvisation, C.I., is the analogy, the lens, though which I explore my spirituality. The layers of touch, leading to a connection point, what is salient, through which we share our weight, our self, is the fundamental analogy of any form of relationship between two beings, between two ‘things’, let it be a kettlebell, a floor, a partner, an opponent, a patient, a lover, or ‘what-is-not-me’.
Shape: What is experience as ‘shape’ closely relates to the concept of structural-functional-organization, Gestalt, logos, a form that I must con-form to so as to understand. Experiencing life through a geometrical lens, I use the word ‘shape’, although great minds like John Vervaeke, do not feel that ‘shape’ conveys the true meaning of what is implied by it, as he discussed at the end of Ep.5 - Plato and the Cave.
Move: The idea of ‘moving’ is related to Aristotle’s con-formity theory, the ability to inform, change our shape so as to conform to what we interact with, affording a participatory knowledge, discussed by John Vervaeke in Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Ep.7 Aristotle’s World View and Erich Fromm. John also discussed the integration of the con-formity theory into Neoplatonism in Ep.18 Plotinus and Neoplatonism.
'What-is-not-me': In some ways, what I experience as ‘what-is-not-me’ does relate to what Bernard Kastrup would refer to ‘mind-at-large’ in analytical idealism as discussed on Theory of Everything.
However, to me, ‘mind-at-large’ takes away the fulcrum of experience from the individual, making it less participatory. Not to say that what is meant is less participatory but that the wording makes it feel as less—easily hinting at a omniscient being outside us. I suggest that the validity of that being is not relevant to the experience of interacting with ‘what-is-not-me’. Cultivating the edge between ‘what-is-me’ and ‘what-is-not-me’ is the root of spirituality, not what is beyond the edge.
Where ‘what-is-me’ and ‘what-is-not-me’ are co-defined. Where salience meets truth, a Socratic ideal. Connecting to that edge is participating. By understand one, you understand the other.
Spirituality is participatory. Chasing anything that is not participatory, not merging salience and truth, would be defined as bullsht, not spirituality. Bullsht, a term coined by Harry Frankfurt, discussed by John Vervaeke on Ep.4 - Socrates and the Quest for Wisdom
Self: Carl Jung’s archetype ‘the Self’ and its relationship to ‘the ego’ resonate with my experience of living. 
Adaptive Self: First heard it from Bernardo Kastrup on Theory of Everything. He is a voice for analytical idealism, a worldview I relate to.
Individuation: The term comes from Carl Jung’s model of the human psyche and the realization of the Self.
Love: Love, tainted by one’s adaptive self. There are as many ways to love tainted than there are ways to fall into suffering. Longing to be capable of loving as a mother loves her child, agape, the acme of love. Yet, as beautiful as witnessing a mother’s love is, the love is chaperoned by our shape. Just as wisdom has one be spontaneous as a child, yet we shouldn’t mistake being a child for wisdom. Loving beyond one’s adaptive self and beyond one’s child, a love afforded by one’s individuation, a love affording other’s individuation. The later discussed by John Vervaeke in Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Ep.16 Christianity and Agape.
Bliss: Sadhguru’s use of ‘bliss’ closely relates to how I experience the word. The talk also shares the main theme of my letter. 
Suffering: I am offering my own participatory understanding of ‘suffering’, as in ‘dukkha’, first introduced by Siddhattha Gotama in the Dhammapada. John Vervaeke also discusses the term in ways I relate to, in Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Ep.13 Buddhism and Parasitic Processing
Yearning & Longing: I use ‘yearning’ as ‘wanting’. ‘Wanting’ in contrast to ‘longing’. A difference brought to awareness by Iain McGilchrist.
 
****
Influences
The work of these men were of great influence, especially John Vervaeke. 
Please visit their platform and support their work, as their work affords mine.
John Vervaeke: www.johnvervaeke.com, facebook, youtube
Bernardo Kastrup: www.essentiafoundation.org, www.bernardokastrup.com
Iain McGilchrist: www.channelmcgilchrist.com, 'The Master and His Emissary', 'The Matter with Things'
Curt Jaimungal of Theory of Everything: youtube, twitter, spotify, patreon
****
Disclaimer
The thoughts and observations shared are always moving, changing with time. There is no attachment to any of the words presented, as they are only ephemeral passengers. The sole purpose is to create ripples in others' mind, as the words of others rippled in mine, accompanying me on a journey toward meaning. Only giving back what I am given, be part of the discussion, not imposing a stance.
 
Also, there is some residual background noise. I will be better with time. 
 
*****
Follow & Support
twitter: @words_sansstory
Instagram: @des.mots.sans.histoire
patreon: patreon.com/desmotssanshistoire
www.desmotssanshistoire.com
 
"I hope my words add meaning to your day, as sharing adds meaning to mine."
悟龟