"Just living it out"...as Stephen says - there is no choice, in reality, but to do exactly that. In fact, as you say, conscious choosing is, I think, itself a fallacy. Thanks Robert.
Both "trying to escape from human limitation" and "just living it out moment to moment" seem to imply a belief in fundamental limitation. The former that it can be escaped, and the latter that it can't, but the underlying assumption is that limitation is fundamental (real).
To quote your always poignant question, "and you know that how?"
What if this life is all about what we can seemingly control rather than about what we can't? We cannot control what is limited, conditioned, because we did not make it that way in the first place. That means we have nothing to do with it, whatsoever. What it doesn't mean is that we are not a factor in the equation. Of course we are. If we were not a factor in the equation, whether or not there was or was not limitation would not matter to us. But it does. (Of course that "factor" is not actually any different from the conditioned "part" of the equation, but there is an undeniable seeming difference which is why this conversation can even happen.)
What is our purview then? It is that we find ourselves awake, which means that as far as we can tell, we are free to respond to circumstances or not in the way that suits us. And, even more importantly, though it is also a matter of influence and conditioning, we are free to take whatever attitude towards our circumstances that best suits us.
These may be conditioned or influenced factors, but I don't buy that take because we are free to go against our conditioning. As far as I can see what makes the difference in how free that really is, is what our beliefs are. If we believe in fundamental limitation as real, then so it is. If no belief in fundamental limitation is present at the locus of our experience, then so that is.
In the former viewpoint, everything is seen from the point of view of fundamental limitation. There is no option. In the latter viewpoint, everything is seen from a limitless point of view, which means that I am unaffected despite the unavoidable existence of the world of limitation.
Both individuals, one adopting the one viewpoint and the other adopting the other, are in/of the very same "what is," the same existence. The difference between the two is one of knowledge, which in turn informs choice and attitude.
Rad piece Robert. Life is too short to be overwhelmed in the over-analyzing fantasy. Many lost in thought to experience the aliveness this moment have to offer. Unfortunately it happens to the best of us.
Paradoxically, there is no choice but to live it out.
Thank you Robert 😍
Very nice. Keeping it simple.
Thank you again, Robert.
This text is great. ❤️❤️
Brilliant! The photos, the conversation, the question, the answer, the insight. Lovely lovely lovely!!!!
"Just living it out"...as Stephen says - there is no choice, in reality, but to do exactly that. In fact, as you say, conscious choosing is, I think, itself a fallacy. Thanks Robert.
Hi Robert, I hope you are well!
Another take:
Both "trying to escape from human limitation" and "just living it out moment to moment" seem to imply a belief in fundamental limitation. The former that it can be escaped, and the latter that it can't, but the underlying assumption is that limitation is fundamental (real).
To quote your always poignant question, "and you know that how?"
What if this life is all about what we can seemingly control rather than about what we can't? We cannot control what is limited, conditioned, because we did not make it that way in the first place. That means we have nothing to do with it, whatsoever. What it doesn't mean is that we are not a factor in the equation. Of course we are. If we were not a factor in the equation, whether or not there was or was not limitation would not matter to us. But it does. (Of course that "factor" is not actually any different from the conditioned "part" of the equation, but there is an undeniable seeming difference which is why this conversation can even happen.)
What is our purview then? It is that we find ourselves awake, which means that as far as we can tell, we are free to respond to circumstances or not in the way that suits us. And, even more importantly, though it is also a matter of influence and conditioning, we are free to take whatever attitude towards our circumstances that best suits us.
These may be conditioned or influenced factors, but I don't buy that take because we are free to go against our conditioning. As far as I can see what makes the difference in how free that really is, is what our beliefs are. If we believe in fundamental limitation as real, then so it is. If no belief in fundamental limitation is present at the locus of our experience, then so that is.
In the former viewpoint, everything is seen from the point of view of fundamental limitation. There is no option. In the latter viewpoint, everything is seen from a limitless point of view, which means that I am unaffected despite the unavoidable existence of the world of limitation.
Both individuals, one adopting the one viewpoint and the other adopting the other, are in/of the very same "what is," the same existence. The difference between the two is one of knowledge, which in turn informs choice and attitude.
Rad piece Robert. Life is too short to be overwhelmed in the over-analyzing fantasy. Many lost in thought to experience the aliveness this moment have to offer. Unfortunately it happens to the best of us.