Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Unattached to attachment

Some months ago, a person gave me an extensive set of notes taken from group meetings I was in some 25 to 30 years ago.

The notes from the meetings were interesting; yet one of the things that struck me the most was how someone had written notes on the notes. "Excellent meeting," said one note. And so on. 

The temptation to evaluate, it appears, extends to everything and everyone. Nothing is exempt from it.

It seems impossible to absorb Meister Eckhart's teaching that everything is of equal value (gleichgültigkeit.) He expounded this on many occasions; and the concept is hardly foreign to other teachers or spiritual works. 

Yet we insist, don't we, in saying that some things are more equal than others?

The reason for this, I am convinced, is psychological, and not rooted in any real sensation of Being. To the sense of Being itself, all things are equal; all events flow past me, and each one can be let go of in one way or another. Even those that appear to be attachment I simply accept as I move through them and go by them. In this sense, I have to understand something new, and that is the idea that I must become unattached to the attachment itself.

The attachment does not go away; but the personal investment in it can become untethered, so that it is not dragged from moment to moment with me, but just arises. This frees my attention to invest itself specifically in the sensation of Being, rather than objects, events, circumstances, and conditions. 

Within this context, there is always a certain goodness; the value comes from the sense of Being, and the lack of value comes from not having it.

Right now, as I dictate these notes, for example, I am walking the dog. It is very early in the morning. 

I pass a mass white roses near the creek; their fragrance fills the air, and at the same time — in that very instant — I realize that my father is dead. 

Each of these conditions provokes a response, but neither one of them is actually bad, even though one response is sorrowful and the other one is joyful. They coexist instantly and simultaneously; just as this moment where I climb up the rocks on the hill does. 

I think; and then there are these emotional, sensory, and physical experiences, all valued through the sense of Being. They are all excellent, in a certain sense. They surpass the good and the bad and move into Being, which is a form of food that is eaten; not good or bad, but necessary.

All food that is necessary produces a sense of well-being when it is ingested; that is, a sensation of health and of rightness. This is part of what the sensation of Being ought to be associated with. It is an acknowledgment of the vigor of life and its truth. 

I don't need to rate it; just experience it.



  1. Yes, but without decades of 'work', as u have often said,,none of this is possible...or perhaps I have missed something? So in a v. real sense, your comments are for people who cannot do what u suggest?

  2. Is there a difference in value between 'dying like a dog' and dying like human being (gurdjieff's 'a man'). For g yes it seems...everything is not of equal value. That some things are necessary does not obviate the fact that some things have less value than others...like dying like a dog rather than a man who has worked on himself...and that is not wiseacring...U are contrasting a kind of neutral sense of being with passing circumstances...? Just thinking out aloud...but of course I am just caught up in my own little projections... :)


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.