apr29

I can't tell if I've come to the logical conclusion of my wacky misadventures or if I'm just low on vitamin D or something but I can't seem to come up with anything worth working my ass off for. In a way I've been trying to find the right thing my whole life. But whenever I come up with something and try it out, get/do the thing or just thoroughly think it through, I eventually end up more or less back where I started.

Energy production when it comes to goals seems to operate in direct relation to desires and projections. The more energy that's needed to reach the goal and the more appealing it seems to be, the more energy is generated in the body/mind to meet it. But you need to really believe that the thing is worth it and that it's going to get you somewhere/something. If you're not totally convinced and/or just okay either way, the drive and focus necessary to meet longterm goals doesn't really generate or sustain. It's far easier to get waylaid by the rest of life floating about the peripherals.

The question is, is this a problem? Or is it just pointing to some truths coming more into focus?

From the perspective of modern society, it's a problem. But from the perspective of some of the moste enlightenede masters of olde, at least as far as I can tell from their transcribed words and ways, it's not. I suspect some thousands of scholars and practitioners would vehemently disagree but it seems to me that they didn't really accomplish anything in particular. They seemed exceptionally lucid and at peace with themselves/what is, which seemed to have made others gravitate to them and take up practices to try to become more like them. Some of the "masters" seemed themselves convinced that others should be more like them. But is this necessary? Weren't they just being who they were at that point in their lives? And didn't I, at some point, come to assume that I should be more like them and others?

It's not so different with the masters of the societal games of material achievement and acquisition. The industrious go-getters who have seemingly endless storehouses of energy fueling their productivity and zeal. Should I be more like them? Or are they just being who they are and doing their thing too?

What I'm getting at, I think, is that maybe all these ways that I've been trying to be just aren't me. Maybe I'm not meant to be anything even remotely exceptional, enlightened, successful, powerful or dynamic. Maybe my thing is to be relatively useless and accomplish nothing the least bit noteworthy or significant in an overarching or tangible sense.

Is that something to resist and try to overcome? If so, why? Aside from wounded pride or fear of hypothetical consequences?

Recently I've been reflecting more on the value of a mundane life. The little things, I guess. Relaxing inside on rainy days. Getting to know someone. Trying new things with friends. Being with others when unexpectedly funny or touching moments occur. Goofing around with an animal that's in a silly mood. Finding some perfectly shaped rocks by the water to skip.

There's a lot of joy and beauty in the spontaneity of nature and living beings. And it seems to me that the best way to be available to those parts of life is to not be too busy and preoccupied with goals.