Wow, It's Been a Month

Almost at least a month since I have written. Since then I have settled into a job, reconnected with friends, got a new garage door installed, getting a tankless hot water heater installed, the La Puente Bed Bugs won their first game, and my son has scaled Mount Fuji. And of course I have continued to read things. Thanks to Joe, I read my first Alan Watts book, titled appropriately enough "The Book". This was written in the mid 60's and is great reading for everyone (including myself) who think so much of Tolle. His "american" interpretation of ancient Hindu beliefs causes one to pause and think hard about how we define ourselves. I believe it is eye opening, but it certainly depends on where one is at in life.

Reading Watts' book made me think (and he does reference) Martin Buber's "I and Thou" (or "Ich und Du" for those who prefer the original German) first published in 1923 and read by me about 1978. I did not understand it then, but upon starting to read it again, it actually brings together ideas in my mind. Reading Watts first certainly helped, but considering Buber wrote this in the 1920's blows me away. Here's a quick few lines

"The basic word I-You can be spoken only with one's whole being. The concentration and fusion into a whole being can never be accomplished by me, can never be accomplished without me. I require a You to become; becoming I, I say You. All actual life is encounter."

And another
"The I of the basic word I-It, the I that is not bodily confronted by a You but surrounded by a multitude of "contents," has only a past and no present. In other words: insofar as a human being makes do with the things that he experiences or uses, he lives in the past, and his moment has no presence. He has nothing but objects; but objects consist in having been.....What is essential is lived in the present, objects in the past."

What does all this mean? I would encourage you to think about it because it borders on how you define yourself and the spirituality you accept. For me it says that I am defined by you, and you are defined by me. We are interdependent not just with each other, but with our relation to all things, a tree, a flower, the air.

When we define ourselves it is always in relation to things around us. How can you be a kind person if there is nothing to be kind to? Kindness is relational. This is not a bad thing, but good as it allows us of freeing our ego up to look at life in a more relaxed manner. Even those people or situations that cause us the most grief are things that define us. The person could never be mean to us either if we weren't there. People could never be better than us, richer, smarter, etc. if everyone were the same.

This interdependence on how we define ourselves make us all equally important to each other. How cool is that? I don't have to feel bad if someone yells at me to relieve their tension, because I am doing them a service. If I wasn't there to yell at, what would they do. I am important to that person feeling important. And therein is the key, feeling something. That is ego. We let go of that and recognize how much we support each other what a wonderful world it would be. Accepting others skills or qualities without comparing. Would we be happy or what?

I ramble, as usual. If anyone would like to talk about this some more, I have lots of thoughts. It is making me calmer to think this way, and I am starting to see the beauty in even things I used to think of as ugly. I will be writing here also occasionally. Just because I have come back from Alamosa doesn't mean my journey is done. In a way I feel like it is just beginning. I have much to learn, many new experiences to ponder, and many more fields (notice I didn't say paths Paul) to roam in. Love you all.