Jonathan, I am struck by your inquiry about the nun's question, resonating with the bothbothandandeitherorism of solitude and communion. This, of course, is loaded: the real and perceived needs of others and perceived needs of others' perceived needs. And so, what if the nun's question is a koan?
I think she might have been hoping that the priest would realize that all they really need is to know that they are loved and that most of the time, this doesn't require much more than eye contact and a compassionate word.
Also, some periods of life are just super busy. But before you know it, children grow up and parents die. I'm at that point now and I'm learning that even with getting older and the feebleness that is gradually creeping in, there are many more possibilities that I can realize for what I can do with my life.
Is the sun's question to do with recognising there is ultimately no separation between what we and others need which is the realisation of the spiritual perfection that we areadyl are, masked by our conditioning, the noise in our head, ego etc?
Nice. Funny: we're talking about this space A LOT at home at the moment. We - I should really probably say 'my other half' - care for members of the family that have major struggles with life, and are members of a community of families in similar situations. And there's an awful lot of cliche in the air about self-care (etc etc etc etc). The realities of the strains of everyday difficulties are hard to fathom in a way that's consistently helpful. And of course that's partly because the help that's called for isn't 'theory', EVEN philosophical theory. But I wager it partly is.
Oh for a simple rubric that permutes to meet the moment! ("One is not alone one"?)
What do they really need? How would you even know? What is the depth of the (not) self that is perceiving and responding? As a practice, you open deeply into wide conscious awareness behind all thinking and prior to most perception. Closer to a quantum choice point. Hang out there. Let the heart be moved. Respond from that place. It’s not an answer but a practice.
Loving the depth and creative challenge of this piece. It resonates with me as pointing to some of the fundamental issues of life as a responsible, aware [insert your favourite personal value here] person.
Perhaps, sometimes, "what they really need" is an example — an example of an individual who has fully recognised their intrinsic and inseparable connection with others – and some would emphasise the non-human as well as the other human – consciously placed themselves in service to others, to *life*; and recognised how service to others *actually implies* a kind of full self-realisation, as well as that self-realisation being in the service of the greater "other".
Like … I'm not doing this self-development for me (alone) but because I am called to do it (by a higher power, beyond me) on behalf of, and for the good of, others. To me, there's a sense of egoless egoism here, walking the narrow path between narcissism and spineless self-martyrdom.
Your Peterson footnote finally induced reading your paper on him (which I'd been resisting on the fear of finding out you liked the guy). In line with the nun's query: Jordan believes he has exactly "what they really need." Are there excellent questions whose power persists only so long as they remain open, asked but never definitively answered?
I needed to read something like this today, thank you. It brought to mind Robin Wall Kimmerer's line 'all flourishing is mutual'.
Jonathan, I am struck by your inquiry about the nun's question, resonating with the bothbothandandeitherorism of solitude and communion. This, of course, is loaded: the real and perceived needs of others and perceived needs of others' perceived needs. And so, what if the nun's question is a koan?
Yes, it is koan-like. I wondered about that too. It has certainly stayed with me in that way. 🙏
Me, too, these days since I read, and likely many more. Thank you for that.
I neglected to mention that the topic of your doctoral thesis is quite intriguing. . . .
I think she might have been hoping that the priest would realize that all they really need is to know that they are loved and that most of the time, this doesn't require much more than eye contact and a compassionate word.
Also, some periods of life are just super busy. But before you know it, children grow up and parents die. I'm at that point now and I'm learning that even with getting older and the feebleness that is gradually creeping in, there are many more possibilities that I can realize for what I can do with my life.
Is the sun's question to do with recognising there is ultimately no separation between what we and others need which is the realisation of the spiritual perfection that we areadyl are, masked by our conditioning, the noise in our head, ego etc?
This is lovely. Thank you.
Nice. Funny: we're talking about this space A LOT at home at the moment. We - I should really probably say 'my other half' - care for members of the family that have major struggles with life, and are members of a community of families in similar situations. And there's an awful lot of cliche in the air about self-care (etc etc etc etc). The realities of the strains of everyday difficulties are hard to fathom in a way that's consistently helpful. And of course that's partly because the help that's called for isn't 'theory', EVEN philosophical theory. But I wager it partly is.
Oh for a simple rubric that permutes to meet the moment! ("One is not alone one"?)
What do they really need? How would you even know? What is the depth of the (not) self that is perceiving and responding? As a practice, you open deeply into wide conscious awareness behind all thinking and prior to most perception. Closer to a quantum choice point. Hang out there. Let the heart be moved. Respond from that place. It’s not an answer but a practice.
Loving the depth and creative challenge of this piece. It resonates with me as pointing to some of the fundamental issues of life as a responsible, aware [insert your favourite personal value here] person.
Perhaps, sometimes, "what they really need" is an example — an example of an individual who has fully recognised their intrinsic and inseparable connection with others – and some would emphasise the non-human as well as the other human – consciously placed themselves in service to others, to *life*; and recognised how service to others *actually implies* a kind of full self-realisation, as well as that self-realisation being in the service of the greater "other".
Like … I'm not doing this self-development for me (alone) but because I am called to do it (by a higher power, beyond me) on behalf of, and for the good of, others. To me, there's a sense of egoless egoism here, walking the narrow path between narcissism and spineless self-martyrdom.
And I've been so slow to start seeing this.
Nice. Thanks for sharing that Jonathan.
Muhammad Ali once said he'd written the world's shortest poem (he probably thought it was the best as well!).
Me. You.
Everything's in the silence between the words, no?
Your Peterson footnote finally induced reading your paper on him (which I'd been resisting on the fear of finding out you liked the guy). In line with the nun's query: Jordan believes he has exactly "what they really need." Are there excellent questions whose power persists only so long as they remain open, asked but never definitively answered?