When to give in

I have several friends into the Law of Attraction and other philosophies that encourage me to not give in to perceived limitations.  Some of my friends insist, "you can do anything if you believe in yourself", and they refuse to put any qualifications on that statement.

My father loved to ride trains.  He did it as a hobby, following train routes, going places he had not been before, loving the feel and touch of the engine and rails.  As he grew older, he became more and more disabled, and less and less able to pursue his passion.  However, he always talked about his next trip and how good it would be.  Eventually he was unable to walk, confined to bed, and did not have that long to live.  He went farther into fantasy, and would talk about heading to New York tomorrow to catch a train to DC.  He refused to accept his limitations, even though the limitations were very real, and independent travel for him was truly no longer possible.

I am not someone who chooses to lie in fantasy.  I'm the one who wants to know from the doctor, how long do I have?  I'd rather struggle with the truth, even though I don't like it, than live in my own dream world.

But at what point is it healthy to give up one's dreams?  When do we face the facts, and realize the chance is gone?  I will never win an olympic gold metal.  I'll never be the rock star I had once wanted to be.  But what about more subtle things?  Will I ever conquer my shyness?  Should I give up on that goal, and accept myself as I am, or should I continue to try to change myself into the person I wish I was?  We all are familiar with the other extreme - limiting ourselves by our negative beliefs, when the truth is that we are far more capable than we believe.  But sometimes we truly are not capable, and there is a lot of gray area in between.

The grieving process is now a well-understood and well-documented process, necessary to handle in a healthy way any major loss in our lives.  When the loss is a perceived loss of capability, and we cannot really know for sure that we are truly incapable, we can get stuck either in a perpetual striving after something that never comes, or a continual grieving combined with the suspicion that if we had only tried harder, or if we only try harder now, things would change.  This limbo land between letting go of one's dreams and choosing to continue to believe despite all evidence can be hell.  Who wants to live with the torture that if they had only tried harder, they could have had their dream?  And who wants to spend their life pursuing something that is never going to come?  When progress is not happening, how does one cut their losses when it is not clear that they have lost yet?

I have a tendency, inherited strongly from my parents, of living a victim story - I don't have what I need because of X - abuse, lack of love as a child, lack of natural ability today, etc.  I fight this tendency all the time, seeking to believe more in myself, seeking to take risk, to learn how to move forward, to grab onto life with gusto.  But how long do I live with lack of success before I finally give in?  And how can I ever know that giving in is really the right thing to do, when there is no proof that I am truly incapable?

They Get To Do That

I have been learning lately about boundaries in relationships.  One sort of boundary is recognizing the other person's right to choose how they will live and what they will do.

I tend to carry a lot of "should's" in my mind regarding relationships - how we should talk to each other, how we should treat each other, what we should do when we're angry, the ways in which we should maintain a healthy relationship, on and on.  What I have been realizing lately is that every one of those should's creates a demand - I am in effect saying to the other, "You have to follow these rules."  When they do not, I am angry.  I assume they agree with my should's, and that furthermore, they do not have the freedom to break those rules, because there is another person whose feelings they have to take into consideration.

The fact is, they get to do whatever they want, whether or not I like it or not.  We all have this inherent freedom, and no one can really take it away from us, other than by brute force.  They get to not only make their own decisions and live by their own values, but they also get to break promises, do things that hurt us, be selfish, be unreasonable.  They have the freedom and the right to do that.  If we have made a commitment with each other, they get to break that commitment if they choose.  I cannot take away their freedom.

Of course, there are consequences - not by punishment, but in terms of how much I want this person in my life, how close I want to be to them, how much contact I want to have with them.  In a viable relationship, each person will at least consider the possible consequences of their actions.  But they still get to do whatever they choose and deal with the consequences.

That may sound like all semantics, but it is not.  The difference is in my attitude.  If I believe they should act a certain way, I get righteously angry at them for not doing so.  I may judge them, I may think I'm better because I am acting the "right" way, I may be frustrated because they are not acting as I want them to act.  But if I truly get that they can do as they please, and I don't like what they do, there is no longer room for any judgment.  There is room for me to exercise my freedom as well - which may mean talking to them, or letting them know my preferences or how their actions affect me, or distancing myself, or at the last resort, to terminate the relationship.  My responsibility is now not to judge or condemn, but to act according to my own sense of values and integrity.

Agreements of behavior can be used as a means of restricting our freedoms, or it can be used to freely choose new ways of doing things.

The necessity of community

Sometime, in history long past, people gathered together because it was necessary for survival.  People discovered they could survive better together than being on their own.  We discovered that through cooperation, caring, sharing, and division of work, we were stronger, and could better deal with the world around us.  Food became more likely to be found, protection against enemies was more effective, and lessons learned could be shared to increase the capability of everyone in the community.  Those who distrusted others or could not cooperate probably died out because of the disadvantages of individualism, and we are left with a genetic pool that inclines us towards connection, caring, and serving each other.

However, today, for the first time in history, a person can live without the good will of anyone, without any connections, community, or relationships, and still have all his needs met - he can have food, clothing, shelter, a job, medical care, retirement for old age, protection from those who might hurt him - all through the social system we have built up over time.  Relationship and community are no longer economically necessary.

Having always had throughout history very concrete reasons to join together, we are today lost without the glue of life-threatening adversity.  If someone is on the street, we wonder why they don't get welfare, why they don't get a job, why they don't take care of themselves better.  After all, there are agencies that handle people like that, right?  Our personal services do not seem necessary when compared to the resources of the state, so we do not have sufficient motivation to overcome the risk of reaching out to help another.

Yet, we are still genetically disposed to gather together, to help each other, to develop long-lasting relationships that fulfill our needs.  But the drive to do so has been severely weakened, and is now more a matter of feeling good rather than of survival.

Not having a ready solution to satisfy our genetic cravings, and not having a society that demonstrates how to live as community, and having a constant drone of advertisements that all tell us that fulfillment comes from spending more money on the right product, we live as we are told to live, but wonder why we feel dissatisfied, or lonely, or isolated.  Our society promotes individual freedom as one of the highest values we have.  Why would we then give up personal freedom to live within the rules and customs of a community, if we do not see a return worth the sacrifice?

We may awaken to our true needs someday, if we can get away from the constant influence of corporate and societal forces that give us a very different message than that of our soul.  Someday, perhaps we will have advanced to the point where we can be more concerned with fulfilling everyone's emotional and spiritual needs.  How much suffering will take place before our awakening?

The Buddhist Paradox

I am dissatisfied with my current environment. My friends all live too far away, the traffic is horrible, and the attitudes are unfriendly.

The common wisdom among my friends is, "live in the now", "love what is", "let go of demanding things of life", "desire is the cause of suffering". I do find a wisdom in this philosophy, but at times it is hard to pin down.
 

However, I also know that without dissatisfaction, I will not be motivated to change my environment. When we can see another way of living in our imagination, that is the point we start to become dissatisfied with the current moment. It is this dissatisfaction, this refusing to put up with second best, that often is the motivator for taking action and improving our life.

Yet, experiencing the dissatisfaction while doing nothing about it is a recipe for misery.

It is surely natural, and I would think, healthy, to feel dissatisfied when our needs are not well met. The animals certainly experience this. Yet it is also obvious to me that I do create much of my own misery by demanding so much of the universe that it is unlikely I will ever get what I want. And if I did actually get what I want, would I raise the bar and demand yet more? Am I set up for permanent dissatisfaction, no matter how wonderful a life I have?

So, I often ask myself, where is the line? When do I try to let go and be satisfied with what is, and when do I allow the discomfort within me to grow to a point where I am willing to actually change my situation?

I can see that this line is dependent on several things. First, on what is possible. If I am missing a limb, or don't like how old I am, or I still want to be a rock star, lots of luck. The wisdom that is obvious to me is, accept where I am and what is possible, and live life to the fullest within the parameters given me. These are the cards dealt to me, and it is not in my power to change them.

However, if I have the world before me, and I have plenty of money, energy, intelligence, creativity, courage, and whatever else it takes to move forward, I may very well act, and perhaps without a lot of thought or struggle, making use of the tools I have, so that I can live a richer and fuller life.

When the task before me is difficult and success is uncertain, then how do I know in which direction to apply my energy - work to let go of my desire, or build determination to accomplish it?

It is in this limbo that I often find myself - I am dissatisfied, yet doing nothing about it because of the daunting nature of the solution. Yet I am afraid to let go of my desire, because it is my only hope of change. If I look back and see that I had it within my power to live a much more satisfying life, and I didn't take it, how will I feel about myself?

I find myself wracked with desires, dreams, hopes, creative possibilities. I see ways in which life could be lived, society could be more supportive of human values, relationships could be closer and more satisfying, yet the things I dream about are usually so big, they seem out of my reach. It almost becomes a torment to dream of something good, because of the anger I then experience from the world not being that way today.

How do I love the current moment, and also live my life fully?