"The path of liberation depends on not taking everything so personally" (Pema Chodron, July, 2008).
The excerpt from a Pema Chodron talk (posted on FB) which contains this quote, continues on about how we "personalize" the experiences we have by weaving a personal narrative around them.
My musings:
I think that storylines are fine in and of themselves. In fact, I enjoy listening to others' stories; their is a sense of wonder in listening to a person's narrative, the interpretations of events, the particular take on whatever he or she is talking about. But that sense of wonder may have a source other than the story. It may be the act of sharing, the present moment of being together, the mysterious gift of a life "just being here." But to discuss this quality of "just being here" is counter-cultural, and may challenge a deep seated societal "value" that assumes that our stories are what, or who, we are. IMHO, this is not the case; we are not our stories, our viewpoints, our bodily-emotional reactions, our imaginings of what happened. Sharing experiences is one way of interacting, but to take it personally means that the story becomes more important than the living present, the profound simplicity of the moment.
It seems that we automatically respond to the events in our lives with a story or interpretation, with all the attendant emotions, images, and bodily reactions. In a way, we live in a kind of psychosomatic dream state, not that external events themselves are unreal (or the fact that internal states arise), but that after events, etc., take place, our primary concern is with our reactions which are really complex networks that resemble a storyline, or movie.
What would our life be without the stories we tell ourselves (or, without personalizing them)? Without the internal play of competing with one another, of taking a victim's role, of feeling superior or inferior? This is not to deny that wonderful and tragic events happen to us. But to "be present" in the midst of our life, to "surrender to what is" may transform us in ways we cannot imagine.
John: as a writer of narratives, I often wonder about this. Often when I am talking to someone, I find myself listening to their stories as stories -- as examples of narrative But in the end I love that people re-create their lives in this way. So I think our lives would be poorer without this impulse: it seems so much a part of being fully human. I guess, what I don't like is when we make ourselves victims in stories, because that always seems like an excuse for not living in the present, for not being brave enough to accept ourselves as we are.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment, Nan. There seems to be a paradox (or even contradiction) in my/Buddhist views on personal narrative. My focus on narratives has mostly to do with how we generate more suffering--"me" as victim, which seems to justify striking out at someone--and how letting go of that is a start toward inner peace, which then leads to a gentler, more sensitive disposition towards others. But then again, the narrative of Siddhartha and his eventual attaining of Buddhahood is so inspiring to Buddhists (and perhaps some non-Buddhists as well), so narrative in this sense is positive. Even stories of how people we know have overcome some tragedy to find a more open attitude towars life is inspiring... The question I'm wrestling with is in living in the present, are we living a kind of narrative? Again, thanks for the thought provoking comment.
ReplyDelete