hopelesshappiness.com

I frequently maintain the impossibility of Perfection. On Monday though, I had a food day that came close. Typically I cook. I love to cook, and I am consistently told that I do it fairly well. Monday was a restaurant day.

This week we are in south Louisiana, vacationing and visiting daughters and granddaughter. Skipping breakfast on Monday, my food day began with lunch at Albasha; a small chain of Greek & Lebanese restaurants in this region. My choice: the "Albasha Super Salad" which includes feta cheese salad, taboule, and stuffed vegetarian grape leaves. Additionally, we shared an appetizer of Halloumi cheese sautéed in olive oil and fresh garlic, and I added a side of kalamata olives. This "Albasha Super Salad" was a staple for a length of time immediately following a minor heart attack, a few years back, when my Wife and I also lived in this area. Albasha was a contributing factor toward significant weight loss and healthier eating habits. I believe, (because of the dramatic change in lifestyle), that this food connection is (at least) partially emotional; but today, long after these healthy habits have become entrenched, it remains largely driven by taste. I have enthusiastically taken to Mediterranean fare, and since moving back to Mid-Missouri five years ago, I have found no rival for Albasha's grape leaves.

Monday evening we enjoyed a unique setting at a locally owned Italian restaurant in Kenner / Metairie. We were seated next to an interesting wall mural of an Italian street scene, complete with fountain, food vendors, balconied apartments, and a multiplicity of active, energetic foot traffic. The Brick Oven offers fresh gourmet pizzas and traditional Italian dishes. I chose the "Spaghetti and Puttanesca: Calamata olives, onions, capers and anchovies sautéed in extra virgin olive oil tossed with our marinara served over spaghetti." As I was perusing the menu and making my selection, I had no preconceived expectations. In fact, I had no recollection of ever previously ordering puttanesca; (though my Wife believes I have). To say I was pleasantly surprised is an understatement. Yet I also believe that the next time I order this dish, (even if I were to do so at The Brick Oven), it is very possible, (perhaps even quite likely), that it will not be as impeccably delicious and satisfying as I found it Monday. (And this takes nothing at all away from The Brick Oven, as everyone in our party found everything very good to excellent.) I simply believe that there are occasions when body meets gratifying sustenance in a way that maximizes the physical experience. Monday was such an occasion.

I also believe that there are occasions when heart meets fervid sentiment; and when mind meets stimulating challenge: and when intuition meets inspired illumination; that, respectively, maximize the emotional, intellectual, and spiritual experience. From day-to-day, all of these perceptual / conceptual experiences will run the gamut from frustration to mundanity to satisfaction, and varying degrees between and within.

So, is there a way to more consistently grasp (physical, emotional, intellectual, spiritual) productive satisfaction? Am I able to guide my (body, heart, mind, spirit) self toward the specific (sustenance, sentiment, challenge, illumination) essentials necessary for maximizing output? And if so, how do I balance the guidance/planning with the temperance of preconceived expectations, and also with the apparently valuable lagniappe of unexpected wonder? When I plan, I create expectations by planning to a specific end. And when I set my sights on this desirable outcome, I often leave no room for the unexpectedness of personal surprise. So to summarize, I believe I am asking if I am able to, (and if I am able to, how might I), consistently put myself in a position that will invite surprise AND maximize productive satisfaction?

Here are some thoughts:

• Diversity of experience; (i.e. Try new things).
• An open mind, driven by skepticism and uncertainty.
• The ability to relax, (with a sense of humor), within a serious mindset of creative effort for learning and growth.

It appears, (from the thoughts above), that to invite surprise and maximize productive satisfaction, one risks the possibility, (perhaps the likelihood), of discomfort. I (personally) have no difficulty experiencing aspects of discomfort as described. I (personally) struggle with the ability to relax within my seriousness, which leads to an imbalance between planning and preconceived expectations, thus suppressing the potential for surprise. By relaxing within my seriousness, perhaps planning will not be as tightly wound around expectations, allowing for a broader vision of possibility, and the occasional surprise. If I plan to expectations, based on experience, (i.e. What I think I know), I am playing it safe. But if I allow for unexpectedness I will more likely be led beyond comfortable security.

I believe the risk of (frequent) discomfort for the reward of (occasional) unexpected wonder, is worthwhile. It certainly was on Monday.

If I take off my glasses, hold my breath, squint my eyes, and scrunch my brain just so, magic happens. That red six of spades first morphs into hearts, then changes colors, then reverses itself, before finally settling into an actuality of a red six of spades.

Along the way, I insist, "something is wrong with it! It's not me! It can't be me! My thinking is solid. I know what I know."

I do not want to acknowledge my ignorance. I see things the way I've always seen them; even when I don't. Square pegs do fit into round holes---Every Day. The Sun does revolve around the Earth! I am the most important person in the World! "They" really are inferior to Us! And there is no way that red six of spades is actually a red six of spades!

...Damn it.

But then I see it. And I shine a kinder light of innocence upon my ignorance. I have learned. I have grown. I can admit to my confusion. I can explain my confusion. And I can promise to be more attentive and more diligent in the future.

And then they go and slip in a black four of hearts.

...Damn it.

Job Advertised:

We are looking for qualified candidates to fill the position of Contributing Humanitarian. This is an unpaid, volunteer position that (additionally) does not require personal monetary contributions. All applicants will be rated on a scale of 0 to 10 in each of the following three areas: 1) Performance Characteristics and Skill Set; 2) Work Ethic; and 3) Listening Skills. A maximum score of 30 is possible; though very unlikely.

1) Performance Characteristics and Skill Set: 10 = Completely Capable of Performing or (within a "given" reasonable period of time) Learning and Demonstrating All Specific Characteristics and Skills Required; (listed below). Consistently Maintains All Previously Established Maximum Levels of Performance.

2) Work Ethic: 10 = Understanding and Execution of Maximum Productivity by Utilizing and Constantly Improving Efficiencies. Always Active and Willing. Always Maintains Focus. Never Succumbs to Distractions. Never Creates Distractions.

(A Distraction is defined as the introduction of a new topic or task, of equal or less importance, before completion of the current topic or task.)

3) Listening Skills: 10 = Always Listens, with Empathy, for Understanding. Never Creates Distractions. Always Confirms Understanding.

Each applicant will be rated in each of the three areas above based on past performance, with emphasis placed on the most recent, measurable five-year period. Additionally, if an applicant is unable to show a solid history of consistent skill performance, based on the ratings above and the specific characteristics and skills listed below, said applicant, by sincerely committing to this effort, may still be considered for an internship.

Specific Characteristics and Skills Required:

• Truthfulness
• Uncertainty
• A High Degree of Active Skepticism
• An Active Care for Personal Health
• An Active Commitment to Lifelong Learning
• A Sense of Humor
• An Active Awareness of Residual Harm
• An Active Effort to Minimize Harm
• The Ability to Incorporate All Skills in order to Effectively Implement Creative Tension, and to Effectively Reconcile Disagreement.

 

Once an applicant, or an intern, meets all the requirements and scores a perfect 30, said applicant, or intern, will be granted the title of Senior Contributing Humanitarian. To date, we have been unable to promote anyone to this position.

Our organization, (which we consider to be made up of all of humanity), is a very flat organization whose hierarchy consists of part-time junior contributing humanitarians, interns, recruits, and potential recruits.

Please Apply Now!

How do I describe something that is nothing and everything folded into one singular microscopic infinity? It is a disturbing, (yet not altogether unpleasant), feeling---this inner anomaly that is concurrently growing and shrinking; taking wing and putting down roots; exploding and imploding; bursting forth in wondrous bloom and withering in shriveled dessication; fighting for survival and searching for a way out.

The thoughts above are remnants; somehow related to last week's consideration of thought beyond corporeal attachment. Though, (as previously stated), I believe my focus should be on my responsibilities to and within my current framework, I also believe that serious, rational consideration of unexplainable gaps and contradictions can aid in my responsibility to learning and growth, and (from there) can be applicable to this framework.

I believe that to overthink the unexplainable is dangerous, possibly leading one from a yearning for answers, to a liberal consideration of brainstormed possibilities, to a grasping conjecture, to a (at this point in this progression of thought) seemingly more reasonable leap of faith, to the bridging of the gap with a system organized in a manner that reassures others of a safe crossing, and finally to a desperate and divisive defense of one's belief, masquerading as truth. In this scenario, the leap (over the unexplainable gap), and the subsequent bureaucracy, is (mis)interpreted as solid groundwork supporting the belief.

I believe that to disregard the unexplainable is also undesirable, potentially leaving one mired in unimaginative certainties, perhaps staring longingly across the gap, afraid and unable to make a leap, thereby eliminating the perspective from the other side which can aid in filling the gap.

Those who leap and then bridge the gap with a gridwork of comfortable truth have expended effort, (sunk costs), that discourage crossing back for a more objective view.

Those who leap and then work at filling the gap, keep open the possibility of continuing to search for other gaps by, 1) once the gap is filled, crossing back or moving forward; or, 2) if unable to fill the gap, leaping back. In either case, one is not in (as much) danger of being trapped on the other side.

A sculpted, geometric, microscopic infinity simultaneously enfolding nothing and everything can only be felt in the gaps. I do not believe this anomaly, will ever, in its entirety, be found. But (again), I believe it can be felt, (if only momentarily), in the gaps. The only way into the gaps, is to expend effort filling the gaps. I have to get my hands dirty. I will never come close to this intertwined Truth of Nothing and Everything by crossing a bridge and gazing dreamily into the gap below.

A scenic outlook is exactly that.

I would like to think that thought is cohesive and coherent within or without corporeal attachment.

I would like to think that pure, unencumbered, unattached thought is Light; and Energy.

If this is so, the closest an individual entity, living in this world, can come to an inkling of an understanding of this concept of pure thought, is through dreams.

"Have you ever dreamed without the physical senses of sight or sound? Or touch, or smell, or taste? Have you ever dreamed as if the empirical corporeality of this world did not exist?"

"Oh the wonderful thinks it can think!"

But without a corporeal attachment, thought cannot act upon itself.

But within a corporeal attachment, thought has placed limitations upon itself.

Is thought somehow attracted to a physical entity? Like metal shavings to a magnet?

Or, is thought a byproduct of the senses? Like seeds sprouting from the Earth.

Once the bond of corporeal attachment is broken, does thought simply die?

Or, is it possible that once that bond of corporeal attachment is broken, thought lives on? Perhaps still cohesive and definable; or perhaps it becomes fragmented and pliable, ultimately blending (and/or dancing) with other thought to a level of overwhelming incoherence?

If thought can exist beneath or beyond the realm of consciousness, (as in dreams), then it feels logically intuitive---(i.e. a smaller leap)---that thought (as Energy) can exist beyond corporeal attachment.

This nonsensory thought has been represented in dreams by nonvisible constructs, (some interpreted as of geometric origin), against a backdrop of nonvisible Light and Dark.

This concept of nonsensory thought, is, perhaps, wishful thinking...

This concept of nonsensory thought, is, strangely, comforting...

This concept of nonsensory thought, must, (and will), remain, nonvisible...

This concept of nonvisible, nonsensory thought, creates, some, discomfort...

Discomfort with this concept of nonvisible, nonsensory thought, creates an urge, to explain...

Discomfort with this concept of nonvisible, nonsensory thought, is necessary, for, respectful, uncertainty...

The redundancy (of nonvisible, nonsensory, and nondefinable) is a necessary reminder.

Thought (as thought) can exist beyond corporeal attachment, and remain cohesive and coherent,  through the memory of others, and through the written word.

Memory is faulty.

Cohesive, coherent thought existing beyond corporeal attachment as written word, while more reliable than memory, remains a minimum of one (interpretive) step removed from the original thought, which in turn is limited by its origin within corporeal attachment.

It appears logical that cohesive, coherent thought must be definitively represented by tangible realities within the framework of corporeal attachment.

Therefore it feels logically intuitive that if thought (as Energy) does exist beyond corporeal attachment, it must emerge as fragmented and pliable, ultimately blending (and/or dancing) with other thought to a level of overwhelming incoherence.

...Perhaps to a frenzied level of overwhelming incoherence.

Unless, of course, there is another framework beyond corporeal attachment within which thought as Energy is able to remain cohesive and able to reestablish coherence.

But if this is the case, I have no conceivable way, within my current framework of corporeal attachment, to coherently represent this mythical framework.

Which brings us back to overwhelming incoherence.

Within my current framework of corporeal attachment, my responsibility is to my current framework of corporeal attachment. To expend effort toward making sense of overwhelming incoherence is nonsense.

If there is another framework beyond corporeal attachment, I cannot believe that it would require extreme ritual divisiveness for admittance.

If there is another framework beyond corporeal attachment, I believe active and universally productive thought within my current framework of corporeal attachment will ultimately determine admittance or rejection; (if indeed, there is a culling).

If there is not another framework beyond corporeal attachment, I believe active and universally productive thought within my current framework of corporeal attachment will ultimately determine if my thought (as thought) will exist beyond corporeal attachment, and remain cohesive and coherent.

To be effective, active and universally productive thought must be singularly defined by each individual.

I do not believe active and universally productive thought to include any efforts toward growth, perpetuation, acceleration or advancement of 1) ignorance, 2) injustice, 3) politics, 4) bureaucracy, 5) inefficiency, 6) consumerism, or 7) unshakable certainty in the face of reasonable, rational disagreement.

I believe active and universally productive thought must include some 1) truthfulness, 2) uncertainty, 3) skepticism, 4) creative tension, and 5) spirituality.

If we were to classify each individual as predominantly a) actively and productively thoughtful (as defined above), b) actively and selfishly (and/or purposefully) hurtful, c) passively selfish, or d) thoughtless, I believe a very large majority of individuals would fall into the last two groups.

I believe many individuals who are actively and selfishly / purposefully hurtful have become very adept at persuading a majority of individuals to be passively selfish and/or thoughtless, by misrepresenting passivity and apathy as comfortable truth. I believe this illusion that comfort is not hurtful, is often accomplished by first deluding oneself; and when put in those terms, I understand why it is an easy sell---even, (or perhaps especially), to oneself.

And because of this widespread delusion, I believe those who are actively and selfishly /purposefully hurtful have more sway over those who are passively selfish or thoughtless, than do those who are actively and productively thoughtful.

When given a choice, the majority choose easy.

I believe this can change.

I believe this must change.

Considerations outside of active and universally productive thought within my current framework of corporeal attachment, are an extraneous luxury; one that I cannot afford.

In any given moment, I must choose the reality of hard work, (within my framework of corporeal attachment), over the speciousness of comfortable truth.

There are many moments in which I make the wrong choice; and there are many moments in which I choose to work hard.

I began this week with a dream. A dream within which there was no sense of sight, or sound; nor touch, or taste, or smell. A dream that encouraged me to ponder thought beyond corporeal attachment. A dream that created a powerful longing for meaning beyond corporeal attachment. I followed the thread of this dream to the conclusion above that I must choose to work hard to fulfill my responsibility to my current framework of corporeal attachment. In many ways, this is sad.

I want to believe that thought is cohesive and coherent within or without corporeal attachment. And perhaps, on some level, I do believe. But I cannot act on overwhelming incoherence; I must act on that which is cohesive and coherent. And I refuse to invent fictions, or to believe myth and legend, for the sake of comfortable truth.

... ... ... ... ...

There are some weeks when I work so hard at thinking, and writing, and walking, and working, and living that when I see my reflection in passing it appears to be writhing in mock pain and yelling "Charlatan!" at an ear-splitting level, while staring into the center of my being with a malicious grin and a dismissive nod. It is late on Thursday night, and I am tired. Perhaps reality will feel somewhat less dubitable in the morning...

... ... ... ... ...

Friday morning: the sun came up and I am reminded of two lines from the song "Lua" by Conor Oberst.

"We might die from medication, but we sure killed all the pain."
"...what was normal in the evening, by the morning seems insane."

It is time to wake up.