hopelesshappiness.com

I remember the title; and I believe I had an outline in my head, but that was yesterday. I recall I was enjoying the unique satisfaction of the day's first jolt of caffeine and the way you can sometimes feel your nerves stand at attention and respectfully nod, or (with a particularly powerful shot) even salute. I experience a similar physical reaction at the end of my mid-summer, 5 mile, sweat-soaked walk, when that first slug of cranberry juice hits my gullet. And even during the walk itself, there are moments of astonishment and wonder that begin as physical exhilaration and rapidly blaze frenzied trails through my mind, exciting consciousness and teasing hidden intuition, (almost) creating an ineffable insight into... ...something... ...or somewhere... ...I cannot quite grasp, what seemed a moment ago within easy reach - the esoteric nature of beingness peeking out from the unknowable depths of... ...I cannot remember where; or what.

And perhaps this is what I meant yesterday morning by 'The Happiness of Forgetting' - that if I did remember, I might go blind, or crazy; from Truth, or Perfection. But if I am supposed to forget, why do I so badly want to remember? And why do I keep searching? Do I always forget what I am supposed to forget? I'm sure I can't remember everything I've forgotten, and when I do remember something, I'm not sure if I was supposed to remember it or if it should have remained forgotten. I am now trying to remember something I remembered, that I know now should have stayed forgotten; but I can't remember.

This push (of forgetting) and pull (of remembering) is a synchronized paroxysm of intricate uncouplings colored by the past and balanced by the future and occasionally disrupted by a moment - it is difficult to string these moments together; Life interferes. Innocence is lost in the past and in the future. Innocence is found in the wonder of a single moment. Innocence is forgotten by remembering and remembered by forgetting. Remembering and forgetting though, corrupt innocence. I believe it is the dance - (the confluence of remembering and forgetting) - that we must forget. We cannot just remember to forget, or forget to remember; we must (in a given moment) lose track of remembering AND forgetting. Innocence is fleeting. Innocence is momentary.

In this moment (as I am writing these words) the dog is barking and I have remembered that I forgot to remember to bring him in out of the heat. Life has intruded and I must go get him in and I should remember to give him a cookie and check his water and now wonder if I should give him his medicine but then will have to remember to tell my wife when she gets home and I am afraid I will forget and she may forget to ask me before she gives it to him because she knows I usually forget about his medicine and I know I should remember it better but if I do then I may have muddied the waters to a point where (because of the past, in the future) neither of us will remember to ask each other and we will both forget to give it to him so I believe it is okay if I remember to forget to remember.

Now I have forgotten the point...

...Oh Yes. After reviewing the thoughts above it appears I should change the title of this post from 'The Happiness of Forgetting' to 'The Happiness of Forgetting the Dance of Remembering'.

Some see forgetting as an impairment, or a loss; and in some circumstance, it may be. But by forgetting we also create an opportunity; we open up a bit of consciousness that allows for choice. Utilizing the law of diminishing returns, once regret or reminiscence overtakes learning, I must let go of that bit of past for the sake of the moment. And when Life again intrudes, opening the door and inviting the past back in, I must remember to balance it with the future and be alert for the next momentary opportunity. And when it arrives I must remember to choose a growth opportunity such as physical exertion, or study, or art, or mindfulness, or questioning, or compassion. It is interesting that we may see forgetting as a loss, yet we often seek ways to 'forget' by choosing mindless, lazy pursuits such as consumerism, or passive, gratuitous entertainment (e.g. reality TV), or drinking, or conforming, or judging; (I speak from personal experience, as my Humanity dictates and as we all can).

One's Humanity demands a certain amount of forgetting.

Forgetting is what allows us to wake up each morning and continue to move forward despite the pain of guilt, and sadness, and loss, and anger, and physicality, and inadequacy, and loneliness.

I doubt more than I know.
I stumble more than I flow.
I rebuild more than I build.
I forget more than I remember.

A key component of compassion is to constructively help others overcome their problems and to actively wish them free from suffering. In recent weeks I have dedicated large chunks of written thought to compassion and I have encouraged compassion toward those whose choices may negatively impact others. I have additionally went so far as to claim, that in part, each of us as individual beings must take some responsibility for other's choices and any resulting impact, harmful or otherwise.

I have found resistance to both of the thoughts presented above, so this week I want to look at two questions that challenge the ideas of 'Compassion for the Oblivious' and 'Communal Responsibility':

1. If compassion is intended to help free another from their suffering, or at the least ease their suffering, how is this applicable to an individual freely choosing and acting in ways that harm others, yet is ignorant of that harm and/or feels they are working for a greater good, thus nullifying or mitigating their own personal suffering? In other words, if one does not perceive oneself as suffering, is compassion for this individual deserving, necessary, or helpful? Corollary Question - In the case of a greater good, how do we determine 'acceptable' casualties?
2. How do we show (and justify) a communal responsibility for current circumstance (both harmful and beneficial) in a practical way that will encourage more widespread compassion which in turn will drive mutually beneficial learning and growth?

1. Compassion for the Oblivious:

In Question #1 above I did not include one doing harm due to apathy or for the sake of doing harm, because I believe these individuals (sociopathic or evil/psychopathic) are a very small minority that absolutely deserve compassion, and may more easily elicit it than the majority. This majority of individuals doing harm are (as stated above) either ignorant/unaware and/or misguided (typically) by groupthink leading one to an easy comfort. This comfort may encourage and perpetuate apathy but most individual sheep are not sociopathic; (though a flock of sheep as a whole may exhibit those tendencies). So, if for purposes of this post we exclude the minority as defined above, we are left with working at easing the suffering of individuals whose choices result in harm, yet they appear not to suffer, and yet again they appear to be capable of rational choice. My Humanity makes this effort difficult.

To find compassion:
First, I must realize that all individuals are equally deserving of the right to attenuate suffering. Then I must acknowledge that all individuals suffer (as that is the nature of one's Humanity) regardless of public persona. And though I have a tendency to exaggerate the importance of my personal suffering (again, the nature of my Humanity) and diminish the importance of another's suffering, I must remind myself that my suffering is no more (or less) elevated in standing than the personal suffering of any other individual being. This is a very hard concept to assimilate, needing (if not constant) consistent reminders (awareness) and persistent thoughtful action (practice) for one to truly live it. (I believe for many of us there are times when it is more difficult to remember that our personal suffering is 'no less' important than another's; the equality must run both ways.)

Once I have acknowledged and begun to absorb this concept of equality, it is more obvious why this compassion is necessary and how it is (or may be) helpful. First it is necessary for my well-being. If I do not work at this compassion, I will at best become an apathetic ignorant sheep, and/or at worst feel anger, hatred, and a divisiveness that will only perpetuate/worsen the status quo. And though this may thwart an adversary, it will do more harm to my personal physical and mental well-being. Second it is necessary for the well-being of others in two ways: (a) on some level, compassion will always find a way through and have some impact, even on the oblivious; and (b) it is the first step toward an application of communal responsibility that will gradually and ultimately lead to advanced mutual learning and growth. But we cannot even consider this sort of communal or global beneficence without widespread individual responsibility.

Based on these thoughts, the corollary question ("In the case of a greater good, how do we determine 'acceptable' casualties?") becomes somewhat irrelevant in that the greatest 'greater good' is to strive for communal responsibility which will leave individual suffering to those numerous factors that impact outside the bounds of individual choice. Anyone who believes in any 'greater good' specific to any individual or group numbering less than the global community of sentient beings is delusional. There are no 'acceptable' casualties. These are strong statements and I know many (if not most) may consider this position unrealistic, but I believe we must start down this long road, and 'Compassion for the Oblivious' is the first step. Without this first step, 'Communal Responsibility' will not be possible.

2. Communal Responsibility:

When first confronted with a concept of communal responsibility, one might think it 'Universal Consciousness BS' in that it encourages one to recognize the connections between one's own personal choice, other's choices, and numerous (in-the-moment) factors beyond individual control and across all cultures and systems of belief. I maintain that it is not as much a universal consciousness (though I see how it could be mistaken as such) as it is an unavoidable interdependence. Like the proverbial ripples on a pond or the butterfly effect, I cannot help but be empirically impacted and in turn take some small bit of responsibility for other's choices, the same as (and because) others are empirically impacted by and minimally responsible for my choices; this circularity is indeed unavoidable. (In a previous post I ascribed a parallel of 'literally feeling a loved one's pain' to aid in understanding this connection.) Focusing on the everyday empirical perspective and avoiding the transcendental or spiritual perspective, may help to keep the BS factor at bay because it is more practical and it is less subject to debate or disagreement. But as stated in the previous section, if one cannot actively accept (through acknowledgement, consistent awareness, and persistent practice) 'Compassion for the Oblivious' then it will be difficult to understand and move on to 'Communal Responsibility.'

Two weeks ago I narrowed my definition of 'free will' down even further, from 'conscious, quantifiable effort that impacts' to 'the empirical importance of conscious choice as it applies to an individual being' (and today I am adding) 'in the practical construct of day-to-day living.' Without rehashing that entire post (Quantum Happiness): as an empirical practicality I (as an individual being) must often think, act, and react as an intrinsically, absolute entity even though an intrinsically, absolute entity (in this world) is not possible. This Human delusion of 'me' is practical and (to this point in our evolution) even necessary, but we must recognize it as exactly that - an empirically practical delusion - and begin to incorporate the forward-thinking practicality of Communal Responsibility into our empirical existence.

I understand how one may feel the need of an anchor in the comforting framework of a 'me' or of an 'us' - it is more than a bit frightening to float objectively free; but it is necessary and practical if we are to advance compassionately and grow exponentially. It may even - (some day, down the road) - be necessary and practical if this world is to survive.

There is one other practicality we must consider. If 'Compassion for the Oblivious' is the first step toward 'Communal Responsibility', and if 'Communal Responsibility' is necessary and practical (perhaps even for our survival), it is illogically impractical for anyone to wait for someone else to begin. The work will most certainly not be easy, the culmination will be far, far down the road, and perfection is (as always) likely unattainable, but the reward for beginning this effort can be felt now... in this moment... and in this moment... and in this moment...

Free-Floating, Circular Compassion:

This week I read about the beauty of the tulip (in 'The Botany Of Desire' by Michael Pollan) as interpreted by its Form, Contrast, and Variation both within a single flower and within a field of flowers:

• Form - shape and structure, symmetry and organization, pattern and placement;
• Contrast - color and luminance and juxtaposition;
• Variation - generational change and transformation and elaboration.

These aspects of beauty project nicely onto free-floating, circular compassion:

• the shape and structure of an individual being and our global community;
• the symmetry and organization found in the shared circularity of compassion;
• the pattern and placement of individual and communal choices made for the beneficence of all sentient beings;
• the color of character;
• the luminance of culture;
• the juxtaposition of striking differences side-by-side;
• the generational advancement of mutual learning and growth;
• the gradual transformation of me-us-them to we as one whole consisting of color, luminance, and juxtaposition; and
• the enlightened elaboration of exoteric goodness, inner peace, and global tranquility.

John Keats said, "Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty."

Free-Floating, Circular Compassion is the Beauty of Truth and the Truth of Beauty.

"In wildness is the preservation of the world" ... "How near to good is what is wild!" ... "Life consists with wildness. The most alive is the wildest." -From Henry David Thoreau's essay "Walking". Thoreau wrote this essay and delivered it as a lecture multiple times in the 1850's. At the time, he was speaking specifically of our westward expansion. Throughout the history of the world we have continued to find new frontiers to explore and conquer. And in each new expansion we have found wildness to tame.

In my lifetime I have heard that 'Space is the final frontier.' I have seen and experienced varying degrees of wildness from city streets to the workplace to the classroom to the boardroom to the bayou to the rural heartland. We are domesticating disease and particles and waves and brain cells and plant genetics and the human genome and doing our best to domesticate nature. We are born to be wild and we sow our wild oats, yet we rein in excessive or harmful wild urges and we encourage our children to be good. We avoid fear and its resulting wildness by simultaneously believing in magic and striving for certainty. And in this sense 'wildness is the preservation of the world' - without it we would wither.

Not only is wildness good in that it encourages and motivates progressive forward movement, but it is intrinsically good because it serves as a reminder that our nature is of nature and in that sense, primitive. This reminder demands an Active Humility. We are not so refined that we can set ourselves 'above' nature. We cannot close the door on nature. To be civilized is an evolutionary refinement; it is not a surgical severing of our relationship with wildness.

I am most alive in the midst of wildness. At the beginning of this dance I may tend to seduce with reckless bravado but as the romance progresses I tend to enchant with sweet promises and soft whispers. No matter my methods, I cannot lose sight of my own image reflected back at me; I am of this wildness... ...and this wildness is of me - and these two points of reference are not the same thing.

I have been spat out into this circumstance, a product of tens of thousands of evolutionary years of taming the wildness of the world.

But what of the wildness within?

I have spoken of refinement and culture and a civilized world in which we enjoy a larger diversity of choice and a greater likelihood of comfort and safety than ever before.

But what of the inner peace and tranquility that comes from Goodness?

This inner frontier is still to be assimilated. This wildness within is still to be absorbed.

(And as I consider these words, I am thinking that perhaps it would benefit us to take a step back and instead of working at conquering and taming the wildness of the world, where we are still able we should instead assimilate, absorb, and concentrate its power for an interdependent good.)

To be clear: the wildness within that I refer to is as pervasive and invasive as the wildness of the world. When I say "I am of this wildness" I refer to the wildness of the world outside and beyond my purview. When I say "This wildness is of me" I refer to the wildness shared within all of us together. Just as the outer world can be seen as a whole, so too can the inner nature of humanity. Last week I pointed out that because not one individual being amongst us can be considered intrinsically absolute, and because we are each impacted by a combination of (a) personal choices, (b) the choices of other individuals, and (c) numerous other factors beyond individual control, our esoteric nature cannot possibly be exclusive to one individual being; it must be shared by all and it must be as pervasive and invasive as is all human interaction. This means that one individual's harmful wildness, in part, belongs to each and every individual being; as does one individual's compassion.

The wildness within includes untamed compassion. I propose that with awareness and practice, each and every individual being, one at a time, has the potential to assimilate and absorb that wild compassion, focusing it in a way that will ultimately create a communal inner reality, that will in turn positively impact the wildness of the world.

Henry David Thoreau also said, "Our ancestors were savages." I propose that our descendants in centuries to come will say the same of us. Yet we do not want to lose touch with the energy found in the wildness of the world or in our wildness within - "In wildness is the preservation of the world."

The apparatus that defines me is typically not of my choosing; even when it is. I believe this to be true of each of us. Those who believe they have created or are creating, controlling, defining, or leading an apparatus are not choosing its ultimate incarnation because there is no ultimate incarnation; there are simply too many, never-ending variables.

I cannot conceive of a single, indivisible apparatus that is not impacted by and conjoined with an ever-changing multitude of other hierarchies, networks, systems, and miscellaneous mechanisms all filled with cogs, gears, pumps, wheels, clockworks, sprockets, fittings, trappings, and various instruments of entanglement. And it is these complexities that allow an apparatus to take on meaning, influence, qualities, and characteristics beyond those originally intended. Within any multi-faceted apparatus, individual control is an illusion. Welcome to contemporary quantum acculturation.

One may choose to see this social milieu in its empirical (particle) form, or in its transcendental (wave) form, or one may choose to utilize both perspectives, though one or the other will predominate in any given moment.

Given a circumstance, one may choose to tint their outlook with reflective aviator glasses (an esoteric spirituality), dark shades (an experiential reality), or rose-colored goggles (an exoteric stability). I typically have on my dark shades, though I understand how some may see me in (and perhaps through) rose-colored goggles. In moments of solitude, (and every chance I have), I reach for my reflective aviator glasses.

This concept of unavoidable interdependence may be most easily explained by applying it to an individual human being. We like to think of our self as an independent, autonomous, intrinsically absolute being, yet we also divide our self into a physical body and a thinking mind. We then go on to add an emotional and a spiritual component, and within each of these we can further divide into ever smaller components with each one having some impact. For example the body has a heart, lungs, a spine, nerves, bones, skin, blood, etc, etc, etc. If one has a heart attack, this faulty pump changes not only the physical component and outlook, but also impacts the mind, the emotions, and potentially one's spiritual outlook. If I were truly an independent, autonomous, intrinsically absolute being, my immutable nature would prohibit the pump failure, the resulting grinding and gnashing of gears, cogs, and wheels, and the ultimate wrenching, driving, clanging cacophony of repair work. I am not self-enclosed and unchanging. I am a multi-faceted apparatus, and as such, when I am joined with other multi-faceted individual beings into a larger conglomerate apparatus, individual control is an illusion.

In multiple posts I have advocated for free will, with my most recent concept or definition being "the conscious output of work / effort that can be quantified and has impact." Using this definition, the concept of free will appears to easily align with the concept of unavoidable interdependence, with the key commonality being 'impact' - (our choices have impact). But upon further consideration I now better understand opponents of free will. We have to ask - How can a conglomerate of ever-changing components (with each component made up of smaller, ever-changing components) possibly claim an absolute, unadulterated accord across the entirety of its constituency? Even with the narrow definition of 'conscious, quantifiable effort that impacts', free will has lost some teeth. This does not negate or even diminish the importance of choice and from an empirical (dark shades particle) perspective free will as conscious choice is still a valid consideration that stands up to scrutiny. But now that we have followed the flow from conscious output to impact, it appears that no matter the make-up of the apparatus (individual being, global quantum culture, or points between and beyond), from a transcendental (reflective wave) perspective there is no free will because there is no indivisible, intrinsically absolute apparatus. As an individual human being I am constantly driven forward by a combination of my choices, the choices of other individual human beings, and numerous other factors that 'in the moment' are beyond my control; and because I cannot change the past or predict/control the future, this is more consistent with the illusory nature of individual control as described in the concept of unavoidable interdependence.

But this is not what I want to focus on.

I want to look at the backflow or rebound once an apparatus has been impacted:

• When impacted, if an apparatus (individual being or otherwise) reacts as if it is an intrinsically absolute entity, Pride Rules! (See the June 7 post and then the June 14 post.)
• When impacted, if an apparatus (individual being or otherwise) responds as if it is an integral part of a greater (indefinite, perhaps infinite) whole, Compassion presides.

So this prompts me to ask how do I (or am I even able to) function within this framework of a greater whole that excludes a concept of 'me'? If we indeed only exist within the framework of an apparatus (individual being or otherwise), then in order to function I think I must give special consideration to the apparatus formerly known as 'Me'. But in so doing Pride has reared its ugly head because simply saying "formerly known as me" makes me feel like a Rock Star, and the 'special consideration' does not feel compassionate. But is it avoidable.

I need a day...

So if I pursue the goal of responding as if I am an integral part of a much greater whole, yet the nature of my humanity encourages me to react as an intrinsically absolute entity, Compassion and Pride will clash. I cannot lose my humanity. Pride will subsist; but I do believe that through Awareness and Practice I can reduce Pride's subsistence to poverty levels.

In the last two posts (June 7 and June 14) I have considered the kinship between Active Humility and Compassion. I also questioned how one can have Compassion for another whose Pride manifests in ways that negatively impact others. This week I realize I have no choice; (the real question is 'How can I not have Compassion'?). If I speak of 'one' and 'another' or 'me' and 'you' or 'us' and 'them' I am perpetuating belief in the existence of intrinsically absolute entities and furthering the tyranny of Pride. Since an intrinsically absolute entity is not possible, I have no choice but to perceive the Pride of another apparatus (individual being or otherwise) as belonging in part to (the apparatus formerly known as) me; just as I have no choice but to literally feel the pain of a loved one who is suffering. And if this apparatus formerly known as me actively accepts that responsibility, the result will be compassion.

My Humanity is rebelling. In fact it is screaming at the top of its lungs, and though I won't repeat much of what it is saying, the gist is that "Even if you are on the right track, you will remain a minority!" and "You must stand up for yourself!" And I know there will be moments and possibly even days when I agree; but with continued awareness and practice I believe I will more and more consistently respond as if this apparatus formerly known as me is an integral part of a much greater whole.

Last week I encouraged an active humility defined as confident uncertainty, and further typified by one who a) knows what and when they don't know, b) readily acknowledges how little they do know, c) is truthful with oneself and with others, and d) works at seeking possible answers. I later claimed it was an important post for me in that it exposed the insubstantiality of my arrogance, which is a primary ascendant of my anger, which in turn is one of my favorite forms of expression. For many, many years I have masq-paraded anger as 'Passion' and believed it to be justified based on perceived results; and (as I said last week) I have masq-paraded specious arrogance and/or self-deprecating insignificance or inadequacy as humility, and delusionally believed myself to be truly humble. Now I am suggesting that anger is not productive and false humility is not truthful - no matter the embroidery.

...I may never write again.

Seriously, with these thoughts I am wondering how I will fuel my fire? Where will I find inspiration? The hyper-conscious act of writing will force me to be consistent with the direction of my beliefs. My anger will continue to speak to me, but if I am sincere about adding active humility to my personal disposition I am now compelled to find an alternative to my normal tirades. I must work at responding (not reacting) to all the (large and small) detritus of Life with humility, and inherent in this new practice of confident uncertainty is an expectation only of myself - I can no longer demand of others. I cannot demand an end to Ignorance, Fear of Failure, Quiescence, Conformity, Arrogance, Indifference, Enmity, Narcissism, or Contempt. I cannot even demand an active humility from others. I am sure that my humanity will dictate some continued effort to persuade (as I just did), but it appears the most influential weapon left in my arsenal is compassion. This new math (Humility - Arrogance = Compassion) is disturbing, but regardless of how I manipulate the equation, the result does not change.

I am not merely disturbed, but very uncertain and a bit frightened. How am I going to have compassion for the Ignorance of the bureaucrat? Or the Arrogance and Indifference of the CEO? Or the Conformity and Quiescence of the masses? Or the unforgiving Enmity and Contempt flowing from 'Them'?

I need a day to think... ...And maybe a beer...

...No beer last night... ...but plenty of thought.

When we talk about Pride or Arrogance we are talking about the essence of one's humanity, or that which makes me, me. Even in its gentlest incarnation any recognition of 'Me' is based on a selfish Pride. This is unavoidable, and (perhaps because it is unavoidable) this is okay. But if we strip away that Arrogance even momentarily, we can connect with an ineffable sense of 'We' and it is here that we are able to intuit compassion as the fundamental affective force capable of moving us forward. When we are in the midst of Life though, it is difficult to lose the Arrogance of 'Me' inherent in the experience.

I have found that in some circumstances I can detect this sense of 'We' for more than just a moment. Ironically, this occurs most commonly when I am alone; listening to music, or walking, or cooking, or (occasionally) practicing mindfulness techniques. I say techniques because I am not an habitual adherent of meditation - (see the subtext below: My Mechanics of Mindfulness); but a common thread through all of these solitary endeavors (and supported by my written thought throughout this site) is being 'in the moment'. In two different posts (here and here) from April of this year I considered meditation as a potential aid to Happiness. And now this week I am considering Compassion as an alternative to passion... (sorry - I meant anger) ...which again brings me into the realm of meditation and mindfulness.

As a realist concerned about keeping my edge, finding inspiration, and fueling my fire, I can attest that Pride / Arrogance (in my case, Anger) has a destructive component that must be held in check; and this is how mindfulness has helped me in recent years. Additionally it is this mindfulness that has led me to recognize and identify this 'sense of We' and its accompanying quilt of Compassion. So, though it does not change the result of the equation, perhaps it is better written as (Pride / Active Humility) + Mindfulness = Compassion.

I should not punish myself or others for being Human. Instead I should (in the moment) cut my Pride with a healthy dose of Confident Uncertainty and blanket the circumstance with Compassion. As always this is far easier said than done, but I am sure the mere fact that I have verbalized my intent has reduced the anxiety and decreased the trembling fear of the bureaucrat, the CEO, the masses, and 'Them'.

My Mechanics of Mindfulness:

Having learned from the past, I live in the moment, for the future. This reminder has been the cornerstone of my mindfulness practice for some years now. It sounds like I am dragging in extraneous consideration (the past and the future) and perhaps at the beginning I was. But, (without getting too mystical or magical), this mantra now serves to bring me back to the moment when necessary, by simply reminding me that I am drawing in my Life experience (breathe in) to progressively move forward (breathe out). Unless one is cloistered, there is no way one can stay in the moment full time, and there is no magical formula or method or mantra to keep one in the moment; we will stray because Life happens.

I have read that meditation has become more and more mainstream in recent years with organizations as diverse as General Mills, Proctor and Gamble, the U.S. Forest Service, schools, prisons, and the United States Marine Corps utilizing mindfulness to channel stress and increase effectiveness. Additionally studies are showing that health benefits include restorative improvement in depression, drug addiction, smoking cessation, ADHD, asthma, irritable bowel syndrome, and many other disorders.

The basic steps of meditation are (1) to sit comfortably, (2) to focus all of your attention on your breath, and (3) when your attention wanders (which it will) forgive yourself and peacefully come back to your breath. For the uninitiated (which includes myself) it sounds very unproductive; yet based on my mindfulness practice, which is typically not planned but utilized in the heat of a moment or in the tranquility of a moment, I have learned to bring myself back to the moment, and I have learned it is much more effective than getting caught up in (and swept away with) the moment.

So in many ways I suppose I do practice meditation, just not in the traditional sense. As I am becoming more and more aware, I definitely feel the advantages of exercising the mind in this manner.

Having learned from the past (breathe in), I live in the moment (hold), for the future (breathe out).

...The Past (in) - The Moment (hold) - The Future (out)...

...The Past (in) - The Moment (hold) - The Future (out)...

...The Past (in) - The Moment (hold) - The Future (out)...