We’re expected to, “Get over it!” In a time with few acknowledged initiation rituals this traumatic breaking of unity is almost universally accepted as a rite-of-passage.
Why does separation – let’s consider it in any and every form it can take. Why does it create anxiety?
What does this say more generally about the violence, incoherence, perpetuating and propagating throughout our lives?
In Qi Gong, at least in the ad hoc mongrel form I practice, there are three opening phases in our relationship to Qi, to the life force.
I do not approach Qi Gong, or anything in life, from within whatever might pass for a mystical view. I do not willingly bring beliefs to any confrontation with something new. I attempt to maintain as diffuse an intention as I can muster so as to be open to what actually happens – as I perceive it, as it enters my awareness at whatever pace that might be.
This is how I’ve approached the concept of Qi. I have not studied the history of Qi. I don’t theorize – much – as to what it might be. I do recognize, and have always felt some sort of sensation between my hands across a gap. It also seems to connect with certain forms of meditation in which we place our awareness within various parts of our body and move it around. These sensations I have myself felt seem to align with loose concepts of the existence of a field of awareness or of intelligence that is slowly coming to fit my experiences of life and that relate to the work of David Bohm and Rupert Sheldrake on the scientific side, and of Krishnamurti on some other side.
Andrew Taggart has become the first contributing author on Stone Soup. In his first post he looks at the story and responds to the skeptic’s view.
In the end he asks, “How can someone … avoid the fate of the con man?”
I’d like to take a stab at that. I’d like to say the answer is simple, though it’s not likely to please “the skeptic.”
Intention gets in the way of attention. It begins an inexorable drift from what is, and finding ways to engage what is, towards building an edifice of will and illusion upon what is desired.
There is a push to give intention primacy, “We intend, therefore we are!” Yet, before we have any intention, we attend.
This pressure to place will at the center feeds, and is fed by, the Ego’s desire to be in charge. If intention is primal then so is the “I” making that claim. It is the I who is insisting, it is the I who has intentions. Attention is a direct connection with Being by a Being that is integrated with its surroundings. Action arises, including intention, out of that relationship. This is the human predicament: While attention brings forth intention, intention tends to take over and insist it is more important with every miss-step following from there.