Mutuality of being with and inquiry

I keep noticing a mutuality between the practices of being with whatever arises (especially emotions) and of inquiry into beliefs.

Being with allows for reduced resistance to what arises, which in turn leads to a disidentification with the belief that created the resistance in the first place. And this makes it easier, and more inviting, to inquire into that story.

Being with ==> (reduced identification with resistance + belief in story) + easier inquiry into story.

And inquiry into beliefs leads to reduced identification with the story creating the resistance and reduced identification with the resistance itself, which in turn leads to an easier being with of whatever arises.

Inquiry ==> (reduced identification with resistance + story that created it) + easier being with of whatever arises.

Both allows the stories involved to be there as before, and also its effects of resistance, emotions, and so on. And both allows for a disidentification with all of that. The story and its effects becomes a third person he/she/it, arising as anything else, rather than a first person I, taken as a life and death matter. Identification goes out of it, so we are not so caught up in the content of the story anymore, or of fighting the Other created by the story including the effects of the story.

And since there is less drama and less being caught up in stories, this makes it easier to be who we take ourselves to be (a separate self), and also easier for Ground to notice itself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.