What is coming up today is that the ‘other way of being’ which is not all about merely ‘surviving’ is naiveté.
The way I am experiencing it is that ‘surviving’ and the overarching seriousness that is core to this ‘way of being’ is the complete opposite of naiveté. Naiveté is a way out of that predicament, because it is that place BEFORE things got serious, before it all became a grim battle for survival. It is that place where life was playful and carefree.
And I am experiencing this literally as two modes of ‘being’, it depends which way ‘I’ choose to travel. The serious MO is where ‘I’ am instinctively/automatically pulled towards. Therefore in the absence of attentiveness ‘I’ drift into that place each time.
However with attentiveness I can catch myself beginning to travel into ‘seriousness’ again and seeing where it leads I can decide to go into naiveté instead.
This has been bringing up some objections towards living life via naiveté. Objections which revolve around whether I will be able to look after myself without those ‘strong defences’ of constantly being ‘on guard’.
So it seems like a textbook sorta situation haha :
1 - See that where I am currently going is not delivering the goods.
2 - Identify an alternative that does deliver the goods.
3 - Explore both ‘my’ resistance to the way that delivers the goods as well as ‘my’ addiction to the way that does not deliver the goods.
4 - Habituate ‘myself’ towards this other alternative which delivers the goods.
In general as well my understanding of what naiveté is, is beginning to click. I always found naiveté difficult to grasp (probably cos I had none ), was it meant to be some feeling? What exactly is it? It seemed the descriptions on the website were always referring to other things like - artless and then I was wondering what artless was all about .
What I am seeing now experientially is that naiveté is more a way of ‘being’, it is a place inside ‘myself’, a place that I had abandoned a long time ago.
The reason why the words on the website would not click was because naiveté has to be lived to be understood fully. But because I had buried it so deeply within myself I was unable to relate experientially, it was just a bunch of words that pointed to nothing.
It is kinda like the whole feeling good thing and how it can take years to click that what is being spoken about is so damn simple and down to earth. Yet here ‘I’ am with ‘my’ sophisticated formulations on what feeling good is. Kinda like the pope dishing out advice on sexual relations, just what understanding is he proceeding from? Certainly not experiential!
Feeling good is what I see in my little brother when he is running about squeeling and having a good time with his toys, and naiveté too of course.
But the problem is that ‘my’ socially conditioned mind has to make everything so damn sophisticated (aka complicated), make everything into some intellectual dilemma. In doing so I blind myself to such simple things as feeling good, naiveté, sincerity. ‘I’ am looking for formulas for things that come from a place that has nothing to do with formulas and intellectualisations. No wonder a farm boy was the one to eventually crack all this.