Unstable

So many of them talk about non-attachment. Philosophies and religions, that is. Then, of course, since most of us have very limited understanding of what that means, we come up with our own descirption about it. This description becomes a cool and hip idea, and we strut around impressing ourselves and our friends with it. When we go to bed, the experience of our days hasn't been affected much at all, but we did have an interesting conversation with the guy to our right.

Then there is the Buddhist tale vaguely recalled at this moment about a man falling off a horse, which could be interpreted as bad just to learn that, as a result, he was not asked to fight in a war, and then something else happens to demonstrate that a situation can be both good and bad and neither good or bad. It simply is.

Now back to what this piece is about. Still having no operational definition for non-attachment, there is an experience that could demonstrate the meaning of the term. In a course of less than eight hours, the possibilities for the near future have changed not once, not twice, but three times. Each time an opportunity was presented, research and planning and energy to run the two were employed just to switch gears a few hours later, repeating the cycle. Feels like being caught up in a cyclone, dropped to the ground, and picked up once again. A bumpy and exhausting ride ensues. This, appears to be attachment. Grabbing on to one thing as the last and keeping it near and dear as the final page, the final answer, the only way. These experiencial few hours in a day allow for an in-depth glimpse of what non-attachment is not, and that already is progress toward clarity.