I understand completely that I am too introspective

Cherubs:


I have been cautioned about my introspectiveness. I have been counseled (and I think carefully, and with forethought and love) that I must join the world, that I am alone too much in my thoughts.


I think perhaps that all those who council me are quite correct. One cannot sit and contemplate one's navel. Yes, indeedy, I agree.


But dearest cherubs, I ask you this..... who is thinking? Who is thinking? And I ask one more time, who is thinking?

Writers serve a purpose in the world. We sit around during train rides to Boston and we think of stuff. Sometimes, we look around us and make an observance that might, one hopes, be useful to somebody else. Notice that I don't say "everybody" I simply say "somebody". I really don't care two bits if I ever publish a book but I sure do care two bits if I don't influence or communicate with other human beings.


I have several good friends who have encouraged me to write a book. What in the sweet name of heaven would I write about I wonder? My family is indeed, colorful. If I wrote about them, I might risk hurting somebody whom I never would have intended to hurt.


I could write about the things that bother me, confuse me, piss me off, make me happy.... make me happy.... I have to think about the "make me happy thing".


I have declared often to those whom I love and to those perhaps who simply endure me that "happiness is an unproductive state". Do you know when I am completely happy? It's when I am doing absolutely nothing. I am completely happy, in a bubble bath, in a tub that I don't have to clean, sipping a glass of wine that I didn't have to buy, looking at towels on towel warmers that somebody else is paying the electricity bill for, knowing that I will soon wrap myself in those towels.


Happiness is not productive. Agnst is productive. Worry and gnashing of teeth is productive (sometimes). Carefulness, and planning and consideration all are productive...but happiness? Well, to me it really is not conducive to getting anything done.


I believe that our founding fathers guranteed us only the "pursuit of happiness". The pursuit, is all that is guaranteed. The happiness is all a matter of perception.

I pursue my bubble bath. But I know that what I contribute is of value. But nobody is going to say to me "hooray for you Margaret". So who will say that to me, other than myself -- nobody I think.


So back to introspectiviness. I am indeed, introspective, and perhaps I wonder why that is. It is, I think, because I give myself the credit and rely on nobody else to do so. Even if somebody says, nope, you didn't get there or you didn't do what I wanted you to do, I still know that I am a person of worth. I guess I credit a person who sat across from me. in a leather chair-- a woman, my therapist, who saved my life.

I no longer see her on a regular basis, but she saved my life nonetheless, and my gratitude to her knows no bounds.

Today, I went to a gym to begin the process of putting back together my body to match my psyche. And my trainer was another kind of therapist. I could tell that he had compassion and I could tell that he had a sense of humor. I did only 9 pushups in one minute. But I knew that if I made a commitement, those 9 pushups would grow. I remember the feeling of muscles working from another life. Thank you to all my dance teachers for that.

Cherubs, the pursuit of happiness, is a very great pursuit. It is my humble opinion that one should attempt it as best one can, even if it results in lack of production. And please all of you, forgive my introspection because what can one do? I am thinking. I am thinking. I am thinking.

Warmly, and with love, Margaret

The obligatory Easter Blog!

Sweet cherubs:

Because of my group membership in the popular social network LinkedIn, I have been in a dialogue with a minister. Yes, this is me, Margaret, the agnostic, in a dialogue with a minister.

He posed a question to the Learning, Education and Training Professionals group on LinkedIn. The question is as follows: Do you know of an objection to Christianity?

Well, as you might imagine, there were several posts indignantly questioning the relevancy of such a question posted in this particular group. But I decided to reply to him privately. I should tell you that he was actually seeking a way to communicate across many other religions and answer questions and talk about Christianity. Well, I thought that was a noble effort, so I replied. I suggested to him that one cannot debate faith, for the very reason that faith is based on an acceptance that cannot be proved or beaten into another person. Faith just is, you either have it, or you don't. What I did suggest to him is that what I call "churchianity" has caused much ill in the world. (More about that later.) Across a few e-mails, I suggested to him that if one were to have a discussion, one must discuss the similarities across all three Abrahamic religions. It's basically the same story, with different names, in slightly different locations, over approximately 3,000 years.

I also suggested to him that if one were to step back one step further to include the eastern religions, there are still points of similarity. "Everybody be loving and helpful to others; everybody help those less fortunate than yourselves." Goodness gracious, what's wrong with that? It's quite difficult to argue with that, don't you agree?

Back to the evil and disparaging "churchianity". Herein lies the problem. Churches were founded by men (and sometimes women, but mostly men). Once you have a "church" you have a problem. You have a problem because then, somebody starts pointing to a book and saying "it says here in this book that this and such and stuff is true and if you don't believe that, then you are wrong, and not just wrong, you can't be a part of our community".

Well, that is where organized religion and I part company. I explained to the good minister that God and I have a good relationship. I explained that she smiles at me every morning when I look in the mirror (I expect that statement may have given him some pause). But I also explained that once you say "it says here in this book" that I believe one is automatially wrong. The discussion of right and wrong must be avoided. There is no right and there is no wrong. There just is dogma and stories and the stuff of humans. It's humans that made religion. God had nothing to do with it.

Finally, I suggested to our friend the minister, that in order to break out of the evils of "churchianity" he consider respect. Okay the Christians believe this, the Jews believe this, the Muslims believe this and the Buddhists, believe this. So what? Everybody's beliefs are okay, and everybody's non-beliefs are okay. You can't convince anybody, but you can share ideas. You can share ideas as long as you do not feel the need to "convince" anybody. Faith and convincing are an anathma to one another. My ex-mother in law is a devout Christian. I learned to get along with her when I stopped beating her with my intellectual approach. As I have said before, faith cannot be proved nor can it be repudiated. When we would talk, I simply smile and say, "your faith must be a great comfort to you". I was not patronizing her, but I was trying to say in a sense, "I"m okay and you're okay". I won't get on the band wagon, but neither will I imply that you're on the wrong band wagon. I just, simply, have no idea.

To me, it's okay not to know. Sometimes, I think, we were not meant to actually "know". Jeepers creepers, there's a lot of quotation marks in this post!

Thanks as always for listening dearest cherubs.

Blessed Be and Happy Easter, Passover, ummm not sure what the Muslims and Buddhists do this time of year.

Margaret