Some teachings tell us that the human condition is and always will be a state of duality and that we suffer due to our attachments. So letting go relieves suffering. Yet evolution or evolving implies change. Change is life itself, persistent, intelligent and underlies everything. I understand the concept of, even the necessity of accepting “WHAT IS” sometimes, particularly that which is outside our “sphere of influence”. At the same time, intentional, purposeful change and evolution require a certain amount of impetus such as suffering or discontent with or rejection of the status quo. Not acceptance. Why would we change what we accept? Unless of course what we accept is not in alighnment with the Laws of the Universe. I understand the value of being disconnected from the outcome, but that also sometimes feels contrary to some of the modern versions of old teachings like the Law of Attraction which would have us be fully committed to, even BE the outcome. Let go or fully commit?
Leave a Reply