Being Meaningful

posted Mar 1, 2015, 6:30 PM by Ricardo Hidalgo


The belief and feeling that pure being or just being is not enough is all too common.  We entertain the sense that for our being to be meaningful, we must do something meaningful, as if being derives its meaning from doing, and without doing anything it is meaningless.  Is this presumption a fact, or merely a presumption based on abstract thought?

When we explore our actual experience it becomes evident that doing is intermittent but being is not.  Doing comes and goes, but being remains.  "I" continues to be whether "I" is doing or not doing, yet the reverse is not so.  No being, no doing!  

In other words, our being, "I" does not derive its meaning from doing.  It's the other way around.  Doing derives its meaning from being.  Doing is "being in action"; being is not "doing at rest".  Our own experience tells us that being does not have to do anything to be meaningful.  Being is inherently meaningful.  It is essentially meaningful just to be, pure being.  

The belief and feeling that pure being or just being is not enough in not based on the reality of our experience.  Rather, it is merely based on a presumption - a presumption that can only be imagined as true by overlooking our actual experience.

See clearly that pure being is absolutely meaningful.  Be knowingly meaningful.  
  
Comments