I want to prioritise meditation, movement, healthy eating etc..
There are two ways of looking at this.
The first and most common: “I really should be meditating each day.. “ – conditioned.
The second, rarer: “I wonder what I would experience if I committed to this practice that I feel might serve me for a period…?” – Method of inquiry.
The first option is common. It’s a driver for a lot of people to start exercising or change any habit.
The second is through inquiry. There is no “should.” It’s a gamble, or a trade. You are running the experiment.
The difference is when we have the “should” we have the conflict. We are doing it for someone else (society). If we miss a day, we become the square peg that isn’t fitting in the round hole that we want it to. We get frustrated.
A method of inquiry allows us to be rational in setting up our experiment – our hypothesis, method (or practice, including timing) and potentially a reward and accountability system. We also are setting ourselves up to review and peer review the results more effectively. Did it work? Is it worth continuing?
So, if there’s something that is potentially worth engaging in, worth going deeper but seems to hit a road block, step aside, come at it from a new angle. Through our own inquiry (and getting others on board with the experiment – especially those who may benefit) we can find things fall into place a lot easier.
