Still thinking about yesterday’s post on what is important and being able to build your life around the answer. I said “my spirituality is most important….my relationship to spirit trumps all other relationships.”
I didn’t realize that until I typed it. Now I’m wondering about the choice of the word “Spirit”. The word comes from Latin meaning “breath”. Breath is certainly our invisible source of aliveness.
How can you have a relationship with aliveness? All religions and spiritual teachers mention an invisible unknown mystery to life and give it some sort of name. We all know that the names are endless for that which cannot be named. I guess Aliveness is as good a name as any, it doesn’t make your mind wrap around an object or make it personal.
It seems the only way I can have a meaningful relationship with Aliveness is to treat it like any other relationship that is important to me. Be attentive, listen, nurture it, don’t ignore it because of the constant bombardment of thoughts, appreciate it…..love it.
The Retired Seeker 
Does aliveness need relationship; and if so, with what? Is aliveness best not left alone to be aware of itself?
Thanks for replying. It doesn’t seem that aliveness needs relationship but the other way around. Aliveness needs nothing. I have heard the pointer of awareness being aware of itself and I kind of get that but still not clear. I guess that’s to help realize the Oneness of it all….
Yet what is this thing that needs the relationship with aliveness? Is it not in fact none other than an aspect of that same aliveness, one which we regard as the issuances of selfhood, or self-entity? As selfhood is an aspect of aliveness, is it possible for there to be any such relationship? The seeker’s task is to realise the seeker’s own redundancy is it not?
I agree that it is that sense of aliveness having a relationship with itself. Indeed the seeker’s task would be to realize this. I just keep forgetting. 😏
Lovely dialogue Hariod and Retired Seeker. The ‘thing’ that needs relationship with aliveness turns out to be the only impediment to … relationship! By which I mean an intimacy with aliveness that has no subject or object. So there’s no “with”, actually. 🙂
I appreciate your comment miriam louisa. I’m realizing that When ‘I’ can get out of the way…the ‘with’ disappears.