The appealing notion of "good enough"

Back in my religious-believing days, I would have viewed this as a sign from God. Now, I just see it as an interesting coincidence. But who knows? Maybe it is a sign from God!

Last week I'd scribbled on a large post-it note some of what Sam Harris had said in a guided meditation of his Waking Up app, then stuck the note next to books that I read every morning before meditating. It quoted Harris as saying:

The goal of meditation is to realize that consciousness as it is, is good enough. Not waiting for something to happen. 

I planned to write about "good enough" today in a churchless post. Since I'd been reading about Zen recently, this morning I picked up a book that I'd set aside during my Zen phase: Question Everything, a collection of brief essays from the New York Times philosophy series.

A bookmark I'd put in Question Everything led me to the next essay that I hadn't read yet. The title that leapt out at me was "The Good-Enough Life" by Avram Alpert. I'll share the passages that I highlighted.

Ideals of greatness cut across the American political spectrum... The desire for greatness also unites the diverse philosophical camps of Western ethics.

Aristotle called for practicing the highest virtue. Kant believed in an ethical rule so stringent not even he thought it was achievable by mortals. Bentham's utilitarianism is about maximizing happiness. Marx sought the great world for all. Modern-day libertarians will stop at nothing to increase personal freedom and profit.

These differences surely matter, but while the definition of greatness changes, greatness itself is sought by each in his own way.

Swimming against the tide of greatness is a counter-history of ethics embodied by schools of thought as diverse as Buddhism, Romanticism, and psychoanalysis. It is by borrowing from D.W. Winnicott, an important figure in the development of psychoanalysis, that we get perhaps the best name for this other ethics: "the good-enough life."

...To fully become good enough is to grow up into a world that is itself good enough, that is as full of care and love as it is suffering and frustration.

From Buddhism and Romanticism we can get a fuller picture of what such a good enough world could be like. Buddhism offers a criticism of the caste system and the idea that some people have to live lives of servitude in order to ensure the greatness of others.

It posits instead the idea of the "middle path," a life that is neither excessively materialistic nor too ascetic. And some Buddhist thinkers, such as the sixth century Persian-Chinese monk Jizang, even insist that this middle life, this good-enough life, is the birthright of not only all humans, but also all of nature as well.

...The Romantic poets and philosophers extend this vision of good-enoughness to embrace what they would call "the ordinary" or "the everyday." This does not refer to the everyday annoyances or anxieties we experience, but the fact that within what is most ordinary, most basic, and most familiar, we might find a delight unimaginable if we find meaning only in greatness.

...Being good enough is not easy. It takes a tremendous amount of work to smile purely while waiting, exhausted, in a grocery line. Or to be good enough to loved ones to both support them and allow them to experience frustration.

And it remains to be seen if we as a society can establish a good-enough relation to one another, where individuals and nations do not strive for their unique greatness, but rather work together to create the conditions of decency necessary for all.

Achieving this will also require us to develop a good-enough relation to the natural world, one in which we recognize both the abundance and the limitations of the planet we share with infinite other life-forms, each seeking its own path toward good-enoughness. 

If we do manage any of these things, it will not be because we have achieved greatness, but because we have recognized that none of them are achievable until greatness itself is forgotten.

I could say more about this subject, but I feel that this blog post is good enough as it is.

Comments

[me]

If good enough isn’t then we’re ALL f’d.

[me]

Let me correct that—if good enough isn’t “GOOD ENOUGH” then we’re ALL fucked.

Thank you.

[Spence Tepper]

"Do no harm."
Hippocrates

"Sometimes doing your best is not enough. You must do what is required."
Winston Churchill

It's s case by case thing.

"Don't let the great become the enemy of the good"

"Don't fear doing your best, fulfilling your potential. Fear coming short of being yourself."

"Take yourself out of it. Do your best and leave the results to God."

"... But at the end of the day, be true to yourself. Did you do your best?"

[Spence Tepper]

Poets.org Logo
Poems
Find and share the perfect poems.

search
search
Dreams
Langston Hughes - 1901-1967

Hold fast to dreams
For if dreams die
Life is a broken-winged bird
That cannot fly.

Hold fast to dreams
For when dreams go
Life is a barren field
Frozen with snow.

Langston Hughes

[Spence Tepper]

'Good enough'
May still require everything you've got. And then some.

[um]

As far as I understand Buddhism is a practice aimed at ending "dukha" en so are all other practices, although they may present themselves other ways.

When Buddha spoke of "dukha"was he addressing that what comes from outside or dit he meant the reaction to what comes from outside.

Is dukha to be defined as "pain inflicted by the outside incidents?!

surrender to what is?
Adaptation to what is?
What is, is good enough as it is?

OR ....

Change what is for the BETTER.
What is, is not good enough as it is.

[Ron E.]

I do like this post. It talks about the “middle path” and “the ordinary” or “the everyday.” It reflects the Zen notion of “nothing special” and “just this” or as S. Batchelor termed it “The everyday sublime.”

For me, being a naturalist and having a naturalist’s outlook (naturalism as science calls it), the ‘everyday’ or ‘just this’ is just what presents itself to my senses (including thoughts) as daily life goes on. There is no need as far as I am concerned to add anything else to nature, to my-self; no need to cloak any of it in mystery or the supernatural. As far as Zen Buddhism is concerned, they may have other definitions of everyday etc., if that’s so then it is beyond me.

I’m fortunate (at the moment!), to be healthy enough and fortunate enough to live in a relatively peaceful country and be surrounded by countryside, and to appreciate nature and life – as it is. I also love some of the Taoist, Zen and Sufi stories and sayings – somehow, they appeal to my nature. I remember the first time I recited the Heart Sutra and the effect the words had, words that rationally made no sense but which must have struck a chord through intuition – again, nothing special as far as I’m concerned.

The last few sentiments expressed in “Question Everything” regarding a “good enough relation” with nature, the world and people is something I’d love to witness, but I’d have to say that we humans are far too caught up with trying to make our lives and the world conform to our ideas and beliefs of achieving “greatness” rather than adopt “good- enough ness”.

[SantMat64]

Could be said that Buddhism boils down to 2 distinct approaches.

1) The self effort to realize satori for oneself, perhaps exemplified in Rinzai Buddhism.

2) Bodhicitta, or the mind (citta) that is aimed at awakening (bodhi), with wisdom and compassion for the benefit of all sentient beings. This is the way championed by the Dalai Lama, or rather, the very long tradition to which he belongs.

Some will see this as a clumsy distinction, but I think the DL's point about Buddhist practice being FOR others and not oneself is worth consideration.

From what I've seen, the practice for the sake of self approach often produces limited positive results. This is true not only for Buddhism but for any religion, or even any advocation.

As Bruce Lee said, "real living is living for others."

[um]

@ Sant Mat

They preach compassion for their own betterment..

[Spence Tepper]

If this is advocacy of the status quo, then it's not the middle way. It's the bottom way.

If this is advocacy of balance of effort, participation in the natural upward movement of growing awareness, compassion and positive change, then it's a good thing.

If this is an excuse for maintaining bad habits that already exist, the downward movement of entropy, disconnection, dismissal of others' lives, that is the natural movement towards death.

Depends upon what we actually label "the Middle Way"...Could just be an excuse for no effort, and lost momentum.

We are all moving, and its an illusion to think we are not.

Are we moving up?
Or down?

The middle way is not static. Change is happening. The middle way is sustainable growth, sustainable effort, gradual but continuous change and effort.

No effort is actually deepening the grooves of old habits, and closing off, little by little, awareness, alertness and responsiveness.

If you look back and what you wrote ten years ago and feel exactly the same, that isn't a good thing.

Because holding the same view isn't static. It is hardening a position and reducing open-minded awareness day by day, year by year. It is calcification, and movement towards death.

The Middle Way should not flatter our ego, our pride, our identity. Those aren't static. They are mental creations.

Anything promoting a static perspective is death.

And even a level of effort, even a level of struggle is part of moving forward. And no effort at all is part of the movement towards death.

The middle, the balance may well be upon a fulcrum far from where you happen to be. Restoring balance for an individual life may require a complete upheaval.

"Barn's burned down.
Now I can see the Moon."
From Zen Flesh Zen Bones

That could actually , just be achieving the middle way, the natural balance. Satori can happen in the middle of severe and immeasurable loss. It's not a bowl of your mother's pudding. But it is amazing and wonderful.

How can our whole human society be entirely out of balance and self-destructive, but each person claim that doing nothing is in balance?

If only we could do nothing. But doing nothing for each of us is really just doing the same stuff that doesn't move anywhere, that adds to harm and pollution, human suffering and decline, in a creation where movement both ways is natural and balanced movement the middle way.

Are you buying your clothes from a place that uses sweatshop labor?
Are you spraying pesticide on your lawns?
Are you spraying poison on your hair and taking poison into your body?

These are simple questions, and I'm sure there are others, that helps us be real with ourselves about whether we are actually in balance, living in the "middle way".

"Oh, but everyone does it...." Means nothing.

[Kranvir]

The reason we run to bent baba, like gurinder Singh dhillon of RSSB is because we think that we are not good enough.

If we just accepted our selves as what we truly are, which is that we are a part of the drop of that ocean, we would never get tricked by a charlatan clown guru or his cult or any religion. We were born free, to enjoy this life until we fell for a fake ass, Moralless baba of beas who put us in a spell and we accepted his code and rules on life - who the hell does he think he is??. He took away our god given rights of freedom. He manipulated love, and sold us a false promise to get to heaven after 4 lifetime's. How can the blind sheep sangat accept this false promise - they will never know whether this is the first or last life so you will be kept being recycled into a life of suffering and as a disciple of the RSSB cult for eons. To make matters worse u also drag your family into this hell life cult also. The moral of the story is , don't get trapped into fake cults, bent narsassist baba's for your salvation as you are complete all by yourself.

[um]

@ Kranvir

How do you know Kranvir the promise is false?
Have you lived through these 4 lives to find out?

[um]

@ Kranvir

As far as I am concerned, you are free to express your personal sentiments and thoughts towards him in any way that suits you..

If you hate the man, go on hating him but do not hide behind religious mumbo jumbo of demons, him using all sorts of "powers" to manipulate the public etc. and the legal accusations, which are matters of the government and the legal system in India

[um]

@ Kranvir

And .. are you in any way a victim of his actions you go on to repeat here?

Did he illegally laid hands on your property or of your family?
Did he in any way harass you, phisicall, mental or spiritual
Did he harm you PERSONALY in any other way?

Or
are you the mouth piece of this or that religious sect ?

It seems to me that you are member of this or that christian cult?

[Elle]

This is a beautiful post.

Indeed we are all good enough as we are. It’s both a talent and a blessing to be able to see the best in everyone. We all have so much more potential than we realize. Everyone brings gifts if you are wise enough to recognize it.

Beautiful. 👏

[AO]

@Kranvir

Radhaswamis believe Kal serves God. They believe Kal speaks the truth. Kal is anything but true and he has deceived all those Masters.

[AO]

If a small child spills milk on the floor, the parent doesn’t correct the situation by spilling even more milk on the floor. The parent cleans up the mess and the child eventually learns how to drink without spilling anything.

We’re all small children. Our “sins” are simply errors. This world has a phenomenally twisted sense of justice.

[um]

@ AO
>> Radhaswamis believe Kal serves God. They believe Kal speaks the truth. Kal is anything but true and he has deceived all those Masters.<<

That is what THEY have made YOU to believe.

That is what YOU believe

That is what YOU want US to believe.

[um]

@ AO

>> We’re all small children. Our “sins” are simply errors. This world has a phenomenally twisted sense of justice.<

WHO told you al this??

WHY do you believe all this?

Why do you want us to belive it??

[AO]

Sin can be defined as a lack of love. And the root cause for a lack of love is always simply ignorance. Hence the need for true understanding.

[um]

@ AO

What makes you say "we" are small children

Would you use that expression for a tree, a crow?
Is there something wrong with a tree and a crow?

If not

Why is there something wqrong with humans and have they to be addressed as children?

It seems you are talking an religious creed. of sorts.

[Kranvir]

Can anyone prove that gurinder singh dhillon is god in human form? Lol.

I can clearly prove the opposite based on his actions - zero compassion, and a massive ego. Furthermore there is no other record of any other master or guru, outside RSSB, that stares into people's eyes.
Further more this evil baba is hell bent on expanding his cult world wide and then spends allot of time visiting those centers to once again look into people's eyes. No other guru has done this. This stinks of a satanic agenda.

[um]

@ Kranvir

How do we know in the west of so many so called eastern spiritual movements?

Almost all greater Indian ashrams have branches in Europe, America and Canada.
Who on earth can prove that you are a good human being
We have here the proof of the kind of base language you use to express yourself..

And what the staring concerns .. just have a look on youtube and you will find as many video's you like were people in adoration are gazing at this or that religious person.

If I were you I would be more concerned about my own [religious] brainwashing

[manjit]

"2) Bodhicitta, or the mind (citta) that is aimed at awakening (bodhi), with wisdom and compassion for the benefit of all sentient beings. This is the way championed by the Dalai Lama, or rather, the very long tradition to which he belongs.

Some will see this as a clumsy distinction, but I think the DL's point about Buddhist practice being FOR others and not oneself is worth consideration.

From what I've seen, the practice for the sake of self approach often produces limited positive results. This is true not only for Buddhism but for any religion, or even any advocation.

As Bruce Lee said, "real living is living for others."

Posted by: SantMat64 | May 17, 2023 at 09:20 AM

@ Sant Mat

They preach compassion for their own betterment..

Posted by: um | May 17, 2023 at 09:41 AM"

Hi Um, I hope all is well.

You write about love and compassion, and the bodhisattva vow, without any qualifiers "They preach compassion for their own betterment.."

I am not sorry to say, but you are completely wrong, completely mistaken.

Like I have mentioned to you many, many times now, having been associated with fake babas, a fake religion who operate under the garb of "mysticism", despite your alleged "leaving the cinema show behind" (you are clearly still very attached and "programmed" by RS concepts and it's family of gurus!) you now think you understand mysticism!

Please remember, you have clearly stated you have not had and can therefore not understand the "mystical" experience, or how it is reflected in the human consciousness and behaviors.

The "experience" of love and compassion, often felt and expressed towards all sentient life, is the summum bonum of all mystical experience. I am almost tempted to release a tidal wave of information from mystics who very clearly state this from across all cultures, times and types of mysticism who all agree, but I think this in most un-indoctrinated people's minds would be quite obvious. Just read any DEEP NDE or psychedelic experience. Mahayana buddhism is this experience, wisdom and understanding formalised.

Associating with fake babas and religions who claim to be genuine "spiritual" paths, one can easily fall into the grave, sad and tragic error of thinking hollow and empty words, born of nothing except religious dogma parroted from one generation to another of religious folks and priests to another, such as charitable works, environmentalism, service to mankind outside of one's own cultic compounds, helping abused women get support etc etc, is merely "exchanging iron chains for gold".

These are the words of priests who know nothing of the "Love of God".

Imo of course ;)

[um]

@ Manjit

I was not talking about love, nor about anybody that has reached that state you speak of but about human beings like myself that all to easy take that word in their mouth without washing it with soap.

[um]

@ Manjit

Not that I agree with OSHO but he sneered now and then about those "caring" for the needy to exalt themselves.

To be frankly, Manjit I was never impressed of the image that is create over here about Mahatma Ghandi as a soft hearted, saintly person. After seeing a documentary of his life I considered him as a very screwed politician, that in my opinion had no problem to sacrifice the poor running unarmed in to the hands of the armed, occupiers of India.

I do not like people that that promote themselves as compassionate but I certainly do respect those that do not talk and give practical help were needed .. like the red cross, flying doctors, etc.

Nor do I have any sympathy for those that take vows of compassion and walk around with divine smiles on their faces, making themselves and others believe they have already arrive in Nirvana

Nor Am I a sympathetic of followers of Rudolf Steiner, in which environment everything starts to stink like hell except themselves.

I never had the intention to do Good or BAD as I have no idea what good is let alone what good is for others. ...that ... said love, compassion and all these WORDS were never heard in our family.

That too is just a personal opinion