I think of challenges as dips in the road. If I hit them at the right angle and speed, I get to fly for a bit, maybe shift over onto a better track. I also might crash and get stuck, but maybe I can dig up a diamond or find something cool on the pavement beneath me.

Is that foolish? Maybe. False? Possibly. All I knows that it makes life much more enjoyable for me.

While acknowledging an outcome, I find it useful to internally allow my emotional reaction to that outcome, even if it’s an antagonistic expression, such as anger or avoidance. If I try to jump straight to acceptance, I often leave an unresolved tangle of conflicting emotions, which nag and exhaust me if I fail to process them out.

For the sake of logic (based on my suspected premise that reality, at its core, is nondual consciousness) I like to entertain the idea of a higher or deeper self: an aspect of individuality that isn’t bound by time and space, that communicates more through intuition and synchronicity than right-angled thought. It’s how I differentiate between fulfillment and hedonism–my greater aspect desires fulfillment, while my surface consciousness (if not aligned with its higher segments) can fall prey to self-destructive indulgence.

Early on, I found the concept of dominance useful. That began to chance when I shifted my focus onto “mastery.” Then, much to my chagrin, I realized that mastery, with its connotation of masters and non-masters, still trapped me in the same hierarchical dynamic.

Nowadays, I try to simply be present and allow for the existence of phenomena, internal and external, as it arises.

Abiding in subjective sufficiency (believing that I am enough, I have enough, and that I can extract opportunities and benefits from challenges) seems to maximize my fulfillment, and turns life from a horror movie into an adventure.

I’ve done the opposite, where I framed everything as a reason to berate myself, to punish myself, to see myself as unworthy. That’s no longer my preference. Outwardly, both paths may look the same as improvements are sought and tasks are completed, but inwardly, I’d rather live through an adventure than a Sisyphean torture.

That’s just me, though. Others might be on a different path to fulfillment.

I’m a fan of abidance in casual, non-insistent “pro-noia,” or the idea that existence is conspiring on my behalf. There’s no way to definitively prove it, nor is there a way to prove the opposite. Regardless, it brings me peace to assume that in the long-term, pro-noia is the default reality. The implications that arise from other possibilities–that I must remain paranoid, constantly weigh odds and scenarios ad nauseum–simply doesn’t appeal to me. I’ve lived that for decades, and I don’t have a desire to keep on doing so.

Arguably, my view may be outwardly impractical, but inwardly, there is no argument, as it has proven to be sound in my personal life. Anyways, I’m not inclined to argue, so I’ll leave the debate to folks who wish to muck around in that particular rabbit hole.

I’ve noticed that when I relax into allowance, even if its of my own negativity (simply feeling it and letting it be, not acting on it or inflaming it with logical justifications or denials), it leads to neutrality, then positivity. This leads me to believe positivity is a default state. So instead of frantic rationalizations denying negativity, or teeth-grating insistence on feeling something more pleasant, I abide in negativity that organically arises, knowing it will reciprocate by allowing the reinstatement of my default positivity. It works for me, but maybe not everyone.

For most of my life, I’ve diminished my fulfillment through constant justification, as if someone was ceaselessly judging my every action, thought, and urge. Then I noticed that even when I “checked all the boxes,” it didn’t make me fulfilled, despite the fact that I’d satisfied all the logical requirements. Is that why I’m here? To play an incessant game of Simon Says? I’ve to believe my logical mind is like seasoning on a dish–it’s meant to complement the flavor of an entree, not drown it out altogether. By incorporating intuition, allowing myself to follow up on something that may not make immediate sense, I believe I am permitting the use of my entire consciousness, instead of utilizing half my wit.

While it can’t be proven, I believe staying open and present is a pathway into existential transcendence–a way of dimming the illusion of space and time, and acknowledging information that isn’t held back by reductive categorizations, and/or potentially oppressive societal considerations.

I’ve tried to pin down whether existence is transactional (every gain must be paid for with suffering and/or inconvenience), or transcendent (everything I need is all around and within me, if I only relax and open myself to its presence). Maybe I’m a pollyanna, or maybe I’m just tired after trying out years of draining, grind-culture elitist self-flagellation (nothing is good enough unless you come in first, then you may get a small pat on the back before moving on to the next beatdown), but I now favor the transcendent. Sure, I’ll put forth outward effort, but I’ve become convinced that I can manage my inward state by staying present and open, which seems to correlate with synchronicity and fulfillment.