Why be normal?

Last week, I spoke about sacrifice and what that word might actually mean. In meditating a little on that concept, it occured to me that those who are prepared to sacrifice, that is, those who want to move toward wholeness and are desirous of a connection with all that is, will run headlong into a terrible word that has haunted me since my youth: normal.

Many of those that have explored alternative spiritual pathways, whatever they might be, have at some point been faced with one of these statements:

"That's just not . . . normal!"

"Why can't you just be normal?"

"Normal people don't do . . . "

I have never met anyone who could give me a really good definition of what normal was so I looked it up:

www.thefreedictionay.com
. Conforming with, adhering to, or constituting a norm, standard, pattern, level, or type; typical:

www.myetymology.com
derived from the Late Latin word normalis

derived from the Latin word norma (rule, square used by carpenters, hence standard viewpoint; rule; carpenter's square; standard, pattern)

Basically, what people are saying when they accuse the spiritual seeker of not being normal, is that the seeker is not adhering to a "standard, pattern, level, or type". This should put on the brakes for any thinking person because it instantly begs the question: who set the standard or laid down the rule, who defined what was "typical" and why should I be beholden to this definition?

The proponent of "normalcy" will then, often smugly or with irritation, tell the seeker that normalcy is defined by society. While it is true that certain behaviors seem to be outside the bounds of almost all societies (premeditated murder, for example), there is such a huge variation in what is acceptable in any given society that it renders this argument specious at best.

So, when we look hard at what the proponent of normalcy is actually saying, we find that he or she is, most often, arguing for behavior that he or she considers normal. In other words, that person is trying to get the seeker to meet their expectations.

Part of what my Taoist teacher constantly harps on is the idea of finding your true nature and then living according to that nature.

If you are a person of faith and that is truly who you are, then that is who you are even if 'normal' people can only believe in what they can perceive with their five senses.

If you are a person who sees and feels the presence of All That Is or God or the Force or whatever you choose to call it, in the wind soughing through the trees or the roar of the waves at the beach, then that is who you are, even if "normal" people only encounter their deity in church.

If you are a person who has peak spiritual experiences while doing tai chi or dancing or running down a long road, then that is who you are even if 'normal' people don't have these experiences or can only encounter them through some other set of rituals and practices.

In short, like the bumper sticker, I would ask you: why be normal?

Sacrifice

Sacrifice:

derived from the Latin word sacrificare (sacrifice; celebrate the Mass)

derived from the Latin word sacrum (sacrifice; sacred vessel; religious rites)

using the Late Latin suffix -ficare

derived from the Latin word facere (to make; act, take action, be active; compose, write; classify; do, make; create; make, build, construct; produce; produce by growth; bring forth)

I heard someone talk about the sacrifices that they make for their children the other day and it got me to thinking about the word sacrifice.

When many people hear that word, they flinch  internally.  Sacrifice brings to mind images of animal slaughter in ancient rites or, at the least, an unpleasant giving up of something one would rather not give up.  In general, the word sacrifice does not have a very good odour in modern day America.  

If, however, we look at the roots of the word, we can see that sacrifice originally meant to make something holy.  Notice all the action verbs in the root: to make, act, take action, do, create etc.  Sacrifice today often implies a passive giving up such as the Lenten sacrifices of modern day Christians but, in its original context, sacrifice implied the doing of something - an action which created something holy. 

If we follow this idea, we have to ask what holy means or meant.

The English word holy dates back to at least the 11th Century with the Old English word hālig, an adjective derived from hāl meaning whole and used to mean 'uninjured, sound, healthy, entire, complete’.

So, with a little etymological jump we can say that a sacrifice is actually the act of making something "uninjured, sound, healthy, entire, complete".  Sacrifice is not a passive act of giving up and putting aside but an active act of healing and completion and wholeness.  Any action that we do to remove our sense of otherness and separateness , any action that we perform to increases our sense that all beings are our relations, is, in the best sense of the word, a sacrifice. 

(Sources for etymology were:

 

The Monastery II

My experiment with awareness breaks throughout my busy day continues. While I can not say that I now calmly sit in the center of the storm that is my work or that I never lose my temper over someone else's silliness, I can say that I seem to be quicker to catch myself when I start to respond from a place of ego/anger. Today, for example, I am not feeling well. My neurological issues are taking center stage since I have not had enough sleep and they are manifesting as pain and numbness in all sorts of interesting places. I had to speak to a person out in the field this morning and found that I was a little severe with her so, after some reflection on this interaction, I decided that today was going to be another of those days when I chose to speak only when spoken to. Now, I have done this before and, in fact, I am pretty sure I noted a similar action early in this blog. The difference is that this time I did not actually go off on someone. Instead, I was able to step back, look at an annoying interaction and see that I just was not (and am not) in a place to be dealing with people today. Fortunately, I have a job that allows me, for the most part, to hold people at arm's length (via email and messaging) if needed. I know that some would accuse me of ducking the issue, of conflict avoidance etc etc. My response is simple. Part of working in the Taoist tradition involves understanding your essential nature. One of the things that I know about myself is that, while I can be sociable if I have to be, essentially I am an introvert. Interacting with a lot of people drains my batteries and, if I am not feeling well, that problem is exacerbated. So, if I realize that I am not feeling prime physically, why should I place myself in situation that I know will cause what the Buddhists like to call afflictive emotions? In this case, I see my strategy as a way of strategic retreat so that I can continue on my way relatively unscathed.