The soul revisited – The ‘source’ and our search for fun and passionate life

Wind Of Passion In My Wild River …!!! :)
Image by Denis Collette...!!! via Flickr

A colleague once said to me: “I’m just doing my job, nothing more. So don’t assume I fully agree with the management” I smiled, and I think: “Yeah, right!” When someone said that, it means no personal ownership on the job. Obviously, this colleague of mine did not like whatever he was doing.

OK, let’s be honest. We did the same thing, sometimes. We are not designed to always agree with each other. We are not destined to get along for eternity. Why? Because each of us is unique sentient being with individual differences. Ultimately, uniqueness is the central attributes for defining who we really are. The differences resulted from this determine our conflicts as well as our creativity.

So, what is so strange about it? The answer is simple: We are not always happy with it.

Differences not always make us happy or passionate. Strangely though, in certain times in our life, differences induce certain levels of conflict and that makes the passion grows. It feels like when we feel anxious with the surrounding, something push us from within. That ‘something’ gives us energy to express ourselves, to fight and claim for what we believe we should.

In his Theory U, Otto Scharmer offered the concept of ‘the source’. It is about something within us; something we can hardly define but we know it’s there, and it’s too strong to deny. It’s the source of our passion, something that always provides us energy to stand again every time we fall, and fight again every time we fail. It is our perpetual ‘calling’.

This perpetual calling is extremely personal, often hidden and emotional. It is often suppressed by our tendency to be socially compliant, but it will erupt when it calls our passion. It is invisible, and yet, it is enormously influential in our life. When we are living through harsh times, finding our own calling provide us both hope and energy. Even in conflicting situation, our ‘source’ help us to enjoy the struggle. As some people said, “the passion is in the risk, and that makes life fun”.

This explains to us why some people are so crazy about what they are doing. This helps us to understand historical people who decide how history is written through their passion (such as Albert Einstein, Mother Theresa, or even Lady Gaga). Their passion, either we perceived it as positive or negative, affect lots of people. If they ever stop listening to their ‘source’ and surrender their passion, the life of most people will definitely be different.

As Scharmer has suggested, knowing our ‘source’ and being adept in downloading to it will provide us a perpetual energy to do things passionately. Of course, this comes from serious practice on listening to our own ‘source’ and tapping energy from it. A considerable amount of time for practicing this skill can makes us a seasoned yet passionate individual.

So, allow me to repeat this again for you…..”the passion is in the risk, and that makes life fun”. Let’s listen to our ‘source’, be passionate, and enjoy the fun ride in the rollercoaster of life.

Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.

8 thoughts on “The soul revisited – The ‘source’ and our search for fun and passionate life

      1. Paradoxically, if we are able to tap to our source, we increase our awareness and our power, and money will come as a consequence. The challenge is being aware that power and money is consequences, instead of antecendents.

  1. I fully agree with that! The most important thing is to find your passion, live with it, and be good in it, so people will find values in your work. That is your power. Everything will come eventually, including the most important thing in life, happiness.

  2. kalau saya baca gini kok konsep nya punya kmirip an dengan makna hidup nya victor frankl pak,.
    di mana manusia harus mencari arti hidup yg bisa buat survive, dan makna yg sama bisa membuat kita mncapai authentic happiness nya seligman,.

    1. Betul, memang ada kemiripan secara makro. Tapi Frankl, sebagaimana tokoh humanistik yang lain, menekankan pada pemaknaan positif. Bagaimana dengan the source para penjahat besar? Theory U Scharmer mungkin lebih pas untuk menjelaskan, karena source itu tidak positif-negatif, dan dia adalah subtleties yang ada sejak kecil, bukan semata pemkanaa hidup. Kalau dipelajari dengan benar, ada perbedan yang cukup jelas antara Scharmer dengan Frankl dan Seligman.

Any thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s