No. Well yes, but that you don´t want (yet), believe me.
This feeling, this burdon of apparently endless participation is why we love fiction, books and movies, isn´t it? One clear start, one distinguished ending, not too long, but long enough to trigger the impression of achievement. Do you like sequels? Some people do, others hate them. Maybe for those who hate them, the story becomes too much like reality. Some People seem to respond very well to sequels. Maybe they have come to terms with the idea of life being an accumulation of storylines? I once heard a lecture about the cultural aspects of romantic movies, the tutor said „…no movie could ever be as complex and sappy as reality, people couldn’t take it, they would leave the cinema“. I think that might be true, for movies and reality. Just that we can´t leave that movie that is our life, not without leaving it all behind and that we will at some point, for sure. „Life is a journey, not a destination“, „the path is the goal“. I guess wisdom we heard often but never really understood can, over time, become a bit of a nuisance, can´t it?
Do we really want the conflicts, the contrast to end permanently? Isn´t this game of opposites what life is all about? It is this back and forth that can make life fun or at least interesting in the first place. To see ourselves, us living things, as players in a game of pure and endless potential, of endless possibilities, I think that sounds like fun. Especially since we will, with dead certainty, leave this game sooner or later, why not play along as long as we can? Life is pure and endless potential, we will never run out of new things, new opposites and new contrast to play with. We can never stop finding new things, we can, however, stop searching for them, stop seeing possibilities and we can decide to hate the game. We can, however, at any given moment also decide to love it (again).
Looking for the shortest and easiest route from A to B is a valid desire. But do we have to become stressed out if the route turns out to be less easy and longer than we wanted it to be? I don´t think anybody forces us to see contingency negatively. We definitely should want change. We should hope and go for better things. Why else would we move, change and transform? If we were comfortable with where we are we wouldn´t. Standing still permanently is the opposite of life, it is death. But like always in duality, I think, both sides are equally important. To me, persisting disbalance is the cause of all suffering. Not whatever information the one side contains is the problem and neither is the other side, not ultimately. Searching for a permanent solution is. In the spirit of consistent rebalancing not even the middle can be a permanent solution. Balance to me is finding the right amount of all things, just to let it go and find the right amount of its complete opposite.
So what can we do? Reflect on what we have tried so far to make things better and then find the opposite and emphasise that. If you have taken life very serious: ease up, try to see it more as a game, more lightheartedly. If you have been too unconscious: be more conscious. If you have been playing around: find meaning. If you have been mostly doing, active: stop and meditate. Don´t meditate to find meaning, meditate simply to create a counterweight for the doing in your life through not-doing for a moment. Don´t be too rigid with your meditation. Don´t be too rigid with anything. If life can be so humorous as to create abstracts like wanting-not-wanting, and doing-not-doing, it could want us to be a little less rigid too, but never not rigid at all ether.