Past No Relish
“Don’t deny the past, but don’t relish its existence.”
Photo by A. Void, Words Whispered by a Tree Friend.
Message whispered from a Tree friend.
Past events did occur and cannot be denied.
Yet they need not to be food for obsession,
or bagged excuses that encourage weight-bearing.
🌀 Commentary for the Journeyer
(Tone, Symbolism, and the Subtle Art of Acceptance)
This message is deceptively simple—one sentence with two instructions, both of which speak volumes.
“Don’t deny the past.” Why? Because denial means separation from the whole. To reject the past is to reject part of one’s lived experience. Memory may be imperfect, but the emotional resonance of past events is very real. Denial hardens it.
But don’t relish it either. This is where the koan lands. To relish the past is to chew on it long after the nourishment is gone. The quote suggests that while the past cannot be removed from existence, it should not be repurposed into identity. To carry the past like a badge—or a burden—is to pause one’s walk across the bridge.
The word “relish” is deliberately sensorial. It implies savoring. When we savor our wounds, relive our victories, or recycle our traumas—we are feeding the illusion that we are made of past moments.
Yet the bridge in the image tells us otherwise: movement forward happens when memory is met with presence. That is, when we say yes to the past, but no to its reign.
🌿 Questions for the Journeyer
(For Introspection, Reflection & Meditation)
What memories am I still “chewing on”—either with guilt or longing?
Do I use my past as a shield, excuse, or identity?
Can I allow the past to exist without letting it define me?
What would it feel like to stop “reliving” something I’ve already lived?
In what ways am I still trying to prove or protect my past self?
-
Past events cannot be undone, but they can be repressed, distorted, or avoided. Denial is a psychological defense—often unconscious. But denial keeps energy trapped. Healing begins not with forgetting, but with truth.
-
Memory is inherently subjective. Most recall is emotionalized. That’s why two people can recall the same event differently. We remember through filters—identity, pain, longing, fear. So relishing becomes a dangerous loop when based on distorted memory.
-
Yes, exactly. The past, when over-consumed, becomes a form of emotional indigestion. Obsession, rumination, and justification are all symptoms. Spiritual maturity asks: Can you remember without reenacting?
-
Yes. The ego-mind survives by time. It feeds on yesterday and tomorrow. Stillness—the present—unmasks it. The quote invites you to return to now not by rejecting the past, but by leaving it unclung.
-
Yes, but only as a shadow. The past is part of apparent existence—it has no independent reality in the present moment. True existence is only now. The past exists as impression, memory, karmic imprint—but it is not actively alive unless animated by attention. It is like smoke from a fire that no longer burns.
-
You can revisit the past from the present—but you cannot be in both at once. When you are truly present, the past dissolves into context rather than identity. But when you emotionally re-enter the past (through grief, regret, pride), it becomes a now-experience. The key is: am I remembering to learn—or reliving to suffer?
-
You cannot undo what happened, but you can release its hold. Acceptance doesn’t mean approval—it means integration. Past trauma is healed when its energy no longer controls your nervous system. Karma, similarly, is resolved not through erasure but transmutation. Presence transforms. What was once bondage becomes wisdom.
-
Because even in illusion, compassion is needed. Denial is a violence against experience. The quote acknowledges: yes, the past is unreal in the Absolute sense—but it has shaped you. The instruction is gentle: do not erase your becoming. Bow to the illusion, then walk through it.
