Solo episode: Alt-Discipline, or the Art of Aimless Manifestation‪.‬ Hopscotch Chronicles Podcast with Dominic Vallée

For the "non-dually" minded, productivity is often problematic, when not a form of torture. Can one truly hold no goal and still build upon a creative urge over longer terms? I say "Oh, hell yes".Oh how it seems, although it isn't the case, like this world is easier on the go-getter and the proactive among us. You know, the typical "No pain, no gain" type... the ones we see as disciplined. But for some others, the ones more often asking "why?" than being satisfied by a yes or a no, so-called manifestation can feel like a cross to bear. Concrete actions and self-realization can present a challenge great enough to keep them in a constant state of anxiety, or even of self-loathing. This type of person at times finds hope in traditions based on non-dual and non-doing philosophies. Still, many having embraced these philosophies will remain haunted by the push for their creativity to bloom. This drive is often associated to the ego, and so a perverted version of discipline is required to, most often than not, repress rather than transmute the obsessive urge to do, to be productive. In other cases, non-doing will be translated to an attitude of "just go with the flow, man" which ignores our natural, human propensity for growth and accomplishment. 
Thus, in our "binarity" driven reality, discipline is often viewed and/or expressed as forced and constrained behaviour, and for anyone mindful of the inter-relational nature of their existence, this poses a major problem. Nonetheless, without ever pushing for change, for newness and evolution, an ever-growing sense of stagnation will most likely embitter the adept to his sickly end. Basically, forceful action provides the adept with an artificial sense of being alive, while the apathetic ones risk ending up rotting in a nihilistic void.
And so then, one could conclude that discipline, when defined by forceful action, simply has to be used in a balanced way... by sometimes forcing things a little, and other times by letting go. Although this compromise approach seems a bit more "sane", or at least more desirable, it also is unrealistic for one very good reason: any centre of gravity pinned between "too much" and "too little", aside from being rooted in duality, is a far too simplistic model to be effectively applicable to ones life. In truth, the immutable sweet spot of "right action" cannot be mentally grasped and much less calculated. Developing on this subject being outside the scope of this text, I'll invite you to think of it this way; doing isn't non-doing, but neither is not-doing.
That said, is there a kind of discipline that isn't inherently dualistic? I mean... yes and no... after all, it remains a word and people will twist them into whatever satisfies their ego-machine the best. But for the sake of this argument, let's say that non-action would therefore require non-discipline. And since this is a pretty useless concept (literally), I'll call this proposed "version" of discipline alt-discipline, because it sounds weird and I'm because such a gen X-er.
All right so... alt-discipline. First of all, it connects to an idea that I often remind people of, namely that control and mastery are two different concepts, the first one requiring an oppositional stance while the latter is based on a cooperative mindset. Another way to distinguish the two, and this will aid in our revision of discipline, is by considering the implications of violence. Control is always violent, even when applied with supposedly good intentions, because control doesn't listen. It proscribes receptivity. That said, this doesn't make mastery automatically soft and peaceful. Indeed, still metaphorically speaking, mastery heals as much as it kills. It pushes for a change ― and this next part is important ― while respecting the nature of what is asked to change. And this is why mastery seems way more difficult than control, because the hardest part, at least from the standpoint of an e