Archived issues of the
NDHighlights are available online: http://nonduality.com/hlhome.htm
Nonduality
Highlights Issue #4800, Sunday, December
30, 2012
Ed note: I tried to present
an excerpt from this article (the first six
paragraphs), along with a link to the full
article, but I was unable to provide the link
(an html problem? I don't know...) Anyway, I
decided to provide the full article, and here is
an attempt to provide the link as it also links
to the journal which may be of interest...
http://undividedjournal.com/2012/11/29/relationship-vs-relating/
Bringing Our Togetherness Back to Life
By Jeannie Zandi
By showing us who we are and how to live
surrendered to what is, nondual wisdom can
greatly minimize the suffering that is our
common human affliction in a separation-based
society. This awareness as a psychotherapist
throws a new light on the issues that a client
brings to the session room. Even the least
"spiritual" client, who may not be interested in
esoteric talk of one's true nature as
consciousness, is interested in suffering less,
especially in the relationships that matter
most. Here, I will explore the difference
between the concept of relationship, which is
born of conditioning and can only perpetuate the
isolation and distress we feel inside of
identification with a "me," and the actual
experience of moment-to-moment relating, which
is our birthright and an expression of our
natural state.
Typically when we speak of relationship in our
culture, we are referring to the concept of
relationship, to an object. We say "I have a
relationship," or "I'm in a relationship," "I
want a relationship," or "My relationship
sucks." And we grow up with the promise that if
we find the right person and do the right
things, that relationship will bring us
happiness, joy, fulfillment, belonging and the
end of loneliness. We even bring this
conditioning into our spiritual mythology as a
belief that "manifesting our soul mate" will
cause Nirvana to descend upon us.
The only thing that can deliver what we are
seeking through relationship is contact with,
and an ever-deepening living from, the Real.*
Thus relationship, as an object to pursue,
acquire, get right and keep, becomes a false
god, heaped with the hopes and dreams of our
lost connection to our deepest Self. To the
extent that the relating between any two people
is pressured to deliver on the societal promise,
we turn what is natural and easeful (learning
about and enjoying each other, negotiating and
appreciating differences) into a stressful
attempt to force the actual relating to adhere
to an inner ideal so that we are not left
feeling the things from which the relationship
was supposed to save us. As well, a conditioned
relationship gone bad simply becomes a
competition to squeeze our sense of our own
goodness out of the "other" by getting her to
behave in the ways we need her to in order to
feel good.
The concept of relationship isn't simple, like
the concept of a ball Г†something round that
we can throw, kick or hit in a game. It is a
highly complex set of assumptions, expectations,
beliefs, rules, and conditions that are widely
shared in our culture, though some variation
exists between groups, families and individuals.
In addition to the underlying assumptions that
are relatively static, there are dynamic learned
strategies we use to attempt to evaluate,
correct, solidify and nail down something that
is meant to be beyond measurement, alive,
changing and unpredictableÆeverything from
pleasing to pouting to spying to working on our
"stuff" to be good enough.
This complex conceptual system is largely held
unconsciously Г†we don't even know that this
mutually bought-into system does not reflect
reality. In fact, we don't even realize it's a
conceptual system. And sometimes, neither does
the therapist. So the first step a therapist
needs to take before offering couples therapy is
to examine the conditioned assumptions,
expectations, beliefs, rules and conditions, and
the accompanying strategies, that make up her
own complex conceptual box called
"relationship." This is no small feat. The more
open, clear and self-knowledgeable the therapist
is about these, the freer the space she can
offer to clients. (A "couple" is another complex
conceptual system, as is a "human being."
Discovering the reality and actuality of what
any of these words points to is a fascinating
excavation of our true nature.) In nondual
circles we talk a lot about our "conditioning,"
but what is it? In psychology, it is "a process
of changing behavior by rewarding or punishing a
subject each time an act is performed until the
subject associates the action with pleasure or
distress." (dictionary.reference.com) What we
are left with after the completion of our
extensive social conditioning process is large
areas where our behavior is unconsciously
seeking pleasure or avoiding distress instead of
expressing the truth of our being. And despite
its occasional and generally short-term benefits
(getting pats or avoiding whacks), it turns out
the result of this behavior is suffering, as we
get further and further away from leading
simple, present-centered, truth-filled lives
from our natural state, and become more and more
unconsciously invested in our
pleasure-seeking/distress-avoiding strategies,
while we watch them fail.
We don't suffer because of our relationships
Г†we suffer because of our disconnection
from the Real. And there is nothing better to
distract us from the search for the Real than
the promise that some object out there is
finally going to make us happy. As long as we
are living predominantly through unconscious
concepts and the acquisition of objects, we are
putting our attention on conditioned
pseudo-reality versus actual reality, and
perpetuating our suffering. Attempting to relate
to another human being through one's
relationship concept is a dead-end street in
terms of joy, fulfillment and intimacy.
Relationship built on conditioning is not
sustainable, transformative, growthful or in the
long run, fun or good for anyone. As we
increasingly seek to solidify the other in order
to feel good about ourselves, and find ourselves
being solidified in order to evoke positivity
from our partner, the life goes out of our
togetherness. And how could it not? Instead of
tending to alive relating, we are seeking to
change living, breathing, dynamic expressions of
God, and the mysterious space in which we meet,
into solid, predictable objects.
It can be a relief for who come to therapy to
realize that they are not failures at applying a
wonderful system that works for everyone else,
but are sane wonderful people who unknowingly
have proven through their experience the
obsolescence of our conditioned model. They are
actually healthy for the fact that they cannot
make an insane strategy work on each other, and
that they are seeking help is more a sign of
success than failure.
The complete and utter failure of the
conditioned relationship model produces the
humility that is a prerequisite to relating from
aliveness, just as the utter failure of the "me"
model is a prerequisite to relating as a human
being from our natural state. So let's raise a
glass to the entry point to true living ГвЂ
total and unmitigated failure! If love is
involved, if the two people have discovered
something real about their togetherness and kept
in touch with it despite their difficulties,
that channel for love can be the beckoning glint
that leads them further into the cauldron of
their own undoing. So you now can see my bias as
a spiritual teacher sitting with any two people
on these issues Г†whosoever loves and enters
into sustained relating opens the possibility of
the death of "me."
At some point an ethical consideration presents
itself Г†is it fair to foist one's penchant
for dying to God upon one's clients, when they
are simply coming in to save their relationship?
I tell people I sit with that my emphasis is on
the truth and alive relating, not on any
particular structure of relationship, as the
rigidified concept of their "relationship" might
actually be what is getting in the way of
satisfying relating! If they run screaming from
the room, I know they are someone else's
clients. I think each true servant of humanity
benefits from discovering and communicating our
own approach, and why we do what we do. Ideally
this becomes explicit in the counseling room at
some point as well. The good news is that the
benefit of nondual wisdom is not all about death
and dismemberment Г†to relate simply from
the present actually does serve our happiness,
it's just a deeper form than the
pleasure-seeking, pain-avoiding happiness on
which we were betting the farm.
What does relating look like outside of the
concept of relationship? If we allow our beloved
dreams to collapse, along with all our scheming
and strategizing to obtain them to collapse, and
rest here in the moment as clueless not-knowing,
what happens to our relationships? What are
they? If we check in with every breath to see if
what we are saying and doing is in alignment
with our highest and deepest truth, what aspects
of what we call our relationships will survive
and what aspects will need an overhaul in the
light of what we know? What aspects of what we
consider "me" will survive and how much will
need to be discarded?
What is it like to function inside a
relationship that is an object and what is it
like to relate from aliveness and actuality
without that concept? What are the rules, the
feel, and the quality of each? If you saw a
couple of humans relating from the first or the
second, what would that look like? We can use
the two descriptions not only to understand what
I'm trying to convey,but also to see ourselves
reflected in these descriptions during a
particularly free or a particularly challenged
relational moment, and learn something about
from where we are relating.
The concept of relationship is a noun, an "it."
It's something to get, to have, to keep, to
protect, to tell people about: "I have one." We
are either "in" or "out;" it is either "on" or
"off." It can become an ornament on our "me"
tree, another trinket that we use to prove that
we are somebody. Somebody good! Each aspect of a
highly conditioned complex concept such as
relationship has a good side and a bad side,
depending on whether we have been conditioned to
glean pleasure or distress from it. So within
the conceptual system of relationship, generally
if I have one, I'm good. If I don't have one,
I'm bad. If I have a bad one, I'm bad (or my
partner is). If I have a good one, I'm good
(I'll take the credit here). It's going well
today, I'm good. It's not going well today, I'm
bad (or my partner is). The 360-degree sphere of
actual experience (what's it actually like in
this moment for everyone, below thought?) is
shrunken down to a finite set of possibilities:
good and bad. We are nowhere near the actual
experience of the moment Г†we are too busy
evaluating it and scheming about how to get good
and safe in the next moment. With each aspect of
the relationship concept, there's a way to be
good and way to be bad, and unconsciously we're
working overtime to be good, which actually
obscures our connection to our inherent goodness
as being. Once we discover our true being, the
whole system of identification that keeps us
enslaved to proving our goodness and minimizing
our badness, is seen as a ridiculous waste of
time. (A short anecdote here Г†when my
daughter was 7, she came home from school and
asked, "Mama, what does `being fake' mean?" To
which I replied, "That's when you pretend you
are different than you are, or you feel
differently than you do, so that people will
like you." She exclaimed with horror, "Why would
anyone want to do that!?")
Alive relating, on the other hand, is a verb,
and it requires no maintenance or evaluation.
There is nothing to be "in" or "out" ofГвЂit
just IS and it is like this right now. The
quality of the relating in the moment is met,
without distancing from it to evaluate it,
manipulate it or manage it. The emphasis is not
so much on what it means, but on noticing that
it is, and deeply receiving/feeling how it is,
whatever the flavor. Relating is happening all
the time, for your enjoyment or excruciation,
courtesy of the Beloved. Within the
conditioning, we skip over the actual experience
of relating in pursuit of the "it" of
relationship (getting a good one, making sure
it's going well) because we think that achieving
the "it" will get us somewhere good. But any of
us who have some years under our belts know that
this approach to living doesn't result in
anything but suffering. There's something wrong
with the program, not with you.
In addition to this goodness/badness game of
conditioned relationship, there are also
tracking systems Г†it's important to keep
track of who's good, how good we are, how good
we are in relation to this one, how good we are
in relation to that one, and who owes whom. We
move toward the ones who make us feel good, away
from the ones who make us feel bad. Again, our
relating in this case is steered by the
unconscious habit to seek pleasure and avoid
distress, not by the truth. When we are
conscious of this dynamic, we can willingly move
toward pain and move through it, so as to start
to develop a wider view of the possibilities in
any moment. When our vision has shrunk to see
only good and bad, only short-term pleasure and
pain, unconsciously we will move toward trying
to get good every time, ignoring reality and
possibility, like nice rats in a maze.
Relating through a concept has fear as its
motivational energy, whereas relating from
actuality is based on love. Where conditioning
lives, unconscious fear lives too. In the
absence of conditioning, love and freedom reign.
In fear-based me-centric relationship, our
questions are, "How does this serve me?" and
"What's safe?" In alive relating our questions
are, "How does this serve God?" and "What's
true?"
Within the paradigm of relationship as concept,
or as an "it," I need one to give me love and
connection. If I have one, I'll have love. If I
behave properly inside of one, I'll have love.
If you behave properly inside of it, I'll have
love. So I need it and I need to control it, so
that I have the good stuff. When we are in this
sort of acquire-and-protect mode it has a feel
of going and getting something, of working to
get it, to secure it, to nail it down. This sort
of togetherness is based on an underlying sense
of lack and the need for control in order to
guarantee love's supply. It requires at least
one project manager, as we try to control things
so our comfort is maximized, shutting down
pieces of ourselves as necessary. The project
needs to be managed closely because if we did
not stay on top of it, where would we be?
In alive relating, I am love, I am connectedness
itself, and the fact of love's abundance is
clear from the bubbling fountain of my being.
From alive relating and resting in the Real,
it's completely ludicrous to think that love
comes from the outside. Pats and kind words are
nice, but our bread and butter come from within.
In alive relating, the sense is, the Holy has it
handled. So there is a giving over of
anticipation, management, and figuring it out,
for this right here. Maybe it will end, maybe it
won't end, maybe you'll like me today, and maybe
you won'tГвЂno management, just a meeting what
is. Alive relating invites a settling into the
now, a settling into what we are, whatever the
feel of it is in this moment.
In the concept of relationship, separation
reigns and objects seem very solid. So there's
"me" and there's "you" and there's "the
relationship." There are other discrete objects
too, those who might threaten it, those who
might take us away from it. In alive relating,
objects disappear as the background becomes the
foreground. Mistrust is met as it rises and
dissolves as we rest as vibrating Being. Objects
become almost transparent, like waves. There's a
sense of a you and a me, but what's really
primary is this vibrating field, this alive
moment, to which everyone belongs.
Inside the relationship concept, you are a solid
predictable object, or at least you should be.
This sort of relationship bolsters and supports
the "me." In fact, a "me" is a prerequisite to
living inside this sort of relationship. Don't
surprise me, because a "me" doesn't like to feel
out of control, and I'll blame those feelings on
you for misbehaving. When I come home, be home.
When I say "I love you," say "I love you" back.
Don't leave me out here in the sea without a
paddle. You are my reassurance object my
reference point for my safety and you owe it to
me to be that, according to the rules of the
relationship concept. The primary relating here
is between conceptual images, and the alive flow
of life is mistrusted and seen as a potential
threat to the relationship. The unknown is seen
as dangerous and thus filled in with
identification, definition and meaning.
Authentic impulses are seen as suspicious,
potentially leading to the dissolution of the
status quo, and so are ignored or downright
discouraged, as we take solace in our
predictable defined togetherness. Our focus is
on how we need to be for the other to feel good
and loved, or how we need our partner to be so
we feel that way.
Within alive relating, you are an ever-changing
miracle, and so am I. You are a wonder! An
unpredictable wild force of nature, and I love
you to be that, because I love actuality. I am
not demanding anything of you because I see you
as a gift to cherish and enjoy, a free being
whose truth and path is not mine with which to
meddle. The primary relationship (if we can even
call it that, as the sense of "two" dissolves)
is between emptiness and the flow of experience.
There is a trust and love of the flow, and a
sense that the unknown is enlivening. Emphasis
goes to what is happening now, whether it brings
pleasure or causes distress, because we're here
for it, we love the truth, the actual flowing
moment! We are both expressions of this flow.
When we are dropped in and dissolved in this,
the feeling is that everything is alive and new,
nothing is ever the same. Authentic impulses are
celebrated, made room for, as possibilities for
each other and our togetherness expand. This
sort of relating can dismantle what's left of
the clinging "me." Our focus is on blessing and
freeing the other to be the unique, organic, and
authentic expression that they are, leaving
identification behind.
In the concept of relationship, time is
important. Our relationship has a past and a
future. Our past becomes very important either
as a wellspring of inspiration ("Remember how in
love we were?"), material for identification
("We've been married 56 years, longer than
anyone we know!"), or as a database to draw upon
when cross-blaming ("Well, why should you be mad
at me for being attracted to him, you were
attracted to her!"). Our future as well becomes
very important Г†we need constant
reassurance that we have one together, to plug
up our great fearof the unknown and
unpredictable nature of being alive, and to
cheer us up with promises of trips and goals to
cheer us up from our current suffering.
In relating, past and future fade and there is
only the timeless immediacy of now. There's just
this. Right here. All the eggs are in the basket
of the present, not in saving anything for later
but in fully experiencing this. Memories from
the past, whether pleasant or unpleasant, are
met as they arise, when they arise, without
fishing for them or using them to bolster
good-me-ness. Thoughts of the future are traded
in for a complete immersion in the trust of the
flow, no matter where it leads or how it feels.
Within the relationship concept, the structure
and agreements of our partnership come from
socially conditioned, unconsciously agreed upon
implicit rules and agreements, and these are
seen as a standard that "everyone knows." These
rigid rules and agreements are imposed like a
template upon actuality rather than rising from
it and deviating (or wanting to) is seen as not
loving the other or somehow betraying the
relationship. The structure that arises through
alive relating is creatively birthed out of
what's alive and organically enduring for these
two unique beings. It is an immature belief that
there is no structure in God's countryГвЂthe
Holy builds mountains that last eons and cell
walls that are perfect for their function. The
structure here rises up out of what is rather
than being imposed on it. It is mutual
conscious, unique and revisable. When the
structure of relating is built from the
moment-to-moment abidance in the truth, it is a
gift, but a gift that must be subject to new
bulletins from the Holy in each moment.
Conscious agreements are forged as long as they
are alive, mutual, and born of these unique
beings at this time (rather than from rigid
definitions of "should"), and they form what we
are together. Rather than relying on rigid rules
to make sure things go well, we trust in our
mutual integrity, respect and our ability to
stay in touch with each other in an ongoing way.
Sadly, most of our relational structures are
built from unconscious encrusted ideas that we
are trying to cram living breathing beings into,
rather than from Divine Will, and turn out to be
deadening prison cells.
Through the concept of relationship, our idea of
commitment is to a person and to an unconscious
and rigidified form of relationship with that
person. We make efforts to preserve the
structure and adhere to it, and follow its
rules, as proof of our love. The commitment from
within alive relating is to the authentic
expression of our highest and most tender Self,
and regard for all beings is included in that
Г†a strict adherence to what is true for us
is combined with an utter sense of the sensitive
heart of the other.
One caveat Г†the concepts that rise out of
talk of nonduality and freedom can be used to
justify all kinds of shoddy behavior in
relationship. In the name of "no structure" we
can be running a pattern of fear of intimacy. In
the name of our "freedom," we can demand our
narcissistic right to do whatever we want
regardless of the effect on another. It is
important that we explore the bounds and
possibilities of relating with people who share
our own depth of integrity, self-responsibility
and purity of intention. If we have to police
and control each other to wring out of each
other the relationship we want, is that the
relationship we want?
To journey from living within conditioning to
living free is a journey to here, now, dropping
everything and noticing what is. It is the
willingness to look, see and become aware of how
conditioned complexes operate within our
energetic systems, to take responsibility for
them, and to find the infinite possibilities
that lie outside their walls of right and wrong,
good and bad. It is to have passion about
self-knowledge, a thirst for drinking the pure,
clean water of our own authentic expression. It
is to find support for the things we have to
face as we drop our conditioned patterns (they
were born of pain and it's pain we'll get to
feel as we stop using them to cope) and open to
a radical vulnerability in the moment. When
things get confusing it is to find sources of
clarity in those who have carved out areas of
sanity in themselves. It is to free every human
being we come in contact with to be who they are
and to feel whatever in us has difficulty with
that. And by being a pioneer in her own
discovery of Self-in-relating, the nondual
therapist can become a torchbearer for others.
*This article assumes the reader is at least
acquainted with the nondual concept of the Real.
About Jeannie Zandi:
Jeannie Zandi (M.A. Transpersonal Counseling
Psychology from Naropa University) is a
revolutionary of the Heart and the director of
Living as Love, a nonprofit organization
dedicated to inspiring, teaching and supporting
people to live from their essence as Love. She
has traveled widely in the US and Canada,
bringing an embodied teaching of living from the
Unknown. Jeannie practiced as a psychotherapist
in Colorado and New Mexico, and now works with
people predominantly through her retreats. She
resides in Taos, New Mexico.
|
|
