The Nature of “Romantic” Relationships
Question: Why do so many relationships end in separation? In divorce?
More often than not it is due to an inability to “truly communicate.” If two people can’t communicate then how do they ever really have any sort of relationship? It seems then that we have to look at what it means to “communicate.”
From my experience, communicating, means not only speaking, but “listening”, “acknowledging”, “taking in” and “valuing” what the other person has to say. This is something that appears to be greatly lacking in many relationships because most everyone is submerged within “desire” and “fear” of some kind. When this is the case then it becomes all about “what’s in it for me” or “what’s ‘not’ in it for me.” The degree or amount of interest that we may have in another, is the degree and amount required to meet/serve our own needs/wants/desires — e.g. our own agenda.
The “Pain” of our romantic relationships
When we’re in a relationship we’re interested in one another enough to fulfill our own desires or subdue our own fears. Because of this two people aren’t really ever “relating” to one another. The relationship is “corrupted” by desire. This causes “dishonesty” because we’re always trying to get what we “want” out of it. This then also causes tremendous conflict within our relationships and also within each of us as well.
…what in effect winds up happening is what happens with any dependency, as there is only one nature of dependency and it applies to all dependency — we tend to get pretty nasty when the thing we’re dependent on is either about to be removed, or is removed. We can observe this for ourselves.
The “deception” and “conflict” that is experienced is by “both” parties in the relationship, and it’s also referring to “both”, “internal” and “external” deception” and “conflict.”
So deception and conflict all the way around.
This “other” person is going to answer all my prayers. They are going to be my white night in shining armor to save me and rescue me from my suffering and bring me everlasting happiness and joy.
We basically expect the other to be like a “genie in a bottle” to fulfill all our greatest wishes and desires. No wonder there’s so much disappointment, divorce, and separation —the very foundation of it is based on an “impossibility” — that somebody else can be the source of one’s own joy/happiness/security/etc..
The more dependent we are on each another as the source of our own joy/happiness/security/etc., naturally the more we suffer the effects of that dependency. It seems we really can look at this whole thing as a form of “addiction.” So all we have to do to understand why and how it is we wind up having the experiences in these “romantic” relationships the way we do is to study and understand the behavior patter of “addiction” which is based on “dependency”.
So then what in effect winds up happening is what happens with any dependency, as there is only one nature of dependency and it applies to all dependency — we tend to get pretty nasty when the thing we’re dependent on is either about to be removed, or is removed. We can observe this for ourselves.
When the source of our addiction is threatened in any way, be it by the perception that someone else is moving in to take our mate, or the perception that our mate is threatening to leave for whatever reason, or the perception that they just don’t “love us enough”, or in the “right way”, whatever it is…, any and/or all of these things…, this threat then produces all manner and manifestations of angry, greedy, resentful, dark, ugly, and just flat out psychologically disturbing and mentally-ill feelings/emotions. All caused by the thought “I want…”, or “I must have…”, or “I need…” etc.. which in tern stems from the identification with/belief in the thought concept of “I/not I.”
So what then is a “true” relationship?
It would seem that “true” relationship means “communication”, and the nature of true “communication” is to “commune”…to “really hear” one another. To “take one another in.” To “fully experience the other.” This appears to only be possible without interference of the “image” of “the I/not I” thought, and therefore without the presence of “desire” and “fear.”
Perhaps a more practical activity might be to understand the nature of our relationship with ourselves instead?
Please do not just believe or disbelieve any of this, but instead observe your own experience. See for yourself if what is said here has any validity, or truth. See if it’s a reflecting “what actually is” or not.
