relationship and communication

[Guest guest]

Hi

 

Since this subject could easily be considered dualistic, I wonder

whether I am not already disqualified and so perhaps best not to

write at all.

But even so, another ½ hour of waste, will probably not impede my

eventual illumination..(?!)

 

Since the following is something I've been presented with thru many

years, it weighs heavy (if you ask 'on Whom ?' then I am chess mate

and I might as well watch Tv and suffer on..unless you say 'Who's

suffering ?'.. ) )..

...so I might be able to write thousands of words,.. but I will try

hard not to take too much of your time.

 

It is about communication in an intimate relationship.

About her incomplete messages (I have to guess the first/half part),

... her apparent living in her private world of -romantic mentality

which wanting undisturbed, looks away from the actuality of our

relating. About my being drained of energy, when having to often

repeat a statement or practical info, at least 3 times before being

heard.. and sometimes not even then,..

I am not talking about a lack of some subtle form of non-

verbal 'spiritual' communication, but about an utterly messy/chaotic

_Verbal_ communication about even the simplest of matters.

She is not 'stupid'; she is very loving (at least in the 'normal'

usage of that word), has good intentions to change it.. but since

intentions are not enough to do it,.. it just keeps on.

 

For an occasional misunderstanding or not listening,..getting a talk

about 'sugar' as a reply to 'please, pass the salt'.. however off

that might be, one does not have to be a Buddha to menage without

great irritation. But how about 20 of such incidents a day ?

Personally, at some point, the body starts to shake inwardly and

despair sets in. Because after 5 years of making her aware of

this, .. talking.. talking.. well I am burned out by now.

 

A couple of 'communication' samples:

- Passing by a grocer's I say: Look at those nice melons.. should'nt

we buy one ?.. her reply: 'oh yes, lemon, we need lemon.. let's buy

lemon !' . I say ' but, what about the melon ?..' .. she:'for the

fish, lemon for the fish..' I say: 'ok, but I asked about the

melon .. why do you keep on talking about lemon ?'.. she:'because, I

ahve some very nice fish home and it needs lemon..'

- In an add about an apt. (are planning to ove in together.. still

not sure about this one !?)it was stated that :'_minimum 2 persons

were required, to be able to move in'.

I've told her this about 5-7 times and also shown it to her, in black

and white.

At some point she says. 'well, i can always sign up my daughter also

if they want 3, because that's what I've done when i moved in this

apt. and..' I reply. 'what are you talking about.. why do you talk

about 3 persons ..?' she: ' well, because that's what i've done.. and

somebody told me that to move in a row house 3 people are necessary

and ..' I : ' you are talking about a hypotetical apt.,.. is all that

talk necessary,.. should we not relate to -This one ?.. it says here

that min. 2 are sufficient, that means 2 is ok, .. _me and you_ equal

2, no .. equal ok, no ??'.. she 'aaaa, ah yea, minimum, yea 2'..

- when we agree on something, _often_ she does not seem to register

regardless of how simple and concrete the message is... when her

actions do not correspond to the agreement, her ussual response is

one of justifying by starting a sentence with 'I forgot...' or 'I

thought you said..'

- She just removed my pipe tobacco from my pouch. I say'please give

me back the tobacco so I do not forget to take it with me' and I

point to it (was close to her).. she: 'Ohhh,.. the tobacco jar is

empty, and is in the kitchen,.. ohh..no more tobacco I smoked it

all..'.. I: what tobacco are talking about ?'.. she: ' well, you gave

it to me 3 weeks ago,.. in the kitchen..'..

well I started to shake inwardly non-Buddha style : 'for gods sake, I

pointed to the one lying next to you..!'

 

Well I'd better stop before I provoke too much detached/nondualistic

thinking in the reader.

 

But imagine yourself exposed to this input hundreds of times...

Where would your non-reactional awareness beyond good/bad, be at ?

Should one carry on with it, in the name of 'seeing ones reactions'

and not escaping ?

 

With age, the sexual togetherness naturally withers (unless you're

willing to torture yourself with 'tantric' manipulation).. so if

there is not some sane verbal communication, what is -left ?

 

As for the non-verbal one,.. the Being/unconditional love, .. can

that fragile flower of communion be, if the verbal is utter chaos,

feeding a lot of high-blood pressure, nervous states etc. ?

Can that communion be, when one abides in complete Non-Presence..

except for her presence to her own personal univers' romantic

creations ?

To be honest, at times I feel that either I get a nervous breakdown or

become apathetic, speechless and with a voluntarily numbed

sensitivity to what's happening around me.. (no see/no hear),..

called perhaps manio-depression.

 

There is love for her, so there is this dilemma.

 

One attitude could be : " that's ok,.. small thing !, let the woman

chatter away,.. she cooks nice food for you and you get your sex, so

what's the big deal ?! "

Well, I cannot hop on that 'solution'.

Really, I feel I do not need anything from another.. I can have a

good life alone,.. it's just that a possibility for a 'dance'..

steping lightly does not have to be excluded.

But that dance cannot even start.. due to the above mentioned noise

one cannot hear the 'music' !

And now, looking for an apt....

I am probably more confused than she is..

She wished for years that we move in...

 

Apart from 'all is illusion.. your not the body, mind, emotions,

ears, words..you are -That' what else would you say to this poor chap

in despair ?

 

JB

[Guest guest]

Dear Abby,

[Guest guest]

 

JB789 [JB789]

 

snip>

Personally, at some point, the body starts to shake inwardly and

despair sets in. Because after 5 years of making her aware of

this, .. talking.. talking.. well I am burned out by now.

snip>

 

Apart from 'all is illusion.. your not the body, mind, emotions,

ears, words..you are -That' what else would you say to this poor chap

in despair ?

snip>

 

Hi JB,

 

 

Albert Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and

expecting to get a different result(something to that effect)and

Nisargadatta said something to the effect that sanity dawns when there is

awareness that you are a prisoner of your own mind.

 

But on a personal note JB, ~ something along the way that served was ~ in

regard to the appearing relative happenings, it's never about the 'other',

it's always about what 'this'stimulates in me (as you said, reaction). And

if one continues on with this; keeps observing ~ at the end of that rope, in

short, is a fucked up insane mind, going hither, thither and yond, DOING as

minds DO; no peace. self-observation helps. 'Getting burned out' is the

prescription and happens in it's own 'relative good time'. Tis a blessing in

disguise and in the words of ONE beloved Jnani, " All is well, everything is

in it's right place, unfolding exactly the way it should " .

 

 

With love,

~jessica

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta, " Jessica White " <ellam-ondre@h...> wrote:

>

>

>

> JB789@h... [JB789@h...]

>

> snip>

> Personally, at some point, the body starts to shake inwardly and

> despair sets in. Because after 5 years of making her aware of

> this, .. talking.. talking.. well I am burned out by now.

> snip>

>

> Apart from 'all is illusion.. your not the body, mind, emotions,

> ears, words..you are -That' what else would you say to this poor

chap

> in despair ?

> snip>

>

> Hi JB,

>

>

> Albert Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and

over and

> expecting to get a different result(something to that effect)and

> Nisargadatta said something to the effect that sanity dawns when

there is

> awareness that you are a prisoner of your own mind.

>

> But on a personal note JB, ~ something along the way that served

was ~ in

> regard to the appearing relative happenings, it's never about

the 'other',

> it's always about what 'this'stimulates in me (as you said,

reaction). And

> if one continues on with this; keeps observing ~ at the end of that

rope, in

> short, is a fucked up insane mind, going hither, thither and yond,

DOING as

> minds DO; no peace. self-observation helps. 'Getting burned out' is

the

> prescription and happens in it's own 'relative good time'. Tis a

blessing in

> disguise and in the words of ONE beloved Jnani, " All is well,

everything is

> in it's right place, unfolding exactly the way it should " .

>

>

> With love,

> ~jessica

 

 

 

Thanks for the pointers.

As for 'all is well'.. heard that one before..

but unfortunatelly, I cannot say that, right now.

Apart from this way of looking at this situation,..

would you say that expecting to get the salt when you say 'please

pass the salt' is a too unreasonable 'demand' to make in a

relationship ?

Also the 'all is well' of being met with some simple/basic sanity

('getting the salt') as response,

and the 'all is well' of being met with a response from a psychotic

(definitelly _not implying she is)..

would you say they are the same ?...

I do not mean conceptualy..

JB

[Guest guest]

Hi JB,

 

Rather than " All is well, " how about this:

 

It is OK for things not to be well. Nothing lasts, please see

that... seeing that deeply, it becomes OK to remain with 'unwell'...

either " well " or " unwell " are equally OK.

 

Usually there's a cycle, where we seek to hold on to things that feel

good or seem good, and run away from/avoid things that are seen as no

good, unpleasant, painful...

 

The cycle can be broken, forever.

 

Let it be.

 

Love,

 

Omkara

 

Nisargadatta, JB789@h... wrote:

> Thanks for the pointers.

> As for 'all is well'.. heard that one before..

> but unfortunatelly, I cannot say that, right now.

> Apart from this way of looking at this situation,..

> would you say that expecting to get the salt when you say 'please

> pass the salt' is a too unreasonable 'demand' to make in a

> relationship ?

> Also the 'all is well' of being met with some simple/basic sanity

> ('getting the salt') as response,

> and the 'all is well' of being met with a response from a psychotic

> (definitelly _not implying she is)..

> would you say they are the same ?...

> I do not mean conceptualy..

> JB

[Guest guest]

snip>

Thanks for the pointers.

As for 'all is well'.. heard that one before..

but unfortunatelly, I cannot say that, right now.

Apart from this way of looking at this situation,..

would you say that expecting to get the salt when you say 'please

pass the salt' is a too unreasonable 'demand' to make in a

relationship ?

 

 

Also the 'all is well' of being met with some simple/basic sanity

('getting the salt') as response,

and the 'all is well' of being met with a response from a psychotic

(definitelly _not implying she is)..

would you say they are the same ?...

I do not mean conceptualy..

JB

 

 

Hello again JB,

 

Expecting to get the salt passed when asking 'please pass the salt' is not

unreasonable in a relationship or otherwise, and getting a response such as

all is well when asking for the salt to be passed at the dinner table COULD

be regarded as 'off'~ perhaps psychotic.

 

But if this passing the salt should not occur as a result of your simple

request and many other instances like this arise continually which disturbs

your peace, do you think there may be something else to look at?

 

You are drawn to 'spiritual' email groups, non-dual and otherwise. What is

it that draws you?

 

As for the all is well ~ that was a phrase often said by Robert ~ from a

statement he made,

 

In listening to robert over the years, what he said was filled with

contradiction. He'd talk about karma and reincarnation and then somewhere

else say there is no karma or reincarnation. Give suggestions to quiet the

mind and then say that the mind cannot be quieted; there is no mind it

doesn't exist. It all depended on who was asking the question and what they

needed to hear at that time. Ultimately, like Ramana and Nisargadatta,

(depending on who he was talking to/those who were ready to hear and could

understand) took it all away and said it was all lies (the truth cannot be

spoken) but his emphasis ~ no matter for whom ~ was always on the Silence.

 

The all is well is referring to karma. It's the evolutionary Teacher and the

Puppeteer. If one still believes they are the body/mind; they are the doer ~

then they come under the laws of karma.

 

" Always remember deep in your heart that all is well and everything is

unfolding as it should. There are no mistakes at anytime. What appears to be

wrong is simply your own false imagination. "

 

The mind is insane JB, not a friend; the only enemy. It's always complaining

and dissatisfied. Solve this problem and another will pop up in it's place.

That's the way the mind is. Whatever the situation, doesn't matter; observe

and see for yourself. It's it's nature. When you get sick and tired of it

then.....

 

Trusting the current that knows the way,

 

~jessica