Thursday, 9 May 2013

Relationship: Philosophical pondering and practical solutions:

 Dear all

Most of the time, when we are either happy or is sad, and when we introspect, we would be forced to ponder about a question. Is our emotional state dependent or independent over a relationship? Before we answer that question let us look into what others have told about this.

According to the Dalai Lama the need for support is felt at the early and late stage of life, and he advises us to show compassion and love at a stage when we are not dependent, which means at the middle ages the dependence is minimum. Paul Coelho in his blog says that emotional non dependence leads us to know where and dependence brightens our life and if we live superficially the soul is then set on fire.

I recollect my late chemistry professor , who lived all his life alone in a crammed room , running after his evening lecture, to the fish market only to fetch fish for his two pet cats whom he lovingly names methyl and ethyl   ( the two alcohols). He had poured his heart to those cats but unfortunately he died recently mostly a case of suicide. I have also heard about an English woman who gave her fortunes to her dog well written over a will she had made prior to her death.

So what is that we miss and that we want to relate to and that is what we do by building a relation. Let us look into what J Krishnamurthy says .According to him ‘’life is a movement in relationship’’ and perfect individuality is perfect harmony. However imperfection being the DNA of creation-which our saints called Maya- a perfect individuality does not exist and the only perfect individuality is the creator itself. So an in perfect individuality like me or you or us strives to be perfect as it is its ultimate goal and creating relationships are an effort in that direction. However this effort in relationship making in life, according to Krishnamurthy is controlled by two elements that are, image and need, which means we behave and expect from relationships what we imagine of that relationship and what we want from it. So what he concludes is that the need that is imagined to be sourced from that relation is meant to escape the imperfection felt when you are alone,  a state which precipitates need. Hence for him relationships are always imperfect and in a lecture that he delivered in 1971 at New York, he calls this imperfection as a social corruption. So to be in perfect relationship he asks us to look at relationships without an image. I quote him here from his lecture . ‘’ Can you look at your wife, or your friend, or whatever it is without the image? The image is the past, which has been put together by thought, as nagging, bullying, dominating, as pleasure, companionship and all that. It is the image that separates; it is the image that creates distance and time. Look at that tree, or the flower, the cloud, or the wife or the husband, without the image’’ he concludes that we should strive to create a perfect relationship by looking at individuals not through the prism of expectations but on compassion and sharing, which he says is perfect love. So a perfect relationship is that relationship which we should pursue where there is no need for dependence, no need for comfort and care, and when not used as an escape route from loneliness, and where it is only giving but no taking anything from the other. The Gita also echoes the same thought and Krishna advises us to have a determined intellect ( viveka bhudhi) by practice of Yoga that  get into  a relationship where we are involved in desire less action ( nishkamakarma) .

This imperfection was realized by the society ever since it started a civilized life of dependence and the institution of marriage has its genesis thus as a social construct to this problem. A construct to cater to the biological, psychological and economic needs of two individuals who need to be related and create further relations to strive in a need based society. So we need mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and we collectively create them and call our self as a family and such families create and sustain society. I gain refer Krishnamurthy who says that this social construction is habit and habitually continued  and has a meaning if there is a perfection of needless compassion within the unit which rarely exists.

Today I read in the newspaper that a lady in Rajkot just killed her son in despair and was attributed to her marital discord. You all are aware of the needless story of marital discord and resulted turbulence. It might be violence somewhere, suicide elsewhere or sheer suffering in silence just for familial existence. Why this suffering and why do we keep individuals in water tight compartments no scope of escape

Where is the end and meaning to this? Finally I read Osho and got the answer to it. He says love and relationships are two different things and not at all related. A relationship is absolute but love is dynamic. A relationship is a nown and results in a full stop. His call is to forget relationships but learn to relate, as once we get into relationship we take us granted and creates images and ends in misery. So by continuously relating we search for more in an individual and the more we search, the more mysterious we feel and the more we pursue and relate and this process does not end and it can happen only through compassion and selfless action:



No comments: