Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Romantic relations and Buddhism?
My boyfriend and I have been together for a bit over a year now, and he's always been supportive of any personal choices I've made, as long as they weren't self destructive. Recently he's asked me to teach him how to meditate (i've barely got a grasp on it myself), if there are any buddhist marriage ceremonies, and what I'd be interested in raising our future kids as. I'd like to answer his questions, but unfortunately they all involve things that I'm not sure about myself. Also, I've had this issue with attatchment. I've grown very comfortable with becoming unattached to wordly things, and bodies. I've realized the reality of impermanance. But I was wondering what role that plays into as a partner to my boyfriend. Although I love him, and I don't want anything to hold back my feelings for him, I feel as though I might be doing just that. By keeping this doctrine of impermanance and disattachment close at hand I've managed to not only become unmaterialisitic, but maybe I'm not committing myself fully to him? Not in the sense that I'd cheat on him, but more in the sense that I know our earthly bodies are not going to last, and so I dont think of romantic ideas like "forever". While he seems more in love with this idea, I can't make myself fall into it. I know I'd like to marry him someday, if it's in our destiny, but I wonder if maybe he should find someone else?
0
Comments
As an enthusiast, I connect with your questions, Ska. We enthusiasts will always want to move towards the best. And, although the West does not like the idea, the 'best' in terms of Buddhism has always been to "go forth". The Buddha Shakyamuni was very clear that the virtuous householder is vital to the Sangha but.... In order fully to practise the precepts and to gain the greatest merit for all beings, it is within the monastic community that this will be possible. It is not conceivable within the context of what Wordsworth described in 1807:
There is no easy answer to this. In a society which values its monks and nuns as communal treasures, such a vocation is praised and encouraged. This is not, alas, the view of our Western contemporaries. Thus, a lot of Buddhist teaching in the West is "watered down" for us, institutionally householders. It is, however, useful to notice how many of the teachers are, themselves, monastics.
One of the things that you may be examining, Ska, is the nature of that emotion between beings which is called "love". You may be noticing that it is dependent, contingent, and, thus, "empty" in our terms.
You ask about "Romantic relations". They are almost entirely dependent, are they not? The character, beauty, wealth or whatever, that attract us are as impermanent as snow on a summer's day.
It is a Western myth that 'romance' is a high form of love. We bought into this notion back in the 13th century, reinforced it in the 19th and have had it battered into us by the cinema and TV. But it is an almost entirely cultural concept. The rise of the popular novel in the late 18th century imported into the 'romance' myth a dimension of sexual satisfaction as integral and essential. In modern terms, sex without romance is deemed to be 'promiscuous' and not-OK but romance that leads to sex is OK. "Romantic relations" will, to most Westerners, automatically include sex. Our sexual behaviour is part of the Right Action which we take on the Noble Eighfold Path. It is the subject of the Third Mindfulness Training.
Whilst we may strive for sexual responsibility as one of the ways to walk the N8FP, our deepening study of suttas such as the Dhammapada, we will almost certainly come across words such as these, spoken by the Buddha Shakyamuni:
There are practical problems, too. As practice becomes more important, the superfluity of most household actions become apparent. Also, few small children understand when a parent would rather sit in meditation than play with them, cook their meals or throw a ball about.
Beyond all this is the confusion that must reign in the Western mind: Buddhism is about compassion and kindness, how can that conflict with our family-based culture? Isn't the loving family the very paradigm of Universal Compassion? Is it?
In the final analysis, our individual path out of dukka may include one or more intimate, sexual one-to-one or family relationships. It may involve our going forth as a monastic. Or it may be a mixture of both. What really matters is that we follow our path with fully-focused attention, mindfully.
In his (IMHO) wonderful book A Path With A Heart, Jack Kornfeld has useful stories in the chapter entitled Generosity, Codependence and Compassion.
The second time is in older age, worldly responsibilities fulfilled. This is my hope, too, that, once my last child is self-sufficient in another few years, I shall be allowed to shave my head and take my bowl and go forth on the next journey.
Interestingly, this process was not unknown in Christendom. When I was a boy, the local Comte and his wife handed their property over to the Vicomte and retired, he to a Cistercian monastery, she to a convent of the Poor Clares.
Perhaps we should all live by the old rhyme:
King Solomon and King David led merry, merry lives,
With many, many lady friends and many, many wives.
But when old age came creeping on, with many, many qualms,
King Solomon wrote the Proverbs and King David wrote the Psalms.
Make bread, weave cloth, create families...it is in the doing that that we shape ourselves.
I recently separated from my husband after 23 years of marriage and began a 'new life' with a partner 5 years younger than I. I will not go into details because it involves other people and I have to respect their privacy and dignity. I am also mindful that even if you take a single gramme of gold and beat it so thin that you may read through it.... there are still two sides to it.....
I left my husband FOR Nick, not BECAUSE of him.
I cannot begin to describe how I agonised over the decision to separate. It was at times painful, hostile and distressing. I found myself engulffed by waves of different emotions coming at me from different angles and at times felt so pulled I thought I would fall apart.
Do I regret these things? Deeply and desperately.
Do I regret what I did? In parts....
Do I regret leaving husband and starting again with Nick? No not a bit. I made the right decision.
I am 48 and am "in love" with someone in a way I never thought it possible to experience. The love I have for this man is all-consuming, passionate complete and whole-some. What is different now, to the way I felt 25 years ago when I first met my ex- is that I have the wonderful gift of experience. I am more mature and able to step back and see the 'bigger picture'. So even though I could not now imagine my life without Nick, I know that if anything happened, painful and disastrous though I might perceive it to be - Life would go on, as it does. I can find the place within myself that speaks of nothing but peace and 'emptiness'. I know that I would willingly lay down my life for him. I'm sorry if that comes over as a dallas-style drama queen thing to say (!) but I am consumed by this Love. And yet, even to my amazement, I can find myself looking at it as if from a distance, and evaluate things as they occur.
We are currently separated by many miles as he works on one side of the country, and I on the other!! I miss him desperately. But I practise my 'Empty Mind' meditation, and sit in tranquility, knowing things are absolutely perfect exactly as they are.
Some may perceive this to be the wrong view, or the wrong effort. I have never felt more right, in this temporary transitory state, in my entire life.
"As long as we Love, we serve: As long as we ARE loved, I would almost say we are indispensable."
He is my Teacher, my Teachings and my All. In him I can see the way I need to perceive outer influences, and watch my reactions to evaluate their worth. He is my Buddha. I am his.
"Wisdom tells me I am nothing. Love tells me I am everything. Between the two, my Life flows."
This is how it is with me.
Humans are humans. That is what we are.
Animals are animals.
Animals and humans share a number of likenesses. I mean, I believe it is chimps that, DNA-wise, are like 98% matches to humans.
But they're not humans.
Love, sex, comfort, touching - these are things that are inherently human. I think they can be human without being unfaithful to any way of thinking or believing.
Sex and our bodies are traits of being human. I believe every animal in the world has a penile bone. So, that when the female is ready for mating - there is no talking. No sunset walks. No Hallmark cards. No wining and dining - they just get down to business. This penile bone allows the male to be ready for fertilization at a moments notice.
So, if sex / relationship / attachments aren't healthy - why are we made like we are? Why weren't we create more like animals to help alleviate this whole need for association with another person?
Why are you with this person? Are you with this person because they meet needs that "you feel are okay to feel" - because it works for you? Or that fits within your comfort zone at this point?
I believe humans are social creatures. I believe that humans seek out mates for psychological, emotional, spiritual, sexual, etc. reasons.
But, I believe it is also possible - and I could be wrong here - to be in a relationship - giving yourself completely to this person, enjoying this person, allowing them to bring you happiness and you to bring them happiness - rockin' each others worlds (if ya know what I mean) - without it becoming an "attachment" in a negative way.
I think we all know that when attachments go the wrong way or turn to the Dark Side - things get weird. Jealousy, anger, hurt, fear, all of these things could be bi-products of "attachment" but there is nothing good about them. Just like caring, compassion, understanding, freedom, security, etc. could be bi-products of a good "attachment".
Wasn't there some attachment between Buddha and his 5 followers? I mean, I think "attachment" gets taken too far. Food can be an attachment. Why not just substain yourself on gruel and water? Why opt for a yummy salad? Isn't the desire for a yummy salad an attachment? It could be viewed that way.
That's why, ignorant as I am, that enlightenment (hopefully) will include the ability to judge which courses, actions, causes, effects, etc. are universally positive and which was bring about the elements that cause people to not be able to reach enlightenment.
I'll shuddup now.
Michael
The trouble is, we believe we HAVE time....
When my good friend and neighbour, who had been planning a holiday away with her husband for weeks, woke up on the day of their departure to find he'd died in his sleep - that's when it really hit home hard and true that Life grants no guarantees. Live the life you want to live NOW. This involves making choices and very often they're not clear-cut, easy or final.... the best way 'forward' is to see where you are at the moment - and be satisfied with living it in as serene and content a way possible. If you cannot find Truth where you are right now - then where else do you expect to find it?
This is what I meant in my post above when I related my tale of Nick and me. I have to live in the moment. If I look too far ahead, and think of when we'll meet again, and when i'll be back with him.... I'll waste the precious Present Moment. This is all there is. THis one precious minute and I love it.
"The Cling-Free Relationship
Can we have attachments that are healthy ? Yes, said the Buddha -- in fact, we need them .
By Thanissaro Bhikkhu
When you read the Buddha’s teachings, there are two things you should ask yourself :
Is he speaking the same language as I do ? Is he aiming his comments at people of my level of practice ?
By clearing up any misunderstandings around these two issues, you will be able to figure out how to apply his teachings to your own life.
For example, with the language of attachment , most people are referring to emotional attachment, which the Buddha analyzed into a whole cluster of positive factors -- such as :
affection, gratitude, trust, and commitment -- as well as some negative ones, such as clinging and emotional bias.
While it is said that the Buddha teaches us to be free of emotional attachments, what he actually said is to be free from clinging. When you cling, you latch on to a relationship in the hope that it will bring you true happiness by satisfying your desires and shoring up your sense of who you are.
With clinging, even your affection, trust, and sense of commitment can cause you to suffer. It will fuel your emotional bias so that you act under the power of likes and dislikes, delusions and fears, creating even more suffering for yourself and others.
But if you can learn to look for happiness inside -- which means straightening out your relationship with yourself -- that takes a huge load off your relationships with others. The sense of affection, trust, and commitment you feel for people who are close to you won’t cause you to suffer.
As for level of practice, the fully awakened person treats all people fairly and with genuine goodwill. But on the way to becoming awakened, you’ll first have to develop wise relationships with the people around you.
If your loved ones can’t rely on your affection, commitment, and gratitude, how will all sentient beings be able to rely on your goodwill ? This is true for both laypeople and for monks and nuns.
The Buddha’s teachings are full of good advice on how to develop warm, trusting relationships with your family and friends.
As for monks, each newly ordained monastic is told to regard his preceptor as his father. The preceptor, in turn, is taught to regard the new monk as his son. The student monk’s relationship to his teacher is literally called ' dependence '. The teacher’s duty is to train the student to become independent within five to 10 years. But the affection, trust, and gratitude of the relationship are expected to last as long as they are both alive and ordained.
So when you look at the language and level of the Buddha’s teachings on attachment, you’ll see that he wasn’t advising against special friends or monogamous relationships. He’s just telling you not to cling to those relationships in a way that will cause suffering."
Wonderful bit of advice.
What you are asking goes to the root of the spiritual search. It is the classic dilemma. Today, in the 21st century, we are trying to answer the question of whether it is possible to 'awken' (if I may use the term as shorthand) whilst engaged in ordinary life, including family and working life.
Up to now, it has been accepted that, in order to progress on the spiritual path, a discipline of renunciation and sacrifice must, to some extent, be practised. At the extreme are the holy men and women who go alone into the wilderness or up into the mountains. Still today, people are retiring for years at a time to focus on their practise under rigourous conditions.
Somewhat less extreme than the hermits are the cenobite, monks and nuns living in community. Once again, there is strict discipline and a major part of each day is spent in spiritual exercises.
A change has, however, come over Western society. It may be a result of the Reformation or of the Enlightenment. It is, by and large, to be found in English-speaking countries. It is the belief that, if we are mindful in what we are doing, this fulfills the requirements of the Noble Eighfold PAth. To admit that the daily concerns of work, relationship and family can be obstacles to awakening has become anathema.
Because teachers of great insight and wisdom have told us that Buddha Nature is a here-and-now reality, we assume that it is easy (or inevitable) for us to uncover it! I am sure that when Comic sees his sensei at work, he appears to flow from form to form. And Comic knows that to arrive at such ease takes years of practice.
Attachment is attachment and will bring us pain. My love for my wife certainly increased my pain at her death. That is a fact, a reality. It also made the calm View harder to reach.
Buddhism is all about choice. We make this choice or that and there are consequences. The Noble Eighfold Path teaches skillful means to escape from the suffering that our attachments and aversions bring us. But, as ever, we need, first, to want to be free of such attachments and aversions. It is fine to decide otherwise. It's just not the Path taught by the Buddha.
Perhaps our age will arrive at a proven way of awakening as a "householder". I am dubious that it has done so yet.
Seriously, seeing the wholistic oneness of the being, understanding the sacred as you are, is also my perspective. But looking at spiritual development over time, LOVE is the line to follow. Opening ones self to another in deeper and deeper ways, engendering mindless trust and faith in another is preparation for spiritual growth. And then there is Death. The greater the love, the greater the grief. And that sorrow is also opening, preparing the soul for union.
Are you referring to the sexual practises that disguise themselves under the name of the Tantra, Harlan?
I fear that I must be a bit of a sourpuss about this one. Tantra is one of the three divisions of Buddhism, based on the Three Turnings of the Wheel. It is often called the Wisdom teachings.
The way in which some Westerners have taken bits of the teaching (just as they have taken the suttas from the Hindu tradition) and turned them into orgasmic enhancers is something I find very distasteful.
As far as I see it we are circulating around the poblem of being attached - not to love but to what our conditioned mind prefers.
What I am going to say is not criticism but a point that should be made clear to those reading.
Simon's advice that, in order to truely progress upon the path, monastic life is essential - is good advice. But unless you plan on living in the monastic community for your whole life then you will have to face the karmic pitfalls of the modern world once again.
Here we have a difference between Buddhist traditions. The training of the Arhat and the training of the bodhisattva.
If you 'want' to reach Nirvana then you definately should become either a monastic or a hermit. This means celebecy and detachment from the illusionary world of Samsara. So if this is your path - then yes 'romance', or more acurately sexual relationships, is out the window. Such is the training of the Arhat.
If, through countless kalpas of suffering, you 'want' to help save others from Samsara then you definately should become a monastic! The difference is that you forsake Nirvana in order to continue to help those in Samsara - which is difficult to do within the walls of the monastary (though not impossible).
So what does this have to do with relationships?
Well, believe it or not, there are Buddhist priests with wifes/husbands. Believe it or not there are Buddhists who wear the newest running shoes (robes and all!)
The differences are how we approach these things and this is were some difficulty may arise for those confused on the path.
For this I will use my friend's example, bearing in mind that he is my dharma brother and I mean him no disrespect.
Attachment is certainly attachment. Dear Simon, was it really your love for our wife that increased your pain at her death or your attachment to that love?
Or your attachment to the idea that that love would never end?
I say love but be aware AWAKE to the truth that all is transient.
I say live but be aware AWAKE to the truth that all is transient.
I say AWAKE but beware that one can become attached to non-attachment.
And with that I bow to you all, my dharma brothers and sisters.