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.
Trust a Necessary Component For Love?
AllbuddhaBound
Veteran
In western psychology, it is commonly held that love is not possible when one does not trust. Zachoeje Rinpoche on youtube states that Buddhist thought is that they are separate and one can indeed love without trusting.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
0
Comments
Then you trust everyone and everything. Then you can love everyone and everything.
Having worked extensively in Relationships counselling, when the trust is broken, it's the devil of a job to get it back again.
It can take years, or a lifetime.
It's like buying an expensive, cashmere knitted jumper, and discovering, a week later there's a large hole under the arm....
No matter how skilful the repair and invisible mending, there was a hole there, you know there was a hole there, and you know that your new, expensive jumper is flawed, even if nobody else can see it.....
I would add one caveat:
if we are talking about relationship love, (as known by all and sundry in general) then the above applies.
If we are talking about unconditional love, as practised by Buddhists, this may be possible. But stuck in Samsara as we are, sometimes, the betrayal of trust can hurt even the most deeply spiritually-focussed people.....
in my opinion.
The Buddhist definition of love is the sincere wish for another being to be happy. That wish can extend toward those we don't trust.
We can still love people who are untrustworthy--such as someone suffering from mental illness or an addiction.
But I believe that it should be a realization that comes naturally to those practicing Buddhism somewhat seriously.
But when one partner in an intimate relationship betrays the other, are there not times when people actually do hold onto the relationship? The relationship may not be as workable and it can create hardship in the relationship but is love not still present in some cases?
I just want to add that I have been taught precisely the same thing you have so it was a surprise to hear this Buddhist belief. It really represents a paradigm shift for me.
Just one other brief thought, is it possible to continue loving someone in a romantic relationship, if they have betrayed you, but you have then decided to live apart?
Love in western thought means that the relationship between yourself and an object or person is benefitial. In the west you can love a hamburger. When someone dies you are sad because you don't benefit from them anymore. :rolleyes:
In buddhism love could not happen unless you had suffered. And knew you don't want that feeling of suffering. You can let go of that quagmire and instead give a genuine wish of happiness to yourself or another. So in Buddhism when someone dies love would be experienced for them wherever they go (depending on your metaphysical beliefs) and also love for yourself to cope or heal.
Sure.... but look at the jumper analogy..... Love might never die. But it will never be as good as it once was. and if it is not reciprocated in kind, is the intended love not a waste?
Our problem is that we bandy the word 'love' around far too much, so that it has almost lost any meaning, and requires clarification. Can you imagine the confusion to a non-english speaker, when we tell them we love our spouse, but we also love sailing, chocolate and yellow flowers?
it depends how hard both people want to work to rebuild the trust.
The betrayed person needs to give time and space to the betrayer to re-build that trust, and prove they can once again, be trustworthy. Without constant overt or subtle reminder that they have some work to do.
The betrayer needs to commit wholeheartedly to being open, honest transparent and accountable, 100% of the time, for as long as it takes.
For a relationship to succeed, it is essential to have three vital components:
Trust
Effective communication
and
mutual Respect. (respect for one's self is also of paramount importance....)
For these components to remain solid, immovable and constant, you must have two energies:
Effort and
Commitment.
in equal proportions, from both parties, 100% of the time.
Let me put it this way:
Trust, Communication and Respect are the three legs of a tripod, and this tripod sustains the crucible that is the relationship. Simmering inside this crucible are the two hearts, being heated and stimulated by a bunsen burner, the dual-colour flame of which, is Effort and Commitment.
Break one of the tripod legs, and the other two are unable to support the relationship on their own. The three components are interdependent.
But this have little to do with love. Little to do with Buddhism as well.
I don't believe the question I responded to was from an entirely Buddhist standpoint, if at all. which is why it has little to do with Buddhism.
Like the love a partner will give to his partner no matter what happen to him, no matter what he does.
Like a mother loving her child even if he disrespect her, rob her, no matter what he does, no matter what happen.
Love can be a time-out for a child. Love can be a break-up for adults. Love is a sensitive alive response.
For example.....
The love a mother feels for her children, is different to the love she feels for her husband, is different to the love she feels for chocolate, is different to the love she feels for that extra half-hour's lie in on a sunday morning, is different to the love a monk feels for his monastery, is different to the love that I feel for my dog.
'Love' is far from 'unconditional'.
Unconditional love is an entirely different kind of love altogether.
"Show me ze plans!"
"Nein Frauline!"
Enjoying a taste (like chocolate), enjoying a situation (like taking a nap) are obviously not love.
You can perhaps say:"I will enjoy living with this person as long as he behave in a way that i approve, as long as he doesn't do this or that".
But even when your partner betray you, and you decide to move out, you will still love that person. Even if you are a very unconscious person. Love will only slowly evaporate after a long while.
True love is unconditional. It may not be eternal, but it is unconditional.
There is no difference between the love for your kids, your partner, your friends, your dog.
There are many difference with what we will do with these people, how we will behave with them, but the love itself is the same.
The love for the friends must not be confuse with an affection for some activities we participate with those friends.
In the West, love is not possible without trust.
In Buddhism, love is possible without trust.
This is because in the West, "love" usually means a male-female relationship ... a relationship of mutual attachment, where both hope to find "happiness" and avoid "unhappiness". In order to open up to the other person you need to feel safe ... i.e., there needs to be trust.
In Buddhism, love is a platform for non-attachment. You do not worry about being happy or about being hurt, because you understand that both are part of the imprisonment of samsara. Therefore, you look for a different kind of happiness, one that includes being free from attachment. This is not the same as being distant, uncaring, or selfish. On the contrary, Buddhism encourages us to love all sentient beings equally as if they are our kind mothers, and to go out of our way to serve all in an altruistic manner.
That is English, for you.....
This is why I say that the word love, by it's over-usage and abusage, requires clarification.
So I suppose, relatively late in the day, we should ask the OP (Allbuddha Bound) to clarify whether he is referring to the Buddhist premise of love, (Unconditional love), or the western idealism of love, in a general sense, or love in a romantic sense?
if we exclude the darkness, of the ying, you are only looking at things from one side, and thereby from a narrow view
Another way to describe what you are talking about is an element of possessiveness, perhaps a relic of our more primitive days -- we would like for our partner to be seen as desirable by others. The knowledge that this person elicits jealousy or envy in other potential rivals might awaken an evolutionary "buzz" in some ways. On one hand, this isn't necessarily a bad thing and can make you appreciate what you have. On the other hand, you risk objectifying your partner.
I believe the Buddhist premise of love, even in a romantic love, is not as conditional as the western belief about love. What people believe about love in the west, it is much more mixed up with expectations and desire of others than with inner feelings. A Buddhist wants to know "am I betrayed by someone other than me, or have I betrayed myself"? This is very important because if one can see how they have betrayed themselves, then they can do something about it. Then it is in their control and they don't have to carry it around and cry "woe is me" like If they believe they have been betrayed by others. To the Buddhist, love is very much more of an inside job. As explained in the following link to a clip, Buddhist love as Za Rinpoche describes it, is much more focussed on self and what we do with love rather than expectations of others. The Buddhist approach definitely gives a person much more resilience.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy9OFQaqmYk&feature=PlayList&p=699B73466066EC6C&playnext_from=PL&playnext=2&index=5
Well thats just the 'soundbite' that I have heard I am sure someone more experienced could flesh out moreso the relationship between aspiration and practice. Love and life.
because to intermingle the two within a thread is causing confusion and dividing the discussion.
could you specify where your focus lies?
I came across Buddhism honestly enough. I am a regular meditator and have worked with a psychological approach that is fairly consistent with Buddhist beliefs for the most part. Acceptance Commitment Therapy (ACT) actually led me to study Buddhism as an adjunct to what I was practicing but I have found Buddhism encompasses so much more than I had learned in my study of Acceptance Commitment Therapy. Specifically, ACT stops short of seeking enlightenment and spiritual fulfillment where Buddhism encompasses everything ACT has to offer, and so much more.
A prime example is the very subject we are discussing now. ACT is definitely steeped in western psychology and in order to maintain standing in the medical community, it has had to curtail forays into spirituality. Buddhism on the other hand is rich in tradition and wisdom which has been developed over thousands of years and there are no limitations. ACT has only been able to scratch the surface with that kind of insight and wisdom. My meager Buddhist education has already been very useful to clients.
So in spite of the fact I am a neophyte to Buddhism, and I have much to learn, I do consider myself to practice Buddhism to the best of my ability. I also believe that these practices do pertain to romantic love as well as other types of love. I take Za Choeje Rinposh literally and I would take that to mean he does not distinguish romantic love from other types of love in the way he treats it and he does distinguish trust from love.
Namaste
Suspecting the beloved is not paramount to the fundamental stability of a relationship. My sample size of three beats your sample size of one.
I'm 60 and I have known four couples for more than 20-35 years ... they have been married for over 30, 40, 45 and 65 years respectively. Their relationships remain vibrant and valued ... and all six of them are absolutely trustworthy in their marriage. Deep affection, respect, companionship and playfulness are still visible.
One of them said it like this: "When she trusts me, she puts her trust in my hands. It is up to me not to damage it. If I break that trust, if I drop it and it smashes, it does not matter if she ever finds out or not ... I have broken it and it will never be intact again."
Believe me, I have asked what they attribute their long happy marriages to ... all 6 have mentioned trust. And forgiveness (often said as, "don't go to bed mad"). And acceptance ("accept or be ready to lose the relationship"). And "pick your battles".
I enjoy reading your posts FF, because they are rich in insight, well measured and thought out. In this particular quote above however, I wonder if the woman in question is actually putting her wellbeing and future in her husbands hands. It gives him a lot of control and power over her life. I am sure, by the same token, she would have his trust placed in her care as well so it may appear to balance out. They certainly seem to be a wonderful couple and it has worked well for them but they would be an exception. There are risks however. If people believe that trust is something that can be broken and it will never be intact again, it sets up a scenario for a lot of suffering and disappointment. And this in the hands of another person, and as you know, people can be foiblefull (pardon the pun).
I think about Pema Chodron and her book "Start Where You Are" which involves Lojong Mind Training. The teaching that I find compelling is "Drive All Blames Into One". To paraphrase, she states suffering is derived by ego clinging which is supported by a belief about one being wronged. She then sites instances involving Serbs and Croats, Irish Catholics and Protestants and Arabs and Jews. She also speaks about feeling betrayed in our personal lives as in our relationships. She states Driving Blames Into One would mean to take the blame on ourselves. Basically, Lojong training and Pema Chodron are suggesting that the one we normally perceive to be the injured party, look at themselves as to blame.
When considering this in the context of western psychology, this would be considered blasphemy. There are a number of pithy catch-phrases that come to mind but "blaming the victim" is one that jumps out at me first and foremost. Buddhism can appear to be very radical when looked at in superficial ways but it is so beautiful when thoughts such as these can shift paradigms in people's lives.
What a rich and beautiful gift.
Namaste
I had a reply, basically agreeing with you but commenting further. But I've written it three times then lost it because I stopped being logged in, or I hit a wrong key.
Guess what I have to add is not that earth-shattering!
I hate it when it does that.:(