Aloneness, Not Loneliness
Soledad Esencial, No Soledad Dolorosa
A question about resolving the pain of loneliness, and whether spiritual realization removes the desire for relationship or frees it to become something fuller.
Aloneness, Not Loneliness
A question about resolving the pain of loneliness, and whether spiritual realization removes the desire for relationship or frees it to become something fuller.
I was listening to what you were saying about the balance of separation and non-separation, about not resolving it in the mind. What did you mean by that? When you spoke about loneliness and aloneness, you said it's because you realize you can never be completely known. Is that another way of saying you realize separation is illusory, and therefore in our essence we're never really alone? There was something there about not resolving it that brought me doubt.
For me, the freedom I know does not require resolving the pain of loneliness. It can be transformed. It can be recognized as aloneness, meaning there is something still real that was once known with pain, something experienced as missing. Then it can be recognized that what was there is not actually missing. It is no longer a painful experience, but it still is a reality. It is this aloneness at a level where there is no separation, yet there is also life, love, and relationships.
The full immersion
Once it is seen that there is no separation, that there is nothing other than life, you get to be the real you. There is nothing other than everything that is happening: the full immersion into all of experience. And being human becomes the center again. Being human is love and relationships.
It's like the Zen teaching: before, carry water, chop wood; after, carry water, chop wood. I could say it the same way about desire: before, want and experience and dive into relationship; after, want and experience and dive into relationship. What can change is the before and after. I love that Zen gives no description, because the same thing happens. It's very clear. There's chopping wood, carrying water. Nothing changes. But I could say what changes is that before there was the experience of something missing and suffering, and after there is no longer that experience. So I could call one loneliness and the other aloneness. But at the fundamental level, it was only ever the one thing. It was only aloneness. It was only the something.
Not resolving it prematurely
There's a mystery to this. It has a human aspect, the embodiment of being human. So when I say not to resolve it, I mean this: the loneliness, the longing, the part wanting to move toward intimacy with others can be such a challenging journey that we resolve it in a way that stops short of going all the way fully into deep love, deep self-realization, deep aloneness, deep openness, and deep intimacy with others. It could be resolved in a way that is simpler for the mind, and I would say incomplete.
Ultimately, it's protecting against a broken heart. It's an avoidance of heartbreak, of that deep pain, the experience of rejection. This aloneness, this loneliness, is such a core part of everything, because one of the things we long for most is deep intimacy and connection with each other. I think that longing is very healthy. That's why resolving loneliness without fully experiencing relationship and intimacy, without going through the challenges of that, is not total. Something is missing in the sense that there is more possibility.
For example, one could have a deep realization of no separation, glimpsing that everything I thought I am was thought, and conclude that therefore there's no need for a relationship. I wouldn't trust that.
But maybe after a realization like that, you feel there is no need for a relationship, yet if it happens, it happens, and there's no need to reject it. Why not? Maybe it mirrors hidden things. But you can realize there is really no need. Isn't it a bit like a dream? Before you realize you're dreaming, you dream that you're in a relationship, that you're this person, and everything is painful and frightening. Then suddenly you realize you're dreaming, and from there it's a lucid dream. So you can still be in a relationship, but it won't have that heaviness you're talking about as loneliness.
Want versus need
Chop wood, carry water; then chop wood, carry water. If you tell me, "Before, I was in relationship, then I woke up, and now I'm no longer wanting relationship," that to me raises a question of words, if I want to be generous with the semantics. When we say "wanting" or "needing," what do we mean? Do we need to eat? Not really. Your body needs to eat. If you don't eat, your body will die. Do you need relationship? Not really. Now, do you want to eat? Do you want relationship? That's a whole other question.
So what is deeper here? One thing is to be free from the neediness of relationship: "If I'm not in a relationship, I'm not okay. If I'm not being loved, if I'm not getting attention in a specific way, I'm not okay." There are all of these ways in which we resolve loneliness through codependency, and that's not healthy. Yet it's also not unhealthy, because it's part of a process, of stages of development. It is healthier to be in a codependent relationship than to not be able to have a relationship at all. And I'm saying specifically "not be able."
That's different from the rarer case, where someone's natural way of being is simply not to be in relationship. We're also talking very generally here. Are we talking about romantic relationship, friendship, and so on? I'll stay away from being too specific and stay with relationship to other human beings. You're bringing up romantic relationships more specifically, so we can focus on that.
The school of relationship
The question is whether there can be a movement, a development, from what was driving romantic relationship as neediness, as "what can I get," as codependency, which is a lower form of maturity in relationship. To me it's like the school of relationship. You start with kindergarten, then primary school. The first school of romantic relationship is codependency, where you try to give the other person what they want. You attune to their wanting and try to give them everything, even if it means sacrificing your own needs and your own authenticity. Then two people do that simultaneously, and you have a codependent relationship, which cannot last very long. It will become problematic, or it could last a lifetime, but it won't go further unless it changes. This is the first step into relationship. Then there can be a deeper movement.
But what we're talking about has to do with how not to ignore or push away the desire for relationship, which is not unhealthy if it's true and deep and natural. It could be one of the healthiest parts of our nature. That does not mean it's illusion. It does not mean the deepest spiritual realization eradicates it. In fact, my experience is the opposite. The more I find myself free, free from what I knew as suffering, the more I prefer relationship, the more I prefer romantic relationship. Before, romantic relationship was very difficult, challenging, and painful. After, it's very enjoyable, challenging, and fun.
I guess it's about not covering the wanting if there's a real wanting. Not numbing yourself from the wanting by resolving it with the belief, "I don't need it, therefore I don't want it."
It could be very true that you don't need it. But as I said, I don't need to eat. I could come from a truly, deeply authentic place and starve myself in protest. There have been situations like that. I think some people have been truly awake in starving themselves in some form of protest and dying from it, and that being the truest, most awake expression of their being, where the decision is free from bodily needs and comes from the deepest place. But is that normal? It's very exceptional circumstance.
Right, not covering up the want. But part of the sense that you don't need it is also: yes, I would like it, but there's a trust that it's not really the kind of relationship I would like, and it's not really in my control to bring it about. It's more up to whatever, mystery.
You are not separate from the mystery
But why are you different from mystery? Why are there two, you and mystery? You are the expression of life. It's up to you. But "up to you" includes you, includes the universe, includes the women you're attracted to.
Exactly.
So don't exclude, don't separate. These are not separate parts.
A few minutes ago you said, "I don't need it; if it happens, it happens." Now you're saying, "I would like it, but I can't do anything about it." Those are already two very different interpretations. "I don't need it, so if it happens, it happens" is one. "I'd like it, but I can't do anything about it" is another. What if the next step is: "I would love it; let's go out into the world and explore it and find it"? You, the life force experiencing and living as a person, and the universe: all not separate.
Every time I've been in that place of "let's go and find it," it always seems to fail.
That's your interpretation of what failed, your interpretation of what went wrong.
I don't mean what went wrong. I mean, remembering from the past when I really wanted a relationship and tried to find it actively, out of will, it never worked.
Will versus love
I understand, but again: chop wood, carry water. One way is, "I need it, I want it, I'm not okay without it," and out of will, forcefully trying to get it. Another is, "I want it; let's go have fun, explore, and see if I can find it." That's not forceful. It's not out of will. It's desire, if it's true and real and deep desire. It's like hearing a new song. Do you want to learn to play it? If you feel like it, you learn it and you play it. Was that out of will? No, it's out of love.
I get it. I'm just not totally sure yet that I want it.
Then just be attentive to the fear of pain, because your previous relationship ended in a lot of pain. Just contemplate that, so that you're as aware as you can be of the experience of not moving toward what you want, if it's an avoidance.
Student: I understand that, and I look at it. But I also feel there's a maturity in it, that I really don't want to settle for anything. Most women are not attractive to me.
That could be maturity. I think it is. And to realize you don't need relationship is the first step out of codependency. Then relationship becomes something you want, something that is chosen. It's more free. It's not coming out of "I'm not okay if I don't have this."
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.