Buddhist view on relationships
-
As according to the topic, what are the expert Buddhist insights to relationships?
It seems that it's a very complex issue where men and women become very insecure abt each other r/s. Jealousy, heartache, insecurities, just to name a few. What is the Buddhist wisdom on this? -
Hi, if we can practise Buddhism in the midst of our relationship, then we certainly can avoid many of the problems that comes with relationships.
Here are some articles that I can find for you:
Excerpts: http://www.jenchen.org.sg/vol6no4c.htm
Not having to endure anything anymore
My spouse and I quarrel frequently and it has been like this for a long time. I have endured to the point where it is impossible to endure anymore. My spouse on the other hand takes me for granted. This has been the case for more than 30 years. Is separation a wise decision?
Domestic quarrels between husband and wife are a common occurrence. However, people who are practising Buddhism certainly will not quarrel unless they lose their mindfulness or become confused at the spur of the moment. In general, the best way to avert a quarrel when things reach a sour point is to practise tolerance. But, when it reaches a point where it becomes impossible to endure any further, then an explosion of temper seems to be the only way out. Jen Chen Buddhism advocates the notion of "not having to endure anything anymore". When we have cultivated to the stage where we attain "the mind of the past cannot be grasped, the mind of the present cannot be grasped, the mind of the future cannot be grasped", we will realise that this is "not having to endure anything anymore." We live each day happily, forgetting the unhappy events of yesterday. When you are able to be detached from the Three Minds [1] and the Four Forms [2], then your family will naturally be peaceful, happy and blissful.
Although you are a Buddhist, you may be lacking in understanding certain principles of Buddhism. Because of this, when the situation goes beyond your endurance threshold, separation becomes your solution. A divorce will follow the separation but the really pitiful victims are the innocent children.
Buddhism speaks of reaching out and guiding people to the realm of the Buddha's teachings, be they our foes, close relatives or those to whom we are indebted. At the same time it also exhorts us to treat both foes and close relatives with equality. Most people, however, are focused only on the "foe" and totally overlook "close relative". This in reality means that they have not fully understood the Buddhist meanings to the terms "foes" and "close relatives". For example, a loving couple may find themselves behaving like enemies when things get sour. They quarrel, fight or may even smash objects in anger. (i.e. they become foes because of the circumstances.) If we understand the principle of equality between foes and close relatives, and are compassionate about reaching out to them and guiding them to the realm of the Buddha's teachings, there will be no quarrels.
Ordinarily, if people avoid disputes, do not over indulge in love, respect their spouses as if they are their guests, then that is certainly a fine example of a happy family.
Notes:
[1] The Three Minds: (i) the past is gone and cannot be grasped. (ii) After this moment, the present becomes past and also cannot be grasped. (iii) The future is not here yet and therefore cannot be grasped too.
[2] The four forms: Form - Characteristics; (i) Everybody has an ego, this is the ego form. (ii) When we see another person, we perceive the human form. (iii) When thoughts arise in our mind, we perceive the sentient being form. (iv) The continuity of these thoughts through time gives rise to the age form. -
More on the nature of 'Love/Hate' relationship, which in Buddhism we call it "Yuan Qing" caused by egoic distortion, by Eckhart Tolle, in the book The Power of Now:
From Addictive to Enlightened Relationships
Love/hate relationships
Unless and until you access the consciousness frequency of presence, all relationships, and particularly intimate relationships, are deeply flawed and ultimately dysfunctional. They may seem perfect for a while, such as when you are “in love,” but invariably that apparent perfection gets disrupted as arguments, conflicts, dissatisfaction, and emotional or even physical violence occur with increasing frequency.
It seems that most “love relationships” become love/hate relationships before long. Love can then turn into savage attack, feelings of hostility, or complete withdrawal of affection at the flick of a switch. This is considered normal.
If in your relationships you experience both “love” and the opposite of love — attack, emotional violence, and so on — then it is likely that you are confusing ego attachment and addictive clinging with love. You cannot love your partner one moment and attack him or her the next. True love has no opposite. If your “love” has an opposite, then it is not love but a strong ego-need for a more complete and deeper sense of self, a need that the other person temporarily meets. It is the ego’s substitute for salvation, and for a short time it almost does feel like salvation.
But there comes a point when your partner behaves in ways that fail to meet your needs, or rather those of your ego. The feelings of fear, pain, and lack that are an intrinsic part of egoic consciousness but had been covered up by the “love relationship” now resurface.
Just as with every other addiction, you are on a high when the drug is available, but invariably there comes a time when the drug no longer works for you.
When those painful feelings reappear, you feel them even more strongly than before, and what is more, you now perceive your partner as the cause of those feelings. This means that you project them outward and attack the other with all the savage violence that is part of your pain.
This attack may awaken the partnerÂ’s own pain, and he or she may counter your attack. At this point, the ego is still unconsciously hoping that its attack or its attempts at manipulation will be sufficient punishment to induce your partner to change their behavior, so that it can use them again as a cover-up for your pain.
Every addiction arises from an unconscious refusal to face and move through your own pain. Every addiction starts with pain and ends with pain. Whatever the substance you are addicted to — alcohol, food, legal or illegal drugs, or a person — you are using something or somebody to cover up your pain.
Whole Person Wellness Assessment
That is why, after the initial euphoria has passed, there is so much unhappiness, so much pain in intimate relationships. They do not cause pain and unhappiness. They bring out the pain and unhappiness that is already in you. Every addiction does that. Every addiction reaches a point where it does not work for you anymore, and then you feel the pain more intensely than ever.
This is one reason why most people are always trying to escape from the present moment and are seeking some kind of salvation in the future. The first thing that they might encounter if they focused their attention on the Now is their own pain, and this is what they fear. If they only knew how easy it is to access in the Now the power of presence that dissolves the past and its pain, the reality that dissolves the illusion. If they only knew how close they are to their own reality, how close to God.
Avoidance of relationships in an attempt to avoid pain is not the answer either. The pain is there anyway. Three failed relationships in as many years are more likely to force you into awakening than three years on a desert island or shut away in your room. But if you could bring intense presence into your aloneness, that would work for you too.
From Addictive to Enlightened Relationships
Whether you are living alone or with a partner, this remains the key: being present and intensifying your presence by taking your attention ever more deeply into the Now.
For love to flourish, the light of your presence needs to be strong enough so that you no longer get taken over by the thinker or the pain-body and mistake them for who you are.
To know yourself as the Being underneath the thinker, the stillness underneath the mental noise, the love and joy underneath the pain, is freedom, salvation, enlightenment.
To disidentify from the pain-body is to bring presence into the pain and thus transmute it. To disidentify from thinking is to be the silent watcher of your thoughts and behavior, especially the repetitive patterns of your mind and the roles played by the ego.
If you stop investing it with “selfness,” the mind loses its compulsive quality, which basically is the compulsion to judge, and so to resist what is, which creates conflict, drama, and new pain. In fact, the moment that judgment stops through acceptance of what is, you are free of the mind. You have made room for love, for joy, for peace.
First you stop judging yourself; then you stop judging your partner. The greatest catalyst for change in a relationship is complete acceptance of your partner as he or she is, without needing to judge or change them in any way.
That immediately takes you beyond ego. All mind games and all addictive clinging are then over. There are no victims and no perpetrators anymore, no accuser and accused.
This is also the end of all codependency, of being drawn into somebody else’s unconscious pattern and thereby enabling it to continue. You will then either separate — in love — or move ever more deeply into the Now together, into Being. Can it be that simple? Yes, it is that simple.
Love is a state of Being. Your love is not outside; it is deep within you. You can never lose it, and it cannot leave you. It is not dependent on some other body, some external form.
In the stillness of your presence, you can feel your own formless and timeless reality as the unmanifested life that animates your physical form. You can then feel the same life deep within every other human and every other creature. You look beyond the veil of form and separation. This is the realization of oneness. This is love.
Although brief glimpses are possible, love cannot flourish unless you are permanently free of mind identification and your presence is intense enough to have dissolved the pain-body — or you can at least remain present as the watcher. The pain-body cannot then take you over and so become destructive of love. -
If the person has ego issues, and is working through them, how is that person to find love? Does a person need to be enlightened before they are capable of finding true love? What does the person do in the mean time please?
-
Being in a relationship means that you are holding onto an attachment towards 1 party, or few people (ie. your love ones). Once you r enlightened, you will not have these attachment, and your love, concerns, and compassion will be equal towards anybody and everybody.Originally posted by Dream Seeds:If the person has ego issues, and is working through them, how is that person to find love? Does a person need to be enlightened before they are capable of finding true love? What does the person do in the mean time please?
In a relationship, if you truely love someone with all your heart, you will display the purest part of your character infront of him/her. However, one shouldn't use relationship as a tool to resolve one's ego problem, because you are responsible for the happiness of the other party. -
If a person is not enlightened, where is the love? If a person craves hugs from a supportive partner is that wrong? A partner to which he/she can discuss lifes up and downs, joys and pains. Ultimately a persons joys and pains are their own responsibilty but comfort is pleasant. I don't understand how monastics can cope with out a hug everynow and again.Originally posted by path_seeker:Being in a relationship means that you are holding onto an attachment towards 1 party, or few people (ie. your love ones). Once you r enlightened, you will not have these attachment, and your love, concerns, and compassion will be equal towards anybody and everybody.
In a relationship, if you truely love someone with all your heart, you will display the purest part of your character infront of him/her. However, one shouldn't use relationship as a tool to resolve one's ego problem, because you are responsible for the happiness of the other party.
path_seeker, thank you for answering my questions. I appreciate your taking the time to assist me. -
husband and wife being together for a long time is not easy.....
so much up and down in any situation.
tolerance, tolerance, tolerance...
easy said than done.
sometimes either one do not show enough compassion and empathy for what she/he going through.
people can be carried away by instant temporary benefits and neglected the other party's feelings.
may all couples live harmoniously and conjugally blissful. -
It's not difficult to find two long loving couples living together, not because they are enlightened, but rather, they are used to having each other around, as companion, soul mate. They care about the well being of each other, and take good care of each other. They are not enlightened because they are attached to each other. If you tear them apart and wants them to show the exact same concern towards someone else, they might not be able to do it, or might not even want to do it.Originally posted by Dream Seeds:If a person is not enlightened, where is the love? If a person craves hugs from a supportive partner is that wrong? A partner to which he/she can discuss lifes up and downs, joys and pains. Ultimately a persons joys and pains are their own responsibilty but comfort is pleasant. I don't understand how monastics can cope with out a hug everynow and again.
path_seeker, thank you for answering my questions. I appreciate your taking the time to assist me.
The definition of enligtenment is very different from what you perceived. The meaning of enlightenment is Enlightenment means full realization and anything else is an inferior state. Not sure if anybody else agree with this.
-
Let's not talk about whether a person is enlightened or not. Even though many people have a very strong ego, there will be times where the ego temporarily subsides and something more real shines through, perhaps during physical intimacy, witnessing child birth, or when the other partner is ill - anything that renders the mind powerless. Therefore even a person with 'ego problems' can have relationship, but their relationship is very unstable, during intimate times they may feel a very deep state of affection for each other, but then that feeling cannot last forever, it will eventually change and when bad conditions arise that person may turn the so called 'love relationship' to 'hate relationship'. As mentioned many people's "love" is only an 'addictive clinging', but we should also accept that there is a possibility and a way to go beyond that... to make love more real.Originally posted by Dream Seeds:If a person is not enlightened, where is the love? If a person craves hugs from a supportive partner is that wrong? A partner to which he/she can discuss lifes up and downs, joys and pains. Ultimately a persons joys and pains are their own responsibilty but comfort is pleasant. I don't understand how monastics can cope with out a hug everynow and again.
'True Love' as eckhart tolle has said has a very different, much purer quality to it. It can make the relationship more stable, more 'True', and there is True Love. Therefore more 'Presence' is needed, and we must detach from '3 Minds' and '4 Forms'. Also, True Love is giving without expectation of return. Expectation of return is Ego, True Love alone does not need that. When you feel hurt when your loved one did not give you what you expected, that is addictive needs and clinging, not love. And then step by step, eventually in accordance to the Bodhisattva way of practise, we must enlarge the scope of this love towards all directions, towards all sentient beings, and then there is true unconditional love.
Why is it that Love is such an important quality in many religions, not only in Buddhism? As we all know Christianity have a very strong emphasis on love, so does the Islamic Sufi path known as the "Path of Love"... and so on. Because True Love transcends the ego and separation and opens up the opportunity to realise the oneness of existence.
Of course unenlightened people can have relationships, but what we are concerned here is the quality of that, how 'true' and lasting is that, and how to avoid the problems that relationships can lead to. As we know, divorce rates in modern times is much much higher than the past, which probably also shows that there is an increasing egoic dysfunction that is haunting many relationships.
Craving hugs? I think there is nothing wrong with that for partners. Anyway a partner definitely can discuss life's ups and downs, joys and pain, why not. You can express your thoughts and feelings to each other but without blaming anyone, which leads to egoic reactions. Secondly, what do you mean about monastics unable to cope with a hug? I don't quite get your question maybe you can rephrase it. -
Quoting from personal experience, being in and maintaining a relationship has nothing to do with whether the couple is enlightened or not. Afterall, it's the chemistry and fusion of two different character that matters.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Let's not talk about whether a person is enlightened or not. Even though many people have a very strong ego, there will be times where the ego temporarily subsides and something more real shines through, perhaps during physical intimacy, witnessing child birth, or when the other partner is ill - anything that renders the mind powerless. Therefore even a person with 'ego problems' can have relationship, but their relationship is very unstable, during intimate times they may feel a very deep state of affection for each other, but when that feeling cannot last forever, it will eventually change and when bad conditions arise that person may turn the so called 'love relationship' to 'hate relationship'. As mentioned many people's "love" is only an 'addictive clinging', but we should also accept that there is a possibility and a way to go beyond that... to make love more real. 'True Love' as eckhart tolle has said has a very different, much purer quality to it. It can make the relationship more stable, more 'True', and there is True Love. Therefore more 'Presence' is needed, and we must detach from '3 Minds' and '4 Forms'. And then step by step, eventually in accordance to the Bodhisattva way of practise, we must enlarge the scope of this love towards all directions, towards all sentient beings, and then there is true unconditional love.
Of course unenlightened people can have relationships, but what we are concerned here is the quality of that, how 'true' and lasting is that, and how to avoid the problems that relationships can lead to. As we know, divorce rates in modern times is much much higher than the past, which probably also shows that there is an increasing egoic dysfunction that is haunting many relationships.
Craving hugs? I think there is nothing wrong with that for partners. Anyway a partner definitely can discuss life's ups and downs, joys and pain, why not. You can express your thoughts and feelings to each other but without blaming anyone, which leads to egoic reactions. Secondly, what do you mean about monastics unable to cope with a hug? I don't quite get your question maybe you can rephrase it.
It's like playing with a Jig Saw Puzzle, where you need to find the exact match to complete the picture. Likewise, the both of you must be match in terms of character, or at be able to live with each other's bad habits to sustain the relationship. It's about acceptance of each other wholesomely, without prejudice. Break ups normally happens when one party decide that they do not wish to continue acknowledging the other party's shortcomings, or they have found someone better. -
that is quite ruthless but people will say it is realistic. but alot times people cannot forsee what is the future of a new relationship. they dive into a relationship and have deep attachments. either party will get terribly hurt.Originally posted by path_seeker:Break ups normally happens when one party decide that they do not wish to continue acknowledging the other party's shortcomings, or they have found someone better.
how sad....
whether enlightened or not enlightened, there is a different after all.
the difference of the wise and the ignorant. -
The buddhist view is not to have relationships at all. No relationships, no pain
-
many people have different point of views to relationships.
to me i see that it has nothing to do with any religion but more of "self".
the buddha had been teaching alot to us of how to discover our "self" the illusions, the delusions..... life's just a dream.
to have good relationships, it takes more than patience, tolerance, mutual understanding.
modern era with modern sophisticated liberal thinking, people tend to neglect the softer compassionate side to relationship. because of greed, lusts, selfish thoughts..... relationship breaks down. a wise person would not create sufferings for others and in return for oneself as well.
it is not easy to maintain but yet at the same time it is not that difficult after all. -
Yes, that is why I said not to talk about whether they are enlightened first.Originally posted by path_seeker:Quoting from personal experience, being in and maintaining a relationship has nothing to do with whether the couple is enlightened or not. Afterall, it's the chemistry and fusion of two different character that matters.It's like playing with a Jig Saw Puzzle, where you need to find the exact match to complete the picture. Likewise, the both of you must be match in terms of character, or at be able to live with each other's bad habits to sustain the relationship. It's about acceptance of each other wholesomely, without prejudice. Break ups normally happens when one party decide that they do not wish to continue acknowledging the other party's shortcomings, or they have found someone better.
True, acceptance is one of the most important factor in a stable relationship. Acceptance takes us away and beyond our ego and clinging. -
Wrong... Non-monastic, lay disciples definitely can have relationship and have children, there is nothing that Buddha states against that.Originally posted by soulrunner:The buddhist view is not to have relationships at all. No relationships, no pain -
Suffice to say, buddha himself threw behind all relations to pursue the truth.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Wrong... Non-monastic, lay disciples definitely can have relationship and have children, there is nothing that Buddha states against that.
Of course, there is nothing in buddhism that says you can't have relationships. Sure, you can have wives and children. But then, you would also have pain and suffering. It's a matter of choice -
Originally posted by soulrunner:
Well, to those who wants to pursue a monastic lifestyle dedicating their whole lives towards the dharma, they should put behind that kind of relationship.
Suffice to say, buddha himself threw behind all relations to pursue the truth.
Of course, there is nothing in buddhism that says you can't have relationships. Sure, you can have wives and children. But then, you would also have pain and suffering. It's a matter of choice[/b]
But if one is a lay person, one does not necessarily have to put behind our relationship in order to pursue the truth, that is unnecessary because there are many people, even in Buddha's times, who are enlightened as lay persons.
Whether relationships would bring pain, well for unenlightened people like us most definitely there will be pain, just a degree of how much. If we can practise the dharma, our relationships become not a mere addiction and clinging, there will be much less pain and suffering. Although the loss of a loved one still brings some pain, it will also not be so much pain because there is no addictive clinging. -
My apologies for my dysfunctional post. I'm new and am still learning the lingo.
At Dharma on Friday, the Venerable mentioned peoples perception of love being influenced by their current state of mind/thoughts. A person can be happy with themselves and then say "I love you" to their partner. If a person is unhappy with themselves they may externalise the unhappyness and blame the partner and say "I hate you". The implication, if I'm understanding the Venerable correctly, and perhaps I'm not, is that love is in the mood of the beholder. If this is so, when a person is starting to fall into love with someone, how does the person know that what they are experiencing is true love and not am externalisation of their own moods/thoughts?
Apologies for misusing the word "enlightened". I meant someone who is able to perceive themselves clearly, not supreme enlightenment, "just" normal enlightenment. Thank you for pointing out my error. I will go and study the terms some more to facilitate better communication and understanding.
An Eternal Now, yes, I am trying to learn the difference between addictive clinging and true love. I will locate a copy of Eckhart Tolles book. My hug comment was me pondering how monastics survive with no hugs, but as you can tell, I am neither enlightened not a monastic.
Thank you to everyone for posting. I appreciate your time and am enjoying this thread. -
What you've mentioned in the externalisation of mood in relationship is valid; however, you can't be good mood continuously for 1 week. To love is not only to say "I love you", but also to show the affection, concern and tender loving care towards the person that you love. This involves time, effort, and creativity with a certain sense of romantic-ness.Originally posted by Dream Seeds:My apologies for my dysfunctional post. I'm new and am still learning the lingo.
At Dharma on Friday, the Venerable mentioned peoples perception of love being influenced by their current state of mind/thoughts. A person can be happy with themselves and then say "I love you" to their partner. If a person is unhappy with themselves they may externalise the unhappyness and blame the partner and say "I hate you". The implication, if I'm understanding the Venerable correctly, and perhaps I'm not, is that love is in the mood of the beholder. If this is so, when a person is starting to fall into love with someone, how does the person know that what they are experiencing is true love and not am externalisation of their own moods/thoughts?
Apologies for misusing the word "enlightened". I meant someone who is able to perceive themselves clearly, not supreme enlightenment, "just" normal enlightenment. Thank you for pointing out my error. I will go and study the terms some more to facilitate better communication and understanding.
An Eternal Now, yes, I am trying to learn the difference between addictive clinging and true love. I will locate a copy of Eckhart Tolles book. My hug comment was me pondering how monastics survive with no hugs, but as you can tell, I am neither enlightened not a monastic.
Thank you to everyone for posting. I appreciate your time and am enjoying this thread.
I believed the term "addictive clinging" refers to possessiveness. Yes, once a relationship developed into possessiveness, it's one's selfishness at work. This suffocates intimacy, and instils hatred and anger if the desire is not fulfilled. To the "prey", it's just fear, tiredness, with the strong urge to struggle to be release.
In either way, all relationship is not free from pain and suffering, especially in times of arguments, where two parties verbally abuses each other. Of course, when the tension subsides, what's left is bad memories scars. However, this is part and parcel of a relationship. Ideally, theyÂ’ll leave happily ever after, but in true fact, we are dealing with two people who want to be with each other, and each brings with them their habit, temperament, needs, expectations etc. So back to the part, relationship is not about getting along with each other, but to accept each otherÂ’s fault and shortcoming wholesomely, with absolute faithfulness.