Dear Ram,

 

To continue our discussion about relationships, I think that relationships are very important to spiritual growth.  Until we have learned how to relate to others, we can not truly relate to Self. That is one of the main reasons we are here on this earth, in this Maya.

 

Ram:  I'm not sure I agree with you that relationships are important to spiritual growth.  My view is that everything helps one grow, the presence or absence of relationships included...if you see life as a learning or growing process.  If not, not.  I think it is much more important how one conducts oneself in and out of relationship, than whether one has them or not.  You see a lot of people who are in relationships who aren't growing at all.  And probably most relationships are as much about insuring emotional security as they are about growth.  As long as someone believes he or she needs someone else to feel secure, how likely is it that they will rely for security on the Self?  Furthermore, you see many out of relationship who have a strong connection with the Self.  And you see those who don't.

 

I used to be into 'relationships' but over the years I have come to the conclusion that the very idea of 'relationship' is spiritually detrimental.  Why?  Because 'relationship' as it developed in America in the Sixites and Seventies is really about having one's cake and eating it too. It was a response to what was perceived by our generation as our parent's generation's dysfunctional marriage institution.  We figured we could keep the good stuff, the warm, fuzzy, emotional stuff, and forego the commitment.  Until this time people courted and then married.  But courtship didn't work any more because the rise of consumerism made our generation incapable of waiting to satisfy our desires.  You don't have relationships in India because the only options are marriage or non-relationship.  Young people commit to the institution of marriage and wait until it is appropriate for them to marry. Committing to an institution is probably more reasonable than committing to another person.

 

Whenever you find someone interested in a relationship you have the issue of commitment.  I can't see that if there is a genuine love between two people the issue of commitment would arise, married or not, in sex/love or not, because love is superior to commitment.  So to me the whole idea of commitment is bogus.  If you know who you are you don't have spare commitment anyway because you are committed to Truth.  Commitment to Truth takes care of every relationship. If you're in one or out of one you see the 'other' as none other than your Self and therefore there is automatic love and respect...and no need for commitment. 

 

Linda:  My other thought is that too many people who decide to be celibate and spiritual are following the teachings of the religious gurus and family expectations, etc. instead of reaching the place where that is the next step in their personal evolution.  One can do the expected, go to the top of the  mountain and sit in bliss all of their life, but will not have learned the many lessons and cleared the sanskaras they came into life to take care of.

 

Ram:  This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  If someone attains spiritual bliss, the idea of clearing samskaras and learning lessons in life isn't an issue.  Spiritual bliss, if by that you mean Self Knowledge, is the lesson of life.  People search the Self for many reasons, but the main reason is that they are suffering in some way.  I think it's the same with celibacy.  People practice it because it feels good and/or it saves one dealing the ever-present downside of sex; attachment, etc.  Furthermore, who do you know that has cleared their samskaras? It seems to me the only reason one would do this kind of work would be to get the kind of mind that would allow one to see that, as the Self, one is actually free of everything in this life, including growing, healing, learning, etc.  At what point do you give up this mad desire to change, to be pure, to be happy, to have relationship, etc?  At what point do you take yourself as you are and let yourself be?

 

Linda:  They think they will be so pure that they can end the cycle of samsara when they are only putting it off for another lifetime.  So, it is not really that odd that at some point while sitting on that mountain top, the idea that there may be something else for them to do presents itself in one form or another.  Is it a step backward, to explore what that is about and determine ones own need to participate?  I think not.

 

Ram:  I think not too. But just because you decide to explore relationship or sexuality or whatever, does not mean that you will come to the conclusions that allow you to lay it to rest once and for all.  After all, if someone attained spiritual bliss and then went off in search of something else that was supposed to take them off the cycle of births and deaths, why would they have the sense to understand the real meaning of relationship...which is that you don't need relationships to be happy?  I think you're forgetting that the purpose of spiritual life is happiness in this life in this body.  If you have that, then what's to do, spiritually or otherwise? If you don't, nothing you are going to do, including relationship is going to give it to you.  If there were an activity or object in the world that could deliver happiness, it would have done so by now.  There is nothing you can do here or obtain here that will solve the existential riddle, except understand who you are.  And this is something that comes independently of the physical details of one's life.   

 

Linda:  Too bad that we teach them to feel guilt over even considering leaving the mountain top instead of allowing it and welcoming them "back" when they are truly ready to be there.

 

Ram:  Well, I'm not with you on this one either, Linda.  I don't see that there is any 'back.'  Either you understand why you were on the mountain or you don't. There is no alternative.  The same with worldly life: either you understand what it is all about, its limitations, or you don't.  If 'back' means that you take up an idea that you had formerly rejected, then there is always the problem of why you didn't figure it out when you were on the mountain top.  There is a woman here right now who is a good example of what I'm saying.  She was with Amachi for twelve years, celibate and all that.  Last year she decided to leave the ashram and felt she need a relationship (as always for her 'spiritual'growth) and she fell in love with my friend.   Well, the long and the short of it is that the 'relationship' didn't work and now she's sitting at Ramanashram eight hours a day, "in bliss."  What is wrong with this picture?  So whether she has spiritual bliss or a relationship she is confused, doesn't understand the value of either.

 

 I've noticed that most people don't really get into what they're into.  They never test their limits or the limits of the idea they're following, so they never really break through into the level of transcendent understanding.  They bounce around all over the place, always trying to figure out what to do next, looking for a way out of their present predicament instead of seeing that it is not here on earth that they are seeking.  So they may end up like my father who, on his deathbed, left these words of wisdom. "Well son, if I have to sum it all up, I'd say this: "Too soon old, too late smart."  I don't see it as smart to just pursue things in this very ephemeral life, believing that some "learning' or 'growing' experience is essential for your enlightenment. I think its smart to write life off altogether and look at oneself to see if there isn't some way to see oneself that allows one to accommodate whatever is in front of one experientially.   

 

Linda:  As for myself, I enjoy giving my love, my sexual love, to another so much that I, in no way, want to spend my life without that opportunity at hand.

 

Ram:  That's fine, I suppose, but isn't this a bit like fiddling while Rome burns?  I mean, here you are: very unhealthy, deep in debt, just suffered a heart attack, overworked, etc. and you have a view of sex that one would expect to find in a teen-ager.  What use has all this good sex or fantasy of good sex been if your life is a mess? 

 

Linda:  I can envision myself as Shivajis consort, sitting on his thighs, penetrated by his penis in a state of constant bliss -  as a Buddhist described his vision of Mt. Kailash.  If that makes me less spiritual, then so be it.

 

Ram:  I have been around for a long time and have met some very wierd people over the years and I think you rank up there with the best of them.  This is not a criticism or a judgement; it is inspired by a sense of wonder. 

 

Love,

 

Ram