With all these greatly peaceful and sometimes wise spiritual types denigrating ego and thinking, why do I not just go along? Well, me not going along isn't bothering them--they're peaceful enough. I stick with affirming mind and ego because the disordered habits exist as much as the potential exists. Most people I've met are not just peaceful and I enjoy the process of moving towards peace in all its complexity. There is a difference between peace and inspiration, and I like both.
Byron Katie is one smart woman. Besides being wise or open or whatever, she's sharp as a tack. That precision helps her show others this wonder and love that she's found in ways they can access from their own dismal holes. How often have I felt that I'd accept something good, but only if someone brings it to me? Ha, ha, ha! We either feel like we are willing to go out and work for what we want or we feel like we don't want to do that. Anything but that. We might prefer to feel peaceful over feeling victimized, but we often choose to feel victimized over working with a sense of intimacy with others. This is not rocket science.
Besides the human-enough emotional reactivity, we also have all these family histories and cultural customs in place about HOW we identify with our pain, customs and habits about HOW to grudge, when to grudge, where to grudge, why, and whom to grudge. I LIKE ego because it affirms everything we feel to be valuable about ourselves, our families, our cultures, our planet...but we also have the habits and customs of grudging. Not rocket science. If you are not using your mind to develop, strengthen, and communicate your love, then YOU are wasting your potential and the rest of the world doesn't even matter.
But unraveling the habits is NOT as simple as all that. It could be if other people weren't involved, but we are. Yes, you've had your insights and I've had mine, and yet they don't always match up for some reason. Learning that reason is part of why we're here. I'm your mirror. (Do you like what you see?) And you're mine. I've got to be honest: I don't always like what I see, and I don't always feel the love. I can turn my awareness inward and find that love, but I want to turn my awareness outward and find it as well. Call me selfish in that way, it won't hurt my feelings. I'm not a monk, I'm allowed to be selfish.
This turning outward while holding onto what I feel to be genuine is all about what ego and mind are all about: resilience. Resilient love, not just love. Resilient joy, not just sporadic joy. Sometimes the people I know act like assholes, and yes, I'm one of those people. So it helps to have an understanding, a conceptual definition (a self-identity or philosophy) that includes potential, openness. That allows me to say, "Oh, you're right. I've been acting like an asshole. But I am also certain that I can change." Without that explicit, conscious space for change, I'll feel pressured. And we can't be pressured into love. We can only be pressured into compliance, and that's something Horney rightly listed as neurotic. I love that we can answer: if I am being an asshole now, what can we do about it? First, notice. Second, accept that as what is at the moment. Third, build something inspired, something new from that foundation. Those feelings, that foundation, might be stuck in one place. That simply shows that we can be steadfast. Just living in a foundation is like living in a cave. It's better than nothing, but it's designed to allow even more.
This is where those three degrees come back in. It's easy enough to move from exclusion ("I hate you and all of your kind; there's no way we can live on the same planet") to inclusion (well, maybe we can survive together and possibly even do business) to working out particular power/status relationships ("I don't like that you're richer than me, but if you support the infrastructure of our country, that may not be so bad") to intimacy ("Well, if we're equal enough, we might as well be close"). The stuff that Gandhi talked about or Martin Luther King talked about is not so different from Byron Katie, Eckhart Tolle, and Karen Horney. Besides starting off by trying to not hate one another, we can move in the other direction, we can move from our love outwards. But this is where resilience counts. If we only want everyone to love because we love, then we grudge power relationships, status differentials, and all of the human history that has led up to this situation where inequality is the rule of the day. It's hard to feel victimized by everything or hate everything and still be a messenger of love. Use your ego; I use my ego. Because we are who and what we are, we are not just our pain. Because we are who and what we are, we are not just our egos. And because we are who and what we are, we are not JUST our love, or just openness, or just potential. As a group, we are creative, resilient potential. If the group can be that, I can too.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Byron Katie + Eckhart Tolle + Karen Horney = Better Health (2)
Eckhart Tolle talks about "the pain body" as a false self in his book The Power of Now. This whole idea of emotional reactivity as something different than emotional spontaneity is very important. It is often unrecognized, but once you see it genuinely, it is almost impossible to miss. It is such an obvious thing once you know it.
One of Tolle's most basic and important points is that most of us have learned to identify ourselves as our pain. We defend our pain, we treasure our pain, and we share our pain with people we feel close to, but we attack people we don't feel close to: we want them to know pain. In a twisted way, when we believe that we are our pain, trying to make others feel pain is a way of trying to share ourselves or share who we are. While this is a normal enough reaction in some ways, it is a very strange custom. Once you think about it, it begins to look like an odd choice to choose to continue this personal and cultural custom. So, again, it is a normal reaction but an odd choice--once it becomes a choice, that is. And it becomes a choice once you get the feel for it. Once you get the feel for it, other people are constantly pointing out to you (often in aggressive ways) that you are not acting like a very genuine person. At that point, it becomes a choice to hear them, to be aware of how we protect our pain rather than strengthen our love, or on the flipside, to choose to remain unaware. We choose to remain unaware when we feel low-down, petty, mean, surly, resentful. In other words, we choose to be our pain when we grudge. And we grudge everything from our parents to our leaders to our neighbors to God to bad food to dirty diapers.
Think about it--you've spent precious time and energy (I have too) grudging traffic, a pile of dogshit, laundry, papers (which you might be expected to fill out), etc. Then, with all that grudging and identifying ourselves as our pain, we feel like life is not so good. Ha, ha, ha! Anyone with the slightest amount of sanity agrees living like that is piss-poor. Then, because we identify ourselves as our pain, we look around and try to find someone to blame for this situation. Kind of funny, kind of tragic.
So Karen Horney breaks it down for the rest of us dummies. She says, "Look. There are three basic ways in which you can notice yourself or others acting neurotically. If someone is moving against others, moving away from others, or moving towards others rather than moving with others, that someone is acting neurotically." Byron Katie is nicer is some ways. She says that you don't even have to show other folks all your grudging and pain if you don't want to--you can work on it yourself with just a little education and the willingness to be honest with yourself and be happy. Isn't that great?! Tolle says, "If you're identifying with pain, you don't have to keep identifying with pain." Oh, yeah, how is that Eckhart? Horney shows the signs we can see with ourselves and others, and Byron Katie gives one way of addressing all that by ourselves or with others. How does it work? We're all really simple at heart. Our hearts are the simplicity of mind, and mind can be--but it is not always--the unfoldment of the love and intimacy we feel in our hearts. It only takes a little education to have a mind and ego that supports the love rather than a mind and ego that falsely identifies as pain.
One of Tolle's most basic and important points is that most of us have learned to identify ourselves as our pain. We defend our pain, we treasure our pain, and we share our pain with people we feel close to, but we attack people we don't feel close to: we want them to know pain. In a twisted way, when we believe that we are our pain, trying to make others feel pain is a way of trying to share ourselves or share who we are. While this is a normal enough reaction in some ways, it is a very strange custom. Once you think about it, it begins to look like an odd choice to choose to continue this personal and cultural custom. So, again, it is a normal reaction but an odd choice--once it becomes a choice, that is. And it becomes a choice once you get the feel for it. Once you get the feel for it, other people are constantly pointing out to you (often in aggressive ways) that you are not acting like a very genuine person. At that point, it becomes a choice to hear them, to be aware of how we protect our pain rather than strengthen our love, or on the flipside, to choose to remain unaware. We choose to remain unaware when we feel low-down, petty, mean, surly, resentful. In other words, we choose to be our pain when we grudge. And we grudge everything from our parents to our leaders to our neighbors to God to bad food to dirty diapers.
Think about it--you've spent precious time and energy (I have too) grudging traffic, a pile of dogshit, laundry, papers (which you might be expected to fill out), etc. Then, with all that grudging and identifying ourselves as our pain, we feel like life is not so good. Ha, ha, ha! Anyone with the slightest amount of sanity agrees living like that is piss-poor. Then, because we identify ourselves as our pain, we look around and try to find someone to blame for this situation. Kind of funny, kind of tragic.
So Karen Horney breaks it down for the rest of us dummies. She says, "Look. There are three basic ways in which you can notice yourself or others acting neurotically. If someone is moving against others, moving away from others, or moving towards others rather than moving with others, that someone is acting neurotically." Byron Katie is nicer is some ways. She says that you don't even have to show other folks all your grudging and pain if you don't want to--you can work on it yourself with just a little education and the willingness to be honest with yourself and be happy. Isn't that great?! Tolle says, "If you're identifying with pain, you don't have to keep identifying with pain." Oh, yeah, how is that Eckhart? Horney shows the signs we can see with ourselves and others, and Byron Katie gives one way of addressing all that by ourselves or with others. How does it work? We're all really simple at heart. Our hearts are the simplicity of mind, and mind can be--but it is not always--the unfoldment of the love and intimacy we feel in our hearts. It only takes a little education to have a mind and ego that supports the love rather than a mind and ego that falsely identifies as pain.
Byron Katie + Eckhart Tolle + Karen Horney = Better Health (1)
It's been a hobby of mine for as long as I can remember to find apparently different or contradictory philosophies, find the rub, and see if something comes out of trying to unravel any puzzles that might be found there. Like checking out Ramana Maharshi and Csikszentmihalyi in previous posts.
Byron Katie has been on my radar recently. I have spent some time considering how her type of inquiry or "The Work" as she sometimes calls it fits with the three degrees of interpersonal relating (inclusion/exclusion, power/status, and the closest one--intimacy). Part of what I like about her presentation is that it allows for dialogue to be helpful. Rather than sitting on a meditation cushion, we can make solid personal progress by having a reasonable discussion concerning things that make us unhappy. And doing so in Katie's way structures the conversation so that progress is almost inevitable and sometimes truly amazing. As with many things, the more you do inquiry, the more "natural" it may feel. Part of what I love about personal progress, though, is that this natural feeling retains a certain specialness even as it becomes expected--it becomes somewhat ordinary to us, but remains bright. (I'll assume some familiarity with her ideas, but there is a link to her website above.)
Essentially, I'd say inquiry is a type of cognitive therapy from a more enlightened perspective than cognitive therapy(CT) is usually conducted from. In other words, it is very like CT but goes beyond what most would consider to be CT. Many cognitive therapists, though, would benefit from engaging The Work. Katie believes that all suffering comes from attachment to thoughts. Rather than just trying to detach from thinking--which she sees as pointless--she tries to help people find their problematic thoughts and then invite people to change their relationship to those particular thoughts.
Thoughts (as Katie describes them) seem most often or most obviously connected to introjected roles and customs at that second degree (power/status) of interpersonal intimacy. These introjections are the "shoulds" about ourselves, the world, and perhaps God that help consolidate personality and cultural disorders. These disorders are simply unhealthy and unhappy habitual patterns of engagement, feelings, thinking, and behavior.
Karen Horney (1885-1952) was one of the first female psychiatrists and a very influential thinker in the field. She described three neurotic means of reacting emotionally and one healthy way. Her healthy manner she describes as "moving with" others. The three unhealthy means are: moving towards (or simply complying in a way that compromises oneself), moving against (aggressing in a way that compromises others), and moving away (detaching in a way that compromises the relationship). I find it fascinating but not necessarily surprising that Katie presents her inquiry in a more fluid manner than I have seen cognitive therapy conducted and Horney gave interpersonal descriptions of neuroses (as compared to Freud's intrapersonal descriptions of neuroses. Both of these women, then, present things in a way that allows much better communication and shared progress. Whereas Freud mostly worked on other folks' intimate neuroses from a more "professional" standpoint at the power/status level of interpersonal intimacy, Katie and Horney included at least the recognition of intimacy and sometimes that intimacy directly.
I believe it was Marshall McLuhan who said that what the world needs now is "thinking mothers". This gender stuff fascinates me. If McLuhan's comment is interpreted in a contentious manner, we could respond that the world needs "feeling fathers". Having done my internship at the VA, though, I'd say that many of those men--having been taught to not feel and express emotions--will feel better about feelings if they have a solid way to think about and also talk about emotions. The knee-jerk reaction to women's oppression may be a radical sort of anti-male feminism, and it helps to both be thoughtful concerning that reactivity as well as remaining aware of intimacy while addressing oppression. (Unless you want gender pogroms.) On the flipside, the knee-jerk reaction to facing suppressed emotion includes everything from rage to shame, sorrow, depression, confusion, meaninglessness, etc. Good luck trying to convince guys that they need to go into that swamp of feelings without some tools and a plan. And if you think you just want them to feel and express whatever they might feel as genuine, spend some time in anger management groups! Society in general is also better off when men have some tools and a plan.
Byron Katie has been on my radar recently. I have spent some time considering how her type of inquiry or "The Work" as she sometimes calls it fits with the three degrees of interpersonal relating (inclusion/exclusion, power/status, and the closest one--intimacy). Part of what I like about her presentation is that it allows for dialogue to be helpful. Rather than sitting on a meditation cushion, we can make solid personal progress by having a reasonable discussion concerning things that make us unhappy. And doing so in Katie's way structures the conversation so that progress is almost inevitable and sometimes truly amazing. As with many things, the more you do inquiry, the more "natural" it may feel. Part of what I love about personal progress, though, is that this natural feeling retains a certain specialness even as it becomes expected--it becomes somewhat ordinary to us, but remains bright. (I'll assume some familiarity with her ideas, but there is a link to her website above.)
Essentially, I'd say inquiry is a type of cognitive therapy from a more enlightened perspective than cognitive therapy(CT) is usually conducted from. In other words, it is very like CT but goes beyond what most would consider to be CT. Many cognitive therapists, though, would benefit from engaging The Work. Katie believes that all suffering comes from attachment to thoughts. Rather than just trying to detach from thinking--which she sees as pointless--she tries to help people find their problematic thoughts and then invite people to change their relationship to those particular thoughts.
Thoughts (as Katie describes them) seem most often or most obviously connected to introjected roles and customs at that second degree (power/status) of interpersonal intimacy. These introjections are the "shoulds" about ourselves, the world, and perhaps God that help consolidate personality and cultural disorders. These disorders are simply unhealthy and unhappy habitual patterns of engagement, feelings, thinking, and behavior.
Karen Horney (1885-1952) was one of the first female psychiatrists and a very influential thinker in the field. She described three neurotic means of reacting emotionally and one healthy way. Her healthy manner she describes as "moving with" others. The three unhealthy means are: moving towards (or simply complying in a way that compromises oneself), moving against (aggressing in a way that compromises others), and moving away (detaching in a way that compromises the relationship). I find it fascinating but not necessarily surprising that Katie presents her inquiry in a more fluid manner than I have seen cognitive therapy conducted and Horney gave interpersonal descriptions of neuroses (as compared to Freud's intrapersonal descriptions of neuroses. Both of these women, then, present things in a way that allows much better communication and shared progress. Whereas Freud mostly worked on other folks' intimate neuroses from a more "professional" standpoint at the power/status level of interpersonal intimacy, Katie and Horney included at least the recognition of intimacy and sometimes that intimacy directly.
I believe it was Marshall McLuhan who said that what the world needs now is "thinking mothers". This gender stuff fascinates me. If McLuhan's comment is interpreted in a contentious manner, we could respond that the world needs "feeling fathers". Having done my internship at the VA, though, I'd say that many of those men--having been taught to not feel and express emotions--will feel better about feelings if they have a solid way to think about and also talk about emotions. The knee-jerk reaction to women's oppression may be a radical sort of anti-male feminism, and it helps to both be thoughtful concerning that reactivity as well as remaining aware of intimacy while addressing oppression. (Unless you want gender pogroms.) On the flipside, the knee-jerk reaction to facing suppressed emotion includes everything from rage to shame, sorrow, depression, confusion, meaninglessness, etc. Good luck trying to convince guys that they need to go into that swamp of feelings without some tools and a plan. And if you think you just want them to feel and express whatever they might feel as genuine, spend some time in anger management groups! Society in general is also better off when men have some tools and a plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)