Showing posts with label judgement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judgement. Show all posts
March 28, 2011
What it Means to Say, "I Love You"
After an hour of arguing, accusations, and passive aggressive attacks, the last thing one expects to hear are the words, "I love you." But this very thing happened to a friend of mine, Joanna when talking to her cousin-in-law. Their family's relationship had been strained for months, due to financial and personal issues, and after one particularly stressful call, where Joanna was feeling angry and hurt, out of the blue, like a parting shot as she was about to hang up the phone, he said, "I love you." This was the first time she'd heard him say these words, or anything remotely close to them, since they were just cousins, and cousins-in-law at that. And that was the last she heard from him for several years afterward, because he had decided to cut her family out of his life. It left her unsettled. But she wasn't sure why.
Joanna's example is just one of the ways 'I love you' can be used to manipulate or to try to fix major relationship issues without actually being vulnerable or connecting. It happens everyday, in ongoing relationships between friends, and family, where 'I love you's are being said that don't mean love at all.
"I love you" is not "I'm sorry."
"I love you" is not "Forgive me."
"I love you" is not "Let me abuse you."
"I love you" is not "Please love me back."
"I love you" is not "I can treat you however I want to."
"I love you" is not "Now say you love me, too."
"I love you" is not "I love you now, but I can withdraw that love any time."
"I love you" is not "We are enmeshed, I own/control/think for you."
"I love you" is not "I depend on you emotionally to feel like a whole person."
"I love you" is not "I'm scared you don't love me, so I hope this keeps you around."
"I love you" is not "Let me in past your emotional boundaries."
"I love you" is not "I don't know how to really love you, so I'll use words instead of real love."
"I love you" is not "I am clearly dominant over you, and it makes me feel good."
"I love you" is not "See, I'm a better person than you."
I love you does not mean any of these things. When they are used to say these things, they hurt, they do not bring connection. They confuse, and create guilt, obligation, and even fear.
There is no blame or finger pointing here, but instead, knowing that just because someone says, "I love you," doesn't mean we are contracted to do something, implied or otherwise. It's OK to ask, "Why did you say that?" or "What do you mean by that?" It's OK not to say, "I love you," back. It's OK not to get entangled in guilt or obligation to do something different just because they said they love us.
It's easy to let, "I love you," infiltrate our emotional boundaries. But we don't have to. We can't stop the errant 'I love you's but we do have control of how easily the words jump over our fence.
I believe, that when we do really feel love, and we say "I love you," it feels good to say, no matter how they respond to us. And, more importantly, it feels good even if we do not say it. Sometimes, all we need to do to show how we feel is share a smile and treat people with respect. That can say, "I love you," more than words.
Let us be mindful of our right speech, that when we say, 'I love you," to someone, it's because it's better than not saying it.
Namaste
February 15, 2011
Why People Don't Like Each Other - Letting Go of Us/Them
It's logical to think that when someone treats us badly, we like them less.
But that's not true. It's actually the other way around.
When we treat others badly, we like them less.
It can take a long time for someone treating us badly for us to finally get the message that our love and affection is better spent elsewhere. Why would we put up with years of abuse, or let a "friend" bully us, or keep going back to partners who talk down to us if people treating us badly makes us like them less?
Whereas, when we treat others badly, we are less likely to want to be around them, to like them, or to give them future affection or love. When we treat others badly, we significantly increase the chance that we will spend our affection elsewhere.
Why is this? It stems from cognitive dissonance. Deep down, we all want to think of ourselves as good people. We wouldn't hurt anyone, or do anything bad. Well, unless, the other person deserved it. In order to maintain that we are good people, when we hurt someone or treat another person badly, we have to create a story in our mind that the other person deserved it. It was something bad about the other person that makes us treat them badly. It's their fault we behave the way we do, so we like them less.
With this understanding, we can see that treating people well isn't effective at getting them to like us better. Treating people well helps us like others more. Treating other people well cultivates a continuation of being compassionate to others and of continuing to treat them well - no matter how they treat us.
That's the key to this meditation - if we treat other people with respect, integrity, and compassion, we will like other people more, be happier, and even like ourselves more. When we like other people more, and we treat others well, we will feel more loved, and feel like we have more friends in the world. The concrete number of people who we can count as friends makes little difference. Our feeling of support and love comes from the feeling of how often we treat people well (not how often they treat us well). Think about this again. Our feeling of love and support doesn't come from how others treat us, but from how we treat others, and why we treat others that way.
If we understand this, when other people treat us badly, we will see not that this other person is a bad person or anything is wrong with them, but that they are simply treating us badly. It's when we treat others badly that we think they are bad people. If we want to get out of the "us/them" paradigm, the key is simply to treat others well. Treating others well isn't for them, but for us. How much they like us won't stem a whole lot from what we do. They will base their feelings for us much more on how they treat us.
So it's fruitless to treat others well to try and manipulate people into liking us. That not only doesn't work, but it sets up the scene to feel unappreciated and used. Instead, what works better is setting our boundaries and not allowing others to treat us badly. If they continue to treat us badly even after setting our boundaries, then it's not about us. If they treat us better after we set our boundaries, then we've made a potential friend based not on us trying to appease them or do what we think they want to make them happy, but based on two people who are treating each other well because they like themselves.
This teaching made an impact on me, because it allows me to continue to treat people well for my own reasons, rather than trying to be a peace maker or trying to "get" people to like or appreciate me. I treat people well for me, because I like other people, because I like me, because it's who I am, and because it's good for me and then, consequently, others. All of us are are responsible for our own feelings and behaviors. And if someone treats me badly, and they don't like me, I understand now that it's not me they don't like, but their own cognitive dissonance, and stories they create in their head. I do it, too. It's human. It's not personal. And that makes people's difficult behavior a lot easier to deal with emotionally.
But that's not true. It's actually the other way around.
When we treat others badly, we like them less.
It can take a long time for someone treating us badly for us to finally get the message that our love and affection is better spent elsewhere. Why would we put up with years of abuse, or let a "friend" bully us, or keep going back to partners who talk down to us if people treating us badly makes us like them less?
Whereas, when we treat others badly, we are less likely to want to be around them, to like them, or to give them future affection or love. When we treat others badly, we significantly increase the chance that we will spend our affection elsewhere.
Why is this? It stems from cognitive dissonance. Deep down, we all want to think of ourselves as good people. We wouldn't hurt anyone, or do anything bad. Well, unless, the other person deserved it. In order to maintain that we are good people, when we hurt someone or treat another person badly, we have to create a story in our mind that the other person deserved it. It was something bad about the other person that makes us treat them badly. It's their fault we behave the way we do, so we like them less.
With this understanding, we can see that treating people well isn't effective at getting them to like us better. Treating people well helps us like others more. Treating other people well cultivates a continuation of being compassionate to others and of continuing to treat them well - no matter how they treat us.
That's the key to this meditation - if we treat other people with respect, integrity, and compassion, we will like other people more, be happier, and even like ourselves more. When we like other people more, and we treat others well, we will feel more loved, and feel like we have more friends in the world. The concrete number of people who we can count as friends makes little difference. Our feeling of support and love comes from the feeling of how often we treat people well (not how often they treat us well). Think about this again. Our feeling of love and support doesn't come from how others treat us, but from how we treat others, and why we treat others that way.
If we understand this, when other people treat us badly, we will see not that this other person is a bad person or anything is wrong with them, but that they are simply treating us badly. It's when we treat others badly that we think they are bad people. If we want to get out of the "us/them" paradigm, the key is simply to treat others well. Treating others well isn't for them, but for us. How much they like us won't stem a whole lot from what we do. They will base their feelings for us much more on how they treat us.
So it's fruitless to treat others well to try and manipulate people into liking us. That not only doesn't work, but it sets up the scene to feel unappreciated and used. Instead, what works better is setting our boundaries and not allowing others to treat us badly. If they continue to treat us badly even after setting our boundaries, then it's not about us. If they treat us better after we set our boundaries, then we've made a potential friend based not on us trying to appease them or do what we think they want to make them happy, but based on two people who are treating each other well because they like themselves.
This teaching made an impact on me, because it allows me to continue to treat people well for my own reasons, rather than trying to be a peace maker or trying to "get" people to like or appreciate me. I treat people well for me, because I like other people, because I like me, because it's who I am, and because it's good for me and then, consequently, others. All of us are are responsible for our own feelings and behaviors. And if someone treats me badly, and they don't like me, I understand now that it's not me they don't like, but their own cognitive dissonance, and stories they create in their head. I do it, too. It's human. It's not personal. And that makes people's difficult behavior a lot easier to deal with emotionally.
January 30, 2008
Zen Podcasts
I found a great series of Zen podcasts. It's from the San Francisco Zen Center. The public lectures are also available in iTunes for free. I listened to one yesterday about emotions, judgment and perception by Edward Brown. I fell in love with his voice, which was so calming and gentle. So opposite of the the constant child-chatter and media-chatter that goes on around me all day, everyday.
Oh, and he also had some great observations about emotions and judgment, and what it means to be "zen". What does it look like to be "zen". I don't know. After his lecture, I still don't know. But I feel better about knowing, because that's the point.
Oh, and he also had some great observations about emotions and judgment, and what it means to be "zen". What does it look like to be "zen". I don't know. After his lecture, I still don't know. But I feel better about knowing, because that's the point.
January 20, 2008
Criticism and Correction
"First, do no harm," is a Zen mantra. That includes "right speech", where we refrain from speaking unless it adds positively to a conversation or to the world.
What about criticism and correction? Does it have any place in "right speech"?
I was thinking about this yesterday as I started reading Dave Carnegie's How to Make Friends and Influence People. I picked up the book at the library last week while doing some research on passive-aggressive behavior. I've heard quite a bit about the book (mostly in the form of jokes about the title), and was curious.
So I started reading it last night, and the first precept is "Don't criticize, condemn or complain."
It sounded very Zen.
His reasons were logical; people don't react well to criticism, people don't change their behavior after being criticized (except to avoid criticism later), and people trust us less when we criticize often. Makes sense.
But is it practical? Can we go through life without criticizing or correcting, especially as parents? Is there another way to express our desires without that?
Passive-aggressives are very good at finding fault in others, while hiding from their own faults. Is finding fault in others universally problematic?
Do you know anyone who criticizes, yet is still well-liked and makes friends easily? A friend of mine once said, "It's not the people who like the things we do who are our friends, but the people who hate the same things we do."
Dale Carnegie uses Abraham Lincoln as his running example of a man who chose not to criticize. Can we all be like Abraham Lincoln? Or would Lincoln crash and burn in today's world of critical media and our society's lust for drama?
What about criticism and correction? Does it have any place in "right speech"?
I was thinking about this yesterday as I started reading Dave Carnegie's How to Make Friends and Influence People. I picked up the book at the library last week while doing some research on passive-aggressive behavior. I've heard quite a bit about the book (mostly in the form of jokes about the title), and was curious.
So I started reading it last night, and the first precept is "Don't criticize, condemn or complain."
It sounded very Zen.
His reasons were logical; people don't react well to criticism, people don't change their behavior after being criticized (except to avoid criticism later), and people trust us less when we criticize often. Makes sense.
But is it practical? Can we go through life without criticizing or correcting, especially as parents? Is there another way to express our desires without that?
Passive-aggressives are very good at finding fault in others, while hiding from their own faults. Is finding fault in others universally problematic?
Do you know anyone who criticizes, yet is still well-liked and makes friends easily? A friend of mine once said, "It's not the people who like the things we do who are our friends, but the people who hate the same things we do."
Dale Carnegie uses Abraham Lincoln as his running example of a man who chose not to criticize. Can we all be like Abraham Lincoln? Or would Lincoln crash and burn in today's world of critical media and our society's lust for drama?
February 23, 2007
Love Is My Religion
Ziggy Marley and his brother David's video Love Is My Religion is on the album that won best Reggae album at the Grammy's. Hollywood has always been far more secular than the general population. But this song... this is kind of the stuff that influences people. Spirituality without religion isn't a new concept, but for our youth, and our country's Hollywood dependent culture, it is.
After watching the video, I wonder, is the concept of love "better" when it's through an organized religion? Is it something different when it's felt, and practiced, by someone who isn't saved? If love is what God is made of, does he really care whether we belong to a religious group or not, so long as we are loving? And what's worse then, in God's proverbial eyes - one who is not religious, but loves deeply the people and world around him, or one who "believes" but doesn't love anything but himself and his God?
If there is indeed some kind of judgement after I die, I'm confident that if God is good, he won't tie salvation to whether I believed in him. If there is a God, who judges, and he judges based on faith, then that kind of shallow God is not an entity I'd want to serve anyway.
Love, that's what it's all about. Whatever it takes to arrive at universal love, and deep caring for the suffering and happiness of the people around us, is fine by me. But as soon as some kind of black and white rules area slapped down on how we are supposed to arrive at love, and if we don't use THAT ONE path to arrive at love it's as if we don't love at all, it's like we're closing our eyes, and loving only the things that we think are good. What's the point of that kind of love?
Just as in life, black and white is easier to manage, easier to judge. But the truth is, life, and death, and I'm guessing the afterlife if there is any, is grey. Grey, grey and more grey. There is no black and white, except for what we want there to be, and expect there to be.
Even in love. It's all grey. I just love as much as I can, with all my heart. Ziggy Marley had it right - love is the best.
After watching the video, I wonder, is the concept of love "better" when it's through an organized religion? Is it something different when it's felt, and practiced, by someone who isn't saved? If love is what God is made of, does he really care whether we belong to a religious group or not, so long as we are loving? And what's worse then, in God's proverbial eyes - one who is not religious, but loves deeply the people and world around him, or one who "believes" but doesn't love anything but himself and his God?
If there is indeed some kind of judgement after I die, I'm confident that if God is good, he won't tie salvation to whether I believed in him. If there is a God, who judges, and he judges based on faith, then that kind of shallow God is not an entity I'd want to serve anyway.
Love, that's what it's all about. Whatever it takes to arrive at universal love, and deep caring for the suffering and happiness of the people around us, is fine by me. But as soon as some kind of black and white rules area slapped down on how we are supposed to arrive at love, and if we don't use THAT ONE path to arrive at love it's as if we don't love at all, it's like we're closing our eyes, and loving only the things that we think are good. What's the point of that kind of love?
Just as in life, black and white is easier to manage, easier to judge. But the truth is, life, and death, and I'm guessing the afterlife if there is any, is grey. Grey, grey and more grey. There is no black and white, except for what we want there to be, and expect there to be.
Even in love. It's all grey. I just love as much as I can, with all my heart. Ziggy Marley had it right - love is the best.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)