35: Ecstacy by Escaping Attachments

First step in Abusive Relation: Establishing Dominance

In an abusive relation - the first step is establishing Dominance. The Abuser attempts to turn those around him into passive Victims.

If the Person is already a Victim, then the Dominator seeks to reinforce the relation.

If the Person is also Forceful, then there is a fight to establish Dominance.

In effect the Abuser is attempting to bring the Victim into his sphere or his Group - so that the Victim will do his bidding. This relation is shown in the diagram below.

In terms of the metaphors we’ve previously established: In the Abusive relation the Abuser attempts to merge the Self of the Victim with his own so that s(he) will do he says. He achieves this through abuse or intimidation. This is a common situation in the relation between countries, as well as between individuals. The USA militarily dominated Vietnam, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iraq again - over a 50-year period - to force them into complying with the will of the Conglomerates that run the world. The Tsar of Russia sent out his military to force the peasantry to send soldiers. The communist leader Stalin sent out his soldiers to force the peasantry onto collective farms. In each case the Abuser forces the Victim to comply. This is very different than encouraging or requesting compliance.

In the Normal relation the Selves of the two people are separate - making independent but cooperative decisions. In the ideal democracy, the Populace votes to determine the course of their Country. They reach a consensus as to common goals and then abide by it.

Groups frequently come to a consensus as to which is the right course for everyone. This is truer for the smallest groups and less true for the largest Groups. Rather than being anything nefarious it is merely matter of logistics. But it is something to be aware of. Large groups are least likely to take the common good into account as the Individual tends to be sacrificed for the Group good. As we’ve mentioned, what is good for the Group is not necessarily good for the Individual - although Propagandists tend to minimize this self-evident proposition.

Internal and External Compliance

In the above examples we were speaking of the situation when the Victim gives her Self up to the Abuser due to fear of Punishment. This means that she has been dominated to the extent that the Will of the Abuser is the Will of the Victim. There is another circumstance. This is when the Abused cooperates externally, but doesn’t internally. An extreme example is when someone is robbed at gunpoint. One gives up their wallet under duress, not willingly. The Robber has not convinced or enticed the Victim to give up his money voluntarily. This is very different from the swindler who convinces the Victim to sign over his life savings voluntarily.

There are few different circumstances, which are shown below.

First if Person B and Person C are equal, then they cooperate - maintaining their own sense of Self and yet merging their external worlds for mutual benefit: B = C.

The middle situation is when C joins B’s group, submitting to B’s leadership externally but maintaining one’s internal sense of self with the choice to belong and/or comply.

The situation diagrammed on the right is when C gives up mind, body and soul to B.

There are 2 situations that arise when Person B > Person C.

    C can submit externally to the dominance of B but maintain his own Self or Soul,

    Or C can submit to B externally and internally.

 

Note that the Diagram on the right can represent a few different circumstance - the Pupil who’s given his Self up to the Master - the Victim who has given her Self up to the Abuser - the Patriot who has given his Self to the service of his Country - the Seeker who has given up her Self to God.

The middle diagram could also represent Generals behind a King - Senators behind the President - Vice Presidents supporting the CEO. In each of these cases the joining of the Group and supporting the leader is for mutual benefit, and theoretically at least can be broken at any time. This is different from the peasants who were conscripted for the army and expected to serve the King without any possibility of leaving except with the possibility of severe consequences. They had no Choice.

Of course while the Peasant’s power of Choice is taken away through Force, the Student gives up his Self and power of Choice willingly to the Master. Similarly the Soldier who enlists voluntarily gives up his power of Choice to the Army.

As an example external compliance without internal compliance: while R attempted to turn L into his Victim, he didn’t care about her internal compliance, only her external compliance. As long as she didn’t bug him about his trailer, he didn’t really care what she thought.

Internal and External Attachment

Compliance has much to do with Attachment. Many times people don’t comply because they are overly attached. There is both internal and external attachment. The Person who is completely attached internally and externally is very vulnerable because they can’t let go. When the Universe takes something away that the Person is attached to internally, they scream and cry - suffering a great deal of emotional pain - throwing their Life out of balance. R, who was firmly attached internally and externally to his trailer/complex of possessions, turned his whole Existence upside down because he wouldn’t let go of his external possessions. Robert was attached internally and externally.

External and Internal Detachment

The state of internal and external detachment is that of the Yogi or the complete Follower. The Yogi attempts to let go of the chains of existence, while the complete Follower gives themselves up to the whim of the Leader. In some ways R was hoping that he could condition L to obey him – to be his Follower.

Ideal is the Middle: External Attachment/Internal Detachment

The ideal is to be attached externally, but to be detached internally. This means that one attempts to win the external game, but is not attached to it. When one has joined the Game, they should play to win. However should they lose, it is important not to hang onto results and be a ‘poor loser’. This implies that one believes that the external Game is real, when it is not. One’s identification with the external Game is the root of internal pain and suffering.

Complete Detachment antidote for excessive Attachment, not solution to Life

Not playing the Game is the state of complete detachment and is only necessary when one’s attachment to the Game causes excessive pain. Complete Detachment is the antidote for Excessive Attachment, but is not the solution to life. It is a medicine not an elixir - as some suggest.

Playing the game to Win is important and yet we don’t want to become attached to the unpredictable results. This is state of internal attachment. R hoped to Win the Trailer Game and played to win. However when it became obvious that he had lost - he couldn’t let go. This caused him tremendous inconvenience and mental stress.

If we think the Game is Real, we have already lost the Game

The underlying assumption that most of us operate under is that the Game is Real and so of course we play for keeps. However this only causes emotional pain, which disturbs our Body. However if our Body is disturbed then it excretes chemicals which imbalance the System. If our System is unbalanced then there is no Peace. If there is no Peace, how can we enjoy Beauty and Dance with the Gods? We have lost the Game.

Disclaimer

Remember this is just an attempt at communication and in no way is meant to represent Reality. These words are merely pointers - signposts.

The attempt to categorize the World - developing mental Systems to rope in Life - which implies the supremacy of the Mind - this is the falseness - because ultimately all distinctions fractalize at their boundaries. This work attempts to point at these boundary lines, instead of delineating the Truth. We have deconstructed some lines by magnifying them. Through intense examination, we have seen that these lines are constructed of some new lines - which can in turn be magnified to realize new lines. This exploration points at the Mystery that is at the foundation. However rather than being discouraged or intimidated by the Mystery, this book is a call for intense examination.

To deal with the Mystery we attempt to take the Metalogical perspective instead of the Logical perspective. Metalogic is based in Paradox - founded on the Intuitive evaluation of multiple Logical systems simultaneously. As part of this holistic view, Metalogic also takes Instinct and the Little Voice (Subconscious Directives) into account when making decisions.

One line that the Author attempts to magnify and thereby fractalize is that between Being and Person. Ultimately we are attempting to persuade the Reader of the importance of differentiating the Inner Self/Being from the Person. This mixture is the primary source of attachment to results - which is the primary illusion - which leads to mental suffering - which leads to physical pain. With these words the Author is making a somewhat awkward attempt at explaining why the illusion of the mis-identification with Person is the root of all human suffering - And that the detachment or differentiation of One’s Person and Self is the key to Bliss.

This is not Theory. This communication is based in Direct Experience and is pointing to Direct Experience. The Author regularly experiences Reality Directly with its attendant Bliss. In these pages he is merely attempting to suggest what this Direct Experience is and how to get there.

Hence, Ecstasy has occurred. The Author attempts to use these words as signposts to point in the direction of this Ecstasy.

 

Home    The Firing Process    IV. Self & Will    Previous    Next    Comments