"A relationship was not meant to be the joining at the hip of two emotional invalids."
From "A Return to Love" by Marianne Williamson
As I was considering how I would follow up on my initial foray into Phase 2 relationships, I was re-reading a book by Marianne Williamson which provides some cogent insights from A Course in Miracles.
I want to touch on several points that she makes because with just a little translation, we are reading what I believe is the explanation for unsatisfactory Phase 1 relationships and the blueprint for Phase 2 relationships.
Let's start with the big picture. The type of relationship most of us sought in the past (but not now, right?) is the result of cutting ourselves off from God. In Busting Loose terms, because we don't remember who we are, we end up seeking someone to cover up that niggling feeling that we're missing our infinitely abundant selves.
-- In ACIM, we are told that we are brought together with others for teaching purposes. Some for a short period of time -- the guy at the laundromat dressed in a garbage bag predicting the end of the world. Some for longer periods -the first ex-husband. Some forever -- you know who you are. In BL, other creations are here to reflect back something we feel about ourselves, give a gift of insight or set something in motion that supports us. The teaching part continues for as long as we need to do the Process to reclaim our power, then disappears. Intimate relationships just force us to do the learning a lot faster.
-- In ACIM, Williamson explains, that the "special relationship" makes other people -- their behavior, their choices, their opinions of us -- too important. It makes us think we need another person, when in fact, we are complete and whole as we are. Ditto for Busting Loose. We give power to the illusion of the "other," then are disappointed when our prince or princess doesn't lead us back to "Infiniteland" and our wholeness.
-- And one last item from "A Return to Love." "The purpose of the special relationship (Phase 1) is to teach us to hate ourselves, while the purpose of a holy relationship (Phase 2) is to heal our self-loathing."
Ouch. Where'd the fairy tale go?
Which gets me back to the original quote and the somewhat pathetic image that conjures up (although I still recognize even that image as a Phase 1 miracle.) Phase 1 relationships are typically about looking for something "out there" because we "in here" are not good enough.
The belief in romantic love must be recognized for the less than truthful construction it is, leaving us to ponder the question of whether a true Phase 2 relationship means one that we don't actually have with another person.
In other words, since the relationship is always with ourselves (God, Expanded Self) do we really need that other person, or are they just getting in the way? In Phase 1, it seems apparent that Expanded Self wants us to experience the full range of feeling with another person, until we stop screaming long enough to pick up a copy of "Busting Loose."
In the expansion part of Phase 2, the intimate relationship provides us with more opportunities to feel discomfort, but this time with the option of doing the Process and reclaiming power.
But in the play phase of Phase 2, where we ultimately end up, we would be so joyful and expansive that we'd be happy with or without an intimate relationship.
Now, as usual, I leave a lot more questions than answers. But assuming you chose to have a relationship for fun, what might this alleged relationship look like? How long might it last? Does it involve multiple non-sexual partners? Does it involve sex at some point? How much sex? What kind of sex? Sorry, getting carried away. What I meant to say was how would an intimate relationship support our playing in Phase 2?
I'm waiting....
From "A Return to Love" by Marianne Williamson
As I was considering how I would follow up on my initial foray into Phase 2 relationships, I was re-reading a book by Marianne Williamson which provides some cogent insights from A Course in Miracles.
I want to touch on several points that she makes because with just a little translation, we are reading what I believe is the explanation for unsatisfactory Phase 1 relationships and the blueprint for Phase 2 relationships.
Let's start with the big picture. The type of relationship most of us sought in the past (but not now, right?) is the result of cutting ourselves off from God. In Busting Loose terms, because we don't remember who we are, we end up seeking someone to cover up that niggling feeling that we're missing our infinitely abundant selves.
-- In ACIM, we are told that we are brought together with others for teaching purposes. Some for a short period of time -- the guy at the laundromat dressed in a garbage bag predicting the end of the world. Some for longer periods -the first ex-husband. Some forever -- you know who you are. In BL, other creations are here to reflect back something we feel about ourselves, give a gift of insight or set something in motion that supports us. The teaching part continues for as long as we need to do the Process to reclaim our power, then disappears. Intimate relationships just force us to do the learning a lot faster.
-- In ACIM, Williamson explains, that the "special relationship" makes other people -- their behavior, their choices, their opinions of us -- too important. It makes us think we need another person, when in fact, we are complete and whole as we are. Ditto for Busting Loose. We give power to the illusion of the "other," then are disappointed when our prince or princess doesn't lead us back to "Infiniteland" and our wholeness.
-- And one last item from "A Return to Love." "The purpose of the special relationship (Phase 1) is to teach us to hate ourselves, while the purpose of a holy relationship (Phase 2) is to heal our self-loathing."
Ouch. Where'd the fairy tale go?
Which gets me back to the original quote and the somewhat pathetic image that conjures up (although I still recognize even that image as a Phase 1 miracle.) Phase 1 relationships are typically about looking for something "out there" because we "in here" are not good enough.
The belief in romantic love must be recognized for the less than truthful construction it is, leaving us to ponder the question of whether a true Phase 2 relationship means one that we don't actually have with another person.
In other words, since the relationship is always with ourselves (God, Expanded Self) do we really need that other person, or are they just getting in the way? In Phase 1, it seems apparent that Expanded Self wants us to experience the full range of feeling with another person, until we stop screaming long enough to pick up a copy of "Busting Loose."
In the expansion part of Phase 2, the intimate relationship provides us with more opportunities to feel discomfort, but this time with the option of doing the Process and reclaiming power.
But in the play phase of Phase 2, where we ultimately end up, we would be so joyful and expansive that we'd be happy with or without an intimate relationship.
Now, as usual, I leave a lot more questions than answers. But assuming you chose to have a relationship for fun, what might this alleged relationship look like? How long might it last? Does it involve multiple non-sexual partners? Does it involve sex at some point? How much sex? What kind of sex? Sorry, getting carried away. What I meant to say was how would an intimate relationship support our playing in Phase 2?
I'm waiting....
RSS Feed
