l love you … but only because your security and satisfaction
are as significant to me as my own security and satisfaction
These wise words echo the psychoanalytic thought of Harry Stack Sullivan (1892-1949), a psychiatrist who viewed personality as living and breathing and finding its meaning within a complex, sometimes complicated, sometimes complicating, web of interpersonal relations.
This view of personality implies that we cannot ever ignore, avoid, bypass, or escape the experience of dependence in any one of three of its forms: (1) that form known as in-dependence; (2) that form known as co-dependence; and (3) that form known as inter-dependence.
Let us explore and examine each of these forms of dependence.
1
Now you might be thinking: in-dependence is a form of dependence?
Think of it this way: from who or what am I realizing in-dependence?
Any assertion of in-dependence is a form of dependence because it references and relies on the other, implicitly or explicitly, to define or refine the self. One might even go so far as to say that in-dependence is the most primitive form of dependence because it exploits the being or existence of the other to define or refine itself as being this or that, so as to exist as this or that.
Consider this mantra of in-dependence, repeated here for emphasis:
I am totally in-dependent of the good or bad opinion of others
I am totally in-dependent of the good or bad opinion of others
I am totally in-dependent of the good or bad opinion of others
I am totally in-dependent of the good or bad opinion of others
I am totally in-dependent of the good or bad opinion of others
By this way of thinking, the independence is found in dependence.
To drive this point home, consider the following attempts at control:
I do not want you to be thinking about pink elephants right now
I do not want you to be thinking about pink elephants right now
I do not want you to be thinking about pink elephants right now
I do not want you to be thinking about pink elephants right now
I do not want you to be thinking about pink elephants right now
At this point, I am willing to wager what you are thinking about.
2
A less primitive form of dependence is found in co-dependence.
A Wikipedia entry defines co-dependence as follows: “a type of dysfunctional helping relationship where one person supports or enables another person’s drug addiction, alcoholism, gambling addiction, poor mental health, immaturity, irresponsibility, or under-achievement.”
This definition begs a complex question: why would anyone need to support or enable someone who is addicted, miserable, immature, irresponsible, or relatively insignificant? In other words, what need or needs would such a “helpful” person be attempting to meet?
The game of co-dependence offers drama and excitement, comedy and resentment, emptiness and tears: “if you agree to play the rescuer, then I get to play the victim (nudge, nudge, wink, wink): you get to have a purpose in life and that purpose is to help me play the victim.”
Seriously, what do you suppose is going on with co-dependence?
Let us now proceed to extract the existential juice from this game.
First, let us pull back and view this game as a victim would view it:
I feel trapped in this relationship, caught like a bug in a web; I simply cannot move beyond it, either because I would die to myself trying or I would be forced to endure a great deal of suffering to make it on my own. Truth be told, I resonate with one or more of these reasons:
- I have something very important to gain from this person;
- if I leave this person, I will be forced to die by my own hands;
- I simply cannot leave this person after all that was done for me;
- this person is my flesh and blood; I deserve to get help and support;
- I am tied to this person karmically; I do what I can to deserve the help
Next, let us pull back and view this game as a rescuer would view it:
I feel trapped in this relationship, caught like a bug in a web; I simply cannot move beyond it, either because I would die to myself trying or I would be forced to endure a great deal of suffering to make it on my own. Truth be told, I resonate with one or more of these reasons:
- I have something very important to give to this person;
- if I leave this person, this person will die by their own hands;
- I simply cannot tell this person to leave after all I was able to do;
- this person is my flesh and blood; I cannot just withdraw my support;
- I am tied to this person karmically; I do what I can to serve this person
From the perspective of an observer, it is easy to see that the victim and the rescuer are making excuses, but in view of their context, these excuses are more than a little serious ~ relatively easy for the observer to dismiss, but not so easy for the victim and rescuer to dissolve.
Clearly, co-dependence cannot be resolved at the level of co-dependence.
3
If the siren call of in-dependence is but a blunt solution to the mire of co-dependence, the play of mature inter-dependence offers an elegant solution, both for the victim and the rescuer, to include (as much as this is possible) and transcend (as much as this is possible) the mire.
The mire itself is worthy of inquiry: how do co-dependents feed on the energy of codependency?
Consider …
–
“When I play the victim, I compel my co-dependent to tolerate or support my need to _____”
“When I play rescuer, I enable my co-dependent by tolerating or supporting a need to _____”
Insert one or more of the following (or insert one of your own if none of these apply): be addicted (to …), be miserable, be chaotic, be confused, be conflicted, behave immaturely, behave irresponsibly, be comfortable, be under-achieving, be over-achieving, stay safe, gain approval, get attention, etc.
–
Here is an example that reflects a low frequency of consciousness:
“When I play the victim, I compel my co-dependent to tolerate or support my need to be safe”
“When I play rescuer, I enable my co-dependent by tolerating or supporting a need to be safe”
Here is an example that reflects a high frequency of consciousness:
“When I play the victim, I compel my co-dependent to tolerate or support my need to be visible”
“When I play rescuer, I enable my co-dependent by tolerating or supporting a need to be visible”
The following case study serves to illustrate the entanglement of this compulsion for completion.
Case study
J and C have been together for more than eight years.
When J plays the rescuer, he enables C by tolerating or supporting her perceived needs to stay safe and be comfortable, having C live her life through J. By way of contrast, when C steps into victimhood and plays the victim, she compels J to tolerate or support these perceived needs, whether she is aware of doing so or not. Granted, her safety and comfort are legitimate needs, but attempting to live her life through J is not.
As I mentioned, the play of mature inter-dependence offers an elegant solution, both for the victim and the rescuer, to include (as much as this is possible) and transcend (as much as this is possible) the mire of codependency ~ both the inclusion and the transcension are key.
By way of inclusion, J is willing, through inquiry, to meet his co-dependent half way by helping her to get clear about her perceived needs for safety (she is sensitive to going out alone, for example) and comfort (she is sensitive to having too much or too little heat, for example).
By way of transcension, J is willing, through advocacy, to go so far as to bring her up to a level where she no longer needs to live her life through him, not through in-dependence, which is primitive, but through inter-dependence, where her give-and-take is a matter of course.
Inquiry is the act of re-questing information, and one need only be ready, willing, and able to inquire inside a codependency, but with personal advocacy (in contrast to political advocacy, which involves a defense of rights), more is required, which includes ongoing acts of inquiry.
Personal advocacy is a process of patience and persistence to ensure that someone who is vulnerable, or prone to feeling vulnerable, can speak truth to an issue, while giving due consideration to his or her views and wishes when decisions are being made about the quality and vitality of his or her life, such that the inter-dependency of inquiry and advocacy replace the co-dependency of compulsion and completion.
The following three forms of inquiry initiate the codependents into following a patient and persistent process of moving the relationship into (inclusion) and beyond (transcension) the mire of codependency:
- What is the most important issue to be considered?
- Which views and wishes are relevant to this issue?
- What clear decision can be made about this issue?
Let’s start here: what is the One Issue in their codependency to which J needs to give his attention (for the sake of inclusion) and appreciation (for the sake of transcension)? To kickstart this process on both sides, it helps to brainstorm possibilities to get the creative juices flowing.
This creative brainstorming is important to the overall process because it lays a groundwork for addressing and resolving the second query: which views and wishes are relevant to this issue?
–
J: I would prefer that she …
address her own need for safety:
go outside on her own without expecting me to go with her
buy her own clothes, using the means that she already has
address her own need for comfort:
shower on a regular basis, at least once every 3 or 4 days
be more tolerant of variations of heat around a single norm
perform her fair share of the chores:
contribute to chores by doing laundry and shopping for food
take interest in budgeting and managing household finances
–
With respect to safety, J knows that C has thousands of dollars worth of cash and gift cards that she can use to buy herself clothes, but because she feels compelled to hold onto said cash and cards for a rainy day, she requires more funds on a regular basis to feel secure enough to buy clothes that make her feel good so that she can feel more inclined to go out on her own without feeling judged as less than worthy.
With respect to comfort, J knows that C cannot shower regularly until she finds herself in a home where she doesn’t feel compelled to black out every time she meets with a living situation that fills her with disgust or that feels revolting. It also doesn’t help that she cannot control the heating as this compels her to stay under the covers in bed where she spends much of her time ruminating about her misfortunes.
With respect to chores, J knows that C cannot contribute to the chores so long as her needs for safety and comfort are not being met. As for taking an interest in the household budgeting, J knows that C cannot and will not do so unless and until she can start working and earning an income of her own, which is not likely happen so long as her needs for safety and comfort are not being met on a regular, consistent basis.
–
C: I would prefer that he …
help me address my need for safety:
go outside with me until I can feel safe to go out on my own
give me a monthly stipend so that I can buy/wear nice clothes
help me address my need for comfort:
get me into a place where I don’t feel compelled to black out
make accommodations around my sensitivity to hot and cold
tolerate my need to hold off on the chores:
until I find myself in a better place where I am not blacking out
until I can start working again and begin earning my own income
–
With respect to safety, C knows that J is doing the best he can with what he has to help her meet her need to go out with her at least once a week for shopping (without buying, as this is not yet something she can do on a regular basis) or dining out (when this is possible). C knows that J is reluctantly willing though not yet able to give her a monthly stipend so that she can buy/wear nice clothes on a regular basis.
With respect to comfort, C knows that J and her are headed for a better place where doesn’t feel compelled to black out so often, but this will also depend on whether accommodations around her sensitivities to hot and cold can be made. If they can, then she will likely start getting back into the swing of things by bathing, working out, and buying the clothes she needs to get out on her own again.
With respect to chores, C knows that J knows that if her needs for safety and comfort are met in the ways she needs and wants them to be met, then she’ll be well on her way to feeling secure and satisfied enough to begin a job search and, if fortune smiles on her (and J), then the opportunity will present itself for her to get back to work and earn an income, rising to a level where she can seek a mature interdependence.
Let us now revisit the questions …
1) What is the most important issue to be considered?
In light of the aforementioned preferences, here is how J and C view the One Issue …
For J, the One Issue is not that his partner needs to feel psychologically safe about going out on her own without feeling judged, and not that she needs to be comfortable (as she cannot yet be comfortable as long as her condition is stagnant), but that as a result of not being able or willing to meet these basic needs for herself (for a host of reasons outlined above), she is attempting to get J to pick up the slack for her.
For C, the One Issue is getting to a better place where she can begin the process of living again. While J does what he can to accommodate her needs while meeting his own, J knows that his best and perhaps only hope rests in getting her to a better place so that she can begin making mature moves towards interdependence, where giving and receiving are a matter of course for her in her relationship with J.
2) Which views and wishes are relevant to this issue?
The view of C: help me and support me to meet my needs for safety and comfort in the ways that I feel are necessary for me so that I can begin the process of living and working and playing again.
The view of J: I will do what I can with what I have to get us to a better place and keep us there.
The wishes of C and J are as indicated above.
3) What clear decision can be made about this issue?
Prepare to accommodate and assimilate the consequences of moving to a better, more comfortable place with the realization that a process of approaching interdependence is going to take time.
*
As I prepared this case study, I came to realize that its backstory is more involved and complicated than can be elucidated in this post, leading me to believe that codependencies are entanglements whose complexities often exceed not only the coping capacities of the codependents but the integrating capacities of those who make attempts to intervene and advocate on behalf of the codependents.
I cannot help but sense that the details of this case could be reworked and reworked yet again with more information about what happened, and is happening, to these two unfortunate individuals.
Nevertheless, in view of this study, let us now expose the roots of interdependence.
*
the aim in life is less about making money to have more and better,
than it is to cultivate and calibrate the consciousness through which
the substance of life can flow as and when it is required or desired
These words echo the brilliance of Eric Butterworth (1916-2003) in his work Spiritual Economics.
In my experience, codependency is resolvable through a sound relationship with personal economics, of which there are two facets: material and spiritual. I’ll begin with the spiritual facet, the more important facet for those who have crossed the threhold from money to meaning.
If a personal material economics concerns itself with the production, consumption, and distribution of material wealth, then a personal spiritual economics concerns itself with the generation, application, and dispensation of spiritual wealth by way of these three primary pathways:
- prosperity: to move forward with hope (hints: be optimistic, be enthusiastic)
- affluence: to flow abundantly (hints: wherever possible, be kind, be generous)
- security: to be without care (have faith in your prosperity / trust your affluence)
To find yourself on the path of generating prosperity, applying your affluence, and offering dispensations through security, it helps to find and keep a singular focus, which can be summarized as follows …
focus, not on what you have, not on what you do, not on who you can be, but on who you must be,
so that the having and the doing and the being come about as a meaningful byproduct of becoming
If you must, etch these words into memory by whatever means necessary.
The material facet of personal economics is no less important than the spiritual facet, involving as it does four vital relationships that serve to bring the meaning, purpose, and direction of your life into focus:
1
authorship
am I being and doing what I love to be and do,
so much so that I would be willing to pay for it?
2
creatorship
am I committed to gaining and keeping mastery?
what can I do to become the very best I can be?
3
stewardship
who can I be, what can I do, to serve profoundly
in ways that are fun, unique, and inspiring to me?
4
entrepreneurship
what is the relevant marketplace willing to bear?
what is the relevant marketplace willing to pay for?
Note: you need not be an entrepreneur to find advantages and opportunities in this fourth relationship. Whatever your position or occupation, paying attention to the marketplace is wise to do. If you’re highly creative, pay close attention to what the marketplace is willing to bear.
Think of these four vital relationships with yourself as hats you wear as you go about your day and think of the questions that define these relationships as subject to your evolution as a soul and spirit.
Treat these questions as exploratory and evolutionary; do not settle for static responses once and for all. Hint: where finding and making good on advantages and opportunities are concerned, the world in which we live is no longer as static as it once was, increasingly less so.
The big aim with these four vital relationships is to seek and find both a dynamic intersection and a creative tension between your authorship, creatorship, stewardship, and entrepreneurship in ways that are materially and spiritually sustainable and satisfying for you and yours.
Use the creative tension to concentrate the intersection as much as possible so that you have plenty of time to enjoy yourself, your life, and the most meaningful, most important relationships in your life.
Most of all, intend your life to be lived to the fullest every day of the week.
*
In my experience, codependency is resolvable through a sound relationship with the four agreements.
The Four Agreements: A Practical Guide to Personal Freedom, authored by Don Miguel Angel Ruiz (b. 1952) and originally published in 1997, offers a code of conduct based on ancient Toltec wisdom by which to steer the course of your life through love, freedom, and happiness.
As much as I appreciate its wisdom, the four agreements are expressed in words that seem clunky, tending towards absolutistic thinking, and when I say this, I do not wish to fault the author, as I realize that some of what was originally written might have been lost in translation.
With that aside, I would like to summarize my understanding of the four agreements, and in so doing, soften the edges around any sword that would carve these agreements into absolute statements of intent.
Herewith, my expression of the four agreements as I understand them …
–
Your word is your wand; be impeccable with your word around making judgments and keeping commitments: being impeccable with your word means speaking without sin (in the original sense of the word “sin”); speaking without sin is tantamount to setting your aim and speaking your truth without missing the mark; missing the mark is only ever possible if you are careless in making assumptions and taking them personally. Always do your best, being impeccable in word and deed, by making few if any careless assumptions about what others think or feel, say or do, and by taking little if anything personally when others are compelled to be defensive or passive-aggressive, or to go on the offensive.
The world in which we live, unfortunately, is full of wounded, traumatized people, walking around with armor instead of flowers. As the Light of Love continues to grow and flow bright and true, the wounds and traumas continue to come up for processing, for healing and wholing.
the worse you get, the less you feel it;
the better you get, the more you feel it
the worse you feel, the less you get it;
the better you feel, the more you get it
Blessed are the wounds and the wounded for they do not always know what they say or do. Blessed, too, are the traumas and the traumatized for they do not always know what they say and do.
Yes, in word and deed, even wounds and traumas can speak if given a chance. Most important, do not make these wounds and traumas your own. The sensitive ones know what I’m talking about.
–
A snapshot of the four agreements for your consideration …
- be impeccable in word and deed (hone your archery skills)
- make few if any assumptions (inquire and inquire some more)
- take little if anything personally (inquire, advocate, encourage)
- always be and do the best you can be and do (think Kaizen)
What follows are the agreements as I understand them through the lens of INFP, my psychological type, one of 16 types in the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator developed from the work of C.G. Jung.
Through the filters of FiNe, I am primarily introverted in my feeling function (my dominant function), juggling novel and nuanced feelings in the exploration, expansion, and expression of my relationship with self and other, and extroverted in my intuitive function (my auxiliary function), seeking novel and nuanced ways to perceive and connect patterns and possibilities into harmonized, optimized, integrated wholes. I recommend running these agreements through your own filters.
Be sovereign and be authentic: be the author in the story of your life … be the attention, affection, appreciation, and approval you wish to see in this sometimes cold, sometimes dark, sometimes harsh world … truth be told, your word is your wand ~ use it wisely or not at all …
Keep drawing ever closer to the ideal of making few if any assumptions about what others think or feel, say or do, and … keep drawing ever closer to the ideal of taking little if anything personally whenever the wound is triggered, the shield is raised, and the sword is drawn …
Own your power to love, trust, care, and give of yourself, your heart, your soul, your mind, your spirit.
Always do your best to be the best you can be, even if it feels no less than the worst you can imagine.
In light of these four agreements, codependency is compelled to find its truth and wisdom in and through the authenticity and maturity of interdependency: speak truth, mind your assumptions, face up to the shield and the sword, and always be and do your best with the magic in your wand.
*
In my experience, codependency is resolvable through a sound relationship with the bidding process.
The bidding process can be summed up in six words: pya aettiontn, be rspeonives, be spptorivue. In a codependency, however, these three intentions tend to be scrambled, but the biddings can tolerate these scramblings because it’s not so much about content as it is about process.
The bid to which I refer is one that offers up an attempt or an effort to satisfy or realize an objective.
The research on the bidding process in communication is unequivocal: quality of encounter and vitality of experience are less about depth of intimacy, less about degree of agreement, and more about how two or more people strive to pay attention to each other, no matter what.
A bid is “a fundamental unit of emotional connection” ~ a look, a touch, a query, a gesture ~ in all relationships, not just romantic, and every exchange in the bidding process either adds to or subtracts from the bonding process between two or more people in a relationship.
For example, a simple query like “how are you?” is not meant to solicit a rundown of your emotional state, and a gesture of good will like “it’s a beautiful day” is not meant to state the obvious. This query and gesture are merely bidding attempts to establish or maintain a connection.
The emotional bid is not about content, it’s about connection, and the underlying feelings that make this connection possible. The misfortune of those who take these bids literally is that they miss these underlying opportunities to get beneath the words for the sake of the connection.
Where codependency is concerned, the bidding process seems dysfunctional (although I would argue that this is not always so), and where interdependency is concerned, the bidding process is usually functional. From a bidding perspective, here are three types of response:
Example: “how are you?”
- you can turn toward the bid: “I feel great; how about yourself?”
- you can turn away from the bid: “We’re running late; let’s go!”; or
- you can turn against the bid: “You asked me that an hour ago”
Turning toward the bid serves to foster a stable, lasting, inter-dependent connection. Turning away or against the bid, more often than not, puts a relationship at risk, and if the turning away or against becomes a pattern in the relationship, you by definition begin to see evidence of a codependency.
Things get tricky when it’s difficult to interpret the intention of the bid or the bidding response when the feelings that underlie the words don’t match the words themselves: was it really a turn toward, a turn away, or a turn against? This ambiguity keeps people awake at night.
Bids can also be subtle, not just confusing. It helps to know someone, to know where they are in life, where they’ve been, and where they’re headed. It also helps to know that human beings generally are afraid to be vulnerable ~ far too protective of their feelings and their egos.
For this reason, most people hunger for emotional validation, and they do the strangest things to satisfy this hunger, even as they continue to be vague about their bids with healthy doses of plausible deniability thrown in for good measure. Perhaps this is why texting is so popular.
A turn toward a bid implies alignment and agreement or, if not alignment and agreement, then at least acknowledgement, one that says “I hear you, I understand you, and I have an interest in what’s going on with you.” Eye contact, sincerity, and/or enthusiasm all give you extra credit.
Children who habitually turn toward their playmates form friendships more easily. Siblings who turn toward one another early on are more likely to stay close for life. Coworkers find it easier to collaborate on projects. Married couples and other pairs have fewer conflicts. Turning toward leads to fewer conflicts, because the partners in a relationship are having the conversations they need to have ~ conversations where they demonstrate their interest and concern for each other
~ John Gottman, The Relationship Cure
In resolving a codependency, it helps to drop any use of the terms “victim” and “rescuer” and to replace them with “those who favor making bids to put upon” and “those who favor making bids to call upon”.
It is useful and helpful to think of this mutually reinforcing process of “putting upon” and “calling upon” as a dance, one that is mindfully engaged as and when it involves a skillful, artful process of inquiry (in lieu of making an ass of u and me) and advocacy (in lieu of taking it personally).
When I pay attention, humbly, I offer safety, as a safe container; when I am responsive, harmoniously, I offer vulnerability, with a bridge of comfort; and when I am supportive, I offer the gift of purpose, openly, with a mirror that favors and supports a meaning for this purpose.
With shield down and sword contained, I instead offer a container, a bridge, and a mirror:
I pay attention: I engage the other safely, by way of humility
I am responsive: I inquire vulnerably, for the sake of harmony
I am supportive: I advocate purposefully, through transparency
I need not strive to be the picture of humility and harmony in my relationships ~ the research indicates that I can miss the mark in the bidding process at least 20 percent of the time (1 out of every 5 bids) and still form a strong, stable connection or relationship with someone.
Keep in mind, too, that making bids complements giving and receiving cues of belonging.
Cues of belonging are the little things that people say and do when they genuinely care for each other, such as giving each other a chance to speak; making sure that each is paying attention to the other and making eye contact; making sure that body language is respectful and that everyone feels heard; and not letting anyone get away with being dismissive or interrupting the other in the course of the bidding process. All of this, of course, assumes that you have healed your wounds.
*
So far, we have touched on three forms of dependence, two facets of personal economics (spiritual and material), four agreements (softened for your heartfelt consideration), the bidding process, and cues of belonging. I summarize my hard-won wisdom about codependency as follows:
–
inquiry by way of humility honors the need for safety in relationship,
as long as both parties remain willing to inquire on behalf of the other
advocacy in the interests of harmony honors a need for vulnerability,
as long as both parties remain willing to advocate on behalf of the other
inquiry and advocacy serve, truly and deeply, the purpose of relationship
as long as both parties remain willing to stay open to serving the purpose
otherwise, the movements of inclusion into transcension will fail to bear fruit
–
In humility and vulnerability, however, we remain forever at risk of feeling hurt.
–
there is one recurring, persistent, perennial, dogging personal problem which, more than any other,
steals the force and the peace of people and continually ruins projects and enterprises and careers;
it is the habit of feeling hurt because of what others say or do not say, of what others do or do not do
~ Ervin Seale (edited by yours truly to make a deeper impression)
–
We feel hurt, not only because of inner wounds, but because of inner sensitivities that are wholly natural, normal, healthy, and vital to who we are as spiritual beings in human form. In other words, feeling hurt is not always a habit; it’s what keeps us soulfully alive as spiritual beings.
Key question: “how well do I process hurt feelings?”
*
I’ll be the first to admit that resolving codependency is a complex, complicated undertaking.
This admission applies to anyone and everyone who struggles daily to break free from the encroachments and entanglements of being part of a couple, a team, a family, or a community.
Unless and until this intention to resolve is given the attention it deserves in and out of governments and corporations, societies and nations, humanity will continue to fail to rise and shine to meet its vast solar potential through safe and sound avenues of co-operation and co-creation both.
Final Thoughts
In June 1982, a German study appeared in a journal called Oecologie that found an answer to a very interesting question: why do only certain insects escape from captivity inside the web of a spider?
It was noted that only heavy insects and insects that fly quickly could avoid capture. Lighter insects, if caught, had to rely on something else to free themselves from the grips of the sticky spider’s web.
In this captivating study, the activity of those captive insects who found freedom was described as “permanent activity”, as activity that endured and remained until the end of captivity was assured.
In light of this metaphor, it is clear to me that humanity is caught in a web of its own making. Although I do remain optimistic that this captivity will eventually be overcome, I am also mindful of the probability that this will not come without a cost, and perhaps a deep cost at that.
For those who still care enough to escape (or remain free of) the Web (no, not that Web), consistency is key, but not only consistency; here, let us add curiosity, levity, and versatility to the mix: a friendly curiosity found with a beginner’s mind and a depth and versatility of feeling found in playfulness.
At the heart of finding our security and satisfaction through relationship lies a unique capacity for us to be friendly, curious, versatile, and/or playful in the exchange of bids and cues against a vast backdrop of three kinds of dependence and two types of personal economics.
In other words, get to know yourself well to really know the other well.
If, however, in any relationship you care to cultivate, you cannot be friendly, curious, versatile, and/or playful more often than not, then let this be a warning sign that this relationship might not be for you.
If, on the other hand, the challenge this relationship poses to you is captivating, then by all means do your best to make it meaningful for you. Just be sure you don’t stay caught inside it, like a bug in a web.
–
To share information and inspiration on what is happening on this troubled yet promising world, I drew up two lists of sites that are serving the causes of personal, global and/or cosmic awakening.
This post has been filed under Integration in the Ultimate Outline.
Note: my evolving outline on approaching a realization of the ultimate in personal fulfillment can be found here, accessible from the nav menu under the page “Be Here Now”.
Note: this ever growing perspective began here: Ultimate Perspective