My girlfriends necklace

[Dan]

I have a question about who is responsible for suffering...and the answer I know is always "me". But I need help getting there. And can't think of any way to get there but via a story....


Let us say....

A guy (Joe) has a girlfriend (Sue). They are not married and both date other people, that is not a big deal. They deal with a little jealousy and insecurity, but are committed to dating other people so they work on it.

Girlfriend has a new necklace, a gift from Other Guy (Bill).

So, Joe finds he is upset when Sue wears the necklace around him. Sue says it just jewelry, and not a reminder of him (to her) but just nice looking.

Joe therefor has the problem He should work on his suffering, get over his attachment to what he thinks it is. Sue should make no change, but be willing to talk to Joe about his problem.

Right?

Now then, same scenario,but replace "necklace" with "hickeys from Other Guy". Same answer?

Warmly,
Dan

Dan


(Sorry for the odd context of my question)

[Loren Enders]

"Everyone is excited by copulation, but very few can transform that bliss into the spiritual path." - Mahasiddha Saraha

Yes, I feel the same answer applies. Thinking about the other can allow you to shortcut the self. Joe should think about Sue's happiness--but if this does not bring Joe happiness they need to sit down and talk about the relationship. Seems like a loaded question: to me for a relationship like this to work both people would need to be mature and dedicated to the other. Which I feel is usually not the case.

I am feeling like I am hogging the discussions so hopefully others don't feel the same. Peace.

[Leslie]

Sounds like Joe's reaction(upset when he sees physical evidence that Sue is dating other men) means that Joe was not opening to his whole experience when he chose to agree to dating other people while in a dating relationship with Sue. Try sitting and opening to the whole experience....there is usually something that the meditator is avoiding feeling and it is usually multilayered and painful. It also holds the key to the next level of awakening. There is lots of juice in this...make use of it! When you are sitting, become aware of all of your experience-body sensations, emotions, thoughts and the space from which it all arises. Don't try to figure anything out.

[A Serious Buddhist]

"He should work on his suffering, get over his attachment to what he thinks it is. Sue should make no change, but be willing to talk to Joe about his problem."

I am uncomfortable with the "shoulds" in this paragraph, as though there is a "right" thing to do and everything else is "wrong". Relationships include pain, bliss, love, open-ness, contraction, aversion, everything. Joe may have painful feelings, but that doesn't make it "his problem". If it's a relationship, the problem is shared. It's not something that Joe should go away and "get over", then come back and have the relationship with the "correct" feelings.

Buddhism is not practiced by "getting over" attachment, or "getting over" anything else. It's practiced by feeling the attachment, and everything else, profoundly, openly, without trying to edit it.

[janaki symon]

i agree with the 'serious meditator' that usage of words like should are counter productive to exploration. even saying that you are responsible for your own suffering adds a judgement that inhibits opening to what's really going on.

in the example you offer, the more relevant exploration might be a larger issue -- who are you in this and what patterns are being engaged in participating in a non exclusive relationship? it's not a question of getting over your reactions to things, it's seeing what you are reacting to. generally the trigger is just the tip of the iceberg and exploration might uncover a deeper pattern.

[Tardy Eye of Common Courtesy]

This is very scary stuff. What if the other guy has an STD, would Sue share that with you?

[Dan]

Granted, we are assuming in the above that everyone in the story is practicing the precept on avoiding sexual misconduct. Which means they are practicing safer sex standards.

Warmly,
Dan

[Tardy Eye of Common Courtesy]

I mean with Joe. I am a mother and a grandmother so forgive me for being too blunt . Think about all the connections and possibilities in the situation ,the other guy might also have several other friends he's playing vampire with. Thanks for your story it is provocative.

[Tardy Eye of Common Courtesy]

What does that mean in contemporary North American terms? Are we to asume that the boundaries amoung all the players are equal and cleary defined? Is there passion in these relationships any lust happening or just blissful lovingkindness? ( just kidding) I would think that honesty and trust amoung the individuals would play an important role . How mature are, Joe,Sue and the other guy ? I am asuming that everyone involved is a Buddhist now that you have clarified that ,however are they all operating at the same standard regarding the Buddhist precept for "sexual misconduct" ? I think this is a great topic you've touched on Dan ... very relevant especially in these times.

[JJ Simon]

Honesty really is the best policy in relationships. Honesty with ourselves and others. If we say we are honestly working with our experience, taking an honest look at ourselves then we need to know if we are comfortable with the boundaries that we have set up in our relationships. Joe really isn't being honest with himself or Sue.
Maybe Joe isn't ready to work with this and needs to be single, celibate or monogamous?

[Dan]

Wait, what part is Joe not being honest about?

[JJ Simon]

Joe is not being completely honest with himself about being detached enough to deal with an open relationship. In the premise he's OK as long as he doesn't see anything that really shows him that Sue's having sex with someone else.
I don't feel that Sue dating 2 people is the issue as long as the parameters of the relationship are set at the beginning of the relationship. If Sue was honest at the beginning as it appears she was, its Joe's problem.
My point is that just because Joe has an attachment he doesn't need to stay in this relationship if he is not honestly capable of working with what is coming up in his mind.

On a personal note I have been in an open relationship that latter became monogamous when we moved in together because we both recognized that living together and having sex with other people would create chaos in our lives. Each person has to decide what their boundaries are and couples need to be honest with each other about what they can and cannot live with.
That has been my experience.
JJ

[Dan]

Many of the answers imply that Sue dating two guys is the issue. But this is not an issue for Sue or for Joe or for Bill for that matter.

Perhaps it is the clinging to monogamy as the only right relationship method that we need address?