Ah, how I love to be back here typing away. Especially when I have such a chapter as this to share.
"How many times have you heard a person say, 'I don't like myself.'? What does that mean? How do you not like yourself? How can you be both the subject and the object of the sentence? Who is the you that doesn't like yourself? .... we all know on some level that there is the me that is the body and the personality, and then there is some higher level of consciousness that is distinct but has a relationship with the body and personality. For example, we all talk to ourselves. When you do that, whom are you talking to? You know that you are not 2 people. There is one you, and yet within your oneness there is an internal relationship between these parts you call 'me', 'myself'', and 'I'. So I can talk to myself. I can think to myself. I can dislike myself. I can look for myself."
If you are like me, then you've often tried to better yourself. You see the person 'inside' that you want to be on the outside, and you become closer to yourself. You find areas that need improvement, and develop a way to fix them. But how do I do this? Can a flower look at itself and say, "I need to grow,"? Can one thing see itself AND fix itself? It seems like a lot is going on there for one person. People say you need to 'remove yourself from the situation/picture/problem/etc.' in order to solve it. So you step back from yourself to look at yourself? ...Isn't that physically impossible? Perhaps if there were a mirror involved, or... I don't know. In any case, there is a beautiful explanation that doesn't involve mirrors.
Explanation: There is me- the character I play. That is the ego- thoughts and feelings clothing a persona- and the body with it's physical sensations. Then there is my self- the soul. This is the spark of Hashem. This is the conscious self, the knower, the experiencor, the actor who plays the character. And then there is the I- the Great Self, the Soul of Souls, Hashem. Of course, when I say 'I am' it is not Hashem, the Great I, speaking. It is probably the self, the soul, speaking, which is a spark of the Great I. But chances also are it's just me, my ego, speaking.
So there you have it. There are three of you! Or three parts that make up who you are. Either way, there is a lot more of you than meets the eye; but you always knew that, didn't you?
So when you step back from you, you should say, 'Myself has stepped away from me.' Yikes... nevermind, don't say that. Horrible grammar, and you might sound crazy. But I think you get the idea.
The person that is telling yourself to improve is your soul. Easy enough to believe, yes? The part of you that is being told off is your ego, which is also easy to see. That darn ego. And the reason you can do this is because you, the character, realize that there is an actor, yourself, your soul. If a person cannot see the separation of actor and character, what happens? Well, they get too involved in the play that they forget who they really are, and end up like Heath Ledger and the Joker. (That is an extreme example, I know, but it is still a valid one). If you are so wrapped up in who you are playing that your soul, the actor, gets lost or thrown aside, then there is no fixing you. There is no part to step away and look at the other part of you and say, "Look buddy! This body is big enough for the two of us!" On a more serious note: not only can you not see yourself if the soul is lost in the ego, but you cannot experience the fire your spark came from.
An analogy: Let's say you see a man running down the street wearing a blue uniform with a badge. You would be safe to assume that he is a policeman. The garment indicates the role he is playing, but not who he is. He might go home, put on some sweat pants, and go running again. Now, he is an athlete. Your garment is never your essence. The clothes you wear are not you, they are on you. Similarly, your character is not you. So you must never confuse the two.
I like this part, because it shows that there is not one role you are playing (unless you are very lucky). You know when you see someone act one way in a setting and a different way in another? Most people call that two-faced, yes? I would like to agree. But not in the same negative emotion others have when they say one is two-faced. And I would also like to ask a question: are you the same way in an interview for the job you have always wanted as you are at your 21'st birthday bash? I would think not. Is that wrong? NO! You are you in both places, just putting to the forefront different aspects of who you are! Because we all play different roles, even with one character. I am not the same at work as I am at home. I am not the same at home as I am at an assembley. I am not the same at an assembley as I am at a recital I'm performing at. I am not the same at a recital as I am when I am with Aaron. I am not the same with Aaron as I am with any other man on earth. ( I just realized that ) And I shouldn't be. If I were the same all the time any place ever... I can bet I would not be liked in every setting. And what is amazing is how the character can do all of this and keep its sanity. Know how? Only because the character and the actor are separated. You must have your soul.
A story: Hashem told Abraham, "Go forth from your country, from your birthplace, and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you into a great nation, I will bless you and make you great." What was Hashem really asking Abraham to do? The Hebrew text is very specific; however, most translations miss the point. Hashem told Abraham, "lech lecha," which literally translates as, "go to yourself." But how can you tell a man such a thing when you are also telling him to leave his country, his birthplace, and his parents' home? Are these not the basic foundations of his identity? Is he not a Mesopotamian, a citizen of Haran, the son of Terah? The answer is yes. But Hashem was asking him to make a spiritual journey toward a new identity. This is clear from the order of instructions. To start on a physical journey, Abraham would logically first leave his father's house, then his birthplace, and then his country, but the order is reversed. That is because this is a journey in search of a new identity, and therefore the sequence of departure was given in the order of psychological difficulty of severing attachments. Abraham had to let go of all that was familiar and reach a new identity based on his identification with Hashem.
"In Kabbalah, ego consciousness is a state called klipah, literally meaning 'hard shell'. You become encased in a hard shell that separates you from the Divine I." The author uses the example of a pianist, which I can relate to: if you are a pianist who is ego conscious, and you have a feeling when you are onstage that "there is the audience, there is me, this is my piano, and this is my music," then it will never come together. You have to crack open that shell and let go. You have to become the music and let the Great Musician play through you, whether you admit it publicly or not. So the joy, the ecstasy of a person in a creative moment is really this strange kind of I-consciousness, rather than ego consciousness or self-consciousness. This experience resembles what the Kabbalah refers to as become a merkava, which literally means 'chariot'. You feel like a vehicle for a higher spirit and you are humbled and grateful, not haughty or arrogant.
You need your soul to hear from your Creator, to feel your Creator, to be close to your Creator. You also need your soul to relate to the souls of others. With only an ego, you have no sympathy, certainly not any empathy. With only an ego, you cannot relate to, understand, perhaps even be kind to the souls of others, because you will not see them. You will see their egos, and you will both have a wonderful relationship of personas. With a soul that is connected to your Creator, your relationships with others are changed. I've seen and experienced this myself every time I go through a 'time to fix this'. I treat my family differently, I respond to events differently, I open up to and listen to others, because my soul is in tune with where it came from; because I care. 'Love your neighbor as yourself' is not just about the recipient. If you do not love yourself, you cannot love the self in someone else. (Remember that 'self' is soul)
Now, how this affects your most personal, prized, intimate relationship is huuuuuuge.
A quote: most people believe in a soul connection. However, when they start looking for love, they often confuse the persona with the soul and get trapped in a kind of shopping mode, looking for what a person has rather than who a person is.
THE question: are you looking for a persona partner, or a soul mate?
Advice: Lists can sometimes get in the way of meeting your soul mate. If you list the characteristics of the person you think you could love, then when you meet a person who seems to fit your description, you will love those characteristics, not the soul. We all want to be loved for who we are, even if we ourselves are not certain who we are. And so we seek reassurances, "Why do you love me?" we ask, "what is the reason?"
Now, I am not against lists when it comes to the very fundamental things. Like, I would not be with a man who is not a believer, and, more importantly, a doer. There are also goals that must match, such as wanting a family. BUT, taken too far, lists can be detrimental to the searching process. I have witnessed this. I know a man (not naming names), who is a bachelor because girls are too tall, too short, too talkative, too shy, too, too, too, too! I know another person who is in a relationship with a tall, dark, and handsome Christian man... who she knew approximately 8 days before they decided to be together. On the other side of the advice above, I know someone else who has been in serious relationships perhaps 3 or 4 times, lived with girls, etc., and is still unmarried. He has currently been with the same girl for over 2 years. They work together, they live together, and she wants to be married. His answer? He still wants to get to know her, he wants to figure everything out first. He wants to know all the whys, all the hows. He still, at 30something, needs reassurance. He still is not sure of who he is or what he wants.
It is a difficult thing, this relationship. What is even more difficult is the reason behind the relationship. I LOVE the answer the author's wife gave him when he asked her why she loved him, "There is no reason why I love you. If there was, I would be in love with the reason, not you."
My conclusion to this post is a hard one, because we just covered so much, and then the author threw the whole love and relationships thing in there so that it's even harder to wrap it all up in a neat, little package. I mean, we just learned that there are three parts of us in one body, which is hard enough to have a conclusion to, and now I have to work in other things!
Thankfully, I think you get the whole point. The point is that there are many points. There is the point of the character, the ego: without which, the soul would have nothing to better, and no reason to be. There is the point of the soul: to better the character, to love the souls of others and see past the egos. There is the point of the Divine I (and just the point covered in this post!): the soul would not exist, the spark needs a fire to come from. And there is the point of throwing in the love thing: because all three parts of you must be involved to have a working, wonderful relationship with anyone.
And after all of that, the questions and answers to this chapter will come at a later date.
No comments:
Post a Comment