Every bit of guidance I get is to stay away from special relationships. The Universe is quite clear about it.

How have been on your journey with specialness ericka

I’ve been involved in polyamory for a little over 6 years. I’ve had my ups and downs, but overall it has been well worth it.

I found this blog entry by searching for “no special love”. I was introduced to the idea a couple of years ago at a poly conference by members of an intentional community called Windward. I’ve been interested in that type of poly loving every since, yet I’m still involved in the “dating as pairs” style of poly because that is what I’m surrounded by.

I beleive that living on a piece of property owned in common with several adults, and living as a tribal band, could provide stability and security to a person and their offspring. Now, setting up such a community can be difficult, but I still think it would be well worth the effort once it was established.

How does one find other partners that also live by the “no special love” ideal? I may begin to try.

Very interesting topic and one that I have been exploring in one of those first-hand kinds of ways that make it rather immediate and your blog entry very relevant to what I am going through.

Osho says of marriage and by extension forced monogamy that they are a form of prostitution. Having been in a very loving marriage, it is difficult to accept some of the conclusions; however, I can see the point and accepting difficult conclusions seems to be the hallmark of a spiritual journey. As a social institution, marriage was derived, I believe, for one reason, property rights. A man or woman wished to pass the accumulated possessions, including name and family history, to progeny. This was also appealing to women because of the perceived safety and security it represented. Hence, a contract was struck between the two for the assumed goal of perpetuating the family legacy. This legacy has been given great weight in every society except possibly among indigenous peoples who may not “own” anything in the way we think of ownership. Nothing is at stake with one’s progeny if nothing is owned, including your own name.

So marriage represents an exchange between two people for the sake of continuity. Both people give up aspects of freedom for an exchange of energy, whether it be food, shelter, or sex. Therefore, marriage can be compared to a form of prostitution where the woman prositutes herself to the man in exchange for various “favors” like greater security and safety. Then sex itself was attacked as a way of expression of strictly love between two people. After all, I wouldn’t want you sleeping with my wife and producing progeny that I have to take care of when I am not sure whether that progeny is mine. See the possession implicite in the last statement. The woman is owned, the child is owned, and my efforts to take care of both is owned by me.

I do however think that true monogamy is very possible and probable between two people who are living in a state of surrendered will. Think of two people, utterly free of delusion, who prefer to sleep only with one partner.

Some of the flowering of a real romantic love and great sex between two people actually comes with a greater knowledge and admiration and adoration of the other. At least this is my own personal experience. Think of the natural growth between two people in a relationship where the depth of the relationship culture is growing in between two people. The two people share a private realm (but only because of the nature of relationships over time) of inside jokes, knowledge of the other person’s tastes and preferences, knowledge of their body and the unique turn-ons for the other person, intimations and depth of understanding, etc. All this makes a relationship “special” simply because it evolves over time with the other person. I am not saying that this in and of itself makes a monogamous relationship either.

In a truly free relationship in between two people, both people would choose to be with the other exclusively without knowledge or possession of a continuity into the future with that other person. I think it depends on how one is built. For instance, I don’t find having many sexual partners attractive. I am not wired that way. I don’t perceive anything “wrong” with it, and I don’t attach importance to it. However, I don’t do it. I don’t do it because I don’t feel led or guided to do it. I don’t feel my nature is such that I wish to be with more than one person at a time. There is much satisfaction in having that culture between two people. I tend to deepen one relationship rather than have many loving, but less rich (in culture), relationships. I enjoy the inside jokes, the deepening of history and knowledge with and of the other. It is just the way that I, in particular, am wired. It is my nature to be that.

I can truly see where a truly free, yet totally monogamous, relationship could develop between two people. Love in its truest form knows no jealousy, and the willingness is there to share it with everyone. But I was not born homosexual, so I don’t share amorous relations with men. Does this make this a “special” relationship, since I only share that with women? No. That is my nature and an offshoot of my nature coupled with my gender. In the same way, it could seem from the outside (again without understanding the state that produces it), that two completely awake and alive people would form a “special” relationship with each other, when it might just simply be a choice or preference or nature of the two people to be that way.

I do know that in my dating, I don’t sleep with all or even more than one of the women who may want to sleep with me, because I feel like it is something that I just don’t do. It feels heavy or incorrect or less than natural for me to do. I am a “marrying” or monogamous type of personality. It is where I find satisfaction, because I enjoy the interplay between lovers – the sharing of that culture. Yet, I also know that future continuance or “security” is a very basic lie that we tell ourselves in order to feel like we have gained something real. I don’t hope or wish or fight for continuance of the relationship, and in an odd way, it seems to both sanctify and solidify the love between two people.

Thanks for bringing your insights back to the board. As someone who has explored polyamory, you definitely are in a position to speak to its challenges.

Ultimately, I’m intrigued by the idea of eliminating jealousy. I never would have believed that would be possible, but I’ve eliminated so many negative emotions in the past couple of years, that it now does indeed seem possible.

I was recently introduced to the idea of “limbic training,” i.e., putting oneself in increasingly intense situations in order to become increasingly able to handle them without the typical feelings of jealousy, etc. For example, one might deliberately put oneself in the situation of seeing someone you’re dating with someone else, just to have the opportunity to get present with the feelings that come up in order to dissipate those feelings. I am super fascinated by this idea and actually quite eager to start doing this. I love the idea that jealousy could actually be eliminated from the repertoire of emotions. Except, perhaps, to the extent that jealousy in small amounts can actually enhance chemistry and dial up attraction. So if not eliminating jealousy, then perhaps learning to enjoy it? ;-)

Anyway, I look forward to more dialogue with you on this subject.

Love,
Erika

My practical experience of polyamoury is that one learns that jealousy, like love, has many flavours, and negotiating a successful non-monogamous relationship comes of learning (often painfully) just which afflictions one has amongst the wonderful smorgasbord of ways to feel hurt about behaviour that is totally not your own responsibility; nor is it at your pleasure to dictate.

Even so, these reactions are human, and substituting a utopic ideal of equality is rife with equally as many problems as the monogamous myth. Polyamourous folk, if they are successful, become great negotiators (and the popular ones become experts of time management!).

I don’t with to disrespect too much this idea of equality and abundance–it is that very idea that, I think, leads many people to put aside the obvious and socially supported choice of monogamy. I also want to make it clear that you seem to me quite smart enough to be aware that just picking up an ideal means that it can be executed without a mighty struggle to learn something that is not a socially widely accepted way of doing things. I do wish to take some issue with the rather fog-inducing language of the ACIM material. The words are full of metaphysical meaning and interesting paradox, however, I would take them only as inspiration, not instruction.

I’m excited to see you forging ahead into relatively unmapped territory and look forward to seeing how you apply your impressive intellect and heart to the subject.