Kuba: Richard wrote in his journal that it is the man’s identification with authority as the ultimate and the woman’s identification with love as the ultimate which is what stands in the way of intimacy. Indeed I can see this is the case, with authority in my case.
In that there is the ‘me’ that ‘I’ assert ‘myself’ to be in relation to ‘others’ – this I can see is an immediate obstacle in the way of intimacy.
Hi Kuba,
Indeed, this is the instinctual and conditioned way – but now you chose to do it the other way, the third alternative. And intimacy is not assertive but inclusive, enticing, friendly, benevolent.
Richard: Unless one can live with just one other person, in peace and harmony twenty four hours of the day, nothing is ever going to work on any other scale’. (Richard, AF List, No. 25b, 19 Jul 2003).
Also, this snippet from Richard’s extensive articles on ‘Peasant Mentality’ caught my attention because it applies to all of one’s “relation to ‘others’” –
Richard: Sure … something [No. 32] recently posted is worth bearing in mind whilst you do so. Viz.:
• [Respondent No. 32 ]: ‘The cherry on the top came yesterday – whilst watching television and having these thoughts running at the back of my head, all of a sudden it struck me, that not only is this earth a ‘free-range’ place in actuality but the entire universe is like this – that there is in actuality no ownership of anyone/ anything over anyone/ anything else – everything in this universe is literally free – as in, has no ownership… all ownership exists in the head in the ‘real’ world’.
(Richard, List D, No. 38, 31 May 2015).
At some point you might find it useful to familiarise yourself on the topic, perhaps in instalments, because it relates to most, if not all of one’s social identity issues and thus being “a ‘someone in relation to others’”.
Again, a “self-less inclination” in order to imitate the actual does away with the need for being someone, let alone asserting yourself and then it’s much easier to allow naiveté come to the fore which you had been shying away from.
Kuba: I can see that in my life I invested into becoming a ‘someone in relation to others’, this is ‘my’ apparent individuality. So initially when allowing intimacy it seems as if I am giving up my very individuality, yet when I look at just what this ‘individuality’ consists of, it is based in separation.
Whatever place ‘I’ have carved for ‘myself’ within the hierarchy it is actually what reinforces ‘me’ as a separative entity and gets in the way of intimacy.
I can very much see that this has been ‘my’ major gripe with getting close to others, in that ‘my’ “splendid isolation” as Devika put it, would have to go. And for ‘me’ as the ‘high achiever’ this meant giving up all that ‘I’ worked for in order to distinguish ‘myself’.
And so to consider allowing intimacy it is experienced as if ‘I’ am disarming ‘myself’, in that ‘I’ will no longer be a ‘someone in particular’ with the power and authority that this might entail. (link)
It’s a strange instinctual habit (though unavoidable at first) that when encountering a new possibility of being in a different, more intimate way, one first lists all the things you might loose if you do that, which when you look at those ‘losses’ closely they are not worth anything in regards to what you really want, certainly not the time to worry about it.
Whereas you could nourish and foster a naïve excitement of a beneficial discovery operating – think of how young children are eager to learn about the world they find themselves in (until their enthusiasm gets more and more stifled and oppressed. This is the kind of naiveté albeit with adult sensibilities which is the next exploration, and don’t be discouraged when you feel a bit shy or foolish – it’s part of the package – as you quoted Richard in your next message.
Just so there is no misunderstanding, lust is not the driver of longing for intimacy –
Richard (to Respondent № 04): “(…) it is pertinent to note that libido (Latin, meaning ‘desire’, ‘lust’, and referring to the instinctual sex drive, urge or impulse to procreate and perpetuate the species) is not, and never has been nor ever will be, the driver of the longing for intimacy, the yearning for an end to separation, the vital interest in loss of self … nor even the means whereby altruism trumps selfism”. (Richard, List D, No. 4a, 23 Jun 2013).
Cheers Vineeto