Three Keys to Happiness

 

Chapter Thirteen
Three Keys to Happiness
Key One – Communication

There are three basic keys to happiness in any relationship; they are communication, giving/receiving, and trust.

These three simple ingredients can lead the way to great happiness for anyone. It is important to contemplate the root source of happiness. It can be summed up in one sentence: Interaction with others that leads to unity. No one has ever been truly happy in relationship who has not had a hope of unity or union with another.

The first union that needs to be established is within the individual: the union of the personality with the soul, or the lower self with the higher self. When we communicate, give to, and trust the soul and subject the personality to it, we take a major step toward joyousness, and truly then begin to consciously seek merging and oneness with others.

Let us briefly discuss the three keys mentioned that lead to happiness in a relationship.

The first key is communication. Communication is the most important of all the keys, for it is the foundation upon which the other two are built. Contemplate this sentence for a moment: If any two people truly communicate, they will be one, for the vast majority of disagreements are caused by a failure to communicate.

All unhappiness in any relationship can be traced back to a failure to communicate by one or both parties.

When we examine common problems that occur in a marriage relationship, we can always discover a lack of communication. A divorce is, in the last analysis, a statement by one or both parties that says: “If you had communicated to me before I married you what is communicated to me now, I would have seen that our relationship wouldn’t work.”

There is one other rule we must take into account: People can communicate with each other only to the degree they have learned to communicate with their souls. Those who have had no soul contact will find that every communication they give or receive will have some deception in it. Words themselves veil true meanings and to have true communication, one must “read between the lines” or learn to look beyond the literal meanings of words.

An example of a communication problem is: A Catholic and a Protestant have a child who has become old enough to go to church. The two get into a heated disagreement over which religion he is going to raised in. This disagreement shows a lack of communication in three areas:

[a] Premarital: The couple should have communicated these feelings before they were married and reached an agreement then. Perhaps communication at that time would have caused each of them to seek elsewhere for a marriage partner.

[b] Communicating each other’s current feelings: If they truly understood each other’s feelings, they would be willing to compromise and reach some agreement in the interest of the child – providing they both have the interest of the child at heart.

[c] Communication with their souls: If they had true understanding, they would realize that in the end, it would not make a lot of difference which church the child started with, especially if the parents teach him the basic virtues found within both churches.

A second example: Joe likes to play cards with the boys every Wednesday night, and Mary does not like this, for she says she wants him to spend more time alone with her. Joe becomes upset because he feels restricted and nagged, and Mary is upset because she feels lonely and rejected.

Again, Joe’s need to spend time with his friends as well as Mary’s need for companionship should have been communicated before they were married. It may have made a difference in their decision to marry.

On the other hand, it is possible that a little communication in the present will solve the problem. Does Mary really need Joe home every night or does she just want more attention and security in their relationship? Is it possible that “I want you home tonight” is a deceptive communication? Is she avoiding saying what she means because of fear of rejection and hurt? Is she really saying “I want to be more a part of your life. I want you to think I am important and if you made me feel that way, I wouldn’t feel insecure if you left for an evening”?

Perhaps Joe thinks Mary is very important but has not communicated it to her. Perhaps it has been years since he bought her flowers, or wrote her a sweet note, or told her how much he cared for her. Communication leads the way to the fulfillment of both their needs.

A major cause and effect of discord in relationships is arguing. All arguments are caused by a lack of communication. A good marriage counselor can sit between almost any two people having an argument, explain in different words what the other party means, and the argument will usually cease because the other’s point of view is then understood. As long as both parties are receptive to communication this can be done.

Arguments have two basic causes:

[1] The two have a different interpretation of various words used in the argument. This different interpretation has not been communicated.

[2] The two are seeing from different levels of vision. No two levels of vision are exactly the same, but a real problem occurs when one of the arguers sees only on the emotional level and the other sees on the mental. The mental person must step down to the feeling world to reach agreement with the emotional person. It is very seldom one can get a person who is polarized in the emotions to follow a course of pure logic.

One would be surprised at how many times cause #1 occurs. Usually when this happens, both parties actually believe the same way, but have a different use of words. Here’s an example:

JOHN: Every time someone communicates, he is teaching in one way or another.

MARY: Do you mean that any time someone says anything, he is teaching?

JOHN: Yes.

MARY: That cannot be right. I have had many people speak things to me that did not teach me anything. In fact, many things were completely untrue.

JOHN: Even if the communication is untrue, there is some fact conveyed.

MARY: Let’s take an example. I take a bite of a steak and I say “This is delicious”, but you take a bite and don’t like it. How does your communication teach me anything? I know the steak is good independent of what you say.

JOHN: Nevertheless, I related to you the FACT of my distaste for the steak and that is my opinion. My opinion may not be true in your eyes, but it is a fact that it is my opinion and I taught you what I think.

MARY: But your opinion was nothing useable so I was not taught anything.

JOHN: It doesn’t matter whether you use it or not. I still taught you my opinion.

MARY: You did not teach me anything. Your opinion wasn’t even true from my point of view.

The problem here is that John and Mary are using a different definition of the word “teach”. John thinks that to teach is to relate any fact so it is understood, whether it is useful or not to the other person. Mary thinks that there is no teaching accomplished unless the person receiving the communication receives data he can use in her life.

Even though John’s opinion may not be true to Mary, it is still a fact that it is his opinion. He related the true fact of the way the steak tasted to him. In relating this fact to Mary, he was teaching by his definition.

By Mary’s definition, he was not teaching because she didn’t care what he thought of the steak. It was not useable knowledge to her.

The two will argue till doomsday and never reach agreement on this point until they agree on a common definition of the word “teach.” If they go to the dictionary and use the most accepted definition and abide by it, then they will find that they agree with each other after all. Perhaps they could arrive with two different terms to define what they felt about teaching. For instance, to teach would be the communication of any fact, useful or not, but an “effective teacher” would fit Mary’s idea of one who communicates useful information. Once they have defined their terms, they have no need to disagree unless one party is just plain stubborn.

Perhaps we can now see the truth of the following rule: “If two people agree on their definitions, and communicate on a logical basis, they will always reach some point of agreement.”

The second cause of arguments is that of seeing from different levels of vision. Some arguments from this category are over such things as capital punishment, religion, abortion, equal rights, racism, etc. If two people are arguing over an emotionally charged subject, then one may know that one or both members in the discussion are emotionally polarized. If both members stay on the plane of the mind, they can stay calm even in discussing such emotional subjects.

Thus, we have two basic types of arguments in this second category: a) Emotional verses emotional, and 2) Emotional verses logical. mind

Here we have an example of emotional verses emotional:

DON: All men are created equal. Blacks are just as good as you or I.

RON: I never met a black I liked. They are all lazy and want to live off the white man. They ought to be sent back to Africa.

DON: You’re a racist pig if I ever met one.

Ron then takes a punch at Don.

Notice that neither of the two men use any intelligent reasoning. Now we will examine an emotional verses a logical argument:

DON: All men are created equal. Blacks are just as good as you or I.

JOHN: It depends on what you mean by equal. In reality, no two people are alike, even in the same race.

DON: You sound like a racist to me.

JOHN: A racist is someone who does not believe in equal rights for the different races. I do believe in equal rights so how do you get the idea that I am a racist?

DON: You do not believe that blacks are equal.

JOHN: I said that I don’t believe that any two people are equal, or exactly alike. By that I don’t mean that they are not Equal in rights, or even potential. I’m talking about ability and personality. You didn’t seem to be listening. You and I are not exactly equal, or alike. For instance, I can run faster than you, and, at present, there is nothing you can do about it.

DON: Do you believe that the black is equal to the white?

JOHN: We all have unlimited potential and blacks and all races should be equal in rights, but in other ways one race will differ from another. For instance, I think that blacks are better basketball players than whites on the average, but, on the other hand, whites seem to excel at hockey.

DON: It sounds to me like you’re a racist.

JOHN: It sounds to me that we had better pin down your definition of a racist so we can talk intelligently.

Notice that Don thought John was a racist because he did not speak from the same feeling level as he did. John was exasperated because he was trying to speak logically to an emotionally polarized person. If Don could shift his angle of vision to the world of reason he would see that John does not LOOK at other races as being not as good as his own. Instead, he is trying to examine differences in a logical manner.

There is one other cause of disagreements and this is illusion. Illusions are caused by wrong core beliefs in a person’s thinking. All beliefs that branch off this core belief may seem completely logical and sound if the core belief is unexamined. But when the core belief is seen in the light of the mind, the illusionary nature of the branch beliefs are readily seen.

If one person believes that man is basically evil and another believes he is essentially good, then the two will disagree again and again on the branch beliefs. To reach harmony, they must both trace their branch beliefs back to the core belief and examine them under the light of reason. Only high mental thinkers will be able to do this. Emotionally charged people can never trace their beliefs back beyond the point of where their mind currently has its attention.

We can begin to see that true communication is difficult to achieve, but when it is we will be amazed at how simple, yet joyous it is.

There are two types of communication: (1) Deceptive communication. This hides the whole truth, consciously or unconsciously, and, in the end, creates restlessness and pain. (2) Honest communication. Here the feelings and thoughts are conveyed as accurately as possible. This leads to joyousness and peace. Some may argue that a certain amount of deceptive communication is necessary because “the truth hurts,” but what is not realized is that the truth only hurts when it follows a deceptive communication.

Let us say that a man is unfaithful to his wife and doesn’t want to tell her of the affair he is having because it will hurt her. Thus, he tells himself that he is doing right in deceiving her; but what he doesn’t consider is that he had to give her many deceptive communications before a secret affair could even take place. If he would have communicated fully with her from the beginning, he would have avoided producing the circumstances that create the hurt. Deception to avoid hurt only becomes necessary when a foundation has been laid by previous deception.

Honest communication is difficult for people because of two fears: 1) The fear of hurting others and 2) the fear of becoming vulnerable and hurting oneself.

Both fears are illusions in this upside-down shadow world. The truth is the opposite of the way most people think. Hurt is caused by lack of communication or deceptive communication – not honest communication. Honest communication only hurts when it exposes deceptive communication.

Every man and woman will admit that they want someone with whom they can communicate. Each person has a strong inward longing for real communion with another. How can we achieve this? How can we let down the walls and let our thoughts and feelings flow unchecked without fear of pain?

As long couples are polarized in the world of feeling and allow emotion to govern decision making, they will generally communicate with some degree of deception, for their emotional selves greatly fears pain for themselves and others, and is willing to deceive to avoid it. To achieve true communication, even on an emotional level, we must raise ourselves up to the plane of the mind and subject the emotions to mental control. The mind realizes that pain is a part of life, that some of it is inevitable, and accepts the fact that some of it will come our way. Because the mind accepts pain, it does not have unreasonable fear of it. Mentally polarized people can be more honest in communication because they do not deceive to avoid pain. They can then subject the emotions to the mind and command the emotions to express themselves in fullness. The mind also controls itself to a degree and expresses itself honestly, provided it is not under an illusion.

No two people can truly be one until the mind through the soul assumes control in the relationship and there is communication without deception from beginning to end. There will be no big hurts even if the two were to separate, but in a relationship of true communion, separation is rare.

Establishing true communication where it previously did not exist takes a great degree of aggressive energy. Honest communication does not occur among emotionally polarized people by “going with the flow”. The emotional self generally leads a person in the opposite direction of the pure reason of the non-deceptive mind. That is why the mind must assume control and literally force communication, as much as will be allowed. When all channels are opened up and a free flow of energy established, then true communication will be the natural state.

To learn honest communication, one must examine every thought expressed by ourselves and others, and look for deception in thoughts unexpressed. The speaker must constantly ask himself, “Have I truly communicated my thoughts in what I just said? Does the listener know how I feel about the subject?” If the answer is “no”, he should seek further clarification.

Example: John is starting up a new business and Joan seems eager to help him succeed. She is helping him with the books, answers the telephone and runs errands. The time comes, however, when Joan seems to lose interest and John finds that he has to badger her to get her to help him. He says to Joan:

“Joan, have you lost interest in the business? What’s the matter?”

“Nothing’s the matter” replies Joan. (Deceptive communication. Obviously something is the matter).

“Do you not think our business will succeed or what?”

“I suppose it will if you work at it hard enough”

“What do you mean if I work it? The business is ours, not just mine.”

“Ours?” she says coldly. “It is no concern of mine. I’ve got a lot of other concerns to keep me busy. I’m tired and I’m going to bed.”

Joan then rises and walks off to the bedroom. John is baffled by her behavior.

Every sentence Joan has spoken here has been deceptive. She did have a problem. She teaches an aerobics class and wanted John to show some interest in it, but he ignored her completely. He also made no comment when she lost ten pounds and her figure improved. Her feelings are deeply hurt. She is afraid to communicate her exact feelings for fear she will be patronized by John and hurt more deeply. Thus, she suppresses her feelings, but suppressed feelings do not die . . . they grow. Joan’s feelings grow into an unconscious attack on John. She strikes at John by ignoring his business in the same way he ignored her.

The problem is that now she has made John upset, the two suffer a loss of affection and the channels of communication are cut off more than ever. At this point the solution to the problem must come from John. Joan is upset and totally focused on her feelings to the extent she does not want to even think about the problem or solution. John must ask himself what he did to hurt her. He must retrace his steps to the first sign of discord. What was the original thing he did to hurt Joan? Was it the aerobics class? He can see signs of how he hurt her by examining how she tries to hurt him. If he can guess accurately and approach Joan with the real problem and show a willingness to solve it then the lines of communication can be reopened.

It would have made everything much easier, however, if Joan had not been deceptive in the first place. When the hurt first occurred, she should have said:

“John, do you realize how it makes me feel when you ignore projects that I am interested in while, at the same time, I am showing interest and enthusiasm for things you like? It makes me feel like you are the only one that counts in this family and that nothing I do matters. It makes me feel like not even helping you in the business.”

“I didn’t realize I was ignoring you. I guess I’ve had a lot of things on my mind.”

“How would you feel if I dropped all interest in your business and acted like I didn’t give a damn?”

“I’d feel pretty bad. I depend a lot on you,” said John.

“I want to depend on you too,” said Joan. “I need your support.”

“I’m sorry honey, but I’ll tell you this. From now on you’re going to see a big improvement.”

Here we see that honest communication would have prevented any major hurt and alienation from taking place. Fortunately, John was yielding and willing to give in to Joan’s communicated needs. This willingness to give is the second ingredient which creates happiness.

To search the website, containing millions of words, replace the word “search” with the word or phrase you want to find and place the entire line in the Google search box.

“Search” site:freeread.com

To access all the chapters so far see the directory at the top middle next to the meme.

For videos explaining the Molecular Relationship go HERE:

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Check out The Immortal HERE, a free book by JJ

 

Series Navigation

The Mystery of Romantic EnergyKey Two – The Open Mind