How to avoid losing yourself in a relationship: what to rely on when things get difficult

– Let’s move on to the topic of love between a man and a woman. I read the information you sent me, and it said that people’s perception of relationships has changed a lot. In this description there is a somewhat romanticized idea that in the past people loved each other more deeply and tried to preserve marriage for as long as possible.

But in reality, there are indeed many divorces now, and at the slightest problem people often do not try to renegotiate things. They have this idea that they can end these relationships, and then supposedly become a completely new person, enter the next marriage — and those problems will no longer arise there. Although that is rather unlikely.

I’m interested in your opinion, because in my view people have remained people. Maybe some social factors have changed.

In the past there was an understanding that until a certain point people practically could not divorce at all. It was only possible with the permission of the church or a priest, but that happened extremely rarely. Then women fought for their rights for a very long time. They gained those rights, but the system was still arranged for a long time in such a way that marriage would be preserved for as long as possible.

Even when I remember my parents, for them it was a matter of great pride that they lived their whole lives together. Now people probably no longer have that perception. Many calmly view three years as some kind of crisis period: they lived together, then separated. And it’s as if only children sometimes stop people from breaking up.

And there was also the point that in the past one of the main tasks for a woman was to get married. I don’t know about men, but regarding women I largely agree with this. Because during a certain period of time it truly was a matter of survival. If a woman did not get married, it was very difficult for her to live calmly and independently. That time has long passed.

Do you think everything has really changed that much now? Or, if we look specifically at people’s relationships with each other, has everything remained approximately the same — with all the pluses and minuses — while mainly the social frameworks, norms, and rules are changing?

– People change, develop. The very human structure develops, the spiritual structure of a person develops.

Just as people 3000 years ago could not reason calmly the way we reason now. And even the kind of reasoning we are having now is not inherent to absolutely everyone, but already quite a lot of people are capable of reflecting on such topics. The structure of a person itself changes.

A person’s attitude toward marriage or toward certain social aspects — and marriage is, after all, a social aspect — also changes. Moreover, we can see in the world a huge number of different types of attitudes toward this, including those закрепed by law.

As I gave the example: in Egypt there may be three wives, somewhere women have very limited rights, and somewhere, on the contrary, women’s rights may even be predominant. The world is very different now. Accordingly, whether the number of divorces has increased or decreased — I think it depends on the specific region, the specific country, and on what kind of people live there.

If I approach this from my position, I would not suggest making general conclusions without basis. Very often people begin to claim: “There are more divorces now,” “If people get married before 20, they will definitely divorce,” or other similar things. But these are all certain abstractions.

Everything depends on circumstances, on the sample group, on a huge number of additional parameters. People really love relying on one single indicator:

– how many years people lived in marriage, – how many children they have, – what country they live in, – what their family status is.

But at the same time they do not study many other aspects at all. For example: were these people even supposed to come together from the point of view of their karmic path? If we approach this only from the social side, then we will not find real answers there. Those answers will be superficial and not genuine.

And if we look deeper — truly study: what was supposed to happen in this person’s life, what was supposed to happen in another person’s life, why someone has constant insatiability, why a person constantly wants another woman or another man, or children, or new sensations. Or, on the contrary, why another person develops strong stability and does not even have thoughts about changing anything. This is very important.

I remember first encountering this question around 2012. I began to understand very clearly, especially regarding men, that there are people who have constant insatiability toward women, constant impulses. And there are men who do not even have such thoughts.

– That’s surprising, because outwardly they may look completely different, belong to different social classes, be very different people.

– The same applies to women. There are women who have endless thoughts connected with relationships, men, searching for something new. And there are women who simply do not have such thoughts. Just as there are women who do not think about children. There are women who do not think about design, career, work. And there are, on the contrary, people who cannot even imagine not working.

Every person has their own inner circumstances. There is a whole complex of overlapping factors here: karmic causes, hereditary causes, social structure, laws.

If tomorrow, for example, a law were passed that divorce is forbidden and punishable by 15 years in prison, I do not guarantee that nobody would divorce. Some people would still do it, most would simply stop showing it or officially formalizing it. Or if cheating suddenly began, conditionally speaking, to be punished with huge prison terms or severe punishment, then the number of such actions would also sharply decrease.

There are people who live in marriage and were never truly close to each other or cheated on each other their entire lives. And there are people for whom marriage is a union of souls, connectedness to one another, the feeling of another person as part of oneself. This is no longer simply an attitude toward a person as one among many people. It is the perception of another as part of one’s own consciousness, one’s own soul. And a person lives by this, perceives it this way, and relates to it this way.

Further, it is very important to understand: when we begin looking at all this more deeply, we see a huge number of causes and effects, and many of them are uncontrollable.

For example, the strength of a wife’s inner impulses may lead to divorce, even if the husband does not have the inner strength to stop it. Although perhaps according to his karmic path this divorce was not even intended. He simply may not have enough inner resources to hold the situation together.

Or vice versa. Sometimes a husband or wife initiates divorce because certain causes and events have already been launched for the second person, which must lead them to another person.

There is a very interesting example that I often give. Did a person go to prison because he killed another person? Or did he commit murder because according to his karmic path he needed to go through the experience of prison and certain sufferings? This is a huge difference from the point of view of consciousness.

Therefore sometimes a person comes to divorce because through it certain states, certain experiences, and certain inner changes had to be lived through.

First of all, all of this should be treated as ordinary life events.

Someone may hear in this the modern demonstrative idea of freedom: a person has the right to live as they want, make any decisions, divorce whenever they want, and so on. But here the question arises precisely of how much a person understands the responsibility of what is happening. How much you understand what exactly you did at the moment when you agreed to be with a person for your entire life. How conscious you were then.

I unconsciously proposed to my wife. I definitely unconsciously made many decisions and performed certain actions. I can say: “I was unconscious, which means now I can do whatever I want.” But actually the opposite is true — turn on your awareness now in order to understand everything that is happening. And at least now act consciously, understanding the consequences, motives, details, and inner processes.

But in order to understand how people move through life and relationships, one must have a view broader than simply the material. One cannot think only in social aspects.

For example, when I look at your life, I never consider it only on the level of everyday social events. Probably I am the only person in your current environment who does not evaluate your life only through the social plane. Because if you look at life only through the everyday or social level, you will definitely make mistakes: your life is too multilayered, too saturated with different ranges of perception and inner experience. And it is not even about the events themselves, but about the depth of the processes passing through you. This does not mean that you are smarter than someone else, better, or “higher.” There are simply people whose life foundation is very calm and simple — and that is exactly the path they need.

I always give the example: in order for my wife and me to have four children, we did not need to go to university or read 800 books. When we had our first child, we did a huge number of strange things. And there are people who study for years, get an education, take courses, prepare — and still do not have children. That is, there are different causes.

Because your life has a very broad range, all people who try to evaluate it only socially will be mistaken. Because here it is important to hear:

– what inner impulses arise in you, – what is happening to you.

And when you begin to truly understand this and look at a person more deeply, it becomes even scarier. Because at that moment you have to admit that absolutely anything can really happen in life. But the point is that not only can anything happen to you. It can happen to any person. Even to the quietest and calmest seeming couple.

And there are millions of such examples. People live together for 30 years, “soul to soul,” nobody around them, they work from home as programmers, lead a quiet life.

– And then suddenly something completely unexpected happens: someone kills someone.

– Or people separate and it turns out that for a long time they have had completely different inner lives. Or a person changes sharply and begins living absolutely differently.

To understand this, one must understand a person’s life more deeply. One must understand the periods of their life. A new life period may begin for a person. And in this period such impulses, such inner energies, such influence of other spiritual entities or processes may activate within them that they begin prevailing over the consciousness by which the person lived before. And then a person’s focus of perception literally changes, consciousness changes.

We observe this in children. It’s just that with children we at least somehow try to observe them. Although even there people look through their own limitations, fears, ideas, and templates, without understanding the scale of the person themselves.

Take you, Tanya, for example. You are 36 years old. Can you imagine that within the framework of truly conscious life you have lived only about 16 years? And ahead of you there are still two or three full conscious lives. And if we look at this broadly, it becomes obvious: you could never have foreseen in advance what your life would become later. Nobody can foresee this. And this is exactly what says that any constructions built exclusively on social logic or material perception are initially distorted.

Therefore Rudolf Steiner said, speaking before teachers, that a real teacher must in some sense be a prophet. That is, they must see who a child will become in 20, 30, 40, or 50 years, and already based on this offer them a path of development. And the only thing one can truly do when looking at a person is try to understand what their spiritual system needs.

If you came to me for advice — and you periodically do — then the first thing I would try to see is: what do you truly need on the level of your inner essence.

Yes, I can say:

– certain laws exist here, – there are social rules here, – you cannot do this here, – there will be consequences here.

All this is also important. But the first thing is to give a person the opportunity to look deeper and try to understand: what for their spiritual essence is the true flow of life? Therefore I can only answer your question this way.

For a very long time, communicating with different people and discussing questions of studying oneself and one’s life, I asked the same question regarding connection with close people — with children, with a wife: what are our relationships actually based on? On what energies? What is this fact of living together? What is it? Is it law? Or a certain freedom? What kind of choice is this? What kind of plane is this? What kind of space is this?

Because if we look deeper and enter a certain zone of perception, we will see that in reality no rules exist at all. I am not talking now about the laws of the country. That is something different.

But if we look more broadly — do rules exist, for example, regarding what thoughts you may go through in your head? There are no such rules. Nobody will condemn you by law for thoughts. And if we rise even higher in understanding what is happening, then we will see that a person can commit practically any actions. The only question is one thing: do you understand that you will have to answer for these actions.

And then the next level of understanding arises: what exactly does this responsibility mean for you?

Do you think you will answer because:

– society will condemn you, – children will begin thinking worse of you, – friends will turn away from you, – your social circle will change, – you will lose money?

Or do you perceive it differently? For example, like this: “I understand that causes and effects exist on the level of energy. I understand that I can change the course of my own life from the point of view of the karmic plan. I understand that I can create new chains of probabilities and events that will affect not only me, but other people as well.”

– Very few people have such a perception of reality. For example, I don’t even have it. What should I rely on in such situations?

Here we can discuss what seems to be the most obvious answer lying on the surface — to rely on your conscience. What is conscience in the classical definition, as in the dictionary? “It is an inner feeling that shows a person whether they are in harmony with the truth inside themselves.”

But here a huge number of questions arise. Everyone has their own truth within themselves. Is it truth or not truth? Because some criminal or thieves, for example, also have their own hierarchy of values, things they would never do, and so on.

And here there also appears a slight feeling of something like shame or guilt, which in modern psychology are often defined as toxic feelings. And many psychologists say: get rid of them at all costs, and so on.

You are talking about things of a completely different order, but they are not accessible to everyone. For example, I can come to you and ask: “What do you think about this? What would you do in my place?”

In the past, people probably went to a priest. Some go to a psychologist, some to their parents, some to a friend. But still, what should ordinary people rely on if they do not have access to an understanding of cause-and-effect relationships and energies? On some initial level, I understand what you are talking about — impulses, energies. But for me it is more like a premonition. I do not have such a strong perception.

— When you say that some people have it and others do not, it is as if you are placing “zeros” and “ones.” But there are neither zeros nor ones here. Everyone has perception; it is simply different for everyone.

There is no limit to perception in the negative direction — in error, in the probability of error. In the same way, there is no limit to perception in terms of breadth, the range of perceiving different possibilities and different events. You can go into this endlessly. Do you realize what that means?

– Yes, of course.

— For example, let us discuss the influence of children. You say: “Are we going to discuss the next 15 incarnations with you, or the next 5–10 years?” Do you understand? And now imagine different probabilities as well.

Essentially, the human brain will not be able to do this. It will not be able to break down all possible probabilities. And moreover, how much time would it take? Even if you and I wanted to describe our lives, it would take us more time than those lives themselves lasted. Because we would begin describing broader and broader ranges.

I am not even talking about describing the future and breaking it down into different aspects. The point here is that a person should try to do this. They should try to pay attention to it, try to remember it.

Imagine: two people meet, and one reacts somehow incorrectly. And suddenly a person has an impulse: “He treats me somehow soullessly.” We recently discussed this topic. But the essence is that suddenly you say: “I remembered that my feeling that another person is soulless is my own ego.” And you stop yourself.

For this, you do not need any special vision. Pay attention: you do not need any bonuses, cheat codes, money, power, or access to sacred people for this. It is only your own perception and understanding of how you behave toward another person.

– This is the level of psychology.

— I would not say so. Because the very fact of becoming aware of this already means that you possess certain energies and strengths. We can discuss this endlessly, but you simply will not have the strength for it.

People come to me for personal sessions, attend groups, and so on. There are people who come and say: “I completely agree with what you are saying, I will not do this anymore.” And the very next day they do it again. You ask: “Why did you do that?” The person says: “I do not know.” And this is very important. It is important for a person to begin noticing simple things themselves — not some cosmic constructions.

– Does this have anything in common with conscience? It seems to me there are some overlaps. What do you think: if you think about other people, then perhaps there is something in common with conscience in that? But again, it is often mixed with shame. You know, like they used to say in childhood: “You have no conscience.”

— When someone tells you “you have no conscience,” if it is not said calmly, as teaching, then it often comes from ego.

But it can also be said calmly, as an observation. From the point of view of conscience, it is a certain balanced state of perception and understanding of other people, the laws of the Universe and truths, and the ability to act according to these laws. A person learns this and will continue learning it for thousands more years.

You will not come to a complete understanding of this within one lifetime. Therefore, every person has conscience. The question is the degree of development of this state, the depth of understanding and feeling of this light, the range of perception of this entire life.

First of all, it is important to understand that another person may feel much more broadly than you within a certain range and may see far more variants of the future. It may seem to you that they are behaving inadequately or badly, or that they have no conscience.

But it is important to look and understand: why are you saying this to the person at all? What are you basing this on? What do you want to happen? For the person to change? To find truth, the truth itself? Or to understand the event? Why are you saying this? Why are you doing this?

Therefore, this word is endlessly discussed. People will constantly return to it and interpret it from different sides. The question here is points of reference, how people perceive and view it when they evaluate the world.

Imagine: there are two people, fairly developed, knowledgeable in psychology. And one speaks about conscience, and the second also speaks about conscience. But one speaks about conscience from the point of view of the socio-material world and the laws of the physical world and believes only in material laws and the physical world. And the other speaks about the fact that, actually, the material world is a derivative of the spiritual world, merely a part of the spiritual world.

Can they find a balance of conscience? Never. It is impossible. We can debate endlessly, we can find some intersections in understanding certain things, but we will not find a balance in the perception of conscience.

– Do not take the next question personally. Let us take an abstract person who dislikes another person. Because I realized that you try to treat all people equally. What attitude should one have toward a person whom, for whatever reason, you dislike? Imagine an abstract situation. I tell you: “I do not like this person.” What would you answer?

— There are two sides of behavior here. There is one behavior that concerns life and your study of life. And there is behavior that concerns specific social aspects of perception.

What do social aspects of perception mean? “I do not like this person, so I will not hire them.” You ask me why. Because I decided not to hire blondes. “But you have no right.” Yet I decided so.

There are countries where this is prohibited, and there are countries where it is allowed to say and express this. There are countries and cities where it is forbidden even to express such things. I think in California you cannot even say this out loud. And somewhere else, it is allowed. You have the right to say it there, and nothing will happen to you.

– And somewhere you will not say that you are not hiring someone because she is blonde, but you will hide it behind some prettier reason.

— A very important aspect is to separate this personally for yourself, because we live in a social world. If we act solely according to impulse and the honesty of lived experience, then that is periodically an entirely different life. Somewhere you will not be allowed to leave the country, somewhere you will not receive a document, somewhere you will lose, because we live in a harsh social society. Most businesses cannot even function if you live exclusively according to such a principle. Someone comes into your coffee shop, and you say: “You know, one of our employees sneezed, ChatGPT said you might get sick.” And everyone leaves the coffee shop.

That is, if you constantly act in such a mode and remain in this state all the time, then in some social aspects it simply does not work. Therefore, we act according to the laws accepted in the country. You say: “But we agreed on the laws, so we act according to the laws.”

Someone may say this is manipulation, that it is not spiritual. It is spiritual because you are aware of the truth of life. And then, if you act in some manipulative things, you recognize this honestly. Do not invent distortions for yourself: “I fired this employee because he simply earned too much money, but I told everyone he worked poorly, because in this country I cannot fire him for earning too much money, these are the rules here. But if I do not do this, my business will die, close down, you will not receive money, and I will go to prison.” This is an example of an irresolvable situation that simply does not work in many countries and legal systems.

So then be honest with yourself: analyze this situation and admit that you do not fully understand, from the point of view of karmic causes and effects and the spiritual world, whether it is permissible to act this way or not. Try to do this in a balanced manner, without creating illusions around yourself.

There is another side, where you act based on your own impulses. When you know that you dislike this person, and you see something happening, and you simply cannot be near them. Inside you, numbness is born. You look — and this person causes disgust, anger, negativity within you. You cannot stay near them, you do not want them touching your children, touching your couch, or coming within two meters of you. Certain states arise inside you, and you do not understand what is happening to you. At the same time, there are situations where you understand why this is happening. And there are situations where it simply happens. This is an important aspect.

And then you keep everything inside yourself while outwardly behaving socially. But you do not say: “Please step four meters away from me, I will tell you the truth. Something is happening to me, some impulse is acting within me, and I cannot figure this impulse out, therefore I cannot stay near you.”

You even have to adapt. You deceive society and the people around you: you invite these people to birthdays, meet them, drink coffee with them, work, communicate, smile, adapt to social society because you do not know how to act differently, you do not know how.

But at the same time, with all your heart, with all your spiritual essence, with all your life force and energy, you continue observing this situation and trying to understand it. Trying to understand what is happening, why such impulses are acting within you. And you try to understand yourself not from the position: “Well, because this person is dirty.” You see that another “dirty” person does not provoke such a reaction in you. Or you see how this same person does not provoke such feelings in your friend. Which means something here is not right.

If you launch such genuine impulses within yourself toward study and understanding, even while preserving this attention toward the person and this characteristic inside yourself, you align the space. You pour incredible love, energy, and happiness into this space. You begin acting honestly, at least toward yourself — in conversations with yourself, in your own reflections.

Sometimes you understand that this situation needs to be discussed with that person. And sometimes you understand that you cannot discuss it directly with them, and then you discuss it with someone else. But you truly want to understand.

– So the key is observation? To observe, to study?

— This is a fact. This is the only thing a person can do when they do not know the answer.

– Often, simply observing a situation brought relationships with people who were initially completely incomprehensible to me to a completely different level. We practically became friends afterward.

— We analyzed a situation in one of the videos when I told you that it was not a blazer, it was a dress. And we discussed it further. How do I know that you took it calmly? Why do I remember that situation so well? Because I tried to observe. I was fully present in that moment. This does not mean I always succeed at this. It does not mean I always notice everything. But I know for sure: in that situation, I was alive. I was present in it, and that is why I describe it so easily, with so many details.

Someone from the outside may say: “Strange, why does he notice such little details?” But I was simply engaged in that moment. I was observing. Other things could have arisen within me as well. For example: “Is it normal to order short dresses?” Or: “You are talking about the dress, but your back is exposed.” None of this arose within me. Moreover, I could have noticed some of your other characteristics but not told you about them — because of social restrictions or because it would have been inappropriate to discuss them in society. I could observe how you yourself felt, how a person speaks, how other people react. All of this can be observed.

A person simply looks and thinks: “Well, they dressed strangely somehow.” They do not look at it more broadly: why did the person do that? What impulses were within them? What states? The person immediately imposes their own construction.

Or, for example, a person looks: you dressed well — and then looks at themselves and thinks: “How bad I look. Why can’t I do that?” And then it turns out that you became the cause of their state. On the one hand, no. But on the other hand — yes. The question is how easily you yourself perceive these zones.

If another person tells you: “I had these feelings arise,” you can answer: “These are your feelings. I was not broadcasting this intentionally. I did not dress in order for something inside you to react.” You can say: “I was standing in the room, went into the wardrobe, looked, and thought: ‘I’ll wear a red blazer today.’” That is all. It has nothing to do with other people. Or: “I just decided to wear a T-shirt. I was not thinking about anything.”

And this is also an important circumstance. Someone may say: “But you could have thought about other people.” And you answer: “This is a question of rules. After all, I did not come out naked in front of you.” Although, on the other hand, you could have come out naked, because it is your house and you have the right to do whatever you want. But you believe that it is not worth doing, therefore you do not act that way. If you had come out naked, people might think twice about visiting you next time.

And therefore you go to some people and not to others. For example, there are people I will not visit, or I ask in advance: “Will there be alcohol there?” People say: “There will.” I answer: “Thank you very much, I will not come.” Or there are people I immediately do not visit because even if they say there will be no alcohol, there is a possibility that there still will be. Or there will be drugs, or something else.

Then learn these details. We live in a society where such conflicts can occur. It is exactly the same as driving on the road and ending up in a traffic jam that you did not anticipate in advance.