But what about intimate relationships?

After my last post about metta, or maitri, a friend posed this question to me:

“Many meditation exercises to develop metta forbid you to focus on someone with whom you’re romantically invoved or sexually interested. Why is this? And, how, then, does metta become extended into intimate relationships?”

I’m certainly no expert in Buddhist or yogic philosophy, but I thought I would share my interpretation, as I shared it with her.

There are meditation practices that can be used to develop metta or maitri, but the actions of this unconditional love exist outside the practice exercises.

The meditations, in which one practices extending metta to various persons — some close to the practitioner, and others who are less loved, or downright disliked ( see my previous post, “Making Love,” for an example exercise) — are ways of increasing the meditator’s capacity for metta.

They are analogous to the weight training and wind sprints a runner might utilize to build strength and endurance before setting off to run across the country. By the time she sets out on her journey, the lessons of the training need to be integrated into her form, because she shouldn’t have to break stride to consider every step.

As far as metta with a sexual or love interest – the reason you shouldn’t meditate on that person is because it’s far too easy and far too distracting. The lesson of unconditional love is one of extending your lovingkindness beyond the obvious recipients, working towards a constant expansion of the loving borders. Also, the point of such a meditation is to stay focused and this is hard to do when you’re meditating on a sexual interest!

There are many ways that metta can be incorporated into loving relationships. I suppose that in Buddhist philosophy, practicing non-attachment while continuing to love someone is a form of metta.

Yogic philosophy, which is originally rooted in Hinduism, says that a piece of the divine light lives in each and every one of us. So in my interpretation, the yogic practice is less about loving non-attachment, and more about universal loving attachment. You see the world in your lover, and your lover’s face everywhere in the world.

I realize I’m splitting hairs here, but I suppose that means that metta and maitri are not exactly the same, since they’re rooted in different traditions… although they may look the same in practice.

There are specific intimate meditation exercises that can be practiced with a beloved. Commonly thought of as Western Tantra, this should not be confused with classical yogic tantra, which is one of the six fundamental types of yoga, involving esoteric ritual practices recognizing the Divine in everyday life. Sexual, or Western, Tantra involves a series of intimate/sexual practices that honor the presence of the divine in your lover. There is a plethora of books and workshops about sexual tantra, including ones specific to couples, women, men, and gays and lesbians. Sexual tantra has gotten a tremendous amount of media attention, as does anything related to sex! (And has been correspondingly trivialized.) This is a link to a good Yoga Journal article about tantra practices in relationship.

I think ultimately there is a chicken-and-egg question here:

Is a kind and loving relationship the foundation for a practice that helps the couple extend lovingkindness to the world both as individuals and as a couple?

OR

Does the practice of of metta as individuals prepare us for expressions of love in more intimate relationships?

As I write this, I can hear the voice of one of my meditation teachers.

He would look at us with a twinkle in his eye, and say: “Yes”.

(Meaning it’s not either/or, but both/all.)

Namasté.