Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

One of the ways that we relate with each other is through our subpersonalities (please see the thread on this topic in the Theory section – the first post explains the difference between primary selves and disowned selves).

In our relationships, we tend to be drawn to people who carry our disowned selves (meaning that we project those selves onto our partners because they have traits that we unconsciously associate with our disowned selves). Recognizing these disowned selves is a way to reclaim those projections and in doing so become more whole. This is one of the ways that relationship can act as a teacher for us.

This is the first of two exercises I want to post in helping those who have never worked with subpersonalites (selves) to identify some of those subs. I believe that knowing our subs is an important part of integral relationship. This exercise is from Partnering, by Hal and Sidra Stone. I have modified it slightly for our use.

Judging Your Disowned Self

Think of your current partner (or a previous partner if you are currently single), and think about the ways that person was able to push your buttons. The longer the relationship the better for this exercise. Really identify the ways this person just annoys/annoyed you to no end. What is it about this person that you judge? In which area do you feel superior? Be specifc as you write down the most irritating or reprehensible attribute of this person. When you discover what it is, you have learned about one of your own disowned selves. Flesh it out a bit by looking at how it operates and what motivates it – maybe even have a dialogue with it.

Now look for the oppsite quality in yourself and see how you contrast with your partner. What kind of person are you? What are the qualities that you are proud of having? Write down these qualities. You have just identified one of your primary selves. Again, try to get to know it a little more, give it a name or notice how it feels in your body.

You now have a picture of one of your primary selves and one of your disowned selves. Repeat this exercise as many times as you like. You can also use family members, coworkers, and friends to help you identify disowned selves. The more a person annoys you, the more likely s/he is carrying a disowned self.

Who did you find living inside you? 

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

great stuff,william, seeds for world peace, thats for sure!

i live in a town where there is the psychosynthesis center. some day i may do the training and become a psychosynthesis therapist, ps deals with sub-personalities as well. but i think i'd rather move south / westward and vecoem a hakomi therapist instead, any HT's out there?

peace
mary

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

Hi Mary,

I'm a big fan of psychosynthesis.

As far as hakomi therapists in Tucson, I have no idea, but there are probably some. Tucson is a very middle America town, but there seems to be a lot of alternative health options here.

Peace,
Bill

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

I have been working with the aspects of discovering subpersonalities through my personal interaction with others for many years. Being keenly aware when I feel irritations, and being really  brutally honest with myself. Eventually I was left with several questions;

If  I have owned those aspects in myself,  what then will attract me to another? In other words once you have experienced the Hieros Gamos in yourself would you want to have a romantic relationship? Another question that arises is that if the challenges that we experience in relationships are basically a reflection of our own inner conflicts, could we then not have a relationship with anyone once those conflicts are resolved? Why should on person be more compatible than another, as each and every other person can be a mirror to us?

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

Hi Sophia,

Good questions.

As near as I can tell, short of full, permanent enlightenment and a cessation of any egoic consciousness, no one will ever be completely free of disowned selves or projections. As long as there is a functioning psyche, there is a shadow.

However, as we begin to reclaim those disowned selves and projections, we become more free to choose partners for who they are rather than having our psyche makes those choices (unconsciously) on our behalf. We become free to choose a person rather than fulfilling an unconscious need.

In regard to the conflicts question, again, as long as we are alive we will never be free of inner conflicts. Enlightenment is a process (and an ever-present reality, but that's a whole other discussion), not a static state of perfection void of ego or conflict.

While it's true that each person we meet can be a mirror, only certain mirrors are capable of reflecting those disowned parts of ourselves back to us. We have all had the experience of meeting someone bright, witty, attractive and yet there is no “spark” there. That person doesn't “fit” our unresolved issues. On the other hand, sometimes we end up with a partner we would never have guessed we would be attracted to.

My last relationship was like that. We seemed a strange couple in a lot of ways, but we had some serious “glue” for a while that allowed us to do amazing work. When the work was done, the glue ceased to be strong enough to accomodate the differences.

I hope that addresses some of your questions. Hopefully others will add their thoughts as well.

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

I do agree with you, for anything to exist at all there must be a shadow, an opposite. As someone once said, “Light is the shadow of god.”

Now another questions arises. I his wonderful book ” The Meaning of Love” Vladimir Solovyov muses that love cannot exist with any meaning, or certainly is uncomfortable with anything else but “forever”. Yet, as most of us have experienced, and as you mentioned about your previous relationship, if we are realistic, the glue will wear off as issues are resolved, and personal growth occurs. Yet to truly love someone cannot happen unless you feel it is forever. Each time we enter into a relationship we hope that it will be forever, sadly most relationships are not, and perhaps it is also the reason why breakups are so painful for not only do you lose someone through whom you have lived a part of yourself, but also the forever dream is destroyed. Perhaps each time a realtionship break-up we are in danger of becoming a little more cynical, a little more “realistic” but also a little more less capable of the total immersion that love requires. Even though it might be subconsciously.

It is also perfectly natural that the initial “joined at hip” feeling will change because that is the natural flow of things, unity, separation, finding the individual self reborn from the union, longing to return to union, union … Just as we as children must leave the nurturing environment of childhood homes in order to discover ourselves. Some will even say that this is an issue that relates to all of our relationships. Finding the boundaries between I and we.

If we look at things realistically it is very unlikely that one person will contain all the reflection we need, or will grow and evolve in same way we do, yet that is what we wish for when we think of the perfect mate. Are our expectations unrealistic in romantic relationships, for certainly as far as marriage with children is concerned the need for an forever relationship increases? Perhaps we need to look at romantic love in a different way, perhaps society itself is not structured to contain the soulful relationship? Any thoughts?

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

Sophia,

your name well fits you! you ask wise questions and make intriguing comments.

As someone once said, “Light is the shadow of god.”

very interesting! i'd love to know the source and context.

Now another questions arises. I his wonderful book ” The Meaning of Love” Vladimir Solovyov muses that love cannot exist with any meaning, or certainly is uncomfortable with anything else but “forever”. Yet, as most of us have experienced, and as you mentioned about your previous relationship, if we are realistic, the glue will wear off as issues are resolved, and personal growth occurs. Yet to truly love someone cannot happen unless you feel it is forever. Each time we enter into a relationship we hope that it will be forever, sadly most relationships are not, and perhaps it is also the reason why breakups are so painful for not only do you lose someone through whom you have lived a part of yourself, but also the forever dream is destroyed. Perhaps each time a realtionship break-up we are in danger of becoming a little more cynical, a little more “realistic” but also a little more less capable of the total immersion that love requires. Even though it might be subconsciously.

i think you're right about this, and it's but one reason why the rate at which children and teens are entering into and breaking relationships is a little scary.

there is another thing here. we can break a relationship and still love the person, or lose both relationship and love. i still love and cherish as friend my first love, though i will never be in love with him again. i still am in love with the one i have put aside from my life because he is married. these two i will probably always love - it's been 25 years for the first and 14 years for the second so i feel pretty safe saying that. but my love for my ex-husband has died, and i feel no regret about that. i am grateful we married because my children are my heart, but if i never saw him or heard from him again, i'd hardly notice. (of course, as long as the children are growing, and we live in the same town, we'll be in regular touch. once the kids are growing, i am so out of here, and then i will have more freedom…)

It is also perfectly natural that the initial “joined at hip” feeling will change because that is the natural flow of things, unity, separation, finding the individual self reborn from the union, longing to return to union, union … Just as we as children must leave the nurturing environment of childhood homes in order to discover ourselves. Some will even say that this is an issue that relates to all of our relationships. Finding the boundaries between I and we.

yes, there is that womb pull, the longing to melt the boundaries, which is behind the sci-fi and fantasy dreams of telepathy and telempathy…

If we look at things realistically it is very unlikely that one person will contain all the reflection we need, or will grow and evolve in same way we do, yet that is what we wish for when we think of the perfect mate. Are our expectations unrealistic in romantic relationships, for certainly as far as marriage with children is concerned the need for an forever relationship increases?

it would certainly be ideal. the modern reality though is that most children are live with a broken and/or blended family or have a close friend in one. probably we are too quick to divorce, as a society, but it is also probably true that there were many achingly dead marriages in the past and people just felt stuck, which was no healthier and arguably less healthy for the children than a maturely handled divorce (ok, granted that may be relatively less common too :) ).

Perhaps we need to look at romantic love in a different way, perhaps society itself is not structured to contain the soulful relationship? Any thoughts?

yes to both. we are infected with horribly distorted expectations of romantic love from early childhood through all the media and societal expectation. the soulful relationship, when it exists, exists in spite of, apart from and in prophetic stance to society.

love,

nicole

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

Thank you Nicole for your kind words, especially appreciated coming from someone as luminous as you.

'Light is the shadow of God.” 
 

God is omnipotent, all-seeing, all-loving, omni-present, unname-able; omni, all, infinite, timeless; in all cosmonogies the unutterable and unthinkable are used to describe god. Actually then at the basis of all religions and belief systems there is an acknowledgment that there exist alongside and within us, something that is actually unthinkable to us, beyond which the human mind can conceive of. The unthinkable then is the source which our questioning minds and imaginations try and make sense of, try to make known to ourselves. However, the human being can only explore the unknowable from the basis of the known.

“That which in its primal nature has no limit, is thus not truly thinkable. It cannot, indeed, be defined, for to define anything is to state its limits. Without quantitative statements, however, something of these notions can be conveyed in terms of relationships, as in the sentence of Marsilio Ficino, 'Light is the shadow of God.” - Melita Denning & Osborne Phillips

So we can in reality only explore the unknown through relationships. Which is for me interesting in relation to romantic relationships, where we actually reach out to the other by our ability to love, and so we gain knowledge of the other, that which we did not know before, yet at the same time in reaching towards the unknown other we discover more about the unknown in ourselves.

The Ancient Egyptians wisely said to gain knowledge of something/someone/a subject you must love it, immerse yourself in it, empathize with what you want to gain knowledge of, then  in the process of gaining knowledge, the knowledge will be transformed into wisdom. What a wonderful thought when you relate it to romantic relationships.

As you say no love is ever meaningless or really lost, for always it forms part of your now awareness. I also think of it as I think of loved ones lost through physical death. For me it doesn't feel like they are dead for I still feel them so part of me.

Thanks Nicole for your response.

Re: Exercise #1: Discovering Subpersonalities

this is so beautiful and true, sophia. thanks for filling it out for me. i agree with you about those lost. my dear one who lost his brother a few years ago says the same thing about him, and i agree. Ric's not really gone. he's so present to me that at times i feel like i could turn around and see his wicked grin.

i was talking to my best girlfriend yesterday about the way we love God through loving people, and she agreed. God does have that whole transcendent, unknowable, ineffable aspect, but people are (or seem to be) immediate and accessible, so easier to know and love (in theory - of course we all have the transcendent, unknowable, ineffable aspect to our beings as well).

love,

nicole