Soulmaking Dyad Practice

This evening, I'd like to offer a few pointers and guidances, suggestions about working in, practising in soulmaking dyads, in pairs. Just to say a little bit about that. It's, like so much of this, a huge subject -- so many possibilities, so many things to consider, to explore, etc. So I just want to say a little bit about that, or pick up a few of those pieces there and possibilities there. Again, things to look out for, things to consider, things to practise. So far, or at least in the last few years, we've worked in twos and threes, and there are some guided meditations there over the years -- I think we called them temenos exercises and things like that. So what we've done is introduced the exercise, usually in twos, usually with a human other, but it could be with an imaginal other, intrapsychic imaginal other, or an object or a being in nature (a tree or whatever it is, a flower), and the exercise of what we call the balance of attention or twoness, as a sort of, I pointed out, basic practice in the sense of it forms a basis for soulmaking, for imaginal practice, for sensing with soul.

So we could regard that as one kind of preliminary, in a way, to soulmaking, to imaginal practice in dyads. The other thing that we put out, and I think we did call this more specifically temenos exercises, was a sort of three-part exercise (either in twos, or threes, or sometimes fours, I think), where one would take it in turns to check in with sensitivity and express, share to the other or others what was happening in the energy body. The other person or persons would take their turns doing the same thing, with the full sensitivity of witnessing, of listening, of receiving and looking at another. The second go around would be the emotions, and the third would be the possibility of sharing an image or something that had touched your soul recently. So that's a very brief explanation. I would encourage listening to those exercises again -- there are a few of them dotted over the last two or three years -- because there are quite a lot of nuances in the instructions. Sometimes if you were there and you took part, and most people seemed to enjoy it or want to pursue it, and people are pursuing that kind of practice, it could well be that one sort of thinks, "I've got that now. I've got the instructions," and takes that away and starts to play with it, which is great.

But it might well be worth listening again, because as we put them out there in the sort of flow of the guidance of it from Catherine or me, there's quite a lot of, as I said, nuance there, little things one can introduce, things to consider, things to incorporate into that practice. And I think I talked about it as almost like practising your scales, so it's a little bit contrived, to separate out energy body, then emotion, then image like that in sort of three tiers and go in order like that. But like practising scales, you separate something, you isolate it, and you work on it, and then when you come to the piece that you want to play on the piano or whatever your instrument is, the ability to play the scales well and having practised them really feeds into the fluency, the fluidity, the capacity to improvise, the responsiveness, the subtlety that you can then bring to bear on the 'real' music, so to speak.

So there are these two levels so far that we've put out -- the balance of attention exercise, and this sort of three-part what we called a temenos exercise. And there's the possibility of sharing images with each other, which we included sometimes, and which people are doing, I think, already -- some people. There's also the possibility, or we encourage, tracking the effects of what is shared, of what's happening, of the perception that's happening, and the possibility of voicing -- "When you shared that, or when you shared that image, this is what happens in my emotions, energy body," or "This is what arises imaginally for me. This is what arises in terms of sensing with soul with me," and the possibility of putting that into the dyad, into the crucible of the dyad, that kind of careful, sensitive tracking, and respectful sharing of that, of the effects of basically what is happening right now for both people. And there are different forms that that can take.

And then there's maybe a whole other level where each person becomes image for the other, or the dyad itself becomes an image. So there can be a sharing of this meeting and the perception of self and other in this time right now, in this meeting, and the perception of that when it's sensed with soul. As I said, there are different forms you can do that with, and other levels. I suppose there's a whole other level where there's really a lot of eros going on there, and I'm not going to talk so much about that level tonight. There's a lot of eros going on between the pairs, the two elements of the dyad, the two people in the dyad. So that's possible as well. In a way, the whole thing kind of gets turbocharged then because of the eros and the inseminating quality of that; the whole thing gets very, very rich, and needs a lot of care and a lot of skill. Actually all this, all these levels need a lot of care and a lot of skill.

So I want to say a few things about perhaps these different possible levels of practising in a dyad, some of them at least, and some general things about that. The first, which I already just alluded to, is just how potent a dyad can be, or working in triads, or basically sharing images with other in that kind of intimate, open rapport there -- just how potent that can be. And some of you will know this, the way all kinds of things can get sparked and ignited -- sometimes very, very beautiful soulmaking perceptions, and sometimes really difficult reactions or contractions. As an entity, if you like, or as a kind of crucible or vehicle, working in relationship is potentially a very sensitive crucible. In other words, little changes can make big differences. Now, all that's the case when one practises solo, so to speak, on one's own, eyes open or eyes closed, sensing with soul. It's very potent and it's very sensitive to all the responses, the relationships, the manipulations, the leanings, the navigation, etc. And a dyad -- I'm not sure if it's more sensitive, but it's definitely a sensitive space. The space is sensitive in the sense that it responds. And everything responds: the energy, the emotion, the heart, the perception, the soul, the mind, all of that.

So just as we emphasized over the last few years, you know, a kind of sense of, "Hmm, maybe there are some prerequisites for this whole endeavour of imaginal practice and sensing with soul and Soulmaking Dharma," similarly, too, it would be wise to pause and consider, "What kind of skills am I going to need if I want dyad or triad practice to work well, to be fruitful, to be soulmaking, to be safe, to be beautiful, not to harm, not to end up in more contraction and confusion, etc.?" And so a lot of skills are needed there. We could, again, outline some of them. [11:07] But just to pause with this. It might be that -- I don't know, for most people, for a lot of people, what proportion of people -- a lot of soulmaking happens in relationship with other human beings, especially those who are interested in soulmaking, or at least a lot of eros and image can be activated in those relationships. And the question is, as I've just been saying, whether the initial sort of spark that feels soulmaking can actually keep, sustain its generativity, sustain its fertility, sustain basically the soulmaking dynamic, the eros-psyche-logos dynamic, deepening, widening, enrichening the whole soul and experience, or whether that whole dynamic, and perhaps even the relationship as well, breaks in some way, short-circuits, it blows a fuse or backfires. So this is really a crucial question here.

Part of the way problems can arise and the soulmaking dynamic, the eros-psyche-logos dynamic can get disrupted is in and around -- so actually in the times of relating, but also around the times of relating with another. So being conscious about boundaries, respecting boundaries, dependent on people's situations, whatever their relationship commitments are and other things. There are all kinds of boundaries, in fact. But being conscious about boundaries, respecting boundaries. Ethical considerations in some cases. Conscious of energy, emotion, psychological patterns, relational and communicative sort of patterns and skills and possibilities, as well as handling skilfully erotic charge, desire, image, and the slides, inevitable slides at times into reification or dismissal, or eros sliding into craving, etc., and noticing all this, responding to all that, developing one's skill and art. Really important. And a certain amount of skill with all that and other elements, too, is prerequisite, we could say, to fertile and sustainable soulmaking relationship with other human beings and fellow soulmakers.

So we haven't talked too much about that, and given too much guidance. That's why I want to say a little bit tonight. But even what I say tonight, as I said, is a little bit limited. Partly why I'm going into it is just I'm aware that people are practising in dyads and noticing the potency, the sensitivity, the care that's needed, and maybe getting a sense of some of the caution and skill and art that's needed. So it seems like it would be good to say a few things about that. And as I said, for many people, a good proportion of soulmaking happens in relationship, so it feels important.

Let's see. So, again, not to underestimate how intimate it is to share in this way with others in a soulmaking dyad. To share one's psychological history or one's difficult history in one's life, wounds and patterns, is intimate; there's something about sharing images that are really soulmaking for us, that really touch us, that generally, often, feels even more intimate than, say, sharing some history of being abused or something like that, or just sharing a difficult emotion, or a lovely emotion, the certain vulnerability of that. There's something about the level of intimacy of sharing soul, sharing sensing with soul, sharing image with other that tends to even surpass those kinds of intimacies, of sharing, of revealing psychological history or emotion in the present moment.

And it's curious. I've pointed this out before. It's curious -- it's like, this thing, from one respect, isn't even real; it didn't even really happen. And yet it touches my soul, and it's important to my soul in ways that are so profound and so meaningful and so central that it's really an intimate space to enter into with someone, and that needs a lot of respect and care. And the range and pitch of skills or art needed to sustain it -- so don't underestimate that, the range and pitch of skills needed to sustain it and to enable it to be soulmaking, because we will need, in these kind of practices, to be able to work well and skilfully with difficulties and relational problems when they arise. And that's part of being in any healthy relationship. It can very easily arise in these kinds of relationships if you have someone you're working with over time, or even it's just one time that you're doing a dyad and something difficult comes up.

So, you know, if we just think for a moment about prerequisites, immediately it comes to mind: do I have, have I developed a certain amount of awareness of my emotional life? So that doesn't just mean the difficult emotions; it means also the subtle movements -- slight boredom, slight excitement, slightly wanting something. Do we call that an emotion? Yes, we could, in the big definition of emotion. These are all kind of colours or leanings, inclinations, states of the heart and consciousness at any time, and to be aware, to be able to notice these movements of the heart and changes in the heart is really, really crucial. So the more of that there is, the better placed one is to be able to do these kinds of practices. Some people, we could say, are just not quite ready, in the same way they're just not quite ready for imaginal practice, really. Then, do I have skill with my emotions? So this is happening, this difficult emotion or this lovely emotion. Can I tolerate it? Can I be with it? Can I give it what it needs? Because I may not be getting that from another person, and I may have to give it what it needs. Can I slow down, if necessary, whatever processes in the mind and the impulses that has kick-started? There are all kinds of skills involved, and that's why we put a lot of emphasis in Soulmaking Dharma on emotional awareness, emotional skill, working with the energy body, and those are integrated.

So all that would be prerequisites. As you're listening, to really ask yourself, you know, "How well developed are those building blocks for me?" Basic mindfulness, you know -- if I can't be there and be present and sustain my attention to some extent, sustain my focus on what's happening, let's say, in this dyad, in my experience [as] the other person is sharing, or the sense of the field -- without a sort of basic training in mindfulness and that capacity to sort of remain engaged and plugged in and alive, present, sensitive to what's going on, attentive, alert, the crucible is cracked. There's no possibility of it holding its material and holding whatever fire is there, etc. Energy body skill and awareness we already mentioned. Where am I with the whole Middle Way, the whole imaginal Middle Way or the emptiness Middle Way? Either one would help when there's reification. I start believing this image of self or other or the couple or whatever in a way that's too tight, too literal, too solid, and usually will ensue, either right then or in the course of time, some kind of problems or not-so-wise choices, etc.

Again, we're talking about possible prerequisites. Where am I with the fullness of intention? When I enter into these kinds of spaces, formal space of working in a soulmaking dyad, what am I really wanting there? And how easily, of course, for us as human beings the intention can contract to something smaller, less noble, less expansive, less profound, less open to possibility. Something sneaks in -- sometimes we're unconscious of it. I'm actually trying to get this, whatever it is -- approval, respect, a good feeling about myself; maybe I actually want to pursue a relationship with this person, which may or may not be fine, dependent on all kinds of other conditions, but am I clear about what my intentions are, and can I open up that field of intention to the fullness of intention and that element of the imaginal, that node?

So all these and more will be prerequisites, and really to ponder for oneself how developed they are and whether they need more work. And if so, you might want to pitch the dyad practice so that it's not further ahead than you're actually equipped for, so it's not more advanced than you actually have the tools to cope with and the resources to cope with. As I said, if we go back to what I said at the beginning, we talked about the balance of attention exercise, the three-part exercise -- energy body, emotion, image, etc., and sharing that. You know, spending a while with those before opening it up to other possibilities or other forms may be really wise, dependent on where you get the sense of what's the appropriate pitch. In general, it may be actually, "For a while now, I just need to practise the balance of attention thing. That's really what will serve me and serve my soul," etc., and not be in such a hurry to go into imaginal practice. So the balance of attention is not really a soulmaking practice, in a sense; it's a preparatory exercise, but so important. So important for healthy relationship, so important for a soulmaking dyad, so important for imaginal practice.

So there's this possibility of pitching, and again, the wisdom, the listening, the discerning, and getting a sense of: where does it need to pitch right now? What's my pitch right now? What's my level right now? And that "right now," as I said, might be for a while. It might be right now, in this moment, this afternoon, whatever it is. Because actually just being opposite another human being, and sitting a few feet from another, a couple of feet from another, whatever it is, bodies, in a way, open to each other, looking at each other, for a lot of people is pretty damn intense. And for some people, it will be soulmaking -- it won't necessarily be imaginal, but it will be soulmaking just to be in relationship, in dyadic relationship or triadic relationship. It's not imaginal -- remember, the imaginal is, if you like, a subset of soulmaking, so it might be soulmaking in the sense of it's stretching one's soul's capacity and one's learning things that feel meaningful to the soul. It's not yet imaginal, but the soul is growing, so there's a kind of eros-psyche-logos dynamic unfolding there. For many people, just to be in relationship that way, so deliberately, so carefully, so openly, so present to each other, and so intimate, if you like, will feel soulmaking, and that's great. One should not hurry through just that level of it.

So yes, the being looked at, just being an object of someone else's gaze, a few feet, and their sustained looking at you, their sustained taking you in, the charge of that, often, for many people in our culture, which I've talked about before -- the whole kind of complication and difficulty that can go with being seen. And then the sense of openness, perhaps in sharing whatever one's sharing, or just in being present with the body, open to another in that way; the intimacy that involves; being honest with another; learning, for example, developing the skill with this playing with the balance of attention, playing with the sense of twoness. All that is really, really important stuff, and may itself feel soulmaking, and it's not imaginal yet. So really to get a sense of the different pitches that you can play at and exercise at, and what might be appropriate there, rather than just, in some cases, trying to do something that's really beyond you just because it sounds like the most exciting or sexy thing or whatever. So, you know, the careful discernment there, the questioning, the openness.

If we just spend a few moments talking about that balance of attention exercise or the twoness exercise. [28:10] As I said, there's quite a lot to this, in the sense that it sounds really simple but actually many people find it quite difficult. So you could very much just sit down with someone else with that intention particularly: "Let's play exactly just with that, with the balance of attention, with the twoness." And one thing you might do, if you decide to do such a thing, or at another time in the context of some other dyadic practice, one thing that's really important is to notice the tendency of your attention. What do you notice, over time, is your kind of habit when in close relationship, when kind of confronted with another and that kind of openness, etc.? Is it, for instance, to somehow lose yourself? I'm so attentive to the other that I don't even notice what I'm feeling or sensing, or what I need or want, or all of that. Is there a kind of merging? And sometimes it actually feels like a person's attention almost goes into the other person and there's no attention in their own locus, in their own space. So just to notice. Not to judge. And this is really, really important: can I withhold the judging?

So there are going to be tendencies we notice -- perhaps to lose the self, perhaps to merge. Perhaps I notice that in relationship (and it gets even more clear when we're face to face like that) there's a perhaps subtle, perhaps grosser way I kind of comply with what I think or believe or presume or perceive the other wants. I find myself bending to that, and I haven't even decided to do that. It's an unconscious bending to fit usually some idea of what the other person wants, which, of course, may not even be actually what they want. So I might notice something like that. I might notice that I need to somehow entertain the other person -- I need to look good, I need to perform, I need to perhaps be a certain way, whatever that way might be: "They need to see love coming through my eyes," "They need to think I'm attractive," "that I'm deep," "that I'm intelligent," "that I'm this or that," "that the holy spirit moves in me," "that it's obvious that I'm an angel," whatever. It could be all kinds of things. But one possibility is just to sit down, practise the balance of attention or be in a dyad with the intention to just notice: what's my tendency, or what's my tendency right now? And then, over time, one might see, "Oh, I have a regular tendency, or it's quite common for me, to take that shape or to morph this way," or whatever it is.

So really, really important. If you're doing just that level of exercise, is it possible to just notice? There is certainly the possibility of bringing different responses in, bringing wisdom or compassion or soulful responses in, in many different ways, to open it up, to free it. But actually one really useful thing to do is just to notice, and see if I can just notice also what the effects of that on my being are. Now, of course, we might notice effects in the dyad that are quite complex, but we might also notice that there's some judgment of it, or we're impatient with ourselves or whatever. What if we just notice that? I notice this tendency, I notice the judgment, and just create some space around that. So the exercise at this point is not trying to do anything else other than notice and create space, and feel the effects of this pattern. It may be that within that then some compassion for yourself comes in, and that's going to have an effect, so that's important too. So that's a very, very important level of exercise, but also potentially really helpful. We could say quite basic, but really, really helpful for many people.

Then there are other possibilities that one can exercise and try out. So, for example, some practices, like in some Mahāmudrā or Dzogchen practices, they encourage meditating with the eyes open but relaxing the gaze. So usually what happens, the way the eyes work, the way the visual senses work, is the eyes and the eye muscles actually focus on something. And for that, the eye muscles have to kind of hold themselves in a certain focus, and there's a kind of intentness and intensity in that. It's quite subtle. But it's quite a different mode to open the eyes and relax the gaze so they're actually not focusing on anything. So you can try this just -- it doesn't have to be in an actual dyad, but you can just try it. What is it to open the eyes and relax the gaze? You will notice, actually, the rest of your body relaxing as you relax the gaze. It's like the eyes and the visual focus are not singling out and focusing on any one object. It's just open to a field of visual form and colour and perception there. It's a more general field. And in that, then, in terms of the balance of attention, we could say the attention is not going out so much to this object; it's in a more receptive mode. As I said, in some practices, some Dharma practices, like some Dzogchen and Mahāmudrā teachings, they will practise that a lot, a lot, a lot, and really develop that practice and take it in a certain direction to do with the nature of awareness, etc., as they would see it.

But doing that just on your own in a room, doing it on your own outside in nature, and getting used to that shift, of being able, and then go back to focusing on something -- that tree or whatever it is -- really, really skilful, and noticing the effects. And then, for a while, you could practise that in a dyad with someone. So what is it -- I'm sitting opposite someone, and I relax the gaze, and in that, actually, my visual field opens up to the whole space. Now, this person might be talking, and I can still hear what they're saying, I can still take in what they're saying, but I'm not focused on them as an object; they become part of the space, like they're embedded in the space, and much less prominent in the space. They're still going to be prominent, obviously, but much less so. So if there's a tendency to sort of focus too much on the other, practising in that way [is] really, really helpful as something one can do, and it relaxes that sort of intensity or forward thrust, if you like, into the other person, which is quite a common thing.

Then, within that, it's possible to do that and also just be aware of one's own experience at the same time, what's happening with me emotionally. For instance, if you do that, you will be aware, "Oh, as I do that, the shoulders relax, and something in my belly relaxes, and the heart, something softens in the heart." And then one might notice other emotions, etc. But correspondingly, then, the gaze doesn't need to be so penetrative to one's own experience. This is, again, part of playing with the balance of attention there. So I hope that makes sense as an option. Another possibility, again, is if you've done a fair amount of mettā practice, and especially if you've done mettā practice the way I would teach it, which is intimately connected to and involving the energy body, then another possibility is to imagine, just use the imagination to kind of see and sense, if you like, a mettā bubble or a mettā field that encompasses you and the other person or persons in the dyad or triad, so that that becomes part of the awareness as well, and there's a sense of us sitting -- not me, necessarily, giving mettā to them; I mean, that's fine, too, but us sitting in a field or a bubble, a cloud of mettā. And the more one can imagine that, and get a sense of it, and feel the softness and the care in it, and the field, the holding of it, and feel it also in the energy body to some extent, at least, that's going to really help the whole sense of sometimes what can be a problematic intensity or fear in a dyad, but also the balance of attention, because there the attention has gone to the field, as well, as a total space, rather than just that person or just contracting into my experience.

And then, of course, what we've done in the last couple of years, two or three years, when we introduced this exercise with the balance of attention, is play with, okay, can it be 100 per cent of my attention is with my experience? So I'm maybe aware that there's a person there, but I'm really just attuning to my energy body, my emotions, my thoughts, my experience here. Can it be 20 per cent with the other person, and 80 per cent with me? Can it be 50/50? Can it be 80 per cent with the other person, 20 per cent with me, etc.? So that kind of, again, very deliberate exercise, and you see where, "This gear is a bit jammed. It's hard for me to get into that gear," or for someone else that gear is quite normal and easy; it's the sort of default. They just keep slipping into that gear, and it's hard to get into another gear. Again, we're interested in range and flexibility and freedom across different ranges. So that would be a really good exercise, as well, as we've already done.

The other possibility, and I mentioned it when we talked about the energy body in this series of talks, is rather than to see the other person with the eyes, or rather than to conceive that one is seeing and sensing the other person primarily through the eyes, is just to play with the energy body awareness, and bringing, again, same as we do in imaginal practice, inhabiting, filling out that whole region, that whole space that we call the energy body. How often, if you're paying attention, how often you will notice -- either in your own practice, in your own times in informal practice but also in relationship, in a dyad or triad relationship -- how easy it is to lose the energy body sense, or it shrinks, or it's like, "Well, I've got my top half. I might have my heart. But where's everything from the waist down?" It's a dead zone, or we're just not aware of it there. So don't underestimate how often that happens and how helpful it is to keep checking in with the energy body and keep opening it up, opening up, filling it with that awareness, and stretching it that way so it's really like the sensitivity pervades that whole space, again and again. It's going to be really, really helpful. And one should notice the effect that that has on working with an image, as we've talked about, but also sensing the other with soul, the capacity to handle certain things in one's own experience, or handle what's happening in the dyad, etc.

But as I mentioned in the talk on energy body in this series, in this course, there's the possibility, too, of not conceiving or sensing that I'm just looking through the eyes. What is it to get the sense of the whole energy body as an organ of sense, as an organ of sensing? So I'm somehow seeing the other with my whole body. I bring that whole body sense into relationship. The centre of knowing or perceiving is not simply in the head, the eyes, or the ears if I'm listening, or whatever. That might have a centre at the heart, or the solar plexus, or the belly, or it might just pervade the whole space like that. Really, really important. And then, as I said when I talked about the mettā possibility, the mettā field, there's also the possibility that the sense of the energy field, the sense of the energy body, begins to spread to include the other and the self, and one can develop a sense of the energy field between two people. I won't say more about that now. I'll leave that for that. But just how important that is, and how helpful that can be when it feels like either there's a tendency to withdraw in a dyad, to sort of go back into oneself, perhaps to go too much into the other person, to merge, or lose one's own sense of what's going on. Just how helpful it is to bring the energy body into play, to open up that awareness. Really, really helpful.

We've used this word, temenos, a number of times. It's another one of those Greek words. It's related to the word 'temple,' or 'sacred space,' or the boundary that protects a space and encloses it and protects it from intrusion or whatever. And so we talk about that particularly in relational practice -- the need for a temenos. As I said, when the imaginal touches us so deeply, it needs to be respected, and it needs to be protected, in a way, and cared for, and part of that is setting up a space, or setting up the conditions that that care and safety is there, so that, again, the crucible can be there, and the crucible won't get broken, shattered easily, or whatever it is -- it can actually sustain whatever's happening there. So when we come to practise in relationship, in dyads, triads, whatever it is, a formal space and time is really part, can be really helpful, in setting up the temenos and the sense of temenos, the sense of a safe space, a fertile space, etc., a special place.

To share images kind of more casually, when it's not the right time for the other person or for you -- they're busy, they're not completely attentive, the space is not conducive, there are other distractions or whatever it is, or something else is going on for them, for you, etc. -- none of that, and you've probably noticed this already, none of that will be helpful at all, and it will feel disappointing, and it will feel painful: I've not been received here. We didn't meet. Something felt important, and it got dropped on the floor or whatever. So having, setting a formal time and space, is actually part of the temenos. Just the formality of it will help to create a sense of container, of crucible, of safety, etc. Posture too. So to sit upright in a more meditative posture will really help. It will help the whole capacity of attention, of sensitivity, of receptivity, of openness, of energy, of engagement. And all that is actually part of the temenos, all of that. So yes, the attention, the quality of attention, the brightness of attention, the softness of attention -- these are all part of the temenos. The sensitivity, the mettā is part of the temenos, as we've stressed. The intention -- again, if I have the fullness of intention, it really helps the temenos. If my intention, or the other's, is something different or less than that, it also is not really conducive to forming a strong and soulmaking temenos.

But the posture, if we go back to posture, it also gives a signal to oneself, to another, "Now we're doing something that takes all my capacity, all my sensitivity, all my care and attention." It gives that signal. It gives that signal to oneself in all kinds of ways, that the being, both beings, actually respond to that. So there are many components to a temenos. I'm really happy to hear recently, from a number of people in the Saṅgha, that they took it upon themselves, saw the necessity after some experiences, of really exploring this area, this domain of temenos, amongst themselves, and thinking creatively about it, and what it needs, and exploring the sense of it, and when it doesn't work, etc., and expanding, really, the teaching.

So I'm happy (A) because it's an important area, and (B) because -- I can't remember if I've mentioned this -- you know, my hope, very much, my prayer, very much, is that as time goes on, those who are deeply interested in Soulmaking Dharma absorb the teachings, digest them, and learn, and develop their art and skill, and then they may be ready, or some people may be ready, to begin to be creative in what they discover and what they add, potentially, to Soulmaking Dharma -- how they can extend it, how they can make connections with other paradigms, etc. Not prematurely, before one has understood and digested and gained skill in this paradigm, in these practices, but in time, that's part of what makes a really alive, creative tradition: that it can be added to; that there's a dialogue, a digestion of what has come before, and then a dialogue with that, and a possible extension, and new angles, etc. So I'm doubly happy, also, secondly, for that reason, feeling really heartened and encouraged and touched by those people taking that on together as an exploration.

And one of the things they came up with was a new concept, if you like, of the temenos tail. In other words, here we are, perhaps working in a dyad, or a small group, or a larger group, or three, or whatever it is, and we take care of the temenos there. But what happens afterwards? What happens in the hour afterwards? What happens in the week afterwards? What happens in the months afterwards? In other words, as I said, there can be so much intimacy and so much sense of being deeply touched in a soulmaking dyad or sharing images together that touch the soul deeply, that then it might be two people or more people go their separate ways, and they meet again in some other situation or whatever, and just because one has been so touched, or that dyadic encounter and exploration made so much impact on the soul, it can be very easy to assume certain things about that relationship, or what one expects, or what one is owed, or what kind of interaction should then ensue or be committed to -- all kinds of possibilities. So, not to say any of that's wrong, but what is it to care then for that tail end of the temenos? We've cared now, in the formal practice; what happens afterwards? So that's also a sort of consideration and exploration that's opening as well.

I mentioned in one of the talks -- I can't remember -- about the need to share a conceptual framework.^[1] In order for a soulmaking dyad to be really fertile and soulmaking and not frustrating or limited or limiting, it's important that the two people share a conceptual framework that actually supports soulmaking. Part of that is sharing what we could call 'ontological commitments,' meaning a kind of sense of what is real or what is to be respected as real -- or we could put it in the negative: what's not to be dismissed. So you try soulmaking with someone who just considers imagination a lot of random nonsense; they don't have the same ontological commitment to the sense of the imaginal and whatever ontological realm or position that holds for soulmakers, which is not "it's just rubbish." Correspondingly, if one ontologically views whatever comes up in imagination that touches the heart, etc., as 'real,' too real, that would be an example of a kind of ontological commitment or part of a conceptual framework that's actually not going to be helpful for the dyad, because one person will be occupying, or has within their range, certain ontological commitments, a certain sense of what's real, what's to be respected, what's not important, etc., and the other, something quite different.

I would extend that to actually say I wonder whether deep friendships actually often need, amongst other things of course, shared ontological commitments. So how deep can my friendship with someone be? I can be friendly, and we can have a laugh, I can even hear their heartache, and all kinds of stuff, and respond, and there can be kindness and engagement in all kinds of ways, but how deep can the sense of friendship be if there's not enough kind of common territory in what I'm calling shared ontological commitments?

People don't often say that, or maybe it's regarded, I don't know, as slightly taboo or something. Even at Gaia House, some people want to make more of or establish or support more of a sense of community among the now many staff working at Gaia House, etc., and would assume, "Oh, well, you just give them some time together. Just have some practice together, or meditate together, or just put them in a room together, and they're going to start making deep connections." It just won't happen. It won't happen unless there's a certain overlap of ontological commitment, but also -- and again, I don't know if this is taboo, is it not -- a kind of either shared eros or passion, or at least commensurate. In other words, someone who has a lot of eros, who's really on fire with eros, is probably not going to be that close with someone who just doesn't have a lot of eros, or it's not going on for them. It's not at the same level, and the souls won't kind of resonate with each other. So I don't know -- is that politically or psychologically incorrect to say that? I'm not sure. But it's important, and even more so the whole conceptual framework, as I pointed out in another talk, kind of needs to be shared enough for soulmaking relationship to really flourish and not to feel frustrating.

So that's a kind of important consideration in terms of, as I said, I think, the other day, if you want to share this wonderful new paradigm and new practice that you're into -- did this dyad with someone, it was wonderful, and so soulmaking, so I take it to another friend, and I know they're heartful and they're interested and they're open, etc., and maybe open-minded or whatever it is, but there isn't that shared conceptual framework, and the whole thing, again, the crucible is not there. So that can be painful for both people, and frustrating. And I think I gave some examples. Even when one person is holding a kind of conceptual framework or concept that's, from the soulmaking point of view, limited or limiting, and they're not sharing it, they're maybe not even aware that they're holding it, somehow in the mystery and magic of that connection between two people, it actually ends up limiting the experience for both people. In other words, what arises for the other, whose conceptual framework maybe is more open, etc., is somehow limited by the silent, and even unconscious, limited conceptual framework of, or not shared conceptual framework of the other person. So again, this should suggest some caution in trying to engage in soulmaking dyads with people who don't really share the conceptual framework, who haven't really understood or absorbed it to a certain extent at least.

Okay, so let's just really very briefly outline some of the avenues or ways of practising, some of the possible avenues, possible ways of practising, some of them, from what this form can offer or allow. And with that, some, yeah, things to bear in mind, consider, look out for, etc. [1:00:41] So if you're practising in a dyad or a triad or whatever, it's probably a good idea, if you're at home, to have some little gap or separation of that practice period from other activities. I mean, it's kind of natural to do that if there's a sense, if there's some sense of the sanctity of it, of that space, of that form, of that temenos. And then, sitting down together -- of course, you could stand up, and you could be moving, so, you know, there are so many possibilities here, but let's just say, if you sit down together, it may or may not need some sort of settling time, meditating in silence. Don't assume that it does. Find out, or check, see what you need at the time. Sometimes just being opposite each other in a formal ritual space will already support some kind of gathering and energization, coalescing of the attention, of the being, some quieting, some heightening of sensitive awareness.

It might be that for some people, or in some situations, or some times, that actually it doesn't do that -- that coming into a formal space with the anticipation of doing this kind of practice actually brings up a mild panic, or self-consciousness, or inadequacy, or some other kind of agitation. Of course that's possible. But generally speaking, you'll probably find that just being together, opposite, in that space, brings a kind of gathering. If it doesn't, then what's needed? Either a little quiet time together, meditating, being with what's going on, being with the energy body, the emotions, or the breath, or mettā. Or bringing that difficulty that one's experiencing right into the dyad when you start practising. That's what's present -- practise with that, and see, can soul be made from that? What does it need? Maybe it doesn't need soulmaking. Maybe it needs some other kind of exploration, or attention, or response.

And then we mentioned the temenos and how important that is, and again, if you listen back to those recordings that we did^[2] from two, three, four retreats (I can't remember; mostly we called them temenos exercises, I think), you'll hear that we have a stage of mettā there, and I would say this is really quite important. And if you listen again, you'll notice there's the giving of mettā, and the consciousness of receiving. So to consciously feel oneself as an object of mettā, as being permeated by mettā from the other or others, as being wished well, as much as giving. So both -- the necessity of having access to and registering both those directions of mettā, the giving and receiving. And then the mettā is a kind of bedrock or background sort of basis of the whole exploration. It never really goes away, but one isn't necessarily consciously formally practising the mettā; one can rely on it as an intention, rely on the knowledge that the field is pervaded by that, that that is the intention, that it is part of the intention of both parties.

So only if you're really sure that it's there as a bedrock and it is kind of unshakeable -- both your sense of receiving it, and your giving it -- only if you're really sure would I recommend skipping that step of just lingering with the mettā and establishing that. So dependent on all kinds of factors, you can skip it, but be sure. Or, you know, it's a lovely thing to do. It certainly can't hurt to start that way and include that, and as I said, that's part of the temenos, and part of establishing and caring for the temenos, and for each other, obviously.

So on those recordings that we did previously, in the temenos exercises, as I said, they're kind of like scales, practising scales, and we sort of somewhat artificially divided it into three levels -- the energy body, the emotion, and then perhaps sharing something that felt soulful -- and separated those out in time, and people took turns, etc. So that remains, I think, a really useful exercise to do, to gain the facility, the skill, the fluidity, the familiarity with all that, those kind of dimensions of practice and of being. In time, you then might begin to include a tracking and a voicing of those three levels or elements of being -- the energy body (remember, energy body also includes imaginal body now, and we've expanded the sense of what that means), the emotional level second, and then the level of soul or image, etc. And so one can begin to, rather than separating them out, include them in real time in a kind of fluid real-time tracking and voicing, and taking your time to feel. You don't have to be speaking or communicating all the time. You can track and then voice. And again, we emphasized the voice and verbal communication, but it could be voicing -- you might sing, or sound, or you might gesture, or you might move or dance. I think obviously the voicing, the verbalizing, will be most common for most people, but there are all kinds of possibilities here. What matters: is it soulmaking? So see.

One can begin to include all that in a more kind of fluid, real-time tracking, and include with that a tracking of and voicing of how either the perception of or thoughts about the other's expression, their presence, their attention, their gaze, their energy, etc., how that's affecting right now my energy body, my emotion, the emotions that arise, what's happening in the heart, and the imaginal sense or sensing with soul. So that one's potentially including, then, the image of this moment, of the other, of the sharing being seen/heard. So this very being seen, or being heard, and being witnessed, can become image. So that would be another level or domain of possibility, another avenue, just extending it a little bit, the exercise. And this, how am I being affected, the latter part of that avenue and level, you know, sometimes it doesn't make much difference. I share something and it's just how it is. Or I share something, it wasn't particularly soulful, and then when I share in a dyad or triad or whatever, it's the same. There's not much impact of that situation on the sense of soulmaking or the energy body or whatever.

But sometimes the sense of how we are being listened to and looked at, including the imaginal sense of it, and of who is listening, looking -- on some recent retreats we talk about being witnessed by the angel, so actually having a sense of the other as angel, as daimon, as having their roots, so to speak, in the divine, whatever it is. One can deliberately instigate or ignite that perception of the other, of who is listening and looking at me, or it might just arise by itself -- all kinds of other possibilities. And in the sense, in the imaginal sense of who is listening or looking, there may be a much greater sense of soulmaking of an image that originally didn't feel so soulmaking -- it felt a little bit, but the effect of and the potency of that situation, the sensitivity of that situation, makes that image almost in retrospect, as it's resuscitated there and recommunicated, it allows much more soulmaking with the same image.

Conversely, of course, we might be sharing something -- an emotion, an image, something that's in the energy body -- and the partner or whoever it is in the dyad, you know -- someone was sharing and they looked away, they told me, "and I don't know why they looked away, but I was sharing an emotion, and they looked away and sort of stared into space for a few seconds, and that just threw me. So I felt disconnected, and I stopped sharing the emotion. I was halfway through and I just stopped." But here it's also possible, then, in the kind of flow and give and take, of course, to just, okay, recognize what's happening, and okay, do I want to voice that, that effect, the effect on me when you just looked away like that? I don't have to blame or be aggressive; I'm just saying, "Oh, I notice I'm a bit thrown here by that." And it's possible that the other person just witnesses that and tracks their response in silence to what you're sharing about that impact of whatever it is, their looking away, etc. Anyway, if they don't say anything, if they're just taking it in in silence, there's a communication through the eyes and through the energy body. Or it might be that they respond, either there and then, or if you're taking turns, a more formal sort of "now my turn, now your turn," then in their time or their turn. And that response that they give you, of course, is going to have an effect, an effect on the sense of connection and what is shaped, what can arise, what can come into the field.

So the whole thing can become much more fluid and responsive at times, but the point here really is to begin to notice and include and express this kind of stage of exercise, if you like -- the effect of the sense of how I'm being looked at or listened to. Sometimes that's very gross, and sometimes it's extremely subtle. And if you're really sensitive, sometimes you can feel someone just blinks or there's the slightest movement of their eyes, not even away in distraction or anything like that, and one can actually feel one's energy body impacted by that, affected by that. It's quite possible. So there's a whole range here of what can be noticed and what can be then shared and articulated as part of the exploration of that crucible and the potentiality and sensitivity of the dyad or triad or whatever it is. So after that sort of three-tiered exercise, after you've maybe got used to that -- and I think some people are very used to it by now; some much less so, so you'll have to see where you're at and what you need -- then you can include the experience of this now, this sharing now, and this being seen, being heard by you right now, in real time, so the whole thing gets a little more fluid and inclusive.

Another kind of avenue or level of possibility here -- they're not completely separate; you'll realize this very quickly. It's hard to actually really cleanly separate these different avenues and levels. But another possibility is to deliberately take the other as an imaginal focus -- that is, to sense them with soul, and to voice that. Again, "voice" is a euphemism for a much larger range of communication, expression, that may include movement, gesture, verbal or non-verbal vocalization, all kinds of things. And then the person responds, if necessary. Maybe they feel, "Hold on, this is a bit ..." something-or-other. In a way, that's a kind of slightly contrived level, and maybe a little awkward with one person just telling the other about how they sensed the other with soul. But see, see what works. It might be you take it in turns or whatever. I would also recommend then, if you're doing that, again -- self, other, world -- to include not just your sense of the other, sensing them with soul, but also take in the space that you're in, the environment that you're in; if you're inside, the room that you're in; if you're outside, wherever you are -- what's the environment? And let, or at least allow the possibility of the sensing with soul to spread to the world. So other, self, and world can be sensed with soul. And that spreading to the world, sometimes we've called it cosmopoesis, when it starts from an imaginal sense of another. But that's (A) just part of the soulmaking process, (B) as we've pointed out, probably very helpful at times for the whole balance of the process, and (C) there will be a lot to learn in that triple object, if you like -- self, other, world -- for sensing with soul.

Another level or avenue of possibility would be to open to responses, optional responses, from the other. Either you take it in turns, and then the person responds after you've shared, or a certain time or whatever, or just in the natural back and forth. So a non-silent witness -- they're responding. Especially if it's more in the fluid back-and-forth, and not so formalized, separate, "Now my turn. Now your turn," it's less of a witness; it's just a partner or whatever in the dyad. And what are they responding in this level? They would be responding what arises for them in the energy body, in the emotion, in the imaginal sense, in the sensing with soul. Okay, so what they're not doing at this level is critiquing what you've just shared, or your perception, or giving guidance or feedback. That may have a place at a later stage -- in other words, you can decide, and I think you should formally decide if you're going to do that thing -- but I would say hold off from that for a while, because obviously it brings all kinds of other complications, potential complications into the dyad, and would need or ask even more care and sensitivity and intuitive awareness.

But as I said, the partner/witness -- let's call it partner -- voices their response, their experience, either in their kind of allotted time or turn, or in just the open, natural back and forth and flow of things, so what arises in listening, in witnessing, in looking, in receiving the other. I guess I should say, point out, that sometimes you'll notice that you do or your partner does intuit or know things about what's going on with you -- in other words, they can get a sense themselves of your energy body experience, or your emotional experience, or something else. [1:21:40] But if you're sharing at this point, to really be careful with the assumptions of being right there. I think it's really important always to respect the other's autonomy, and their experience, and their sense of their experience, and if there's a place for privacy of boundaries here, also. So yes, that kind of intuitive sense, empathic sense, of course, can go on between human beings, and the range of that is a lot larger than just the usual meaning of what we term 'empathy,' in terms of "I can see that you're sad," or "I can see that you're happy," or whatever it is, and resonating with that. The range is larger than that. But still, it's really important to respect, as I said, the other, and to tread carefully with that kind of thing. If you're going to share, you can check it out. You can say it lightly. You can, "I'm wondering if ...", etc.

And it's also possible -- and I've mentioned in this series of talks -- that there can be a real sense of entering into and sharing an image with someone else, sharing a sensing with soul of the environment you're in, of each other, of some other intrapsychic image. One of you might have voiced that image first, and then both of you can enter it sometimes. And sometimes not. So don't put pressure on these kinds of things to happen at all. Sometimes just a person is telling you an image, and it's impacting you even though it's not an image for you yet. But there are certainly those possibilities.

So with these avenues or levels, whatever we want to call them, take your time. Find the right pitch for you -- and that might vary from day to day, or you might just be curious about what happens when we limit it this way, what happens when we limit it that way. Stravinsky, the composer I mentioned the other night, he used to say, "The most terrifying thing is an empty sheet of paper, a blank sheet of paper. Once I've given myself certain constraints in the creative process or what I can do in this composition -- I've just created this pretty arbitrary set of constraints and limits to the creative process -- then I start discovering and creating a lot." So similarly with these kinds of exercises, we might think, "Oh, I just want to jump to the super advanced level where fireworks are going off and everything's on the table," etc., like that, but you may well create/discover much more, much more fertile, as well, in checking out the earlier stages or simpler stages of these kinds of practices. And like I said, they will lay the ground for a really fecund and rich and wide opening out of experiences and insights and sensings with soul as you go on in the whole practice -- not just in dyads, but also on your own. So don't get too hung up on a hierarchy and needing to get to the maximum thing or whatever. As I said, all this asks a lot, and takes time to develop the kind of sensitivities and skills and the whole art of it. There's a lot involved there.

Just to mention some other possibilities. You know, it's also the case that you can deliberately, together, decide on a theme that you want to explore. So the process might be the same in terms of it involves the energy body, the emotion, the sensing with soul, the sensitivity to each other and one's own experience, etc., but together you're somehow exploring a theme, and that theme could be whatever you want it to be. So rather than just an open sitting together, "Let's see what happens," it might be that you explore -- I mean, it might be an image; you're deliberately bringing an image that you want to open out and explore more. It might be a particular kind of cosmopoesis that you've perhaps glimpsed or sensed is possible. It might be a certain kind of dukkha that you want to bring into the field for potential soulmaking -- potential soulmaking. It might be the temenos as theme. So a couple of people were telling me, as they were exploring this whole area of temenos in a group, in an ongoing way, and this whole temenos tail that I mentioned, that actually it's possible to sit down in a dyad and take the idea and the sense of temenos right now, between us or around us, and take that as a theme. Someone shared how lovely and fruitful that was. So that could be a theme.

It could be one of the elements of the imaginal, one of the nodes that you particularly want to explore. It could be this whole business about self/other/world and how they ignite each other, what the tendencies are. It could be something like the nature of matter, which I think is a really profound and important investigation, especially these days where we live dominated by a reductionist, scientific materialist view of matter -- wonderful as that is in terms of what it has given us, but also it has massive consequences on how we live, how we treat the earth, how we treat other species, etc. It could be that you deliberately enter an image together. It could be that one person brings an image and just wants to share it and see what happens. It could be that you deliberately enter into an image of each other. So there are all kinds of possibilities here.

In the practice, you will notice many of the same kind of larger considerations about navigation and responsiveness that one has in individual practice, in solo practice. So sometimes the concertina opens, that node, that element, especially when there's a lot of eros (and again, not necessarily sexual eros). The degree of eros and the energy and the force of the eros, it's almost like it presents lots of imaginal possibilities all at once, as possibilities, lots of sensings with soul, as possibilities at once. And then the question is, which do we choose? How do we choose? Why are we choosing this one over that one? So that becomes quite interesting. The whole issue of pacing -- again, where should we linger? Where should we slow down, etc.? As I've mentioned so many times now, the importance of the energy body, and how you will notice certainly in individual practice but sometimes even more in working with others, in a dyad, triad, whatever it is -- quartet? What's that? So the energy body awareness shrinks, or I'm only kind of aware of part of my body, and I'm not really inhabiting and filling out the whole energy body. So just again and again, to check on that, to expand it, to allow it to expand to include whatever areas of that space are not being included at that point. So helpful as part of the ongoing sensitivity and responsiveness and care for the practice in the moment.

And there are so many aspects of experience, just as in individual practice, so many aspects of a kind of complex experience that's arising at any moment, and in a way, you can focus on the totality, the whole gestalt, or you can focus on any one of those or two of those, and kind of attune to this or that particular aspect of the complex experience that's happening in the dyad or triad or whatever it is, and decide to explore that. And you know, it's life, things are impermanent, so the attunement between two people, or even one person between themself, comes and goes. And that's okay. That's just, as I said, life -- things are impermanent, so sometimes it feels like, oh, you're super attuned to each other; sometimes one person will feel like, "Oh, this person is not quite either attuned to me in terms of their sensitivity and their attention," or "We're just kind of pulling in slightly different directions of what we're interested in right now, and so that affects the attention."

All of this is normal and okay. Maybe it's like, "Oh, hold on, let's just check something here," and sometimes it's like just recognizing that, and it's okay, it will come back into attunement, alignment, sensitivity will come back, and we can just wait for it to come back. But to expect that, of course. And of course, sometimes, if you do a lot of this kind of practice, you'll notice that sometimes there's an exquisite and profound and profoundly touching sense of connection and soulmaking igniting, etc., and other times less so. Again, it's just like practising on your own. So to be a little spacious and equanimous around that. Yes, we take care as best we can of the conditions and the art of it, and there's an element of grace here, and it's not completely in our control. So that's important too.

[1:33:33] I want to pick up on what I mentioned about what I'm calling the sensitivity of the dyad, and just recognizing, yes, how sensitive that whole space is and that whole crucible is so that little things, little gestures, little moments, or even movements of mind or energy or intention, etc., can really affect -- sometimes quite dramatically -- the sense of what's unfolding. So remember the other day I shared about the yogi who came into an interview with the image of a really big woman, and she was resting her head, lying and resting her head in the lap of this big goddess woman, and then it became sexual, etc., and there were other things that I pointed out then. Actually, when she came in that time, it wasn't the first time that she'd shared that image with me. But when it first came up, it was a very brief image that came up as she was getting ready for bed. So it wasn't even in formal practice. She was on retreat, getting ready for bed, and this image just came up very briefly.

Then she did a dyad practice with a partner, and she shared that image. And quite unexpectedly to her, tears came as she shared it, when she was sharing this image. It moved her at a whole other level, whereas when it had come up the first time, just briefly, going to bed, it made an impact but there wasn't that level of emotional and soul-response. So again, the power of the soulmaking in relationship, where there's temenos. Something happens, some alchemy happens to an image, that it's possible for the soulmaking associated with that image, and even how imaginal it is and all that, to go to another level, by virtue of the crucible of the dyad, by virtue of the temenos, by virtue of the space we're in and how we're being attended to, etc., and all that, or even the soul-sense of the dyad itself. All of that, again -- this thing ignites that thing. And sometimes this can be, as I said, quite unexpected.

Of course, it's sensitive, as I pointed out before, both for better and for worse, so to speak, or in ways that are helpful to the soulmaking and in ways that kind of can end up shutting down the soulmaking. So someone shared with me that they were remembering an old relationship, a past relationship with a lover, and there was still some pain and grief around that relationship; it hadn't completely been resolved or let go of in them. And then they worked with it imaginally, feeling the pain, holding that in the crucible of one's being, with the energy body, with the emotions, etc., and it did become image -- or rather an image came in relation to that. It's not important what the image is, so I won't share it, although it's actually quite interesting. It was a sort of baffling image to her, and even more baffling was why it seemed to help, and exactly what way it was relevant to the pain, or meaningful, and how it was healing. So, as I said, it's interesting, but I don't have time to go into it right now. The point I want to make right now is there were these memories, the leftover pain from quite a while ago; it became an image that puzzlingly was healing and touching the soul and very pertinent. And then she was doing a dyad, a soulmaking dyad with her current partner, her current lover, and decided to share that image, the healing image with respect to the old lover.

But in sharing it, unlike the example I gave before where something didn't feel that soulmaking and then one shared it and it suddenly just was soulmaking and touching at a whole other level, this fell flat. Shared the image which did feel meaningful, and profound, and healing, and touching when I worked on my own; now in sharing it, it just goes flat. Why? What's going on here? Well, perhaps understandably, there might be some fear of her current partner's reaction: "Why are you thinking about that?", or "Why are you thinking about him?", or whatever it is. And this fear perhaps led to her leaving bits out of the sharing. So because of the subtle fear, she didn't share fully, etc., and the whole thing wasn't really allowed or supported to become fully imaginal. Now, that could have been, obviously, done differently, perhaps, in various ways, but the point I really want to make is just about the sensitivity of the space. Again, on our own, in a large group, in small groups, in dyads, you probably will have seen this now. And like I've pointed out several times, soulmaking doesn't just happen by itself; we have to really care for the conditions, the temenos, all the different aspects that allow it to happen. And sometimes that is not just a default of the being. There are all kinds of other things that can happen, and just pull a plug out of the crucible, or just shatter it a little bit, or leave the lid off, or whatever analogy we want to use. Soulmaking is really a very sensitive business, and the dyad or group soulmaking is also extremely sensitive. In a way, as I said, things catch from one person to the other -- very important to be aware of, to take care of, and to be interested in, actually, I would say.

I shared, but it's worth repeating this again on the same theme. So I was working in a dyad, and the person I was working with was describing her experience, and at that point it was really almost all about her energy body experience. And I found myself, at that time, very sensitive to her gestures and her words and her energy, and I could feel the concertina was opening for me, the sort of spread of potential images -- potential images waiting in the wings; their beginnings there. But despite that concertina and the sort of potential there and the, yeah, relative fecundity of that, nothing was really igniting to become imaginal fully. And something felt slightly blocked somehow, despite my partner in the dyad having quite strong energy openings, which she was very in touch with, and very mindful of, and describing to me quite articulately, etc. At a certain point I asked her, "Is it energy perception, or is the energy perception an image? Are you perceiving the energy imaginally?" And as I said when I shared this the first time, she got it immediately, and then it shifted to it's an image of her energy. Immediately I felt my experience open up to image, right then. The imaginal sense of what was happening, and her, and myself, and the dyad just opened up from that shift.

So two points here. One is, again, the significance and the power of the option of sensing the energy body or the energy field imaginally, sensing it with soul rather than with the usually not quite fully conscious implicit reification that we have when we're relating to energy and our perception of energy. But more importantly right now, just how sensitive the dyad is, and the fact of the subtle dependent arising of experience in the dyad. So my experience depended on a subtle shift in how she viewed her experience. Just a subtle change from reified to imaginal in terms of her experience, and my experience changed. Again, there's some kind of magic connection that can be there in these kinds of processes that make it very, very sensitive.

I'll share something else. I was working also with someone. We were in a dyad practice, in a formal dyad practice. And I can't remember exactly how it came up, but she felt stuck, and she also felt wilfully stuck. So something in her wanted to be stuck in some way, and I can't even remember exactly how, or how it arose, etc. I actually felt quite spacious, despite the fact that she felt stuck. I felt quite spacious in that moment. And I sort of, metaphorically, was tickling her. I can't remember exactly how, but being a little light and humorous and sort of like that, in the hope and the attempt that it would help. But she felt that my tickling, so to speak, my tickling her, dissolved her will. She was wilfully stuck; my tickling dissolved her. And that touched an even deeper pain. So it was a pattern reminiscent from her childhood with her siblings, her older siblings -- different thing with her parents. But with her siblings, there was a particular way they would ridicule, and she felt humiliate, her when she was hurt and she wanted to kind of gather her will like that. When she wanted to gather her autonomy or her will when she was hurt or crying, she would be ridiculed and humiliated, and this really was quite a deep pain that was still echoing substantially years later. So we were exploring that and talking about that, in a way, and it was good, and helpful, and honest, and open, but it wasn't imaginal.

And then suddenly I was able to see her and our relationship imaginally. So again, it's really to get a sense, I hope you can get a sense, over time, as you practise more and more, of what that territory is of the imaginal, and how it feels, its particular flavours and qualities. That's partly why we elucidated the twenty-eight elements. But it does feel quite different. You can be talking about the same thing, paying attention to the same dukkha, even using the imagination in working with that dukkha or whatever, or something else, but it's not imaginal. Anyway, at that point, suddenly I was able to see her, and also our relationship, as imaginal. And I shared that I sensed myself imaginally as mystical husband -- so we touched on this before, this particular dyad -- and that from there, from that imaginal sense of being her mystical husband, I said, "I will protect you. I won't ridicule or humiliate you. I won't tickle," I won't tickle her. But then it opened up for her, and that changed something for her. The whole kind of stuck grip dissolved and she felt empowered and much better.

So what's going on here? Again, the sensitivity of the dyad. One person moves into the imaginal -- there is a quantum leap into the imaginal -- and senses it, maybe shares it. In this case, I did share it, that particular sensing with soul. And it opens her up and heals something in her. In this case, she caught the soul-sense from me. One person catches the soul-sense from another, is ignited by the other's. We could view it that way. It might also be another way to see it is just that that image and the imaginal is kind of, so to speak, in the field, and one person is just articulating it or experiencing it, which allows the whole field to make a quantum jump. In other words, it's there -- the field is pregnant with it, and it just requires one or both people to be aware, but it's there in potentia, so to speak. So this is really interesting, as well, this way that a sudden shift into imaginal perception can then affect the whole field. And particularly interesting here is the fact that it affected in a healing way what was happening with the other person. So one person's imaginal perception in relation to another heals what was conceived of and felt to be a real, non-imaginal dukkha. To me, this is really interesting.

And I would venture to go a little bit further and say that sometimes when that kind of thing happens, it heals more than, let's say, in this instance, an actual guarantee of, quote, 'real' protection. If I had just said to her, as a human being, as a conventionally conceived human being, "I will protect you," or "I won't let that happen," or whatever, I don't know whether it would have had the same effect. And that's curious, again, because the normal view would conceive of the imaginal as not being real. Of course you want real protection. Here's a, in a way, non-real imaginal protection, yet it has more power. It has more healing, penetrative power to the being that feels in need of protection, vulnerable, unsafe, etc. And very probably that kind of thing happening imaginally in the dyad like that, probably more healing than, say, just her actively, mindfully imagining someone protecting her, or someone protecting her in the past, and just trying to use the imagination but it's not really imaginal.

Similar possibilities with all kinds of realms, in terms of realms of human need and pain and experience. So someone might need to feel respected or appreciated, and again, it might be that when that comes from an imaginal level, it actually might wield a power and have an effect that is not available from more conventionally conceived human communication or relationship. So I find that very interesting. And it's partly a point about, again, the sensitivity of the dyad, how things can shift very quickly when one person's experience flips into the imaginal or opens up to the imaginal. But also just what is going on in terms of, again, dukkha and image, and dukkha and the imaginal here. And you know, what exactly is the relationship between experiencing, the need to experience the dukkha as real, and linger there, and feel that pain, and the opening up of the imaginal around and in relationship to that dukkha? And again, there may be different orderings. Sometimes -- we've talked about this with the dukkha and soulmaking -- you really need to be with the dukkha, and experiencing it, and take it as real and all that, and feel it, and then from that ground, from that soil, from that opening, then an image can come. And sometimes the other way round: the introduction or the reception, the birth, the opening to an image, actually does something that allows the dukkha to be experienced more and to heal, etc.

Is it that different dukkha or different situations need different approaches? Do different people have particular preferences there in terms of the order that they go in? I don't know. But the same choices, questions, possibilities as in solo practice with dukkha and the imaginal arise in the context of the dyad, and the same kind of sensitivity, care, openness, and curiosity in navigating all that is required in a dyad.

I mentioned at the beginning, and possibly you can begin to hear, as I'm sharing some of this, you know, just how much this kind of practice demands of us good relational skills, good skills in relationship. So on the last retreat -- I can't remember if it was in a Q & A or what -- someone asked me about dyad practice, and one of the things I said in response to the question at the time was it's really important that you have a kind of ability and the willingness to kiss and make up, I think I said. In other words, of course people butt into each other; of course there are misunderstandings; of course there are conflicts of interest; of course there's something said that wasn't so sensitive, that then causes a pain, and that spins off and carries a residue, and makes an impact, and there's closing; of course all that happens in human relationship. And as I said, a dyad, working in this kind of very intimate, very open, very sensitive and deep way with another person, it's a very sensitive field. So yes, expect that. Expect there are going to be things that happen that need attention and need a lot of skill in kind of repairing and taking care of.

So I made that point as one of the points I was making in response to this question about dyad practice on the retreat. And Yasmin picked it up in the closing circle, and I thought quite rightly, and I'm glad she said it, because to "kiss and make up" sounds kind of superficial and flippant. It wasn't actually how I meant it. But it sounds something akin to kind of brushing the difficulty under the rug, "kiss and make up, get on with it." That's not quite what I meant, but I'm really glad that Yasmin said that. What I really mean is, as I said, the willingness, the ability, the care, the carefulness, the precision, the patience, the humility, the openness, the flexibility, the love -- all that -- the equanimity, all that is necessary, and just the sheer hard work sometimes of addressing difficulties that come up, either in a dyad between two people, or one person in the dyad, or in a group, etc. Are you able to do that? Do you have those range of skills? They're not that common, actually. Certainly not that commonly exercised in our world. There's not a lot of training about that, not even in the Dharma, you know? But to be able to do that, I think is, I would say, necessary to this kind of work.

So again, if we go back and talk about prerequisites and that kind of thing, to really think, "Do I need to develop that? I kind of like the sound of that practice," or "I've had some times where I've practised dyads or triads or whatever and it's felt really beautiful. I want to pursue it." Okay, but check. Check your relational skills, and maybe they need some work, some exploration, some cultivation. Maybe that can go on in parallel. Maybe you take a little time and just develop that. And sometimes this needs to happen in the moment, in the fluidity of the back and forth of a dyad, of the give and take of a dyad, in real time. Sometimes something happens and people separate, and then three days later they say, "Well, hold on. I really need to tell you. Something happened the other day, and I just feel really shut down," or whatever, and then you talk about it after it happened. So that's really important, but also in the moment, in the fluidity of the moment.

So relational skill is really, really important; indispensable. One will also notice in practising in dyads and triads and larger groups with the soulmaking, you're going to notice all kinds of relational patterns. You'll notice your particular poises, stances, contortions, inclinations, etc., in relationship, will come up and hopefully begin to be made conscious in the dyad. So there are all kinds of possibilities here of what you might notice. It might be the patterns of the way your energy is, the energy body, like there might be a certain contraction of the energy body or a certain kind of brash throwing it out or domination or being dominated, in ways that may be fine in some respects and soulmaking, even, but may be, in other ways they manifest, not so fine, or it's a kind of habit, it's unconscious, it's not desired, and it's not very soulmaking.

Maybe you start to notice, "I or the other person is doing most of the talking." That's a kind of pattern. Or it might be even, of course, there are patterns of the balance of attention -- we talked about that. It might be a pattern of, for example, being more interested in one's own experience than the other, or vice versa, or not to notice the environment. It might be something that's quite subtle to put into words -- it's not quite the balance of attention, but it might be that the gaze tends to be more penetrating of the other, and one person might have the pattern to be more penetrated, so to speak. I don't necessarily mean sexually, but there is that, as well. But it's more the intensity and intentness of the pattern of gazing. So things like that might be noticed. All kinds of possibilities. I'm listing just a few general kind of areas that one might notice patterns in. What gets really interesting is seeing and working with the subtleties of each individual and their patterns in terms of energy, emotion, psychology, relational patterns brought into the dyad, etc. But we will notice all that.

Sometimes these patterns will just change by themselves in the context of doing the dyad practice. In other words, because there's the natural expansion of the soulmaking dynamic, of the eros-psyche-logos dynamic, with all the change in perception, and perception of self, and sense of self, and sensing with soul, and sensing the other, sensing of relationship, all that naturally expands and can, at times, break certain structures in the breaking of the vessels and all that. So sometimes these things change by themselves by virtue of the kind of usually gradual alchemy that's happening in that particular crucible. And/or it's also really fine and available to notice whatever patterns you notice, about relational patterns that are coming up in the dyad, and decide deliberately to experiment with doing it differently. So to let oneself be, for instance, more the penetrated one, so to speak, more the gazed upon one, more aware of oneself as object, as erotic-imaginal object for the other, rather than aware of one's erotic-imaginal gaze and attention penetrating the other, so to speak. And one decides to do it differently, or it might just change by itself.

Deciding deliberately to experiment with changing something -- you know, not "I'm changing this forever," but just, "Let's try doing it differently now, deliberately" -- again, that could be a theme. Remember, that's not ego, just because you decided deliberately to experiment with something, and do something, or make a change in practice right now. Just as in imaginal practice, I decide to introduce something into the image, or change the image, or bring this image into relationship with that image, or whatever it is, or bring this image into relationship with a certain dukkha or whatever -- just because I decide to do that, it doesn't make it ego and thus not soul somehow. The question, as always, is: is it soulmaking? Does it feel soulmaking? Not, "Did I make this happen, or did it happen by itself?" Could be either. It's irrelevant. What matters, what's relevant, is does this feel soulmaking right now in whatever is happening, whatever direction one is kind of exploring, whatever thread one is following there?

In relation to all this -- relational patterns, relational skills, the sensitivity of the dyad, etc. -- I want to just touch briefly on what we might call the different kinds of, different levels and directions of fabrication that can happen in a dyad -- specifically of self and other, but really anything. But yeah, specifically self and other. The different levels and kinds of fabrication of self and other in the dyad. So what do I mean by that? Let's delineate a few options, a few possibilities, rather. In soulmaking dyad practice, let's say, we can welcome, we can expect and be interested in, become familiar with and skilled with, and get clear about whole ranges of the senses of self and other. So we could divide that into -- let's say four, right now.

(1) One is what we might call the normal self-sense, the conventional human self-sense. Two normally conceived, conventionally conceived human selves in relationship, in conversation. So even though I'm sitting down to do a soulmaking dyad, that level of perception, that level and type of fabrication -- in other words, just the usual, normal, most popular level of fabrication is just to fabricate the usual, conventional sense of self and other. That level is important. Because my intention is to do a soulmaking dyad, that doesn't leave that out as a possibility. It doesn't shut the door on that possibility.

And often, this particular kind of conventional self-sense, if you like, is a really important stance when there's difficulty or relational stuff to talk through together or negotiate. So I'm sitting in a soulmaking dyad, and it might be that actually for our whole time, or some portion of the time, we're actually just talking as two human beings to each other, on that level, working through a difficulty, whatever, and there's the, let's say, normal range and the normal type of the fabrication of the perception of self and other.

(2) A second possibility is what I'm going to say, in inverted commas, is 'no-self.' And I'm putting that in inverted commas just because it's so common for people to report, "Oh, no-self. There was no self. I was sitting with so-and-so, and we were doing this or that, Insight Dialogue or whatever, and there was no self." I would say actually this refers to a range of ways and degrees of less self and other fabricating. So there are so many possibilities here. We could feel like everything, including you and me, is all one awareness, one cosmic awareness, one cosmic love -- they're sort of classic examples. They could be just the fading of personality, so my usual self doesn't arise, and I'm not even really kind of framing the other person in terms of their personality or their usual personality that I'm used to or they're used to. It may just be the fading of a kind of gross reactivity, so that there's a really deep equanimity and quieting of the push and pull, the rub, yes, the reactions of the being to whatever's happening. It could be I experience, "There are just five aggregates here, and there are just five aggregates there." And then all kinds of deeper perceptions of emptiness. All of these involve some degree of fabricating of the self and of the perception of other, but less than the normal one that we usually are used to.

So that's a possibility too. The normal self-sense, number one; number two is just, let's say, not no-self but less self, in all kinds of different ways. (3) Third possibility is a soulmaking imaginal perception, the sensing with soul of self and other. In other words, the self that I feel myself to be right now, and/or the other that I perceive there is imaginal. It's not the normal self-sense, the non-imaginal self-sense. Neither is it particularly unfabricated, like far down that spectrum. But it's an imaginal perception, it's a sensing with soul of self and other, and again, world and eros and whatever. That would be the third possibility. (4) The fourth -- which I can't remember if I've mentioned yet -- is a sense of a third. Sometimes what can happen in dyads is I sense you, I sense me, and then I sense we, I sense us. And that *'*us' feels like not so much an independent soul-entity, but it feels like it's a kind of soul. Somehow it includes us; somehow it's separate from us. So there's a sensing with soul of the dyad itself as a soul, if that makes sense. And that can arise in addition, or at the same times as the sense of self and other. So that would be a fourth kind of sense of self and other that we could delineate there as possible, something to look out for.

This arising of a 'we,' you know, it's -- well, maybe I'll let you explore it, but it's potentially very significant. I remember an interview with James Hillman that I read some years ago in a book of interviews, which I found a very interesting read. They were talking about love, and he said, "Love needs a third." So two is not enough to sustain love. There's I love you, you love me -- wonderful. And for that love to be really fertile, and when it is fertile, there's the arising, the sense of a third, and that the two, each, both together, are in relationship to that third. And if that third also becomes sensed with soul, if it has soul-significance, soul-resonances, if it's an imaginal perception -- I don't just mean intrapsychic, but if it's sensed with soul -- then that's another level of, again, anchor for the relationship, another kind of influx or nourishment or service for the relationship. So I'm reminded of a friend, and her parents, it sounds like, stayed in love with each other right into their very old age, in what sounds like quite a delightful way. And partly I wonder -- unlike some other relationships that I can think of, where that withers or something happens to the love there -- her parents were actually both very, I'd say, committed Catholics, but also their Catholicism had a sense of depth and soul-meaning for both of them, and so there was this third that they were kind of in the service of, through their marriage, and they were in relationship to. But anyway, there are lots of possibilities for this sense of 'we.'

It doesn't have to be quite something like that. It could just be the sense of we two sitting here, I can see that you're separate, and I feel separate to a certain extent, and yet there's this sense of a third that we also can get. It's not quite an amalgam, because the separateness, the twoness, is retained in the 'we,' but the 'we' forms itself as a kind of third unit, if you like. You could say we're in it. You could say it's separate from us both. Hard to articulate, but lots of possibilities. So I'll mention that as something that's possible to open up and to discover.

But let's go a little slow here. If there are all these different possibilities for the self-sense and the other-sense, in terms of whether they're imaginal, whether they're less fabricated, whether they're normal, etc., again, we're potentially faced with choices of navigation. How much conventionally human perception versus more fully imaginal at any time? Where on that spectrum towards the sort of fully imaginal, fully authentic sensing with soul and eros, on that whole spectrum from the conventional to the fully imaginal, what's right, right now? What feels right? How am I going to decide? What determines that? And there's the possibility of steering it. So, you know, sometimes when things are really imaginal -- sometimes, not always -- we're not so interested in our personal stories, in the conventional human, personal stories. We're two almost other beings relating to each other. Sometimes the personal stories are then viewed imaginally, and they're sensed with soul. [2:17:29] So there's not necessarily a separation there. Sometimes attraction might come up of different kinds. Maybe there is eros. Maybe it's sexual. Maybe there's a sexual image and sexual energy comes up. Maybe there's sexual desire, but it's not really eros in the full sense that we mean it, in terms of its impregnating the imaginal. There might be imagination there, but it's not really imaginal.

Then, okay, is that okay right now? Or do we want to steer it away from that in different ways? Can I, for instance, see the human as divine manifestation, this human or that human, or as portal into the divine? And that will do something to the whole sensing, the whole perception. Or I may be able to see and sense my human eros as the manifestation of divine eros. All this range is possible, and all this navigation is possible. And again, the question is, what's right, right now? Why are we choosing this? What feels appropriate or necessary even? What can also happen sometimes is that if you think, this self, and the other, and also the world or the environment, and each of those, and the couple, the two, can be perceived, let's say, conventionally humanly, or imaginally, or somewhere along that spectrum. So what that means -- you've got four elements: self, other, the couple (the 'we'), and the world. And each of them can be -- let's just put it in the binary -- either imaginal or conventional. And all the different permutations of that.

In one of the examples I gave before, you know, I was in the imaginal perception, my imaginal self relating to -- actually not in an example before, but I could be this imaginal self relating to a conventionally conceived human self. They might sense themselves conventionally, in this conventional human sense, not imaginal. I might sense them that way. Or we both might be imaginal. Or, of course, can both be conventional. Can be that my partner is an imaginal being, we're both perceiving her imaginally, but I'm still in my usual, conventional sense of self, and he/she/they are looking at me from that imaginal perspective and talking to me, and maybe even that kind of gaze and that kind of relating, from an imaginal to a conventional, is healing. I don't know how many -- you'd have to calculate the possibilities there, in all those different elements, each of which can be in any position there. I'll just throw this in: you have to be a little bit careful if one is an imaginal other speaking to a conventionally conceived human self, you know? I'm a little cautious about sort of New Age channelling things and stuff like that. So all of it's imaginal Middle Way, etc. All of it's with the fullness of intention for soulmaking, etc.

But again, there are all these possibilities and directions that can [open] -- suddenly you find yourselves in a certain constellation of these different permutations, or deliberately you're aware of it and you're actually cultivating a certain relationship between one kind and another kind there. But all these are possibilities of what can open there. And all that is relevant to healing sometimes, but again: fullness of intention. Not just for healing, although that's in the bag of gifts. But again, the question of: what feels right here? What feels the most soulmaking? Maybe, at times, what feels the most healing? How do we want to navigate? How do we navigate, etc., with that?

So, in a way, what we also could say, again, in terms of all these realms and possibilities of practice, they demand of us a great sensitivity. So we could say, in relation to what I just said, it demands a kind of triple sensitivity and triple capacity, at least. (1) One is sensitivity and capability of skilful relationship to the human level of the other, regarding them, relating to them, respecting them in the conventional human sense. Is that there? To what degree is that there? How can I cultivate it more? (2) Second sensitivity and capacity needed is to my human level -- my conventionally human conception/sense of my self. Can I actually be sensitive to, "Ouch, that hurt when they just said that," or "I need this right now," or whatever it is? (3) And thirdly, sensitivity and capability of skilful and artful relationship with an image that's present. So the needs and requests of all three -- conventionally human other, conventionally human self, whatever images are present -- they determine, if you like, together, what is then appropriate. I hope all this makes sense in terms of possibilities and things to look out for.

Now, I said I wasn't going to talk much about eros, or rather, I'm not going to talk much about when there's really a lot of eros between the two members of a dyad. I'll say just a little bit. I won't really go into it and that whole realm, level of possibility. Just to be aware that in some instances, or with whatever, when there's a certain spark, or just the conditions are supportive, just how much eros may arise for the other. And then, you know, this brings the questions: can I contain it? Am I okay with that? Are they okay with it? Can we hold the boundary, whatever the boundary is, if there is a boundary? Can I handle all that eros, all that desire, all that sexual energy, if that's what's arising? What about -- we said the boundaries, but also what about just the inevitable slips of eros into craving, the contraction into craving, of the imaginal into some kind of reified perception? Does my art extend to the ability to notice when that's happening? Because it feels very different. I notice when that's happening, and I can open things up, I can change things, I can support the movement, the expansion of craving into eros, and of reified perception, fixation, fixated image, into imaginal image.

And again, what else am I bringing in? Do I need to feel attractive here? Because that's not the fullness of intention, is it? As always, checking: "Okay, there's a lot of sexual energy. There's a lot of desire, whatever. It's definitely got some eros in it. Is it soulmaking?" And as always, letting that be the guide. Some people will be practising this kind of dyad where the situation, either they're already in a romantic, sexual relationship or they want to be, and it's fine -- there are no other issues, there are no boundary issues, and it's all kind of open territory. And they might be open and okay to having sex or some degree of sexual intimacy. And it might be that in the course of working in a dyad, there's a lot of eros, sexual eros, that arises, and people decide to be sexual together. As I said, grown-ups, consenting adults, it's their choice, of course, and that's available as human beings, as long as it's okay with the other people. But just a word about that. Careful -- if I'm in a soulmaking dyad, careful about the intention. It may be that actually having some physical, actual sexual contact may be soulmaking. Or you may find, if this is your situation, this is what you explore as part of your larger explorations, you may find that being sexual in a soulmaking dyad, or a soulmaking dyad leading into that, may actually squander the erotic charge and the erotic tension necessary to sensing with soul. The twoness collapses. The sexual energy and charge collapses in different ways. Now, that in itself is fine, but it's a certain choice, and it's something to be aware of, and something to decide: is that what we want right now?

Or it could be that you decide to be sexual, physically sexual, and again the question: what is needed if we want to allow that and support that sexual contact to be sensed with soul, to be soulmaking? So remember, soulmaking is more than heart. We can have a lovely, heartful making love or whatever, could be -- it has a whole range. But soulmaking means more than heart, and more than a lot of other things. So what might be needed? If that's what we decide in this instance or whatever, that we're going to be sexual, we're going to make love or whatever it is, have some kind of sexual intimacy -- actual, physical sexual intimacy -- and we want it to be soulmaking, then what supports that? Does it have to do with the intention? Does it have to do with the attention? What kind of attention? Does it have to do with the pacing of the whole unfolding of the process, perhaps?

So I don't think there's any formula here, but you'll have to -- this is speaking just to those this is relevant to at the moment -- you'll have to kind of feel, "Okay, well, how does that happen?" You can have a lot of sense of soul and sensing with soul at one moment, and then it suddenly collapses. [2:30:15] You can't assume that just because I have it now, now we change to this activity, mode of behaviour, whatever it is, we're going to have sex, and I assume that the soulmaking sense continues. Maybe. But often not. It needs a certain kind of care. And what does it need? I have to kind of experiment and find out, perhaps. Or it might be that you decide, "Okay, there's a lot of eros. There's a lot of charge." Maybe you're talking about it. Maybe you're including it and working with it. But you keep the formal time, whatever that was that you decided to devote to soulmaking dyad practice, you keep that formal time for practice and that formal space, and you let the eros channel into the sensing with soul without acting it out during that time. And then afterwards, your mobile phone timer goes off, right, the dyad's over, then you can do whatever you want, you know? But these are choices. Again, it's not for me to set any rules or whatever. But again, just to point out how much, how sensitive the whole thing is, how sensitive the sensing with soul is, how sensitive the dyad is, how sensitive we are as creatures and as souls, and what care is needed, and to find out, and to experiment.

A couple more things. I mean, sometimes -- and again, depends on the situation, depends on the actual relationship between two human beings who are in a dyad, etc. -- but it may be that one feels lots of sexual desire, sexual eros for the other, and lets the other know. So Person A feels a lot of sexual desire, etc., and Person B actually feels it and is aware of it and lets Person A know that they can feel it, can feel it flowing toward them, and that actually they appreciate it, and that it's lovely. And then it may be more bearable energetically in and for Person A. Is it just because they shared it, that it's then spread, so to speak, to be held in a larger field of the dyad, so there's less pressure, more space -- they're not just trying to hold it inside, or they're not just carrying it themselves? Or is it the fact that in knowing that it's okay, and being reassured that it's okay for that degree of eros and desire and sexual energy to be around, that the other person doesn't feel threatened by it, etc., that they feel less need to sort of button it down and repress it or hide it or whatever? So again, depending on the relationship, dependent on the trust, dependent on the context, etc., including these things, and talking about them, and being careful how you hold them together, or what you do with them, however you decide, how you sense them, how you relate to them -- really important.

But there's so much potential here in dyad practice. As I said, I'm just mentioning a few things about when the sexual eros gets really quite strong and intense, but really when there's any eros between human beings -- not even working in a dyad, not even sexual -- that eros, as we've pointed out so much over the last few years, it's a key and a galvanizer of the whole soulmaking dynamic, and therefore the sensing with soul, and what that can open us to, and bring to us, and give to us, to the being. [2:34:43] There are a couple of lines from Rumi, actually, in this regard. I don't know where it's from, but I'm assuming it's a poem that he wrote to Shams, his mystical lover. And it says, "The tender words we said to one another are stored in the secret heart of heaven. One day, like rain, they will fall and spread, and our mystery will grow green over the world."

We could hear that -- I don't know exactly what Rumi's whole philosophy was, despite the beauty of the poetry, but -- "stored in the secret heart of heaven," "the tender words we said to one another are stored in the secret heart of heaven," stored in the mundus imaginalis, stored in that realm or dimension of being of eternality -- they're stored there, at that level, in the angelic realm, when our tender words are spoken out of sensing each other with soul. Not even just words, but those perceptions, that sensing itself, is stored somehow eternally. You have, again, eternality as one of the nodes, one of the elements of the imaginal. There is that sense, that they exist somehow, they make an imprint, an impression, and somehow they are eternal. Of course it's impermanent, but in some other way, this profound sensing with soul that has touched my being, touched my heart and soul, it feels to be eternal. I sense it as eternal, "stored in the secret heart of heaven," in the mundus imaginalis. "One day, like rain, they will fall and spread, and our mystery will grow green over the world," like a kind of cosmopoesis. Those words, that gaze, that sensing with soul will spread, and its mystery will grow green over the world. It changes our sense of the world that we're in.

And as I said, I shared in an earlier talk on this series, you know, sometimes there is a sense with any image -- intrapsychic or extrapsychic -- but perhaps more keenly, I wonder, when we're working in a dyad or when we're sharing this sense of participating in an imaginal sense, participating in an image with an other, that sense of participating, the privilege of participating in that dimension of being, in that whatever we want to call it -- the mundus imaginalis, the angelic dimension -- can be felt to be such a privilege, such a grace, to participate in the eternal that way, and in the divine that way. It can be sensed and felt in the depths of the depths of one's soul as perhaps one of the greatest privileges of human being. And to taste that, even if it's only for some moments or a few minutes, can change the whole tenor and outlook and relationship with existence, with life and death. Taste that for a few minutes, taste that for a few moments even -- changes my relationship with dying young, changes the way I sense myself, my human being, other, this particular other, but a human being in general. It changes my sense of the world. So that's there with all images, intrapsychic or extrapsychic, all sensing with soul. But I wonder, I'm wondering whether there's something about sensing oneself in relationship with another actual human being that way that can bestow this gift and this grace and this sense of profound privilege. Anyway, so much is possible. So much awaits discovery and creation.