Relationship without attachment.

Or as Jiddu Kṛśnamurti once put it: „Love is when the self is not.“

What we’re really attached to

The other day I was asked a question that comes up often in my own life and in my work: “How can I stop being attached in relationships?”

I know this question not only as a philosophical one, but from experience. I have been living in non-monogamous relationships for years, and that has brought me face to face with jealousy, attachment, and the deeper patterns underneath both.

What started as a personal challenge became a deeper inquiry into myself through yoga philosophy, Advaita Vedanta, and the teachings of Jiddu Kṛśnamurti. And from that perspective, the question is never just about relationships. It is about how the mind relates to reality itself.

Let’s start with the basics:

Attachment is not situational. If it exists, it permeates the whole mind. Relationships simply make it visible, because images, roles and expectations clash directly there.

So we can use relationships as an example, remembering that the same mechanism runs through every part of life.

So what are we actually attached to? Are we really attached to the person as they are?

No.

We can only be attached to what exists within us, because that is all we ever know. Therefore, we cannot be attached to the other person as they are. It is the image we have formed of them that we are attached to — and to the image we have formed of ourselves in relation to them.

Those images are shaped by memory, culture, conditioning, and expectation.

So we see the other person as „partner“, „girlfriend“, „husband“, or whatever else we imagine them to be. All of these roles, ideas and ideals have certain attributes, certain expectations. So if I have formed an image about myself (as being “the husband” for example), I will relate to “my wife” in a certain manner, because “that’s what husbands do”. If in turn “my wife” has images about herself being “my wife” and me being “her husband”, she will act according to her ideas of that relationship. So in most relationships, two people do not actually meet as they are. What meets are two sets of mental projections.

The present moment, however, is alive, constantly new, fresh and moving. Ideas, thoughts, concepts and roles, on the other hand, are from the past, dead and static.

That is why if we see the present moment through the net of the past, we will only witness a distorted view of reality – and that will inevitably lead to conflict. If for example “my wife” starts behaving differently, because she is changing, my image of her and she herself will fall further and further apart, until one day I realize the two do not match at all anymore.

That is how images stunt growth, both theirs and ours. Only without them we can truly see each other and have the necessary space to change. And who they really are is different from moment to moment.

Imagine your partner doesn’t reply to a message.

The reaction that forms in your mind is not the present moment, but the image:

“They should care.”

“They might lose interest.”

The reaction is to the image, not to reality.

But this pattern of image forming shows up in all areas of life. We attach ourselves to things, status, career, identities, spirituality, and all the roles we play in daily life. Even helping others, caring for others, or „saving others“ can be forms of attachment.

So it is essential to understand the topic from the ground up, not just get rid of attachment in one area while leaving it untouched in others.

If we look closely enough, it might not be something we reduce over time — but something that can end altogether.

Now, when we look at these images and ideas we are attached to, we see that they are all mental processes. And in all of them, we are the creator of the idea – be it about ourselves or others. That shows it is a process of identification.

We identify ourselves, and even others, according to these ideas. And since they provide us with an identity, they offer a sense of aliveness and (sometimes only because of the conflict they bring about) energy, which is why the thought of ending these images can even feel dangerous.

In yogic philosophy, this attachment is known as rāga. Rāga literally means „coloring“ – the mind, being colored, is unable to see reality in its purity. Reality is distorted and filtered through wishful thinking, desire, and ideas of what should be.

Now, when we see that we are attached to images, the natural reaction is: we should detach from them.

But detachment has its own problems:

Why detachment is not enough

It can easily turn into indifference, carelessness, even a kind of quiet nihilism. And yet, not being attached does not mean becoming cold or withdrawn — in fact, it means the opposite.

More importantly, detachment is still part of the same movement as attachment. It is simply the opposite direction. And as long as there is an opposite, both sides remain. So as long as we are “detaching,” we are still caught in the same mechanism — moving within the field of time, thought, and becoming. And that movement inevitably creates conflict.

There is another trap hidden here: we can become attached to detachment itself. To the idea of being free. To the identity of being someone who has “let go.” At that point, nothing fundamental has changed. Attachment has only become more subtle.

In yoga, the resolution to this is called vairāgya.

Vairāgya: de-coloring the mind

Vairāgya literally means “de-coloring”: the mind is no longer distorted through desire, projection, or resistance.

Patañjali distinguishes between outer and higher vairāgya. While outer vairāgya often arises through experience, through disappointment, loss, or seeing the impermanence of things, higher vairāgya comes through understanding. It reaches even the most subtle layers of attachment.

Higher vairāgya is not a gradual process of detaching from one thing after another — that could go on indefinitely. It is a seeing through the entire movement of attachment itself, which is what we are aiming for here.

But if this is done halfway, by thought alone, nihilism lingers. Because the brain will ask: „What will remain if the illusion is exposed?“

If you think that everything will be empty and meaningless, it is not vairāgya.

Or in other words: As long as the question of nihilism remains, one is not free of attachment. Because when attachment is truly understood and ending, the question about what would be if one were not attached ceases to exist, since the question itself is an indicator for being attached.

To understand this better, let’s look at another important aspect: attachment to the outcome of our actions.

When action comes from desire

Usually, we take actions based on a desired outcome.

That means that the action itself is already colored by desire. Because desires are projections of ourselves into the future, the action will be a self-centered activity. And the self-image is itself created by thought and attachment to ideas and ideals.

So action based on desire is action based on an image of ourselves we think we are, or would like to be. That binds us and attaches us to those ideas. That is why we must be aware of our desires in action.

„Am I acting for gain, or because this action is needed in this moment?“

Being able to see means being able to look without any ideas in mind, therefore without any distortion. Then what we see will tell us what action is needed. Most of the time, the brain is busy creating thoughts and images, and action follows those, not the actual reality.

Acting because the action is necessary, not because we want to control the outcome – that is true action. That way, action remains possible without falling back into attachment.

If, on the other hand, we act based on images and ideations, we react, we don’t act. That is the cycle of samsāra, cycling through time. A situation is presented, but instead of responding to it, we react based on experience, emotion or expectation. When we see what is, however, we can respond responsibly and adequately.

Seeing as the witness

For that to happen, we can begin to observe. The words we speak, the emotions that arise, the thoughts we think – without immediately identifying with them. In yoga, this is known as sakṣi bhāva – literally the perspective of the witness. We can learn to be this witness-consciousness by looking around and seeing whatever we see, without giving it a name, without judging it, but just seeing it.

It begins to feel as if there is something in us that remains untouched by what is happening. The body and mind may be affected, but beyond them, there is a witness that sees reality as it presents itself. Being that witness, we can use the body & mind and its experience and knowledge to respond to what is being witnessed. This change of perspective creates distance to the content of the mind, without becoming cold or rejecting toward reality. This distance lets vairāgya unfold naturally: attachment becomes visible, understandable, releasable.

So maybe the question is not how to stop being attached in relationships. Maybe the real question is: Can there be relationship without the self at the center of it?