What does "Do not be unequally yoked" mean to you?

[Depression = 72% of members]

I was wondering about the community's thoughts on this. I'm interested in exploring any small truth here, I don't have an example and this isn't reactive but more positive action to grow my understanding. Inputs are welcome

I'll share first.

• The wording is interesting to me. It's specific in scope. It's not "be equally yoked". That choice tells me that there is breadth. It accounts for a wider understanding of the act of being yoked. This seems to encourage to accept an inexact match, with some mismatch.



• The context is as workers of a faith. Yet I've usually heard this in a marriage context. It seems more accurate to speak of the total person--e.g., character, faith, etc.--instead of the "he's not Christian, unlike my girlfriend, so it's automatically harder". I have heard it used with the relationships-only way before, in seeming allowance for a person of poorer total person because of their label.



• I like the smallness of this sentence with reference to the sense of scope given earlier: "(... .) We have spoken openly to you, our heart is wide open. 12 You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted by your own affections. 13 Now in return for the same (I speak as to children), you also be open." Paul pleasantly opens up the thoughts there. Then this seems to suggest that to be yoked, is simply one aspect, of a facet, of a life.

In the context of disorders of partners, I felt my own experience was somewhat concentratedly focused. I searched for the good. I created good in my head. I made it up--because "life is so hard, therefore it must be for her too". I relied on a perceived physical attraction, I ignored my beliefs on non-physical attraction and focused on excusing my partner's lacks in these areas on her lack of wealth/spiritual/emotional/educational background to pursue these deeper desires. "I learned these easy, so it should be easy to teach." (Acknowledged--not an optimal statement at the time--should is not want/belief imposition/etc.) One consideration now is she is neither my spouse nor daughter, but a "sister" in this context, who is to teach here? Pursuit of physical intimacy seems a focal point for struggling nons.

Therefore to follow that narrow focus of mine contrasts with this passage. It is narrow not only in the religious sense but in the sense of a faithful total worker. The sentence has breadth to acknowledge the complexity of a total life. When taken with the assignment of responsibility to other humans, as humans, it can clarify. Therefore, it seems a truer standard when we figure out who to yoke with. It seems healthy and more wholesome to keep in the mind instead of a simple narrow view that I took. It's helpful both as a way to heal and be healthy. On that basis I'd like to respectfully extend the scope of this discussion to those who have Buddhist interests so it's easier for you to share. Thank you.

[gotbushels]

I was wondering about the community's thoughts on this. I'm interested in exploring any small truth here, I don't have an example and this isn't reactive but more positive action to grow my understanding. Inputs are welcome

I'll share first.

• The wording is interesting to me. It's specific in scope. It's not "be equally yoked". That choice tells me that there is breadth. It accounts for a wider understanding of the act of being yoked. This seems to encourage to accept an inexact match, with some mismatch.



• The context is as workers of a faith. Yet I've usually heard this in a marriage context. It seems more accurate to speak of the total person--e.g., character, faith, etc.--instead of the "he's not Christian, unlike my girlfriend, so it's automatically harder". I have heard it used with the relationships-only way before, in seeming allowance for a person of poorer total person because of their label.



• I like the smallness of this sentence with reference to the sense of scope given earlier: "(... .) We have spoken openly to you, our heart is wide open. 12 You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted by your own affections. 13 Now in return for the same (I speak as to children), you also be open." Paul pleasantly opens up the thoughts there. Then this seems to suggest that to be yoked, is simply one aspect, of a facet, of a life.

In the context of disorders of partners, I felt my own experience was somewhat concentratedly focused. I searched for the good. I created good in my head. I made it up--because "life is so hard, therefore it must be for her too". I relied on a perceived physical attraction, I ignored my beliefs on non-physical attraction and focused on excusing my partner's lacks in these areas on her lack of wealth/spiritual/emotional/educational background to pursue these deeper desires. "I learned these easy, so it should be easy to teach." (Acknowledged--not an optimal statement at the time--should is not want/belief imposition/etc.) One consideration now is she is neither my spouse nor daughter, but a "sister" in this context, who is to teach here? Pursuit of physical intimacy seems a focal point for struggling nons.

Therefore to follow that narrow focus of mine contrasts with this passage. It is narrow not only in the religious sense but in the sense of a faithful total worker. The sentence has breadth to acknowledge the complexity of a total life. When taken with the assignment of responsibility to other humans, as humans, it can clarify. Therefore, it seems a truer standard when we figure out who to yoke with. It seems healthy and more wholesome to keep in the mind instead of a simple narrow view that I took. It's helpful both as a way to heal and be healthy. On that basis I'd like to respectfully extend the scope of this discussion to those who have Buddhist interests so it's easier for you to share. Thank you.

[LilMe]

To me, being unequally yoked means that any relationship is going to be pulled down to the least common denominator.  We cannot help or bring someone else up to where we are; they will always end up pulling us down.  It can affect our faith, our values, our lifestyle, diet, etc.

I suspect many of us 'nons' are helpers and caregivers by nature and spend a lot of time trying to better other's lives.  I know I do!  But I realize now that I cannot become entangled in those lives or it brings ME down.  There is a certain point where I must pull away or I start to become less than my best.

I look forward to other responses 

[fromheeltoheal]

I'm not a religious person, so I don't have an opinion on the phrase in the context of a religion, but a yoke is typically a wooden brace that goes around the necks of two oxen and attached to a plow, so they can pull it together.  The term 'unequally yoked' describes two oxen that are not matched well, one stronger than the other, so the two of them yoked together will just go around in circles instead of forward in a straight line.

Now taking that metaphorically into a marriage or a relationship, if two people are unequally yoked, one could be stronger than the other, or they could just have nothing in common, so the relationship will just go around in circles instead of move forward.  Put another way, it suggests a lack of teamwork.  Now with my ex and me a wooden yoke wouldn't be a good idea, the thing would have burst into flames and broken apart, no way something could have held that disastrous pairing together, and the field would be full of random squiggles and nothing would grow, fer sure.

[schwing]

This phrase when quoted from the Bible usually includes also "... .with unbelievers."  So in the past whenever I've heard this passage discussed, it was in the context of matchmaking with non-Christians.  This phrase can sometimes be used to discourage matches with people not sharing your religion.  But I suppose it can be considered as wisdom when it comes to selecting partners in general.

It wouldn't be wise to pair up with someone whom you do not feel is pulling their weight so to speak.  But what would be considered "equal" can vary.  For example, a partnership where one person is the primary bread winner and the other person manages the home, could be seen as an equal yoke so long as both sides values what each are contributing to the household.  This doesn't always play out as such; we can easily overvalue or undervalue our own contribution as well as that of our partner.

The "yoke" could refer to so many things; not just devotion to religious or spiritual responsibilities.  It could refer to the parenting of offspring (discipline/nurturing/providing/cultivating).  Or the care of the seniors.  Managing of finances.  Health.  Mental health.  Happiness, etc... In general it helps to have a broad understanding of all the moving parts in a household.  When one partner is blind to a big moving part, they will see things "unequally" and that could lead to resentment.  And this oversight can poison the partnership.  Whether nor not you are of the same faith.

I think it might be a good idea to have a "performance evaluation" periodically.  Query what do you contribute to the partnership?  What do you value from your partner?  Exchange ideas and learn.  Might be eye opening to see what aspects one is taking for granted.

My 2 bits.

[Meili]

I'm not sure that I completely agree with LilMe's assessment of not being able to help another rise up. And, since I'm not religious in any conventional sense of the word, and this may be completely off topic from what you are asking, but I'm going to go with fromheeltoheal's metaphor and keep my response placed in the context of a r/s and my involvement in them.

I think that thinking in terms of not being "unequally yoked" means goes more to one party doing all of the work, from their perspective, to make the r/s work. It is my understanding that in many cases, one party believes that he/she is doing the lion's share of the work; thus bearing more of the burden of the yoke.

I know that I have been in this position numerous times. I have felt that I was bearing all or almost all of the burden. What I'm discovering is that this is just a perception. While it is certainly true that from my point of view I'm working harder, my point of view is not the only relevant one in the r/s. This generally results from my only seeing things based on my own expectations and standards. Whether or not the yoke is shared equally becomes less important than how I feel about it. This means that I have now created a larger burden on my SO as she tries to work harder at sharing the load equally. It also means that I have devaluded her initial efforts.

[HoneyB33]

To me, being unequally yoked means that any relationship is going to be pulled down to the least common denominator.  We cannot help or bring someone else up to where we are; they will always end up pulling us down.  It can affect our faith, our values, our lifestyle, diet, etc.

I suspect many of us 'nons' are helpers and caregivers by nature and spend a lot of time trying to better other's lives.  I know I do!  But I realize now that I cannot become entangled in those lives or it brings ME down.  There is a certain point where I must pull away or I start to become less than my best.

I look forward to other responses  

I totally agree with what you said, LilMe. This is what I have come to understand in all of this. For myself, I mistook the desire to help people as something that I would bring into my most intimate relationship, and it's taken me this experience to realize that that was totally destructive to me--all it did was pull me down.

I think the point with this verse is that in order TO do works of compassion, faith, love, etc, we do have to be equally yoked with our most intimate partner. Otherwise we spend all our time on the imbalance, and that was very much my experience. When I look back at the last several year of my closest relationships (ppl I was not equals with), I can see how literally all of my energy went into repairing these relationships. And all it did was drag me down.

I think the point is that there are basically two different set of "rules". How we approach our most intimate relationships, and how we approach relationships that are outside of ourselves. If we don't have real standards for out intimate connections, then it does effect the work of faith in our lives, and we do not plow correctly.

We can definitely approach relationships outside of ourselves with different standards, and more flexibility. To "bare with those that are weak in the faith". But that doesn't mean that we have to try and depend upon people who are not dependable. I've come to realize that I have suffered a lot because I haven't allowed a different standard in my life, for the people closest to me. And because of that, it's really hindered my growth--pulling me down, rather than up.