Will you be my relationship coach, pretty please?? LOL
--- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], navashok <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> > > I actually look upon this as a fairly healthy and some-
> > > what more evolved way of dealing with sex and romance.
> > > Who, after all, would ever want to hook up with someone
> > > who has all these fantasies of the perfect lover or mate
> > > running around in their heads, so much so that they LONG
> > > for them or develop an abstract NEED for them? I don't
> > > know about you, but every time I've run into a woman
> > > like that and been foolish enough to get involved with
> > > them anyway, I've learned very quickly that they were
> > > never relating to me *at all*, just to the fantasies
> > > in their heads.
> >
> > Great post Barry.
>
> Thanks for noticing, as opposed to some who have a
> tendency to read anything I write through aversion-
> colored glasses. :-)
>
> > As a friend of mine said it recently: if you date, it's
> > not just a nice woman, but a whole set of Samskaras,
> > desires, ideations, well Karma, and at some point, you
> > ask yourself, if you really want all of that.
>
> Exactly. The odd Rama - Fred Lenz guy I studied with
> for a while described interpersonal interactions as
> "touching and merging auras." Imagine a field around
> yourself as a luminous sphere, 2-5 meters in diameter.
> Now imagine inviting someone else -- who has an equal
> aura -- *into* yours. That's what you do when you focus
> intently on someone else, and even more so when you get
> involved with them.
>
> Although I certainly don't buy all that this guy said
> about the nature of relationships, I still like the
> "merging auras" metaphor because it allows a completely
> blameless view of why some relationships don't work out.
>
> A guy and a gal (or some other permutation best left to
> individual imagination) hook up, romantically and sex-
> ually. On their own, their auras are one predominant
> "color" (really combination of colors and energies), but
> put two of them together, and it's like the "color wheels"
> your kindergarten teacher used to use to explain the
> concept of color. Take a yellow circle of celophane
> in one hand and a blue one in the other, and they have
> their own distinct colors. But cross the two circles
> and you suddenly have a third color, green.
>
> That was Rama's view of what happens in relationships,
> and why one should never blame the other party if a
> relationship doesn't work out. Sometimes when auras
> merge, the resulting color is pleasing. Sometimes it
> isn't. No harm, no foul, either way. The secret to
> having relationships is just in recognizing when the
> aura you've chosen to merge with yours is not produc-
> ing a "color" that is equally pleasing to both parties.
>
> Color me a cultist (and some possibly will), but I
> think he might have been onto something with this
> metaphor. I like it because of its "no fault cause."
> Deciding to share another person's "whole set of
> Samskaras, desires, ideations, and well, Karma"
> CHANGES your own. Sometimes the result works,
> sometimes it doesn't. No harm, no foul, either
> way.
>
> But *recognizing* the "inharmonious color mergings,"
> and choosing not to pursue them, that can be of value.
> Learning to recognize such things before they even
> start, that can be even more valuable. :-)
>
