Yes- I think it's when you feel yourself disappearing that the trouble begins.
On Jun 26, 8:09 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > Vam.. i am sure you would agree that our idea of fairytale love is knocked > right into our heads since childhood...our literature is full of it.. all > the creative arts feed on it...plus all the marriages made in heaven > crap you hear about... you grow up taking it for granted.. until you > actually do fall into a relationship and reality hits you...and if you are > aware of your sorroundings i guess you would reralise beforehand not to have > unrealistic expectations...and after all said i think its different for > everyone.. the poetic kinds who are in love with love rather than the > person...the practical kinds who seek convinience and max. profit...i dont > know wat category to put myself in...i give myself completely to whoever it > is at the present...i dont have any expectations.....but it is when i feel > my freedom is threatened that i completely withdraw...the only thing i have > romantic illusions about is freedom..you can tell us wats yours...and i > would also like to say that i agree with your point of view also..one can > seek spiritual fulfilment with the one and is content(not misinterpreting > it)... > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 10:03 AM, ashok tewari <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > It does, Slip, but does not indicate if the case was one of fairy tale > > expectations from relationships in ' love,' to start with. > > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> All cultural disparity aside, Vam, the "imho" (in my humble opinion) > >> clearly indicates the subjectivity in the statement. > > >> On Jun 25, 4:49 pm, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > " Imho, being 'in love' is, as Arch says, a fairy tale." > > >> > Wouldn't it be more accurate to state that of ' love,' as you or Arch > >> > understand or mean it ! ? It would be a great service to let your > >> > readers know that and, better still, to actually state what you > >> > understand or what your ' love ' means to you, as in what it does to > >> > you, how it affects you, what place it has in your hierarchy of > >> > values ? > > >> > For instance, if you've fallen for the fairy tale kind of love, you > >> > will end up with disappointments appropriate to fairy tale kind of > >> > love ! > > >> > And, this isn't semantics. > > >> > On Jun 25, 7:29 pm, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > I guess depending on how fast you want to travel it could be both! I' > >> > > have been reluctant to reply to this thread but I do share some of > >> > > your views PSK. Truth is that I have been married for close to 20 > >> > > years now but I have not lived with my wife for clos to 5 years. We > >> > > are both much happier than we were when we lived together. I have had > >> > > a few long term relationships since and they were just too much for me > >> > > personally. I have a GF now and she wants to pin me down, I feel > >> > > smothered. We lived together for a while and I wound up excomunicating > >> > > her from the solice of my abode. We are still 'together' but during > >> > > the course of our 1 year relationship I have had (and still do have) a > >> > > few different partners including her best friend who has shared our > >> > > bed on different occasions. She want's monagamy until we GET MARRIED! > >> > > Imagine that! I'm still married to the mother of my children and I > >> > > don't see that changing. Polyamorous relationships ARE possible but it > >> > > takes complete transparancy and a strong commitment to your > >> > > 'significant' other. I, however transparent I may be, can only be > >> > > commited to being a father and a good friend! I love her and all of > >> > > the women who I have 'known' equally. The love that some women require > >> > > I cannot and will not provide. Too emotional and without logic! Imho, > >> > > being 'in love' is, as Arch says, a fairy tale. > > >> > > On Jun 25, 5:33 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > Thats the beauty isnt it..our own separatre roads..running parrallel > >> to some > >> > > > at some point departing ..reconnecting again...intersecting with > >> some...or > >> > > > is it more like a river... > > >> > > > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:09 PM, vamadevananda < > >> [email protected]>wrote: > > >> > > > > You have to take your own journey forward, your way, with your > >> desires > >> > > > > and ideas, and your suppositions or beliefs. That learning curve > >> can > >> > > > > hardly be progressed upon by wishing, opinionation or > >> argumentation on > >> > > > > a discussion forum. Make your choices, have the experience, and > >> know > >> > > > > and conclude for yourself ! > > >> > > > > I've stated my conclusions, from my experience and understanding. > > >> > > > > On Jun 25, 11:19 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > and is it not possible to celebrate that oneness in the > >> multitudes.. why > >> > > > > > settle down.. i do not say.. have a string of affairs...wat i am > >> saying > >> > > > > here > >> > > > > > is.. that completeness can come by sharing with more than one.. > >> two does > >> > > > > not > >> > > > > > always have to form a single unit.. it can be three or four or > >> > > > > watever...wat > >> > > > > > we are told mostly.. there is the one for you...but that is not > >> wat i > >> > > > > want > >> > > > > > to believe nor will i believe it.. it is circumstances that make > >> us > >> > > > > settle > >> > > > > > for one... > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:09 PM, vamadevananda < > >> [email protected] > >> > > > > >wrote: > > >> > > > > > > The point, Kid, is in this oneness we see everywhere, as in > >> apparent > >> > > > > > > unit systems such as you and I, a pond or mountain, a pig and > >> a tree, > >> > > > > > > atom or organs. There is one - ness, unity, evident in each > >> > > > > > > individuation, having a form and qualities, properties and > >> aspects, > >> > > > > > > character or personality ... individualised being. > > >> > > > > > > The diversity of such ' ones ' is mind boggling. But we come > >> to see > >> > > > > > > their interconnections as we widen our scale of view, over > >> space and > >> > > > > > > time. And lo, we discover other ' units ' in biospheres, > >> Himalayas, > >> > > > > > > oceans, continents ... earth, solar systems, galaxies ... > >> universe. > >> > > > > > > The universe is the One ... Universe. > > >> > > > > > > In the context of your post, ALL of us have problems with > >> settling > >> > > > > > > down with one, or as One. But since they are each in the same > >> line of > >> > > > > > > truth, some of us see the merit in each, try hard to retain in > >> memory > >> > > > > > > all the time, untill the segregating or dissipating forces in > >> our > >> > > > > > > psychic world relent and let our experience and understanding > >> > > > > > > complete. > > >> > > > > > > I have spoken of our higher nature and I am partial towards > >> it. That's > >> > > > > > > when we are comfortable with one, as one. Studies in clinical > >> > > > > > > psychology and psychosomatics, yoga and meditation, confirm > >> the > >> > > > > > > wellness it offers. That leaves you free and uncluttered, > >> happy and > >> > > > > > > good. Even officials in the police department respect that. > > >> > > > > > > At any point in time, not everybody is capable of it; some > >> might not > >> > > > > > > want it. And many are not aware of it, at least enough to > >> choose > >> > > > > > > it ! > > >> > > > > > > On Jun 24, 2:36 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > and your point is?? > > >> > > > > > > > On Jun 23, 1:33 am, vamadevananda <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > Do you know what a system ( closed or open ) is, Kid ? > > >> > > > > > > > > The Universe is a system ( not sure if it closed or open > >> ), in > >> > > > > which > >> > > > > > > > > everything else is included. It is One, quite apart from > >> each being > >> > > > > or > >> > > > > > > > > all beings it includes, not excluding the ones now or yet > >> > > > > unmanifest ! > > >> > > > > > > > > On Jun 22, 1:26 am, "pol.science kid" < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > I have a hard time believing when someone tells me that > >> they have > >> > > > > > > > > > found the one... what does it mean anyway..The one.. why > >> does it > >> > > > > > > thave > >> > > > > > > > > > to be one...I believe that people can and do fall in > >> love with > >> > > > > more > >> > > > > > > > > > than one person at the same time...and that is why i am > >> opposed > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > > > > > marriage as an institution...a promise to be with each > >> other > >> > > > > > > > > > forever!...I think open relationships are much > >> better..there is > >> > > > > no > >> > > > > > > > > > emotional burden...Also sexual and emotional intimacy > >> does not > >> > > > > always > >> > > > > > > > > > have to be in one single package.. i do not see adultery > >> as > >> > > > > something > >> > > > > > > > > > horrible...and i really resented the way media made an > >> example of > >> > > > > > > > > > Tiger woods and his many affairs...so wat he slept with > >> many > >> > > > > women.. > >> > > > > > > > > > its not like they didnt know who he was and that he was > >> > > > > married...The > >> > > > > > > > > > fact that religion penetrated and dictated every aspect > >> of > >> > > > > individual > >> > > > > > > > > > lives still shows its effects...sex is something sacred > >> and at > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > > same time tabboed(although some countries have come to > >> take > >> > > > > liberal > >> > > > > > > > > > views there are still many orthodox societies)... its a > >> natural > >> > > > > > > > > > instinct why make something else out of it...its like > >> hunger..The > >> > > > > > > more > >> > > > > > > > > > you try to regulate it the more you pervert it...the > >> fact that > >> > > > > > > > > > teenagers are told to abstain should only be because of > >> health > >> > > > > > > reasons > >> > > > > > > > > > not because premarital sex is a sin...It was because > >> that > >> > > > > religion > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
