yuuichi

Why do we fall in love, or have romantic affection to people of the opposite sex?

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, yuuichi said:

But by definition, resonance involves both bodies reacting equally with each other. Yet I assume in most situations, attraction is initially very unequal (for example, a man may see a beautiful woman from afar and he becomes attracted to her without any effect upon her. A woman may also be deeply in love with a famous person, but when she goes to his concert or event, he has no romantic interest in her at all).

 

Based on this:

 

49 minutes ago, yuuichi said:

Is this flow of etheric energy what traditional chinese medicine practioners and/or Daoists assume qi to be?

 

Also I'm quite interested in what you said previously. You said that the interaction of the subtle bodies of male and female are involved in the formation of love, but how does this process come about?

 

I was assuming that you are talking about the formation of mutual love. Though this may not always manifest exactly simultaneously in both participants, a basic or potential resonance between them can be assumed from the start. Apart from that, each of them has their self-oscillation modifying the picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

You can go on adding still more questions. But this topic is just about this one:

 

 

And there is a simple evolutionary answer for that. But romantics don't like that answer because they want to see love as something heavenly and not of this earth. And so the simple answer will be ignored. But I'm not going to press my point any further, as I know this to be useless.

 

I understand where you're coming from but the point is you don't have to have sex and you don't have to let your emotions take over. 

 

I just think self deception is a powerful thing. Also being physically attracted to someone isn't love. Even really connecting with someone isn't love. Sorry but we may need to define love that's if it's possible to rationalise it? 

 

As I said earlier today "don't love anyone love everyone" whatever love is! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a good thing that we the freedom to say what we want and mean what we say. There was a time when people where not afforded this luxury by the ruling class. Just look at the dark ages and what went on during this period...especially women. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of TCM, the "symptoms" of falling in love have to do with the Souls being stirred and made restless. 

 

Such a thing can happen for a number of reasons, including, yes, Soul-to-Soul connections which may form in mysterious ways. 

 

One interesting thing, however, is that all of those symptoms can be considered as signs of disease and lack of proper cultivation. Excessive happiness burns the heart. Excessive reactiveness to another person hurts the liver. And so on. 

 

The most "healthy" state of being would be one where one does not feel love - even though some consider the state of being free of soul-stirring pathologies as a "state of perpetual love".... which has absolutely nothing to do with the common "symptoms" of love, such as fast heartbeat, happiness, impulsivity, anxiety, etc.

 

Even old-time lovers which do not feel the "thrill" of seeing each-other, but just feel happy and better with the other person on their side are still on the "pathological" side of things. 

 

A disheartening aspect of TCM, but something which comforms pretty well which what I have been experincing on my practices - what we call "love" between man and woman nothing more is than seeing in the other something that makes you attached to them. Feeling good because the other person is on your side only indicates that there is some kind of fault on you yourself - for you should feel just as well and content being al9ne with yourself. 

 

That should be the gist of it. 

 

Now, about the energetic side of things, as long as there is movement of the souls, there is movement on qi. Portions of the people's qi will form connections between then, but those have a much limited range. Qi isn't beyond the boundaries of Space and Time. That would be (with some luck) the Souls. 

 

Now, one small correction : The etheric body isn't the same as Qi. In fact, it is a theosophic construct which tries to cram the whole ayurveda into a single thing. 

 

Aether and qi (especially the one used on TCM and qigong) are not exchanable. Working your etheric body through the use of cristals, assana or what not may have no effect or even become a problem on your qigong routine. 

 

Maybe we can sumise saying that qi, ectoplasm and aerther have shared energies between then, but are not the same.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to consider that Love may be a delusion? 

 

I may be saying that just to play 'devils advocate' but I feel it's a valid question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love is an action and a decision to commit to a relationship. When I decide to be a part of the other person's growth...I participate in it...then I have transcended my own natural tendency to be selfish. 

 

There was a story about a man who was invited to participate in a communal supper. The only obstacle was to figure out how it is that this man could use an eating utensil that was much to long for him to get a morsel of food to his mouth. All the others were in the same predicament. The solution was to use his utensil to feed the other across from him, and vis versa.  

 

Just a little thing like getting up and away from something that is dear to our hearts to help another is an act of love. Yes, it is inconvenient, but the reward is worth it...freedom from the bondage of self. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Desmonddf where did you learn traditional chinese medicine? You seem to be more knowledgeable about it than anyone else on this forum.

Thanks for your help.

Edited by yuuichi
Spelling
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jim D. said:

Love is an action and a decision to commit to a relationship. When I decide to be a part of the other person's growth...I participate in it...then I have transcended my own natural tendency to be selfish. 

 

There was a story about a man who was invited to participate in a communal supper. The only obstacle was to figure out how it is that this man could use an eating utensil that was much to long for him to get a morsel of food to his mouth. All the others were in the same predicament. The solution was to use his utensil to feed the other across from him, and vis versa.  

 

Just a little thing like getting up and away from something that is dear to our hearts to help another is an act of love. Yes, it is inconvenient, but the reward is worth it...freedom from the bondage of self. 

 

That's not love. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Jim D. said:

"That's not love."

What do you think love is for you? 

 

Care, consideration, gentleness etc. I think the term 'Love' is too broad and too general to have any real meaning. Love is a catchall word which if it was a sacred word would have great power but it's not sacred and therefore is ultimately meaningless.

 

As they say actions speak louder than words!   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a theological question? In the world of Tao the Daoist makes mention of demons but not in the way that Christians do. A demon to a Daoist would be closer to saying it is our negative thinking that controls a person. In other words, what ever we fear or resent fragments the wholeness of the person experiencing these negative emotional states. In philosophical Taoism there is no dualistic relationship...the I and the Thou. We are one and same with Tao. Therefore there is no God or Satan. I think if a Daoist were to use the descriptor "God" he would use the lower case "g" in god.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@yuuichi I've learnt from two major sources: The first one being a professional-forming course near where I live ( Minas Gerais, Brazil), on an institute called IMAM (Instituto Mineiro de Acupuntura e Massoterapia) - which could be translated as " (state name) Institute of Acupuncture and Massoterapy". It was a two-years course and it contemplated both western and eastern knowledge. There are a couple laws being passed on our House of Congress which may enable for a full-fledged Graduate-Level TCM course to be created at my country, and I'm definetely expanding my horizons as soon as it is launched.

 

The second source would be a spiritual guide which is with me and knows acupuncture and TCM very well. It gives me guidance and, in some cases, even treats people in my stead (through conscious possession practices, which I'm perfecting myself at). He's really freaking good at what he does. He is currently treating a woman with pain all over her body, and he is doing wonders to her. She's even paying upfront in hopes of me not stoping the treatment, haha.

 

I won't, by the way. I love how this spiritual guide is slowly developing my own skills and showing me how to see the meridians and work with new techniques. One of the benefits of conscious possession - the spirit is there, but you are there as well and can see everything that's being done :)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2019 at 3:32 AM, yuuichi said:

(...)

But a man can just look at a photo of a very attractive woman and by the time of interacting with her online, or even by just looking at her photo, a man can feel a strong romantic feeling towards that particular woman. There is obviously no exchange of qi, but the man still started to develop romantic feelings for that woman.

(...) 

 

In my opinion, that's just the general shallow understanding of love which permeates our most basic human nature. 

The causes and general process of falling in love are explained by modern science. 

 

So, to contribute positively in this thread I'll just say that one doesn't need much more than a photo to understand if he/she wants to have sex with a particular individual. We have this shallow understanding of love, a brief talk and a little step further would be to formalize the intention of not having sex with those outside the relationship. Love is born. 

 

That's what people call love: when you feel something missing in you and you expect to get it from someone else who happens to be the object of your sexual desire. 

 

Real love is something else. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be confusion on how love is being defined.

 

The Greeks identified 4 types of love. This thread concerns the love ‘eros’.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the standards of ancient greek culture in which the philosophical definition of Eros was born, it was desirable for a mature man to have a child lover ( a young boy) to have sex with and to teach him about life. That bond would be defined with the philosophical concept of eros, but today we should probably rely on the more pragmatic psychological definitions of pedophilia and child abuse. 

 

Considering that, I don't think that it's desirable to rely on an ancient definition of something that we can currently experience, observe and define with our own cultural standards. 

Edited by Cheshire Cat
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t know about that, but I don’t really think that’s true. Homosexual sex happened frequently all around the ancient world and in ancient Greece, but it certainly doesn’t seem common. Socrates, Plato, Archimedes, Aristotle, and all the other famous ancient Greeks didn’t seem to be involved in that. Also I looked up the definition of Eros in the dictionary to make sure, and it didn’t mention all the things you mention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To make it crystal clear, because some people are obviously stupid, this thread has always been concerning the topic of romantic love, which is the feeling a man feels when he looks at a beautiful woman, and the heart beats fast, one loses their breath and so on. The reason I made this thread is to ask, why does such physical effects happen just by the eyes looking at an attractive female appearance? So stop having a debate on what love is and isn’t, and return to the subject of what was originally discussed please. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The design of the human is a reflection of the divine, on this plane of reality.

And so is the love that humans feel easily and naturally.
Nothing is wrong with it.

 

However corruption has entered into humankind, and so such questions arise.

 

Probably a better question is how can I uncorrupt myself so that my love will once again reflect the divine ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish people would stop using the word love as most have concluded the definition is extremely vague. 

 

Desire is a fundamental aspect of sex but strongly akin to animal activities i.e. Fornication and breeding perhaps to grow our desire for ever greater sensation.

 

Care means you keep an eye on someone/something as you see it as having value i.e. So humans see themselves in their offspring and so wish help them grow to a perceived greatness.

 

Bliss is the state of uninhibited, dynamic, eternally flowing ecstasy i.e. Being at one with all things yet attached to nothing, desire tempered (transmuted) to the hearts passion and yearning, caring for all things but never wanting for oneself.  

 

The whole idea of love has been tainted by ignorance and shouldn't be used unless you wish to perpetuate ignorance! 

 

Better to say what love isn't perhaps!

 

Quote

1 Corinthians 13 New International Version (NIV)

13 If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.

 

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

 

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

 

13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have bliss, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have bliss, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have bliss, I gain nothing.

 

Bliss is patient, bliss is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Bliss does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

 

Bliss never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

 

And now these three remain: faith, hope and bliss. But the greatest of these is bliss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so back to the question.

 

Q. Why do people fall in love?

 

A. We have become more and more polarised due to our desire for sensation as we have come into being through consecutive rounds and cycles of existence. We differentiated into male and female thereby accentuating aspects of the one into a dualism. What we gained from the sensation of physical being we have lost from the view of wholeness and peace as confusion reigns and we seek peace in 'the-other'.

 

The attraction to 'the-other' is the mortals attempt to again become complete but is an absurdity as 'they' are already whole but have simply become polarised. When one realises the error of imbalance one begins to rediscover that aspect of hidden self and in so rediscovers the path to wholeness. peace and bliss.  

 

Notes:

Of course as all things are relative the coming into being was experiential bliss but when there is no longer anything to be gained the egoic consciousness returns to a state of non-being drawn to the bliss of peace and the dissolution of 'the other'. Such is the eternal cycle. 

 

Screaming in the void we reach out and holding branch and root return and return for evermore. So it is called the eternal return. 

 

So let the Dao be your guide and teacher that you may always find bliss

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOW

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, yuuichi said:

I didn’t know about that, but I don’t really think that’s true. Homosexual sex happened frequently all around the ancient world and in ancient Greece, but it certainly doesn’t seem common. Socrates, Plato, Archimedes, Aristotle, and all the other famous ancient Greeks didn’t seem to be involved in that. Also I looked up the definition of Eros in the dictionary to make sure, and it didn’t mention all the things you mention. 

 

They did... however, different from what we think about today. Pederasty was a good thin on Plato's ideas, but homossexuality between grown men was considered to be unnatural and punishable. 

 

Greeks didn't see homossexuality and pederasty as the same things. Not at all. Mainly because they had the idea that grown men were already "macho", and two "macho" could not have sex without one dominating and emasculating the other. Being emasculated was something inacceptable for the greeks - but young men didn't had any masculinity (in their view), so, through intimate contact with someone masculine (an older men) they would "learn how to be masculine".

 

9 hours ago, Cheshire Cat said:

According to the standards of ancient greek culture in which the philosophical definition of Eros was born, it was desirable for a mature man to have a child lover ( a young boy) to have sex with and to teach him about life. That bond would be defined with the philosophical concept of eros, but today we should probably rely on the more pragmatic psychological definitions of pedophilia and child abuse. 

 

Considering that, I don't think that it's desirable to rely on an ancient definition of something that we can currently experience, observe and define with our own cultural standards. 

 

The "young man" was someone of marigeable age, just the same as the girls of mariageable age were maried. 

 

Usually boys in their teens. Something from the range of 14 to 20-something. 

 

It wasn't paedophilia, as the attraction wasn't on prepubescent boys - the greeks just didn't see having homossexual sex with someone your age the same as having homossexual sex with someone younger or older. 

 

Indeed, consent was a must on those cases, and not only had the family of the young men accept it, he had perfect freedom to accept or deny the romantic approaches of other men.

 

Also, even male-female relationships also followed this "young-old" model. The young women were married to much older men - and that was what was considered to be proper. An old woman marrying an old man, well as a young woman marrying a young men, would both be ridiculous for the common greek on ancient Greece.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God is creative and he creates through the Male+Female > Creation.
Which is the fundamental action at all planes and levels.
Anything that exists participates in this, and there is not choice not to.

 

If one has a problem with this then the real question is "why am I deranged ?".
And the answer is that the entire species is deranged which gives rise to the mass unhappiness and ridiculousness of mankind, a pretty sorry looking bunch of hobbos that frankly embarrass the other creatures on the planet who don't have a large table of mental health conditions that they are proud of.

 

Because of this derangement humans perform the Male+Female > Creation at far lower levels then was intended to. 

In fact as the human being is so deranged and seems unable to perform his creative activities as a whole being, what happens is that he fragments into small parts that attempt to perform creation trying to salvage something.   Which is a bit like a deranged Quantum Physicist finding work repairing vacuum cleaners.

 

Human beings have finally deranged almost all of their Creative abilities, and we can see this in how much pride they take in their systems-for-healing-self-inflicted-illnesses-through-wilful-stupidity, or medicine.

It is also true that the state of mankind being so primitive is strongly influenced by the seasons and celestial movements, of which they once upon a time had some knowledge of, but having invented a fashion for destroying all information gathered by previous generations in a joyful festival, and then walking around wondering if something is missing whilst their societies fall apart ... what can be said except : "few escape".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites