I agree with keeping in mind the idea of pre-incarnative choices. And I have no problem following my heart with someone who is the opposite of what I'm looking for if it felt right. My concern is with those who, for various reasons, there may be apprehensions. We would normally say "Well my heart doesn't feel it" with that person. As has been said, if there is disharmony that can't be overcome, walking away is reasonable.
But does what we feel have anything to do with the heart, or is it placing our heads where our hearts should be? Is what we feel their problem as a result of not being congruent with their development because of their choices and the character they developed, or is it actually ours in not being able to see past superficial judgements and radiate love without expecting to be wholly fulfilled? We certainly can't be responsible for everything, but what if they are actors testing our ability to love and do what is most loving? "Light and love go where they are sought and needed.." We have these ideals in our mind, and when they're not met, it supposedly has nothing to do with us because our "heart" doesn't feel it. Perhaps this lack of feeling in the heart may actually be pointing to a lack of love in general within the self.
What if our apprehension towards others is the resistance of the edge? Are we the ones stuck in this illusion? We speak of our unity, infinity, and being perfect representations of love and wisdom, yet I wonder if any of us are really living it. I mean, it's said we're to commit to a mate, but also get a collective orgy going on. Freely shared social and sexual intercourse. There are an infinite number of sub-densities, and I think the choice and polarization is all that's needed, but I can't help but wonder how far we can go.
In terms of like-mindedness, I think we need to express our beliefs honestly, but perhaps the only requirement for a relationship should be built on the foundation of love/community/harmony. Otherwise I think we may just perpetuate the archetypes (for lack of a better word) of superiority, dogma, and the enlightened master. I don't want to be creating any slaves! And I want to be careful that I'm not looking for a mirror to grope.
But does what we feel have anything to do with the heart, or is it placing our heads where our hearts should be? Is what we feel their problem as a result of not being congruent with their development because of their choices and the character they developed, or is it actually ours in not being able to see past superficial judgements and radiate love without expecting to be wholly fulfilled? We certainly can't be responsible for everything, but what if they are actors testing our ability to love and do what is most loving? "Light and love go where they are sought and needed.." We have these ideals in our mind, and when they're not met, it supposedly has nothing to do with us because our "heart" doesn't feel it. Perhaps this lack of feeling in the heart may actually be pointing to a lack of love in general within the self.
What if our apprehension towards others is the resistance of the edge? Are we the ones stuck in this illusion? We speak of our unity, infinity, and being perfect representations of love and wisdom, yet I wonder if any of us are really living it. I mean, it's said we're to commit to a mate, but also get a collective orgy going on. Freely shared social and sexual intercourse. There are an infinite number of sub-densities, and I think the choice and polarization is all that's needed, but I can't help but wonder how far we can go.
In terms of like-mindedness, I think we need to express our beliefs honestly, but perhaps the only requirement for a relationship should be built on the foundation of love/community/harmony. Otherwise I think we may just perpetuate the archetypes (for lack of a better word) of superiority, dogma, and the enlightened master. I don't want to be creating any slaves! And I want to be careful that I'm not looking for a mirror to grope.