THE LAWS OF LOVE ...
A conversation between the author of the book Vicent (Spiritual Laws) and Isaiah (The voice of his mind)….
Ideally, 2 people would join because they love each other, but in most cases this does not happen, join for other reasons, let's see which:
And what are those factors? That is, why can a union be produced without love?
There are different reasons. It may be because there is a physical attraction, for material or emotional convenience, for mental affinity, for the need to be loved or for the need to love.
Can you talk to me in more depth about each of these reasons, so that I can be more clear about what they consist of?
Sure. Let's start if you want for the number one reason in your world: physical attraction or sexual instinct.
When the spirit is still underdeveloped in its capacity to love, its will is greatly influenced by instincts, and in the specific case of the choice of partner, the sexual instinct prevails over feelings.
That is why he usually chooses depending on what activates his sexual instinct, which looks outside and not inside. That is why people who are physically attractive have an easy time finding a partner, while the one who is unattractive seems to be doomed to not find her.
This behavior is majority in your world because, in general, most beings have little developed the capacity to love and is more accentuated in adolescence, because it is a stage where the sexual instinct coincides with the immaturity of youth, which makes even the most advanced spirits the desire to satisfy their sexual instinct over the awakening of feelings.
I believe that there must necessarily be a mutual sexual attraction in the relationship. If sexual desire does not arise between them, what would be the point of joining as a couple?
Of course, it is a necessary but not sufficient condition. But don't confuse the sexual instinct with the sexual desire.
And there is a nuance that differentiates them. It is true that sexual desire can be activated by the biological sexual instinct, but not only by instinct. It can also be activated by feelings. The biological sexual instinct is mainly activated by physical attractiveness and novelty. It is a biological programming that drives the individual towards promiscuity, because from the biological point of view this favors the genetic exchange and the proliferation of the species.
When two people unite by physical attraction, without feeling in between, once they have been sexually satisfied, there is usually a decrease in sexual desire between them, since for the sexual instinct that relationship is no longer novel and is not activated as at the beginning
The consequence is that, if this relationship is prolonged, there is usually a loss of sexual appetite, because among them sexual desire depended entirely on instinct. Sexual relations become scarce and tedious. The interest in this couple is lost, because it is no longer novel and is activated in interest by other candidates, due to the fact that they are new.
If these relationships are prolonged they are a constant source of unhappiness, because then the lack of affinity and feeling comes to light, which at first were eclipsed because the sexual instinct covered them. And this reflects in an increase in disagreements and reproaches. It is often said then that the love in the couple is over, that there is no passion, when in reality there was never love, only attraction by instinct. When there is an affinity of feeling, the sexual desire wakes up and never goes out because it does not feed on instinct, but on feeling.
Let's talk now about union for material convenience:
There is not much to clarify about this. It is the union for material interests. It occurs when one of the two or both spouses considers that they will take some kind of material advantage in life that they did not have before, such as material comfort, social position, success, fame, wealth or power . This motive of union is even poorer than the previous one, there is not even sexual attraction and it is more evident that there is no kind of feeling, that is, the other spouse is led to believe that the reason for the union It is the feeling of love.
This means that the reason that unites two people may be different, because if in both it were a material interest there would be no need for pretense.
Effectively. It is often the case that in each of the couples the reason for the union is different. In one case it may be the material interest and in the other the physical attractiveness. For example, the unions that occur between a millionaire who is not attractive, but who is attracted to beautiful women and an attractive woman without money who aspires to have it. In neither case are there feelings, only an expectation of satisfying a desire but surely both will pretend that there is a feeling to hide their intentions. It will be a relationship where neither of you will be happy, although initially there may be a relative satisfaction when your expectations are met.
And what is the union for emotional convenience?
It occurs when one of the 2 people considers that the psychological profile of the other can favor him when it comes to expressing certain characteristics of his personality that he knows are selfish but that he does not want to change. For example, a submissive and difficult person may suit a dominant and authoritative person, a capricious person may suit a complacent person, a fearful person, someone determined, or a lazy person active.
But I understand that it does not have to be negative to have apparently opposite psychological traits, but rather it may be an opportunity to help. For example, the determined person can help overcome the fear of the fearful partner.
Understand that the problem is not that there are differences in personality, but that the couple is chosen for emotional convenience and not because there is a feeling for her. If a person needs to overcome fear, he can seek psychological help to overcome it, even in the couple, but he should not choose his partner for that reason. In these cases, what usually happens is that the relationship between the members of the couple is of dominance or psychological dependence. The one will feel enslaved in the relationship, because he only receives from the other orders and not feelings, while the other, let's call him the dominator or psychological dependent also suffers, because although his ego Smo is pleased, the absence of feelings on his part makes him feel empty and dissatisfied in the relationship.
Tell me now about the union for mental affinity:
It is the union that occurs between two people who share the same tastes, same hobbies or the same interests. For example, people who have the same social level, the same type of work, similar intellectual level, the same professional or material expectations or who have fun with the same hobbies, for example to play sports or go to parties.
But is there something wrong with sharing tastes or hobbies? I think it's something natural and desirable in a couple.
There is nothing wrong with sharing hobbies or interests. What we present here is that the decision to choose a partner cannot be made based on mental affinity, since this unites them only at the mental level, but at the level of feelings.
For many people are convinced that having similar tastes and interests has a lot to do with compatibility as a couple and that as a reason for that compatibility feelings can arise. For example, marriage agencies prepare a compatibility test to try to find the ideal match for their clients based on their tastes, interests and aspirations, with the idea that this increases the probability of an affinity between them.
It will be just a mental affinity, never sentimental.
Feelings do not understand probabilities, nor can they be planned. They have to arise spontaneously, even if they do not fit into the mental schemes that one has of “the ideal couple” that are usually stereotypes, such as the tall, handsome and romantic boy for women or the sexy, blonde and hot girl for men. These are only mental fantasies that feed the imagination and have little to do with feelings. If the feelings worked by probability, they could never unite related souls between them, since the probability of this union occurring by chance is very low. These unions by mental affinity usually have a time of apparent good progress, but they generate a feeling of emptiness in the interior whose origin is difficult to identify, because in the eyes of the outside, which works a lot with the mind, it seems that you have everything It takes life to be happy. However, the only thing it takes to be happy is the feelings.
Let's talk now about people who come together because they need to be loved:
This is a fairly common reason. It usually corresponds to people who have felt little loved in life with nostalgia for a love they have not known in this life, but who intuits inside that they have lived (in their past prior to current life). They have a need to be loved so great that when someone cares about them as a couple they feel so grateful that they accept that relationship without taking into account their own feelings. They are usually people with low self-esteem. They feel unattractive and believe that nobody will love them. They don't believe in the right to be happy.
Many of these people have had a difficult childhood, with huge emotional deficiencies, helplessness or situations of physical or psychological abuse. If that person has not yet freed himself from the oppressive family environment, he can use the relationship with an escape valve to free himself from that insufferable family relationship.
But is there something wrong with feeling the need to be loved? I think it is something natural and inherent to every human being and I think there is no one who does not want it.
There is nothing wrong with wishing to be loved. Indeed, it is something natural in every spirit and symptom that there is already a certain level of evolution, since one is already aware that the key to happiness has to do with love. The problem is that if this need to be loved is very pressing it can cause despair and emotional blindness, anxiety to quickly find someone to fill that void, which causes the person to rush when choosing a partner, because he will surely accept as couple to anyone who shows up at that time and not the one who arouses their feelings. Affective emptiness causes emotional blindness, which prevents seeing the couple as they are. Rather, he idealizes it according to his expectations in order to love her.
These people also often live relationships of domination or dependence. Many of these people are those who have reached the relationship fleeing from a suffocating family relationship. When they find someone authoritarian and dominant they are usually submissive and allow the other to dominate and humiliate them. Emotional blindness, lack of clarity and the desire to escape have made them choose the unknown with the belief that it could not be worse than previously lived. And it has turned out that the unknown was the same or worse than what they were trying to leave behind. The ignorance of something better makes them even accept this situation as normal and end up adopting the same role of submission they had in their family, which in their life as a couple reproduce the same situations of suffering as in family life.
Sometimes if they choose with a certain knowledge of the cause, looking for the opposite of what they have had, that is, they look for affectionate, peaceful, tolerant and good-hearted people, who know that they will be treated well. In these cases there is a relationship more of a paternal / filial or maternal / filial type, since they seek to receive from the couple the love they did not have from their parents and that is why the spouse acts more as a protector than as a couple. The person rescued from the family relationship of suffering feels grateful and indebted to the protector who rescued them from the situation of suffering and tries to compensate him in some way to the point of becoming self-convinced that that feeling of gratitude is love of a couple. A dependency relationship is generated between one and the other
In this last case I observe that there is at least one happy ending….
There is less suffering, but there is still no happiness, because there is no correspondence of feelings, because at least on one hand there is only gratitude and this makes neither of the two people happy, the one because they do not love and the other because they are not loved .
This last example of the protection relationship then resembles emotional convenience, doesn't it?
It is similar because one is looking for a partner with a certain psychological profile, with the nuance that in emotional convenience there is no need to be loved, while in this case it is the need to be loved that promotes the search for a certain psychological profile in the couple
I think there are also many people who join others for fear of loneliness. Can the person who seeks a relationship for fear of loneliness be considered to have a need to be loved, or is it for emotional convenience?
Sometimes it is for one thing and sometimes for the other. There are people who are afraid of loneliness and it is not for the need to be loved but for convenience because they need someone to please them in their desires, facilitate their lives or make them more comfortable, especially when they get older, because they fear to old age and illness and do not want to be left helpless at the end of their life. But it is true that in some cases the fear of loneliness is a manifestation of the need to be loved.
Tell me now about the union that is based on the need to love:
Agree. This type of relationship occurs when one of the members or both of them already has a capacity to love quite developed and needs to manifest it to be filled and feel happy. They are also usually people who are nostalgic for having loved intensely in a relationship that they have not known in this life, but whose interior intuits that they have lived (in another life). When this need to love and find the loved one becomes very pressing, it can happen, as in the case of those who need to be loved, that the need to feel is imposed on their own feelings and the couple is chosen not in function of the feeling that arises for her, but for her own need to love.
But is there something wrong with needing to love?
I say that if there is no need to love there can be no feelings, because if there is no need there would never be a search for a partner. It seems a contradiction with the message of developing feelings, doesn't it?
As I said when we talk about people who need to be loved, there is nothing wrong with feeling the need to love. As you say, the need to love is linked to the ability to love. People who have a great capacity to love can love many people, but it does not mean that they can fall in love with any of them, because the feeling of love for a couple does not wake up with anyone. The problem comes when, because of the need to feel, one is forced to feel what one does not feel, that is, force to the feelings and in the relationships of love, the feelings cannot be forced, but must occur spontaneously. Forcing feelings is different from developing feelings and here what we are saying is that forcing feelings is not good, simply because it generates suffering instead of happiness.
The person who is dominated by the need to love also suffers from emotional blindness that prevents him from distinguishing love from the need to love.
That is to say, she convinces herself that she is in love, when she really strives to feel love. He also does not usually look at whether or not he corresponds in his supposed feelings of love. It simply convinces itself that it is, or that if it is not at that time, it will be reciprocated if it is given completely to the other person, that is, that the other person will not be able to resist his flow of feelings and end up falling in love.
But I understood that loving is giving without expecting anything in return. But it seems that the love of a couple is an exception because if there has to be something in return and it is that the other corresponds to you.
And it is still true that he who truly loves does so without expecting anything in return, since he cannot demand to be reciprocated in feelings by the person he loves or in the case that he was reciprocated, he cannot force the other to recognize his feelings or that you agree to form a partner with him if it is not his will. That is, he must respect the will and freedom of the other and be willing to fit a no for an answer, even though he has given his heart. But if it is true that in the case of the relationship, to become happy it is necessary that there be a reciprocated, mutual love. Loving without being reciprocated does not allow any of the two people to be happy.
You have exposed here different motivations different to the feelings that can give rise to a couple's union. Have you talked about physical attraction, emotional, material convenience, mental affinity, the need to be loved and the need to love? Do these motivations occur independently or can they go together? I want to say that if a person can feel physically attracted to another while feeling the need to be loved, for example.
Yeah right. In fact, there is almost always a mix of motivations. The physical attraction is usually combined with almost all others, because the sexual biological instinct is in every human being, although sometimes it is also absent. Actually, depending on the ability to love the spirit, one type of motivation or another prevails. In less advanced spirits, who still know and value love little, any combination of the first four is more commonly given: physical attraction, material convenience, emotional and mental affinity . In more advanced spirits, combinations of physical attraction are more commonly given, with the need to be loved and the need to love. And at an intermediate stage there may be combinations between physical attraction, emotional convenience, mental affinity and the need to be loved. It also happens sometimes that these motivations do not occur simultaneously but appear at different times in the relationship. For example, a relationship can be initiated by a physical attraction and when it is turned off, other types of reasons to prolong it come out, such as material or emotional convenience.
Vicent Guillem (Spiritual Laws II)
