The search for the perfect match

Since pretty much every spiritual teaching out there hits on the same core idea—that getting too attached to people or things during our temporary time on this earth isn't exactly the move—I really hope you've done enough soul-searching and inner work to make sure you don't end up getting emotionally hooked on anyone.

Personally, I know I’d probably get attached, and honestly, that just leads to nothing but anxiety, stress, and heartache, so maybe it’s just better off being by myself. I actually think it's kind of cool how the English word "alone" can be read as "all one." 🙂

Robert Diaz2 said:Since pretty much every spiritual teaching out there hits on the same core idea—that getting too attached to people or things during our temporary time on this earth isn't exactly the move—I really hope you've done enough soul-searching and inner work to make sure you don't end up getting emotionally hooked on anyone.

Personally, I know I’d probably get attached, and honestly, that just leads to nothing but anxiety, stress, and heartache, so maybe it’s just better off being by myself. I actually think it's kind of cool how the English word "alone" can be read as "all one." 🙂

Look, I’ve been around the block enough times to know that you can't really have a connection without some kind of underlying bond—it’s just how things work, trust me, I've put in the hours and tested the theory. It’s like trying to drive down a highway without any lanes marked out; you might think you're making progress, but you're really just drifting aimlessly. There are even those old-school perspectives floating around that suggest it doesn't actually matter who you're rolling with or what kind of grind you're pulling in your day-to-day life, as long as you've got a clear destination in your sights. If you have that one big goal acting as your North Star, everything else—every person you meet and every job you hold—can basically just serve as the wind at your back, helping push you toward that finish line.

Michelle Robinson97 said:Look, I’ve been around the block enough times to know that you can't really have a connection without some kind of underlying bond—it’s just how things work, trust me, I've put in the hours and tested the theory. It’s like trying to drive down a highway without any lanes marked out; you might think you're making progress, but you're really just drifting aimlessly. There are even those old-school perspectives floating around that suggest it doesn't actually matter who you're rolling with or what kind of grind you're pulling in your day-to-day life, as long as you've got a clear destination in your sights. If you have that one big goal acting as your North Star, everything else—every person you meet and every job you hold—can basically just serve as the wind at your back, helping push you toward that finish line.

I totally agree with that. I mean, if someone actually stays focused on their own path and goals, they aren't going to be super clingy or emotionally dependent on their partner. But let's be real here, how often does that actually happen? Those high-level, spiritually aligned relationships are incredibly rare. Especially nowadays, when everyone's brain has been basically fried by the media. Every single show on Netflix or TV is just packed with intense emotions, passion, and pure melodrama, so people start thinking that chaos is the norm and try to force that onto their own relationships.

I actually know a couple where both people are pretty spiritual and understand all this stuff, but even then, the girl eventually fell into that pattern of dependency. She’s constantly nagging him whenever he tries to focus on his own hobbies or work, while she just keeps demanding attention. It's so hard to keep your ego in check within a relationship. Like, really tough. Even if you're one of those spiritual types, if you lose your center and your focus, it just goes to show that maintaining that balance is probably only possible for a very small group of people.

Robert Diaz2 said:Since pretty much every spiritual teaching out there hits on the same core idea—that getting too attached to people or things during our temporary time on this earth isn't exactly the move—I really hope you've done enough soul-searching and inner work to make sure you don't end up getting emotionally hooked on anyone.

Personally, I know I’d probably get attached, and honestly, that just leads to nothing but anxiety, stress, and heartache, so maybe it’s just better off being by myself. I actually think it's kind of cool how the English word "alone" can be read as "all one." 🙂

Thank God most people don't actually follow those "spiritual" teachings—if they did, there wouldn't be anyone left on this planet.

This is where things actually start getting interesting. All those spiritual teachings handed down by supposedly "enlightened" figures—well, they ultimately originate from the spirit itself. It stands to reason that the spirit shaped this world to align with the human experience. From what I can gather, it seems to have been part of the grand design for us to form deep emotional bonds; everything in existence points toward this being a fundamental, natural necessity—something clearly visible in the wild and among the animal kingdom. Furthermore, if one looks at the ancient Upanishads—which served as the foundational bedrock for most of the spiritual philosophies currently trending in America—the universe and nature are essentially synonymous with God.

And now, even the spiritualists are pushing back against this—it’s truly bizarre. It’s as if God is acting in direct opposition to Himself, working against His own design in an attempt to dismantle exactly what He intended to create.

Emotional attachment remains one of the fundamental pillars of human love—it manifests within the bond between parent and child, among friends, and between romantic partners alike. It is, by all accounts, entirely natural. While certain animals exhibit similar traits, they don't all possess this specific depth—as I mentioned before. From a theological perspective, one might ask why this exists in the first place; if it is indeed the intention of God, then there is a glaring contradiction to address. This capacity for connection inevitably brings with it immense suffering, heartache, and a myriad of complex problems—which suggests it doesn't quite stem from a source that is purely composed of love and goodness. Something simply doesn't align. Of course, everything I have just laid out is merely me airing my own thoughts—it doesn't necessarily bear much direct relevance to the core topic at hand.

The fundamental point here is that bonding is a biological imperative—it’s entirely natural. Without that instinctual connection, life as we know it wouldn't even exist; and even if it did, parents wouldn't feel that innate drive to protect their offspring. There is actual scientific precedent for this, too—studies have shown that when you artificially suppress oxytocin levels in parents, that protective instinct vanishes, often resulting in them becoming aggressive toward their own young.

While certain inclinations may be innate, an individual still maintains the agency to decide whether or not to engage with them—provided they have the willpower. Of course, that choice is often a fragile thing, given that our neurological wiring is essentially hardcoded to respond to these stimuli. We aren't entirely helpless, however, when pitted against those relentless evolutionary pressures and primal instincts.

Nancy Wilson2 said:Thank God most people don't actually follow those "spiritual" teachings—if they did, there wouldn't be anyone left on this planet.

This is where things actually start getting interesting. All those spiritual teachings handed down by supposedly "enlightened" figures—well, they ultimately originate from the spirit itself. It stands to reason that the spirit shaped this world to align with the human experience. From what I can gather, it seems to have been part of the grand design for us to form deep emotional bonds; everything in existence points toward this being a fundamental, natural necessity—something clearly visible in the wild and among the animal kingdom. Furthermore, if one looks at the ancient Upanishads—which served as the foundational bedrock for most of the spiritual philosophies currently trending in America—the universe and nature are essentially synonymous with God.

And now, even the spiritualists are pushing back against this—it’s truly bizarre. It’s as if God is acting in direct opposition to Himself, working against His own design in an attempt to dismantle exactly what He intended to create.

Emotional attachment remains one of the fundamental pillars of human love—it manifests within the bond between parent and child, among friends, and between romantic partners alike. It is, by all accounts, entirely natural. While certain animals exhibit similar traits, they don't all possess this specific depth—as I mentioned before. From a theological perspective, one might ask why this exists in the first place; if it is indeed the intention of God, then there is a glaring contradiction to address. This capacity for connection inevitably brings with it immense suffering, heartache, and a myriad of complex problems—which suggests it doesn't quite stem from a source that is purely composed of love and goodness. Something simply doesn't align. Of course, everything I have just laid out is merely me airing my own thoughts—it doesn't necessarily bear much direct relevance to the core topic at hand.

The fundamental point here is that bonding is a biological imperative—it’s entirely natural. Without that instinctual connection, life as we know it wouldn't even exist; and even if it did, parents wouldn't feel that innate drive to protect their offspring. There is actual scientific precedent for this, too—studies have shown that when you artificially suppress oxytocin levels in parents, that protective instinct vanishes, often resulting in them becoming aggressive toward their own young.

While certain inclinations may be innate, an individual still maintains the agency to decide whether or not to engage with them—provided they have the willpower. Of course, that choice is often a fragile thing, given that our neurological wiring is essentially hardcoded to respond to these stimuli. We aren't entirely helpless, however, when pitted against those relentless evolutionary pressures and primal instincts.

If you’re saying everything in the universe is interconnected, then sure, I guess you're right about that...
But if you mean that being attached to someone or something is actually a good thing, then I have to wonder why there are so many miserable, unfulfilled people walking around this country, considering how deeply attached everyone seems to be—not just to other people, but to material things, specific ideologies, abstract concepts, or even past events... 🤷

Robert Diaz2 said:I totally agree with that. I mean, if someone actually stays focused on their own path and goals, they aren't going to be super clingy or emotionally dependent on their partner. But let's be real here, how often does that actually happen? Those high-level, spiritually aligned relationships are incredibly rare. Especially nowadays, when everyone's brain has been basically fried by the media. Every single show on Netflix or TV is just packed with intense emotions, passion, and pure melodrama, so people start thinking that chaos is the norm and try to force that onto their own relationships.

I actually know a couple where both people are pretty spiritual and understand all this stuff, but even then, the girl eventually fell into that pattern of dependency. She’s constantly nagging him whenever he tries to focus on his own hobbies or work, while she just keeps demanding attention. It's so hard to keep your ego in check within a relationship. Like, really tough. Even if you're one of those spiritual types, if you lose your center and your focus, it just goes to show that maintaining that balance is probably only possible for a very small group of people.

You know what's actually fascinating? The fact that we've convinced ourselves that controlling the ego is an impossible task. Sure, centuries of societal conditioning have left their mark, but we are still free. Completely. You always have the choice to act on a thought or an emotion, or simply not to. Sometimes we just fall into the trap of thinking we *have* to react, so we give the ego a microphone.

Like you said, if a person has a goal and a focus, they won't be clingy or emotionally dependent on their partner. And if that goal and focus is simply "to be free," then there isn't an ego around to distort things. 😁

@Nancy Wilson2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZofi4ly8bg

Nancy Wilson2 said:Thank God most people don't actually follow those "spiritual" teachings—if they did, there wouldn't be anyone left on this planet.

This is where things actually start getting interesting. All those spiritual teachings handed down by supposedly "enlightened" figures—well, they ultimately originate from the spirit itself. It stands to reason that the spirit shaped this world to align with the human experience. From what I can gather, it seems to have been part of the grand design for us to form deep emotional bonds; everything in existence points toward this being a fundamental, natural necessity—something clearly visible in the wild and among the animal kingdom. Furthermore, if one looks at the ancient Upanishads—which served as the foundational bedrock for most of the spiritual philosophies currently trending in America—the universe and nature are essentially synonymous with God.

And now, even the spiritualists are pushing back against this—it’s truly bizarre. It’s as if God is acting in direct opposition to Himself, working against His own design in an attempt to dismantle exactly what He intended to create.

Emotional attachment remains one of the fundamental pillars of human love—it manifests within the bond between parent and child, among friends, and between romantic partners alike. It is, by all accounts, entirely natural. While certain animals exhibit similar traits, they don't all possess this specific depth—as I mentioned before. From a theological perspective, one might ask why this exists in the first place; if it is indeed the intention of God, then there is a glaring contradiction to address. This capacity for connection inevitably brings with it immense suffering, heartache, and a myriad of complex problems—which suggests it doesn't quite stem from a source that is purely composed of love and goodness. Something simply doesn't align. Of course, everything I have just laid out is merely me airing my own thoughts—it doesn't necessarily bear much direct relevance to the core topic at hand.

The fundamental point here is that bonding is a biological imperative—it’s entirely natural. Without that instinctual connection, life as we know it wouldn't even exist; and even if it did, parents wouldn't feel that innate drive to protect their offspring. There is actual scientific precedent for this, too—studies have shown that when you artificially suppress oxytocin levels in parents, that protective instinct vanishes, often resulting in them becoming aggressive toward their own young.

While certain inclinations may be innate, an individual still maintains the agency to decide whether or not to engage with them—provided they have the willpower. Of course, that choice is often a fragile thing, given that our neurological wiring is essentially hardcoded to respond to these stimuli. We aren't entirely helpless, however, when pitted against those relentless evolutionary pressures and primal instincts.

Exactly. That’s what I'm saying. It's right there in plain sight, especially with that part in bold. I don't think anyone ever claimed it wasn't natural, either. I mean, obviously, it is. 🙂 I guess some souls have just already been through all of this before. You know, after going through a few different lives, they finally start to realize that maybe it’s actually time to rise above all these earthly attachments. They begin to see that even though being connected to everyone and everything brings a certain kind of happiness, it’s really just temporary. I mean, at the end of the day, you're always facing sickness, death, and—don't even get me started on the daily grind—all those constant stressors and worries that just drain you. Eventually, there comes this moment where it just clicks, and you feel this intense need to pull away from all that heavy heartache.

I was just sitting here wondering, how does that one psalm by John the Apostle go again? I think it was him who wrote it, if I'm remembering correctly.

I was thinking about this bit from the Bible earlier, and it’s honestly such a heavy concept when you really sit with it. It basically says we shouldn't get too caught up in chasing after everything this world has to offer. I guess the idea is that if someone is totally obsessed with worldly stuff, there isn't really any room left for the love of God. It’s kind of like how everything material—you know, those physical cravings, the constant desire for more things, or just that overwhelming pride in what we own and who we are—doesn't actually come from God, but from the world itself. Everything around us is so temporary; trends fade, stuff breaks, and eventually, all those worldly desires just pass away. But, if I'm reading this right, the people who focus on doing what God wants? They’re the ones who actually last forever. It’s a pretty deep way to look at life, I suppose.

My bad if I got any of the Psalm a little bit wrong, but I just memorized it once a while back, so I’m really hoping I remembered it correctly and stayed true to the actual wording. 🙂

Jacob Sanchez7 said:You know what's actually fascinating? The fact that we've convinced ourselves that controlling the ego is an impossible task. Sure, centuries of societal conditioning have left their mark, but we are still free. Completely. You always have the choice to act on a thought or an emotion, or simply not to. Sometimes we just fall into the trap of thinking we *have* to react, so we give the ego a microphone.

Like you said, if a person has a goal and a focus, they won't be clingy or emotionally dependent on their partner. And if that goal and focus is simply "to be free," then there isn't an ego around to distort things. 😁

@Nancy Wilson2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZofi4ly8bg

That’s so true. But from what I've experienced, I feel like being able to keep that awareness of being free from the ego only works if you're consistently doing the work on your Self. For me, it seems like I can only stay somewhat steady and not get sucked back into old roles or intense emotions if I've had some time to meditate and find a bit of peace first. So, I guess a person might only be able to build those truly healthy, deep relationships—the ones without that suffocating attachment—if they’re making self-work a regular habit. I mean, I honestly don't know if anyone can pull that off without putting in the effort. Personally, I can't. Plus, finding the actual time to commit to that kind of work is a whole other challenge. 😁

Robert Diaz2 said:That’s so true. But from what I've experienced, I feel like being able to keep that awareness of being free from the ego only works if you're consistently doing the work on your Self. For me, it seems like I can only stay somewhat steady and not get sucked back into old roles or intense emotions if I've had some time to meditate and find a bit of peace first. So, I guess a person might only be able to build those truly healthy, deep relationships—the ones without that suffocating attachment—if they’re making self-work a regular habit. I mean, I honestly don't know if anyone can pull that off without putting in the effort. Personally, I can't. Plus, finding the actual time to commit to that kind of work is a whole other challenge. 😁

Inner work? That implies the Self isn't perfect, but it is. Our mental habits might be messy, sure, but we aren't the mind itself. We still have the space to make decisions over the thoughts we choose to act upon. If you feed your thoughts by giving them attention and energy, you're essentially "fertilizing" them, haha. It’s just like that old Native American legend about the two wolves. Even when the worst thoughts cross your mind, you remain free. The storm passes regardless of whether you're scowling at it or laughing.

Jacob Sanchez7 said:Inner work? That implies the Self isn't perfect, but it is. Our mental habits might be messy, sure, but we aren't the mind itself. We still have the space to make decisions over the thoughts we choose to act upon. If you feed your thoughts by giving them attention and energy, you're essentially "fertilizing" them, haha. It’s just like that old Native American legend about the two wolves. Even when the worst thoughts cross your mind, you remain free. The storm passes regardless of whether you're scowling at it or laughing.

I feel like you really have to pull the Self out from under everything, because it gets buried under all that societal brainwashing from the time we're kids, which just pushes us toward worldly stuff. For me, if I'm not actively working on myself, there's no way I can hold onto that primal peace we're all born with throughout the day.

Hey, if you don't have to do it, that's awesome. 🙂 I know there are some people out there who just naturally don't need to, and honestly, I think that's pretty wow. But personally, I really can't skip it. Especially when you're dealing with people every single day who seem to go out of their way to provoke you. 😁

I definitely know the story about the two wolves. 🙂

Robert Diaz2 said:I feel like you really have to pull the Self out from under everything, because it gets buried under all that societal brainwashing from the time we're kids, which just pushes us toward worldly stuff. For me, if I'm not actively working on myself, there's no way I can hold onto that primal peace we're all born with throughout the day.

Hey, if you don't have to do it, that's awesome. 🙂 I know there are some people out there who just naturally don't need to, and honestly, I think that's pretty wow. But personally, I really can't skip it. Especially when you're dealing with people every single day who seem to go out of their way to provoke you. 😁

I definitely know the story about the two wolves. 🙂

That peace existed long before we were born. It’s here now, and it’ll be here long after we’re gone. A finger might block the Sun, sure, but only in appearance. Once you stop obsessing over every passing thought, you realize the truth: you are constantly immersed in that peace. Thoughts? They're just fingers momentarily obscuring the Sun.

Robert Diaz2 said:I feel like you really have to pull the Self out from under everything, because it gets buried under all that societal brainwashing from the time we're kids, which just pushes us toward worldly stuff. For me, if I'm not actively working on myself, there's no way I can hold onto that primal peace we're all born with throughout the day.

Hey, if you don't have to do it, that's awesome. 🙂 I know there are some people out there who just naturally don't need to, and honestly, I think that's pretty wow. But personally, I really can't skip it. Especially when you're dealing with people every single day who seem to go out of their way to provoke you. 😁

I definitely know the story about the two wolves. 🙂

Oh, please. I’m definitely not meditating nearly enough—or at least, not nearly as much as I "should" be. xD
In practice, I’ve found that my work serves as my best and most effective meditation. It’s that specific sensation when you’re doing what you truly love—that moment where time simply ceases to exist and you lose yourself completely in the task at hand. We lived in that state constantly as children. That feeling is our true nature.

rustymaker5 said:If you’re saying everything in the universe is interconnected, then sure, I guess you're right about that...
But if you mean that being attached to someone or something is actually a good thing, then I have to wonder why there are so many miserable, unfulfilled people walking around this country, considering how deeply attached everyone seems to be—not just to other people, but to material things, specific ideologies, abstract concepts, or even past events... 🤷

I was referring to the concept of attachment—the way species formulate emotional bonds that essentially act as a biological glue, serving the greater purpose of ensuring survival. This mechanism exists within all meaningful relationships, whether they be platonic friendships, parental ties, or those more "romantic" connections. It serves a fundamental function; if these bonds were to vanish, I suspect humanity would descend even further into chaos. Of course, there are instances where this becomes problematic—where excessive attachment triggers significant emotional and psychological distress—that much is true. But what can I really say about it? It is a natural phenomenon, certainly, yet ultimately, it remains neutral.

Jacob Sanchez7 said:You know what's actually fascinating? The fact that we've convinced ourselves that controlling the ego is an impossible task. Sure, centuries of societal conditioning have left their mark, but we are still free. Completely. You always have the choice to act on a thought or an emotion, or simply not to. Sometimes we just fall into the trap of thinking we *have* to react, so we give the ego a microphone.

Like you said, if a person has a goal and a focus, they won't be clingy or emotionally dependent on their partner. And if that goal and focus is simply "to be free," then there isn't an ego around to distort things. 😁

@Nancy Wilson2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZofi4ly8bg

Yes, selfhood is essentially the very nature of being—of self-consciousness—so there, they’ve hit the nail on the head. When we speak about someone being "self" in an ultimate sense, what we really mean is that they exist in relation to themselves—distinct, isolated, and fundamentally severed from anything or anyone else. That, quite simply, is the inherent nature of a conscious individual.

Robert Diaz2 said:Exactly. That’s what I'm saying. It's right there in plain sight, especially with that part in bold. I don't think anyone ever claimed it wasn't natural, either. I mean, obviously, it is. 🙂 I guess some souls have just already been through all of this before. You know, after going through a few different lives, they finally start to realize that maybe it’s actually time to rise above all these earthly attachments. They begin to see that even though being connected to everyone and everything brings a certain kind of happiness, it’s really just temporary. I mean, at the end of the day, you're always facing sickness, death, and—don't even get me started on the daily grind—all those constant stressors and worries that just drain you. Eventually, there comes this moment where it just clicks, and you feel this intense need to pull away from all that heavy heartache.

I was just sitting here wondering, how does that one psalm by John the Apostle go again? I think it was him who wrote it, if I'm remembering correctly.

I was thinking about this bit from the Bible earlier, and it’s honestly such a heavy concept when you really sit with it. It basically says we shouldn't get too caught up in chasing after everything this world has to offer. I guess the idea is that if someone is totally obsessed with worldly stuff, there isn't really any room left for the love of God. It’s kind of like how everything material—you know, those physical cravings, the constant desire for more things, or just that overwhelming pride in what we own and who we are—doesn't actually come from God, but from the world itself. Everything around us is so temporary; trends fade, stuff breaks, and eventually, all those worldly desires just pass away. But, if I'm reading this right, the people who focus on doing what God wants? They’re the ones who actually last forever. It’s a pretty deep way to look at life, I suppose.

My bad if I got any of the Psalm a little bit wrong, but I just memorized it once a while back, so I’m really hoping I remembered it correctly and stayed true to the actual wording. 🙂

Yes, it’s transient—and if that attachment was intense, the inevitable result is pain and loneliness. That is perfectly natural. Pain serves a purpose, after all. In this instance, its role is motivational, preventing someone from simply running in circles... circling through a repetitive loop of short-lived happiness and suffering.

Modern society is truly in a bind because it neglects the spiritual nature of the individual—which is, inherently, solitude. Everything is designed to ensure a person avoids being alone, pushing them toward building ever-larger social networks to surround themselves with noise. People are quite literally terrified of being alone with themselves; they flee from it as if it were some insurmountable catastrophe. Furthermore, people fundamentally misunderstand the definition of solitude, conflating it with loneliness simply because they look visually similar (in both cases, one is alone) and because they remind people of the sadness, pain, and depression associated with being lonely. That is what people are actually running from. Our environment is largely to blame here—and by environment, I mean the distorted, romanticized image of love and relationships that permeates everything. Life is painful and brief, yet it seems the collective "greatest achievement" or life goal has become this pursuit of finding a "soulmate" or similar nonsense (in terms of the concept itself).

http://chronicle.com/article/The-End-of-Solitude/3708

It is an interesting observation that the number of single people is supposedly increasing. It is as if more people are beginning to see through the very nature of how they have been conditioned since childhood. However, this isn't always a positive development, as many of those individuals end up alone in the sense that they suffer from actual loneliness. That is merely a byproduct of what this world is turning into and how people behave toward one another. We are too distant... people who don't truly know each other don't even speak. Honestly, this is such a massive topic that I could write entire novels on it, so it is better if I remain silent; there are other threads for that. 😁

Jacob Sanchez7 said:That peace existed long before we were born. It’s here now, and it’ll be here long after we’re gone. A finger might block the Sun, sure, but only in appearance. Once you stop obsessing over every passing thought, you realize the truth: you are constantly immersed in that peace. Thoughts? They're just fingers momentarily obscuring the Sun.

Oh, please. I’m definitely not meditating nearly enough—or at least, not nearly as much as I "should" be. xD
In practice, I’ve found that my work serves as my best and most effective meditation. It’s that specific sensation when you’re doing what you truly love—that moment where time simply ceases to exist and you lose yourself completely in the task at hand. We lived in that state constantly as children. That feeling is our true nature.

Yeah, there's definitely some truth to that. That flow state during work. It’s not for nothing they say an idle mind is the devil's playground. Everyone's got their own little way of finding that inner peace. 🙂

Nancy Wilson2 said:I was referring to the concept of attachment—the way species formulate emotional bonds that essentially act as a biological glue, serving the greater purpose of ensuring survival. This mechanism exists within all meaningful relationships, whether they be platonic friendships, parental ties, or those more "romantic" connections. It serves a fundamental function; if these bonds were to vanish, I suspect humanity would descend even further into chaos. Of course, there are instances where this becomes problematic—where excessive attachment triggers significant emotional and psychological distress—that much is true. But what can I really say about it? It is a natural phenomenon, certainly, yet ultimately, it remains neutral.

Yes, selfhood is essentially the very nature of being—of self-consciousness—so there, they’ve hit the nail on the head. When we speak about someone being "self" in an ultimate sense, what we really mean is that they exist in relation to themselves—distinct, isolated, and fundamentally severed from anything or anyone else. That, quite simply, is the inherent nature of a conscious individual.

Yes, it’s transient—and if that attachment was intense, the inevitable result is pain and loneliness. That is perfectly natural. Pain serves a purpose, after all. In this instance, its role is motivational, preventing someone from simply running in circles... circling through a repetitive loop of short-lived happiness and suffering.

Modern society is truly in a bind because it neglects the spiritual nature of the individual—which is, inherently, solitude. Everything is designed to ensure a person avoids being alone, pushing them toward building ever-larger social networks to surround themselves with noise. People are quite literally terrified of being alone with themselves; they flee from it as if it were some insurmountable catastrophe. Furthermore, people fundamentally misunderstand the definition of solitude, conflating it with loneliness simply because they look visually similar (in both cases, one is alone) and because they remind people of the sadness, pain, and depression associated with being lonely. That is what people are actually running from. Our environment is largely to blame here—and by environment, I mean the distorted, romanticized image of love and relationships that permeates everything. Life is painful and brief, yet it seems the collective "greatest achievement" or life goal has become this pursuit of finding a "soulmate" or similar nonsense (in terms of the concept itself).

http://chronicle.com/article/The-End-of-Solitude/3708

It is an interesting observation that the number of single people is supposedly increasing. It is as if more people are beginning to see through the very nature of how they have been conditioned since childhood. However, this isn't always a positive development, as many of those individuals end up alone in the sense that they suffer from actual loneliness. That is merely a byproduct of what this world is turning into and how people behave toward one another. We are too distant... people who don't truly know each other don't even speak. Honestly, this is such a massive topic that I could write entire novels on it, so it is better if I remain silent; there are other threads for that. 😁

+1

Robert Diaz2 said:I totally agree with that. I mean, if someone actually stays focused on their own path and goals, they aren't going to be super clingy or emotionally dependent on their partner. But let's be real here, how often does that actually happen? Those high-level, spiritually aligned relationships are incredibly rare. Especially nowadays, when everyone's brain has been basically fried by the media. Every single show on Netflix or TV is just packed with intense emotions, passion, and pure melodrama, so people start thinking that chaos is the norm and try to force that onto their own relationships.

I actually know a couple where both people are pretty spiritual and understand all this stuff, but even then, the girl eventually fell into that pattern of dependency. She’s constantly nagging him whenever he tries to focus on his own hobbies or work, while she just keeps demanding attention. It's so hard to keep your ego in check within a relationship. Like, really tough. Even if you're one of those spiritual types, if you lose your center and your focus, it just goes to show that maintaining that balance is probably only possible for a very small group of people.

The frequency doesn't really matter, honestly; what matters is that these examples exist and prove it's possible. If two people are primarily focused on supporting each other to build their individual lives, where is the room for that "you and me" dynamic, if you catch my drift? At the end of the day, it’s either about the "we," or it’s about the individual. There isn't much middle ground.

Justin Garcia7 said:Why would it be boring?

People seem to expect their partner to complete them or keep them entertained, but that's nonsense. Everyone gets bored with someone after a while, which is probably one of the main reasons so many relationships and marriages fall apart.

I don't actually need an identical match because I'm already whole on my own (aside from sex 😁). In principle, I don't need anyone; I'm genuinely content with myself, though having that identical half would be nice, like the icing on a cake. Maybe it's true that you have to work on self-actualization first, and then connecting with a twin flame happens as a sort of confirmation of that growth. We can't trick God, outer space, or the universal mind. You can't force happiness; everything has its timing, but that Mind expects us to cooperate on the road.

From everything I have read regarding twin flames, it isn't a guarantee that you will meet them in every lifetime. So, I suppose you just have to stay positive and keep moving. 😁

Furthermore, if you don't encounter your twin flame, you will eventually meet someone else.

And those meetings only happen once both parties are truly ready.
In other words, if you haven't met that "special one"—whether they are a twin flame or just a regular soulmate—it simply means you haven't reached that stage of development yet.

Besides, nothing in these matters happens through force, so you really have no choice but to live your life and strive to be the best version of yourself. And then, one day.............................................. ........ 🙂

And you know, careful what you wish for.
Karmic connections, especially involving a twin flame, have a tendency to push you right to the edge.

Michelle Robinson97 said:The frequency doesn't really matter, honestly; what matters is that these examples exist and prove it's possible. If two people are primarily focused on supporting each other to build their individual lives, where is the room for that "you and me" dynamic, if you catch my drift? At the end of the day, it’s either about the "we," or it’s about the individual. There isn't much middle ground.

I mean, yeah, there are plenty of examples out there.

Tyler Cruz32 said:From everything I have read regarding twin flames, it isn't a guarantee that you will meet them in every lifetime. So, I suppose you just have to stay positive and keep moving. 😁

Furthermore, if you don't encounter your twin flame, you will eventually meet someone else.

And those meetings only happen once both parties are truly ready.
In other words, if you haven't met that "special one"—whether they are a twin flame or just a regular soulmate—it simply means you haven't reached that stage of development yet.

Besides, nothing in these matters happens through force, so you really have no choice but to live your life and strive to be the best version of yourself. And then, one day.............................................. ........ 🙂

And you know, careful what you wish for.
Karmic connections, especially involving a twin flame, have a tendency to push you right to the edge.

I think that pretty much covers everything. 🙂

Karmic connections, especially when you're dealing with that whole twin flame thing, can really push you right to the edge.

So, what's the deal with this?

Michelle Robinson97 said:

Karmic connections, especially when you're dealing with that whole twin flame thing, can really push you right to the edge.

So, what's the deal with this?

It implies that you aren't necessarily destined to stay together forever in every lifetime; instead, you have to "work through" the karma that follows you from previous lives. This means people can love each other to the moon and back, feeling like it is truly "THE ONE," experiencing passion, love, and a connection unlike anything they've ever felt before—they recognize each other instantly—yet sometimes it remains difficult, if not impossible, for the relationship to actually survive.

After all that, it is understandable how such experiences can take a heavy toll on a person's psyche.

That is why I maintain that one shouldn't live in a utopia believing that they will simply meet now and live happily ever after. Truly happy loves, free from struggle and hardship, are quite rare. Even when dealing with a twin flame.

I once read a story online from a girl about her experience.

They met, recognized one another, and were identical matches... he had the "feminine" energy and she was the "masculine," or vice versa. Their love and passion were boundless. But then they broke up. They went completely no-contact. It hit her so hard psychologically that she actually became physically ill. She endured years of pure agony. He was also struggling deeply on a mental level. Eventually, they reached out, reconciled, and got married.

But you see, even they had to endure a brutal period.
This is my point: the idea of instant happy endings where we meet, everything is perfect, and we live together from this moment until the end of time—that is often nothing more than a utopia.

Justin Garcia7 said:I feel like I’ve hit a standstill on my own spiritual road, and I could really use some words of wisdom to get me through. 🤣
It wasn't such a big deal before—I was just cruising through life—but lately, I've developed this intense craving for a partner who is my absolute perfect match.
To be honest, I can't bring myself to be in just any relationship. I've become incredibly picky about everything, and I know I need someone who is as close to me as possible, almost an identical soul. I'm not sure why my mindset shifted so suddenly, but at least I'm finally aware of what I actually want... the question is, how do I find my twin flame?
Even casual hookups just don't feel meaningful anymore. 🤷
This longing is starting to feel suffocating. It’s getting hard to focus on my work and personal growth when I feel like everything would just click so much easier if I had the right partner by my side.

Look, we actually *are* our own twin flames, just split into two different bodies... but here’s the thing: if we want to actually connect with our other half, we can't just obsess over finding them; we have to master unconditional love first. And clearly, some part of "us" isn't quite ready for that stage yet. So, you know, instead of rushing out to hunt down your twin flame, you should probably spend that energy working through your "karmic lessons." You don't want to blow your chance with your soulmate in this lifetime if they're actually out there, right? Because if we spend our incarnations living separately without doing the work to balance things out—you know, like fixing those parent-child or sibling dynamics—we're just racking up negative karma.
Besides, isn't the whole point of twin flames about finding wholeness within ourselves, rather than just feeding the ego by chasing someone identical or someone we can lean on for constant validation?