Bonding with ideals vs. real people

When mothers or fathers do not extend a bond to their children,
The children may create an “idealized fantasy parent” and then seek for a reflection of that in the world.
The reasons for why the mothers/fathers did not extend the bond could be related to their own past.
After all they too were children at one time, subject to parents who might have done the same to them, and so on.
The parents themselves might be victims of the same, pursuing an ongoing project of meeting an impossible ideal [parent imposed or self created (usually an oppositional reaction)] and redeeming themselves.
So like the game of passing the parcel, they pass on their own failed project to their children, who then either continue that or choose otherwise.

PS: The roles of parent and child are in a kind of looping rotation.
…Parent -> Child[Parent -> Child[Parent -> Child…

So this goes on and on in the threads of family lineage and genetics.
In such cases, each next generation gets wounded by the projection of the ‘previous generation ideals’ on them.
Then the next generation either make their own counter ideals or try to fulfill the projected ideals, and accordingly seek in the world.
For such family systems, whole threads of genetic lineage then live off an attachment system that is entirely ungrounded/disconnected and based in the imaginal/imaginary spaces of ‘fantasy/ideals/mythic creations’.
It is a kind of primal disconnection and dissociation from reality itself, by moving attachment to the imaginary rather than what actually exists.

This also has a close connection to idol (imaginary gods) worship,
Which is also based on projection of ideals.

When forming relationships/bonds, I’ve noticed there are 2 clear categories:
# The people who bond in reality/actuality
# The people who bond in idealization/imagination
I’ll talk about the 2nd category here.
When both the partners meeting each other have an attachment to their internal idealized figure, they start to project the ideal onto each other.
The agreement then is more like a fantasy role-play:
“You play my fantasy, and I will play yours.”

There are different relational dynamics that can happen from here.
One of them is:
One of the parties projects the ideal onto the other, and the other tries to live up to that to secure the bond.
Generally the one with the narcissistic wound will take it upon himself/herself to live up to the other’s ideal projection.
“If only I can improve myself, strive, and be good enough, to meet the other’s ideal, then I can secure my bond with them.”
The one projecting the ideal does so from some kind of primal entitlement that was somehow escaped the socialization process.
They are like the demanding baby that expects the whole world to come and serve their needs.

A relationship like this could work, if the fantasy projections are doable and somehow align (socialization generally tempers the ideals to realistic levels).
But most of the time, the ideals are intense and impossible.
In a way, by very definition, ideals are impossible right?
Reality is always something else.
So often in such relationships, there is alternating role play,
Of the projector and the adapter.
Both the parties wound each other’s real selves with each other’s ideals.

The bond is never secured from start to end.
However these relationships kindle the inner flames of longing, passion, intensity, purpose, hope and other such feelings.
In that sense they are like an adventure and gratify you with the above feelings.
They make you forget your pain of disconnection and lostness.
They are exciting but empty and illusory – like an extended more involving movie.

Imagine you were really thirsty and ran with full passion and joy towards a mirage in the desert.
This experience is something like that.
When you do reach the actual sand patch where the mirage was seen,
The water has disappeared, and now the mirage has receded to the horizon again.
This is how ideals are unsatisfiable and impossible.
Even the conception of these ideals keep shifting to more and more complex and impossible forms.
No depiction can fully capture the fantasy/ideal.

Various traumas and deprivations may be instrumental in what directions and forms these ideals take.
Ultimately we long for the infinite.
And when we focus this longing onto the realm of relationships,
The above patterns happen.
Relationships are a stepping stone and not the end goal itself.
If seen that way, and if both the partners are actually seeking god through the relationship,
The relationship will only raise them higher.

Happiness and Depression in general

happiness-depression

My real happiness automatically means the other person is accepted.
My depression automatically means the other person is not accepted.
This is a side effect, it is based on the overall context of that person’s life itself (much beyond the person’s will power or control available).
It is not something the person chooses as such (they do have a choice but it is not much, like it is only from the top of the iceberg portion.)

That is why universally beings gravitate to happy beings (and avoid depressed beings).
Depressed (low spirit contact) ——————————— Happy(high spirit contact)
That is because universally what is loved is ‘spirit’.
That is why children are naturally loved, because they are the closest to ‘spirit’.

So the idea of bringing up children, is for them to have minimum loss of spirit as they grow up.
It is to minimize the loss of their spirit as you introduce them to society, culture, human games, and creating an identity etc.

You want them to choose an identity from their own freedom and then help shape it better like a potter adding finesse using all of your experience and knowledge.
(One easy way to kill a child’s spirit is impose/enforce something seriously unreasonable on him (role-reversal etc.) or something totally different and out of his nature, and tell him – “Be THAT otherwise you are a shameful loser”)
Bringing up happy adults -> retention of a high amount of spirit in adulthood
Bringing up depressed adults -> loss of a lot of spirit in adulthood

In other words, if the ‘identity’ serves spirit you have a happy person, else a depressed person.

Of course depressed adults will program the children with the depression programming – consciously(top of iceberg) or unconsciously(under the iceberg).

So there are only 2 kinds of families really:
Happy families, Unhappy families – and infinite variation of these 2 themes.

Spirit I feel is not a specific kind of expression, way of being, behavior pattern, appearance etc. It can express itself in a multitude of ways.
I feel all spirit means is high electricity/high energy = high freedom
Spirit = freedom
So a person is happy when he has spirit, that is freedom.
A person is unhappy when he lacks spirit, that is being stuck.

‘Ken Wilber’ says the same:
Contact with Spirit = Happiness
Away from Spirit = Depression
That’s all there really is.

All 3 spectrums are equivalent:
Freedom ————————— Stuck
Happy——————————- Depressed
High spirit ————————- Low spirit