There are 2 poles to this:
Incoming boundary violation —– Distancing boundary violation.
The oppressor —and—- The abandoner.
The bully —and—- The hermit
The two are many a time a sort of a response to each other.
The one expecting incoming boundary violation, preemptively distances himself.
The one expecting distancing, pushes in as rapidly(oppressively) as possible.
In the extreme case of distancing, it would feel like the movie “I am legend” i.e. ambushed in a house by millions of zombies wanting to eat you up.
In the extreme case of the pursuer kind of person, they would get desperate and cling to every last straw of possible relation. Like a hungry hunter lost in the forest, and where every animal he tries to catch outruns him.
The distancing kind of relationship person is caused by trauma and fear of enmeshment.
The pursuer/chaser kind of relationship person is caused by trauma and fear of abandonment.
Another analogy for empathizing with these 2 positions = Police and the Thief.
The police chases, while the thief runs.
So we have a chaser and a runner.
Hell for the runner = having a million people chasing him everywhere.
Hell for the chaser = having a million runners but all faster than him.
For the distancer person, it is like hiding in a cave.
Since he actively avoids all relationship with any animals, the animals entering the cave to have a relationship with him would mostly be predators right? Who would sniffed have him from the outside itself and then entered the cave.
So this then reinforces the idea that the world is predatory, to the distancer person.
For the chaser person, they are like the starved-hungry wild animal,
Ready to devour anything in sight because they are super hungry, but every animal runs away from them.
The chaser person is essentially in a state of being starved.
While the distancer person is essentially in a state of being food-poisoned.
So both of them are living in 2 separate hells.
But they attract each other from being denizens of the same hell polarity.
The different parent project types:
# Parents having vain projects (going nowhere, dead end) of their own.
Like eddies, going in circles, cyclical, virus like, dog chasing its own tail, neurotic + trying to draw you into that.
# Parents having successful projects (going somewhere in society, some vision, some longer term ideal etc.) of their own + trying to draw you into that.
Broadly speaking, here are the aspects:
1. Parents Recognizing The Independence Of The Child:
* 2 parents recognize the independence and support the independence of child.
* 2 parents recognize the independence but do not support the child.
2. Parents Not Recognizing Independence Of The Child (purposely/unconsciously)
Treating the child like it is their product like their smartphone, designed to serve them, and they believe the child must be shaped as such.
* 2 parents trying to push their child in a common progressive project/direction they are already tuned into.
* 2 parents trying to push their child in a common vain direction they are already tuned into.
* 2 parents trying to push their child in different progressive directions, but tearing their child apart by the pulling. Here the child could choose any one path, but will disappoint the other parent.
* 2 parents trying to push their child in different vain directions, and tearing the child apart, uselessly. So in this case the child can take after neither parent and must find its own path, and end up disappointing both parents.
At an abstract level, we are tuned into themes themselves.
The theme is like a spectrum, a 2 poled rod.
For instance, the theme could be:
[…Poor —— Rich…]
Once tuned into that, your focus will be on that aspect of existence.
Both the poor and the rich are actually tuned into the same game of sorts.
Now, there is no absolute poor or rich.
It is all based in relativity.
So really it is only a long infinite line,
Spanning from poor on the left to rich on the right, with you in the center.
If you look to the left you are richer,
If you look to the right you are poorer.
So depending on how you draw your frame of reference,
You can position yourself as rich or poor,
As your relative position inside the frame you hold.
Only if you believe you are poor will you seek riches.
So you have to tune into that theme first and then position yourself in a frame to begin playing.
You will play the game until you achieve your ideal and neutralize.
Then you may move on to other themes.
Now just like the poor-rich theme,
There could be many many such themes.
Here is a list of some of them:
Knowledge —– Ignorance
Power —– Powerlessness
Pleasure —– Pain
Master ——- Student
Guru ——— Disciple
Wonder —— Mundane
Freedom —– Entrapment
High energy —- Low energy
Togetherness —– Aloneness
Relationships —- Loneliness
Ecstasy —— Depression
Health —— Disease
Positive body image —– Negative body image
Security —– Insecurity
Meaning —— Meaninglessness
High self esteem —– Low self esteem
High status —— Low status
Atonement —— Guilt
Ease —— Stress
Safety —— Fear
Order —— Chaos
Good ——- Evil
Right —— Wrong
Perfection —— Imperfection
Independence —– Enmeshment
Attractiveness —- Unattractiveness
Authenticity —– Fakeness
Joy —– Misery
Interests —– Boredom
Escapes —- Traps
Usefulness —– Uselessness
Transcendence —— Bondage
Flow/Harmony —– Friction/Conflict
People are generally invested in many such themes,
With different priorities depending upon their conditioning imprints.
Their explicit ego ideals and actions reflect their implicit position.
Like you want to get rich because you believe you are poor.
The poorer you believe yourself to be, the more unacceptable you feel it is, the stronger will be your drive to achieve the necessary riches to complete and neutralize.
So what themes are you invested in?
Something to contemplate.
Let’s take 2 cases:
1. When you are in your own space.
2. When you are in a shared space with others.
When you are in your own space,
Various interests bubble up into your mind,
And the strongest one usually gets your attention/focus/investment/energy.
When you are in a shared group-space with others,
Then the different people are in a relationship with each other.
The following questions come up:
# Who is going to set the frame?
Will there be multiple smaller frames between the people?
Will the frame organically emerge or will it be a chaos?
# Who is naturally receiving? Who is naturally emitting?
# Who is open/malleable? Who is rigid/closed?
# What are the intentions/expectations of the various people around?
# Where are each of these people coming from?
# What is the common larger frame? What are the expectations? cultural structs? societal structs? governing that.
# What can I say, what can I not say?
# What are the set of possible topics I can speak about?
All this can be sensed.
All of these come under “social dynamics”.
This invariably happens when a group of people get together and create a group space.
Expansion and Contraction,
Is the constant pulse of life.
The heart is expanding-contracting,
The lungs are expanding-contracting,
The pulse at your nerves is expanding-contracting,
The digestive system peristalsis is constantly pumping,
Even at the subtle layers,
Your mind also expands and contracts,
Your emotion also expands and contracts,
Wakefulness also expands and contracts,
Really life and death are the grandest expansions and contractions.
The better you are at releasing trapped stuff,
The more you can take in, in the next cycle.
Different masters have different kriyas or techniques for this purpose.
# Osho’s Dynamic Meditation
# Sadhguru’s Shambhavi Mahamudra Kriya
# Sri Sri Ravishankar’s Sudarshana Kriya
And so on.
Journaling/Writing is an excellent way too.
We all need to purge things from our lives that do not serve us anymore.
The idea is to keep the flow going.
Empty yourself fully, to receive fully again.
And this dance goes on,
Carrying you through evolution itself.
A deep trend I observe in society is:
Maternal instinct is deified —while— Sexual instinct is demonized.
Are they not the 2 sides of the same coin?
Ultimately isn’t the sexual instinct prior to the maternal instinct itself?
How would the children even happen without sex?
The mother’s urge to play and protect the child, is it not the same as the male’s urge to protect and play with the opposite-sex?
Why is the sexual instinct and mothering instinct treated like they belong to 2 different levels of reality?
Aren’t both of them part of the same nature?
And it is totally prevalent across the entire animal kingdom.
What gives the mothering instinct is also driven by hormones only, just as all of sex-instinct too is driven by hormones.
Why is the mothering instinct elevated to a different level of reality?
It is considered a blasphemy even to think about it.
This is a vast topic, but just wanted to share this as food for thought.