home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

  

 

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity

 


Soulmate, Myself:
The Perfect Mate

Jamie and Landon, the novel, part 2

 

 

return to 'Jamie and Landon' novel review main-page

 

 

Elenchus. I’m seeing some things more clearly concerning my admiration for Jamie.

 

Kairissi. You’ve been taken by her.

E. I don’t look at it that way. My new clarity is more like performing an autopsy after the crime scene.

 

 

E. I’ve been giving a lot of thought to Jamie’s example of selflessness and devotion to God. As I’ve said, a beautiful woman who is also “sainted” I find to be incredibly and compellingly attractive. However, I’m seeing now that the male can easily fall into illusion by this kind of – I’ll call it – inspirational eroticism.

K. Elenchus, we have stated, many times, that a woman, virtuous and near-angelic as Mother Teresa, might engender a surfeit of wonderment and veneration. The dazzled male might elevate to a high pedestal and worship and adore her. But none of this, by itself, constitutes proof of true love.

necessary but not sufficient

E. And this is the illusion. I’ve come to see that, eventually, all women, and men, too, when a good level of maturity is won, will reflect this empyreal aspect of the mind of God. All of us are destined to become magnanimous and altruistic as we unfold the inner “made in the image” capacities.

K. A few might achieve this while on the Earth, and a few more while dwelling on the “lower levels” of Summerland, but, in the unending ages to come, all will yet rise to heights of spiritual development.

E. I think both men and women, if they’re sane, will desire to be with a beautiful inspirational mate. She draws one's best from the depths. And I think it’s clear that one will not be mature enough or ready for the eternal marriage unless he or she has become the embodiment of this “inspirational eroticism.”

K. It’s a necessary requirement for the eternal marriage but, of and by itself, not sufficient; meaning, a beautiful woman might appear to the fevered male as “queen of heaven” – but this doesn’t mean he should marry her. She might not be the right one for him. But… this was your insight, Elenchus, and I am talking too much.

E. You’re not talking too much, and you’ve added to our wisdom.

K. Tell me what else you’ve seen.

E. Let’s remind ourselves that there are different kinds of love. For example, there is agape love, the love that God shows to us. The New Testament characterizes it as the love that sends rain to both the just and unjust.

K. It’s fair to all, no favorites. It even loves enemies. This love is selfless and other-centered.

E. Agape love is inspirational. We are drawn to this largeness of spirit. And I was deeply moved by the many examples in Jamie’s life where she put herself out for others, even her enemies. And we intuitively want this selfless quality in a mate and lover. However, let’s explicitly point out that agape love, by definition, does not focus on a particular one.

K. How does this work with the exclusivity of marriage? Remember Francesca in the "Bridges" movie, she was put off by his notion of loving the whole world.

E. Let’s come back to this question. But a second kind of love is friendship.

K. People often talk about the ideal of marrying your best friend. What do you think about this?

E. CS Lewis said that friendship is seeing the same thing, having the same values, walking the same road.

K. When we view it this way, friendship maybe isn’t quite the lofty star we thought it to be. It’s more like “I’ll be your friend if you agree with me.”

E. Now, it’s not wrong to want to be around people who are similar, but friendship becomes pathological when based on an inner neediness of "not enough" and "I need you to tell me who I am and that I have value."

K. We can see how the ego just loves this. We have the saying, “There are no friends, only accomplices.”

E. And then, of course, there's the whole world’s very favorite love – sexual or erotic love.

K. But, do we employ the term “love” too loosely? Is bio-stimulation or using another as a pleasure source really love at all, or just some form of manipulation?

E. These are the awkward questions most people don’t want to ask. All of the world's loves are expressions of using others to feel good about yourself.

K. There's another kind of love, too – the natural affection between parent and child, or siblings, or grandparents, aunts and uncles, extended family. But, even as I delineate here, I immediately cuff myself with reminder that there are plenty of parents and children, and all the rest, who do not love each other, and will easily reject you if you disagree with them.

looking under the hood

E. As we look at each of these forms of love, or what passes for love, and look under the hood, we find ourselves pausing and wondering if there is any real and true love on the Earth.

K. I think we can see that, when the ego gets involved, there’s a certain smell to all of it. As we’ve said, “every ego wants something from you.” And it wants love – as it narrowly defines love as pleasure – from others but isn’t so keen on giving love. Elenchus, where does this leave us as we consider the eternal marriage? – and I’d like you to comment with further reference to Jamie.

E. As we’ve stated, we can’t find our true mate by embarking on a hunting expedition. It’s not a hiring process, interviewing candidates, “Are you the one to make me happy?” For many people, this resume-shopping is only about physical beauty and sexual pleasure.

K. That always works out so well.

E. But this error of hunting for qualities to “make me happy” is also extended to the “sainted” attributes, the “inspirational eroticism.” People search for these, too.

K. Jamie offers a double whammee here as she’s both erotically attractive and wins every Miss Congeniality award.

E. She’s fairly deadly that way – which heightens the illusion that hiring the best resume is the way forward here.

K. How do all these four loves play out in the true marriage?

E. I see it differently than I did before. I once thought that agape love keeps a marriage together.

K. While marriage needs an attitude of self-sacrifice, the agape love “sends rain to the just and the unjust” – it’s not focused on just one person. This could be annoying to a mate.

E. I think every maturing person should want to be with a mate who, in a larger sense, lives by agape love. But not because it will specifically benefit you. I want to be with a girl, like Jamie, who wants to enter “the harvest fields” of God. This means, there’s a service-mindedness, a great desire to help the disadvantaged, to do the work of God. Everyone will eventually think this way, but I don’t believe it’s possible to enter the eternal marriage until this mindset is in place. Without it, the marriage would be impaired, just one more ill-founded John-and-Mary union. And I say this even if the two are Twins.

K. Because even if they are Twins, they wouldn’t be operating on that better level. And so they’d mess themselves up and be unhappy.

E. Friendship, properly construed, is a natural blessing in the real marriage. They see the same thing, they want to the same thing, they both deeply desire to consecrate themselves to the work of God, and they delight in each other in terms of having a partner who is devoted to the same goals and standards.

K. This truly is heaven.

E. Sex and eroticism is very easy in the real marriage. Coming together bodily, for Twins, is an outward expression of an inner oneness and harmony. It’s ten times, a hundred times, more pleasurable this way.

K. I think this basis creates a super-delight for them because it taps into the mind and energies of Mother-Father God. It's an uber-pleasure totally unknown to John and Mary.

E. And the fourth love, the natural affection, is super-charged for Twins, as they derive from a common kindred source. They are called Twin Souls as they share an inner life, and this particularized sense of oneness, I think – not agape love -- is the real glue that makes their union so integrated.

K. It's what we've called the "coming home" and "utter familiarity."

E. As a final thought here, I’d like to confess to some other insights; ones that have been disturbing to me. This whole issue of Jamie, and why she’s attractive to me, has caused me to go deeper into this subject of Twinship.

K. What are you seeing?

E. I don't want to be confrontational or unkind, but, recently, I’ve had doubts that I never thought I'd have. I’ve allowed myself to entertain the doubt that we might not be Twins.

K. (silence)

E. Many psychics have said that we are Twins. But they’re not the last word on this and could be wrong. For a long time I’ve said that no one can tell another, in any final and absolute sense -- not even a Spirit Guide – who your Twin Soul is. There may be indications but the last word on this is reserved to the mediations of each individual. This is so because one’s soul energies are an extension of God, and there is no final mapping or defining the essence of God – especially by any third-party observer.

K. But, Elenchus, we had that massive “no you and no me” mystical experience!

E. We did – however, strictly speaking, this momentary collapse of the ego’s boundaries is possible between any two individuals. This is why the famous Indian gurus talk about “bliss” and oneness, and they’re not referring to a union of erotic lovers.

K. I'm afraid to ask, but what has really prompted you to allow these doubts?

E. I’ve still not recovered from that terrible experience with you many years back now, you know what I'm talking about, when you were so vicious to me; and then, prior to that, many years when you ignored me, wouldn't even look at me, drew back, and showed outright hatred to me. And I’ve often wondered, how could you be my Twin Soul if you lacked even a basic sense of natural affection for me, especially over many years? - this wasn't just a momentary slip of anger. It doesn't make sense to me, how you could do this, even allowing for life's pressures.

K. (silence)

E. This recent consideration of what Jamie is as a person has made me realize just how dead I feel on the inside and how starved I am for real relationship, to be with a mate who truly matches my deepest goals and aspirations. I want to do everything with her, and talk about everything with her. I cannot express how much I want this. All that Jamie represents appeals to me more than I can say.

But you've never been that way toward me, you have your own agenda, your own projects, and I've been on the outside.

I don’t want to comment more on this right now, and I don’t want to indulge in sensationalism concerning what I might do. But I have decided this. When I cross to the other side, I will be open to possibilities. And I will attempt to discern God’s will for me in this area.

Right now I feel confused, and I don’t want to make any decisions in this muddied state of mind. I don’t want to rush to any judgments. But I will investigate. I’m going to give myself some time for the right answer to present itself. I intend to live by this dictum:

 

 

Elenchus. Here’s a major lesson I’m learning from all this.

I’ve thought about the term “soulmate, myself” and how it came to be – a message from the Guides in the middle of the night.

But what am I to make of this “myself”? Surely, I’d assumed, this must have something to do with Twins sharing a great sense of similarity.

This must be true, I thought, but what I failed to further investigate is, in what sense are Twins similar? In what sense does this “myself” manifest?

For many years, I’ve accepted early joint experiences of mutual happiness to constitute this similarity and “myself.” And it’s true that we did share a kind of mystical experience of the “coming home” and the “utter familiarity.” These perceptions, I came to take for granted, must be the manifestation of the “myself” in “soulmate, myself.”

But I’m not so sure now that early joint experiences of mutual happiness stand as isomorphic to “myself.” The problem is, you are not like “myself” in many important ways. We do not share similar values, similar life goals, similar aspirations.

How can you and I enter a state of “soulmate, myself” when you’ve never been like “myself” in all the most important ways? This is troubling to me. I didn’t allow myself to admit this discrepancy until now.

You don’t want the same things from life. You don’t see what I see. You’re not walking the same road. How can this fundamental existential difference reach the high bar of you as “myself”? How can there be a “soulmate, myself” if we’re so intrinsically different?

I’m inclined to suspect that our “early joint experiences of mutual happiness” constituted, for me, a mere foreshadowing, an echo, of someone else yet to come.

I guess I always thought that Silver Birch’s comment about “so magnetic, so overwhelming” meant a burst of sexual affinity, pleasure, and extreme delight. But – I’m not so sure now that “so magnetic, so overwhelming,” in essential essence, has anything to do with brass bands, fireworks displays, and confetti parades. I think this is where I made my mistake in judgment.

I think “so magnetic, so overwhelming” has more to do with “complete rest to the soul” simply to be in the presence of the beloved. Have I ever experienced this with you? I thought so, but now I’m wondering if I merely wanted to believe I’d received this. Maybe, a long time ago, I experienced a brief flash of this quietude with you, but since it was so brief, and so ephemeral, I feel that I must chalk this up as one more echo or foreshadowing of someone yet to come.

There's someone I met more than 50 years ago. I’ve thought about her, off and on, all during those 50 years. She was the most “perfect” and "sainted," intelligent and beautiful, girl I'd ever met, but she did not come with “brass bands, fireworks displays, and confetti parades.” There was this naturalness about her, I just felt totally at ease.  With her, it was all steady stream “complete rest to the soul” simply to be in her presence. No brief flash, it never stopped with her.

She loved me, and I loved her. I liked being with her, and liked everything about her, but I did not pursue her because of the lack of dramatic explosive extreme delight. And now I'm sounding like the stupid fellow who confessed similar sins to the Ancient Sage in Summerland.

I think I was a great fool. Everything about her was one-to-one correspondence with all of my goals and life aspirations. She thought as I thought. She wanted what I wanted. She was the epitome of “soulmate, myself” in a real way. And I need to find her when I cross to the other side.