posted October 10, 2015 08:54 PM
Your reality is not mine, and vice versa. The way you perceive the colour blue may be the same way in which I do, but there will always be variance and subtle differences. It's between 450 and 490 nanometers for all of us, but yours may be closer to the 450, mine 490, or contrariwise. My blue is no better or more correct than yours, and my asserting it so hardly changes the fundamental argument.Our reality is governed by perception, and yours and mine are not the same. They hold enough similarity to where we can both agree we're homosapiens sapiens living somewhere on Earth, in the year 2015. We can both agree on each other's sex, confirming what the other has stated as fact. We can pose hypotheses, agree, disagree, or even agree to disagree.
But I cannot give you my reality, nor can I step literally into your perception and experience yours.
Oftentimes, when we say 'I don't believe in X,' we are making an ontological statement, when, in truth, we should be addressing that the inherent divide between your reality and mine does not affect whether or not you believe in X. I'm operating on the grounds of fallacy, if I should believe that my opinion will change the very nature of your experience. Should you later decide to reevaluate your own position, or question your own reality, I've merely contributed to your inclination to do so. I have not changed your perception, nor your reality.
This is what I mean by the statement that I no longer believe in twin flames. In the context of my reality, I am abandoning the investment of faith I had given to it, determining now that a greater truth may lay elsewhere in terms of my own experience of my perceived reality. (And, really, this is what the slang of 'your mileage may vary' should really be encompassing.)
I'm not turning away from the concept out of bitterness, either, or that it didn't work out for me the way it should have. I've got to say, I'm feeling quite the opposite. Even being wrong, and having to ultimately follow my own gut, instinct, heart, and soul -- has been the best part of the journey. Thus far, that is.
But I don't think it's part of my reality. I don't like the commercialisation; that way it's really just substituted 'soulmate' and been laden with romantic fantasy, peddling an ideal to millions who are eager, lonely, and susceptible to succumbing to its charms. I don't like how smart, sophisticated and enlightened folk are now being told that the twin flame is the ultimate romantic ideal to which we should all aspire -- and, conversely, being told in the same breath that it's exceptionally rare, not likely to actually happen, but man, if it ever did .... It's nice to have goals. But I'm not sure I want this to be one of them.
I don't like the factions that have formed, akin to religious denominations. How I'm now being told that, as a twin flame, I've got to follow these instructions, or buy these readings, in order to know what's up. I don't like that. I respect those who give of themselves freely in this area, however. I don't feel as if they're trying to sell me on something. It's more that they're sharing a piece of their reality and what they believe.
And I'm fine with that. I admire that. And, for them, I have no reason to doubt its veracity, and say it's untrue just because my experience has been different. I don't control your reality; I don't know it. Only you do. I can only know what you tell me of it, and perceive to be true of it. And, hey, if you freely admit that you don't either -- then you're right where I am. At least at present.
So, this is not a shot across the bow; I'm not seeking to start a war. I'm not saying that those who believe they are twin flames aren't twin flames. I'm saying that I don't think it's a part of my reality, and I can't devote time and energy to something which I don't feel 'belongs' to me -- at least in terms of where my effort should be invested.
For those of you for whom it is, I wish you the best of luck, and not in the least facetiously. Your reality sounds like a pretty groovy place. 
I'm fascinated by your experiences and the journey you're on. Please don't be so reticent to share them. For someone, it may make the difference between belief and abandonment of that belief.
For me, I think it's a bit more complicated. I haven't found the 'mythology' to which my life relates quite yet; I've not found the cause of the craziness -- the root of the synchronicities. I will say one thing, however, with as much honesty as I can muster.
My mother has always been reliant upon my being the family astrologer -- bless her, even as she can't quite sort it all in her head, and says she just doesn't have the time to do so. She's asked a few times now whether I was going to stay married to my husband, or, the transits I'm under were going to lead me to deciding divorce was the best option for everyone involved. (It isn't.) Alas, it did appear that I've quite a few marriage progressions, as it were, and a marriage year in a decade, at 45. She always felt that I might marry for true love at that age, and, 'a lot can happen in a decade.'
Indeed, it can. I had to admit that, well, I just don't know. But I think I'm all right with the uncertainty. Whatever path is to unfold will. I have faith in that.
She suggested that the direction my life takes opens me up to possibilities I'm not presently able to fully consider or comprehend -- that I could very well meet someone.
Meet someone?
I let the phrase slosh around in my brain for a moment. Meet someone. And marry them? In a decade? She reminded me, again, that -- yes -- I could meet someone -- and marry them -- in a decade. So, I began thinking about that. Seriously. Not being with my husband. No longer being my stepdaughter's stepmom. though I know we'd maintain a close relationship, even still. And, well, frankly, falling out of love enough with my boyfriend to fall in love with someone else -- and marry them.
It's akin to Invasion of the Body Snatchers; someone else would have to take possession of my heart and brain -- my soul -- for me to decide that all with which I have been so blessed would be worth trading. For anyone.
So, it made me consider -- ahhh, but what if you met your real supposed 'twin flame'?
And this voice started actually speaking in your head, and this man said that you were his twin flame, and now that he's found you, you're going to ... go off into Sunset Boulevard ... ? And ... do ... twin flame-y ... things?
And it made me consider it legitimately -- all of the things this twin flame of mine would need to be, to resonate on the level that must happen for me to believe that, yes, this is it, and turn my life upside down. I figured I'd start with the most basic, superficial traits. After all, that's where we all start upon first meeting someone.
He could be brunette, with hazel eyes -- like my husband. With this dashing Han Solo-esque swagger that both makes me roll my eyes and find it endearing. Great sense of humour, sexy, and a surprisingly charismatic egomaniac that allows him to get away with it. Highly intelligent, but a bit lazy, relying upon nepotism, his movie star looks, and smooth talk. But that has always felt more 'soulmate-y' rather than 'twin flame-y', to be honest. We're not exactly looking at the portrait of spiritual evolution or a trajectory of enlightenment here. But does it matter? Only if it's being compared in these terms.
So, in that case, we've narrowed it down somewhat.
He would then most likely need to match the physical description of the 'man' that haunted my brain throughout my adolescence; my 'transdimensional imaginary friend' -- who, really, was just a recurring figure throughout several dreams. The blue-eyed blonde who would finally 'solidify' as one of the greatest characters I've ever 'created'. That could happen.
But then he'd have to be an erudite genius, with an exceptional -- and truly remarkable -- voice; a consummate gentleman with a known hatred of evil and willingness to -- and history of -- fighting for justice. Part of that history would rival the sort of eclectic panoply of talents and skills possessed by Leroux's Erik (from Le Fantome de L'Opera). A polymath, with a life that's almost as fascinating as the actual person that's lived it.
And he'd need to have been born or raised in my hometown, though we've met far from it later in our lives. And, naturally, he'd have to inexplicably think that I'm absolutely amazing -- almost by existing alone. I'm not saying pedestal worship here; just the meeting alone would have to make him feel as if something incredible is happening. And I'd need him to be a creative professional, such as myself, so that we could easily join forces and create world-changing art. As, no doubt, that's what we'd be here to do.
His name could be anything, but it would be nice if he, or it, were in some ways ever connected to names which resonate to me. Namely, those of my characters (tin inpunded), or those which I admire. Which means he'd also need to be in his late forties -- between 47 and 49, considering the age of my 'imaginary friend', (he'd be 48) and the year of my character's birth (1969).
And, yes, he'd be metaphysically inclined with a slightly unconventional world view; an understanding in the possibility that anything is possible -- while still appreciating science, and being deeply logically oriented.
He would remind me of Spock at times -- or, more accurately -- the Doctor. Probably the Tenth one: gregarious, theatrical, impassioned about ideas, and a love of possibility. And, well, absent-minded, and a touch of a flibbertigibbet.
He really wouldn't have much of a history in terms of relationships to speak of, being very, very much the loner without a driving need for companionship. Even if he's kept his heart just open enough -- should the impossible happen, and he actually meets someone who makes the effort seem worthwhile; a complement to the panoply of quirks and host of eccentricities. So, quite the recluse, most likely, with so little experience in intimate relations, I've no idea how I'd even meet such an individual. Really. Lightning would have to strike, or, fate intervene. Something like that.
But then I've been told that it's a bit like that; lightning does strike, and fate brings about a chain reaction that leads both to one another. Almost as if it were orchestrated on a much higher level; conducted, by forces greater than those operating here on Earth.
And I don't doubt a bit that there is, and that such things can happen. And, for many, have.
The more I contemplated this hypothetical reality in which I'd disregard the love, contentment, passion, insight, enlightenment, challenge, and true happiness I've already found -- now, and here in the present -- I realised the astronomical unlikeliness -- the sheer volume of the odds against -- that ever, ever happening.
But I can't put a phrase to it. I can't summarise it in two words -- even if they've become imbued with more than any of us can truly articulate. For me, in my life, I can't do that.
Instead, I'm just going to be grateful and happy, resting peacefully in the knowledge that I'm exactly where I should be. Regardless of the motivations behind it, or its deeper cause.
And I'm okay with that. I'm actually better than okay with it -- I'm glad.
Thanks for listening to my blather.
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
posted October 10, 2015 08:54 PM
I agree with every word.
posted October 11, 2015 02:36 AM