Antiquatis

Hi!
Posting after a while! Had gone a bit astray! Long time back I had read something about 3-d / 4-d relationships. It mentioned that in 3-d relationships are based on need but in 4-d its based on sharing and by choice.

I wanted to know what people understand by sharing based relationships. what does it exactly mean? how does this exactly work? Is it agape form of love?

any comments?

Snetu

Welcome back!
It might depend what you mean by agape? In Christian theology, agape is the love that God/Christ shows to mankind. At the best of times, this can be used to describe a good parent/child (or spousal) relationship. I have also seen this word used to basically describe slavery. Theologically, agape is usually referred to as being unconditional and voluntary. While I agree that a shared-based relationship needs to be voluntary, it does not need to be unconditional. In fact, I would say that it needs to be conditional. For example, take a couple in 4D+. What will happen to the relationship should one of them decide to try out 4D-? Follow in order to maintain the relationship? Stay behind and break the relationship? Neither is agape.

Have you ever read "The Missing Piece Meets the Big O" by Shel Silverstein? It is a children's book and a relationship's book. The basic message is that it is only after you complete yourself that you can enter into any meaningful relationship presumably with someone who has also completed themselves. Then, you can choose what to share in a relationship because you are meeting all of your own needs yourself. Of course, this is just my viewpoint.

Hi!
I am glad to get a reply !

Is it agape form of love?[/quote]It might depend what you mean by agape? In Christian theology, agape is the love that God/Christ shows to mankind. At the best of times, this can be used to describe a good parent/child (or spousal) relationship. I have also seen this word used to basically describe slavery. Theologically, agape is usually referred to as being unconditional and voluntary. While I agree that a shared-based relationship needs to be voluntary, it does not need to be unconditional. In fact, I would say that it needs to be conditional. For example, take a couple in 4D+. What will happen to the relationship should one of them decide to try out 4D-? Follow in order to maintain the relationship? Stay behind and break the relationship? Neither is agape.

I don't really know what agape means! I just read about it in few of earlier posts on Material relationships on the forum. I was trying to understand it. I guess what you makes sense, like the relationship is conditional but the love is unconditional.

I was mainly trying to understand the 4D kind of society where from what they say : that monogamy/polygamy is out of choice and if it does not suit the other person, they simply leave, but there is no pain. Thats something hard to understand at first reading as from what we see around, I do see that there is pain from one side.

Have you ever read "The Missing Piece Meets the Big O" by Shel Silverstein? It is a children's book and a relationship's book. The basic message is that it is only after you complete yourself that you can enter into any meaningful relationship presumably with someone who has also completed themselves. Then, you can choose what to share in a relationship because you are meeting all of your own needs yourself. Of course, this is just my viewpoint.[/quote]

Thanks for mentioning about the book. I would like to read it. The message I guess does make sense, else one of the two people who is not complete will always keep being hurt.

Snetu

Sorry! I thought when you used the word that it was from a Christian theological point-of-view. A few internet searches should turn up a wealth of information. Wikipedia probably has a page on it (i.e. agape).

In 4D, the veil is no longer present. This means that an other self's thoughts and emotions are plain to perceive as will your own be to others. Until such a thing is experienced, it will not be possible to fully understand the ramifications of this.

Most people are not complete. Pain is a good thing in that it tells you that something is not right with yourself. The only one who can truly fix that is you.

What I was taught by my "mentor" was that there are three types of love (love being an "attractive" principle to bring entities together):

Eros, sexual attraction, to keep the species going. Usually based in persona, most powerful but short-lived. Analogous to electric charge.

Logos, a more "mental" attraction based on the sharing of common values, analogous to magnetism. Commonly seen in couples that have been together for decades, and still "love" each other. Not as powerful, but lasts longer.

Agape is spiritual attraction, not experienced between two people but between a person's spirit and the Intelligence of the Universe (God, gods, ascended beings... whatever term you care to use). Appears weak--isn't--and can last lifetimes.

I think there is something there and it could be represented as a matrix (not sure how to draw a matrix using only BBcodes). I would see the most powerful as referring to something most direct and difficult to ignore (yang). And the same time, it also does not last long (not yin). Someone following this kind of direction is easily swayed since the focus is on the latest and greatest thing. I think of a child (regardless of actual age).

At the other end, yin is something that lasts for a very long time (maybe even forever). Something based on this is going to stick around. It is very subtle and easy to miss especially if you aren't looking for it. Because of its endurance (or patience), it outlasts the yang side (note the "appears weak" in LoneBear's description). I think of a mature person.

I would see a sharing-based relationship to be amongst people (does not have to be a couple) who have a good balance between the 2 and thus can build a relationship based on both. Note that this is different from agape. [again, just my opinion]