Sunday, 12 May 2013

Love Mathematics.

Love Mathematics.

Can we love more than one person at the same time with the same type of intensity and feeling without it being a betrayal to the other?

Of course the answer will be positive and negative, depending on who is answering. I aim to discuss the possibility that we can in fact have enough love and ability to share it with many people rather than just one individual. 

My theory is, that if the giver is pure in their intentions, then the love they give can be received exactly as it is intended.

Now at the outset of course I do realise that there are many forms of love under the umbrella of the word LOVE. In the English language of course we have come to use this word rather too flippantly and the essence of love has thus been altered. For example you can love a person an animal and food. They don't all get the same type of love from you, though they can potentially share the warmth of your intentions in the same amounts. But for the purpose of this post we are talking about people, and about possible relationships with them that may go beyond just friendship at the usual level. Now I can hear you thinking, sex, intimacy, privacy and bonds of marriage. Well I am talking about these too, but do realise most of us already have some idea or guidelines or even laws regarding certain aspects of this interaction.

Sex for example: It would seem that in many places monogamy/sexual-fidelity is the preferred ethic. In fewer still multi-partner arrangements suit the needs of some, and occasionally non sexual/celibate relationships are sought out.

monogamy (mɒˈnɒɡəmɪ Pronunciation for monogamy



  1. the state or practice of having only one husband or wife over a period of time Compare bigamy, polygamy (sense 1), digamy
  2. (zoology) the practice of having only one mate.


 polygamy (pəˈlɪɡəmɪ Pronunciation for polygamy



  1. the practice of having more than one wife or husband at the same time Compare polyandry, polygyny
    1. the condition of having male, female, and hermaphrodite flowers on the same plant
    2. the condition of having these different types of flower on separate plants of the same species
  2. the practice in male animals of having more than one mate during one breeding season.

celibacy (ˈsɛlɪbəsɪ) 



  1. (religion) the state of being celibate
  2. abstention from sexual intercourse

Intimacy: Most people seem to see intimacy as the bit only shared between married or committed relationship partners. But intimacy can be directly related to the human touch, rather than simply sexual intimacy which is quite different. Relationships can be strengthened if we have physical contact, as the interactions cause a feel good factor few people recognise easily. Hugging is a prime example, as is kissing and or hand shaking. Trust is often given to the giver of intimacy, when the receiver instinctively feels it comes with honesty and integrity.

Privacy: There are of course relationships that we want to conduct elements of in privacy. I just wonder what our motives are if some of the elements are not detrimental to others. Hugging, hand holding and kissing for example are not offensive to me, unless they show no regard for others. Having sex in public spaces would be frowned upon by most people, and for good reason. But sex is not a dirty thing. What some do with sex however is often considered such, and therefore not acceptable in public forum. In front of children as a prime example, or with children and animals. (Though it has to be considered why it had been done through out our history)


Bonds of marriage: This institution has been around since the year dot of course. Relationships contained within these bonds are often considered the most beneficial to many people. The modern world however has a differing view of the importance of marriage and I respect this too as a sign of openness, if the doers are considerate of the implications of this stance. Obviously sexual-fidelity is not limited to marriage alone, this is a deeply personal matter. Many married people deny their vows of chastity and fidelity as it suits them, we can read about it everyday in the papers. But for many there is a certain feeling of protection that comes with the contract of marriage. An oath of intentions.

Now to the meat of the article here. If we see fidelity as a proof of our relationship status then we can only seriously consider one person to receive intimate sexual contact with us. Some may stretch this a bit to exclude kissing another person on the lips in a passionate way, but mostly people base their relationships on this standard. If we are single, then there is no great issue to answer to. We can sleep with or have sex with, or kiss and fondle whom so ever we chose without it unsettling our minds. Things will only bother us if we know that we made a contract (be it verbal or in writing) with another human being, who is expecting us to be honourable and have integrity.

But what if we have many relationships that don't include sex or behaviours that are questionable? 

I like to think that I am able to determine well enough for myself what contract I make with a person when I become involved in a relationship with them. So I can happily have many friends, have many great experiences with others and determine if a deeper intimate experience is allowable or not. After all I am the one who has to live with my conscience. I try never to make a promise, or even hint at one unless I am sure that is my statement of intention. Of course I have to include the element of another persons perceptive powers, that might infer or conclude another thing. And if I make a dedicated attempt to say or do a thing, I make my best efforts to adhere to this and succeed. But I'm only as good as my best efforts.

I have a friendship with a person whom I have never met for example. She is an extraordinarily charming woman. A lover of life and of truth from what I have gleaned. She is also very considerate towards other sentient beings, very romantic and very creative in her talents, and as such makes me love her dearly. On occasion this has felt very strongly like a most desirable quality that I would love to have at closer quarters to myself. To look into her eyes for example, to feel her energy, to see how people respond directly to her love and light, to hug and to feel energized by her company. But she is not known to me in this way, she is married and lives in a far off place. She is loved by many other people and one special person shares her intimate contacts every night, and yet I am not in the least jealous or envious because it is the wonderful love she displays that has brought her this reality. That love has nothing to do with me, but I can recognise it in her and feel attracted towards it. I don't wish for things to become other than what they are, I am grateful for the time she spares, sorry no, shares with me. Therefore I believe that if we all saw things this way, we could all share her light, her love and be equally empowered by her touch.

O.K. so I am single and am allowed to have open relationships with people. But the truth is, I wouldn't want to be different even if I were myself in a dedicated and intimate relationship. I am at peace with myself, because I honour my personal integrity to be a man of peace of light and of love. How could I willingly do an injustice to another sentient being? To have many relationships on equal footings is definitely possible, providing that we are true to our intentions. If we make promises we should strive to keep them. And we should constantly review our methods and motives towards others, perfecting our love and compassion.

For me the mathematics add up to a successful life where love is shared with as many people who care to accept it. My affirmation is this. Good things will happen to those that seek the betterment of the other person ahead of their own wants. I see god in the numbers.

I hope and pray that this will help many, as it has helped me whilst writing and reflecting upon it.

May peace and love cover you and protect you.

Love and Light.

Peaceful Warrior.

All pictures are from Google and represent no-one directly attributed to the article.

No comments:

Post a Comment