Wednesday 2 April 2014

abundance

Polyamorists have been known to comment about the abundance of love, and how it isn’t limited. This is, in my experience, quite often in the context of an analogy that, just as a parents love for a child is not reduced by the arrival of another child (which implies that, if love is limited, the love they are capable of would be divided between the total number of children and thus reduced - a bit like dividing a fixed number of apples between an increasing number of ‘ankle biters’), so too is romantic or sexual love capable of being felt without limits. Hence, polyamorists (such as myself) argue that is possible to be in love with more than one person at the same time … and that it isn’t necessary to choose between those people - but that is a topic for a different place J .
Similarly, some people - particularly some Wiccans / Pagans - consider that the good things of this world, such as the joys of Nature, Love in its various forms (e.g. agape, romantic, parental, filial [meaning, of a child towards parent(s)],sibling, etc) is also something that is unlimited - at least in principle. Now, there are some obvious counter arguments to this (e.g., the fact that we live on a finite (i.e. with a limit) planet), and there will come a point where continuing consumption (whether due to lifestyle or overpopulation or both) will use up all of some resource or other, but the view has considerable validity in relation to nonphysical matters. In particular, there is an argument here is that trying to slavishly, selfishly, fearfully hold on to some aspect of creation solely for oneself, is not only ultimately impossible, but counterproductive. As an example of the implications of this view, if everyone was generous and loving, how would it be possible for anyone to go without?
There is a lot that is good about the principle or law of Abundance ... but there is a lot that people get wrong about it as well. For some thoughts on this, see http://gnwmythr.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/post-no-892-law-of-abundance-is-not.html
As of the time this definition was written, I’ve also touched on this idea in the following posts:
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.