--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Emily Reyn <emilymae.reyn@> wrote: > > > > Share doesn't know how to dance or play *with* people, > > because that would require a vulnerability not present > > in her. > > Now, in the language of the TMO, TM is alleged to bring the > experience of 'invincibility'. That is, the absence of > vulnerability. It does seem that people who have had long > practice with at least some spiritual techniques develop a > sort of psychological invulnerability.
If that invulnerability leaves them unable to "dance or play *with* people," it would seem to be a pretty serious disadvantage. I'd suggest that there may be a kind of core invulnerability that comes from spiritual development, but that when it's authentic, its effect is to make it possible to be *more* vulnerable in one's interpersonal interactions. One isn't afraid to be vulnerable to another person, because that core cannot be shaken. > > I experience this happening to me over a long span of time. As this develops, > I have noticed the tendency to seek out people that seem to have similar > weaknesses to mine, or complimentary ones, is diminishing. > > So I can imagine it becomes exceedingly interesting in how one relates to > someone who has no obvious weakness, or caves in to certain emotional > prompts. If we call our individuality a persona, then such persons do not > relate to one another on the basis of persona. This can be particularly > upsetting for people who only relate to others on the basis of persona, for > such persons without or with a diminished persona appear to function > independently, or largely independently of whatever you foist in their > direction. >
