#acharyaprashant #multiplepartners #relationship #love #cheated
Video Information:
Interview Session, 12.01.20, Advait Bodhsthal, Greater Noida, India
Context:
Are multiple sexual relationships wrong?
What's wrong with having multiple partners?
Multiple romantic or sexual partners: the real story
Music Credits: Milind Date
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Category
📚
LearningTranscript
00:00 Namaskar Acharya ji. We're sitting in a lawn and we are surrounded by rabbits all around.
00:12 Man has made attempts throughout history to transcend its animal nature and one of the
00:18 things has been it trying to be stable in its sexual relationships. Such a thing is
00:28 not found in animals. We do not have any compulsion or pressure to be loyal, not be infidel. What
00:38 is your take in the concept of having multiple partners or not having any moral or cultural
00:48 pressure to engage sexually or romantically with any one person throughout the life?
00:57 Multiple partners is too much. Let's begin with one partner. Why do you need a partner
01:06 at all? Now I'm not taking a position, I'm asking a question. Why do you need a partner
01:14 in the first place? You need a partner because you feel a certain vacancy, right? You feel
01:24 a certain urge, a feeling of incompleteness. You're looking for something and you feel
01:35 that that which you're looking for will be provided by the person you are relating to,
01:41 the one you are partnering. Now do you succeed? If you succeed then why do you need another
01:53 partner and if you don't succeed why do you need another partner? The whole thing does
02:03 not have so much of a moral angle to it. Go ahead and have 40,000 partners. Be related
02:14 to 10, 20, 30 people in whichever way you want to. Have a platonic relationship, have
02:28 an actively sexual relationship. Go ahead and try all of that. If any of that gives
02:36 you contentment, does it? If it gives you contentment, go ahead. Here is an early warning,
02:48 it won't. You'll be wasting your time. Forget about multiple partners. Even those who with
02:59 all loyalty stick to just one partner find that they are not getting what they wanted
03:06 out of that one partner. So the question is not one partner versus multiple partners.
03:14 The question is whether any of these partnerships are any good. Are these any good? And if they
03:28 really are good, who can stop you from partnering? The deity of your choice. If one person or
03:40 a group of persons is really able to give you that which would fulfill your life, then
03:50 you just cannot be stopped. You'd say I'm prepared to lay down my life but you cannot
03:57 stop me from being with that person. Mostly these flings are blind attempts at getting
04:17 from people what people cannot give and using ways to reach destinations that those ways
04:34 cannot reach. When you say one has multiple partners, there is an obvious sexual connotation
04:44 to it. One is relating sexually to many people. Relate sexually to one person, relate sexually
04:53 to many person, will sex give you what you want? Have sex with 10 persons or have sex
05:06 with one person 10 times? Did you get what you really set out to get? So the ones who
05:20 are in all fidelity sticking to one partner need not feel any kind of moral superiority
05:27 over the ones who are engaged in the internet of relationships, the whole mishmash, this
05:40 connected to that, that connected to that and this connected to that, that whole network.
05:49 Both are failing in their attempt. Both want something that is very very deep but both
05:58 are trying to get that deep something using very shallow means, very shallow means. The
06:07 body is a very shallow way to get that which your consciousness desperately craves for
06:21 and remember all your relationships are deeply your attempts to fill an inner void. Your
06:31 consciousness is trembling, it is wounded, it is incomplete, it lacks a huge part of
06:45 itself rather it lacks its own center and therefore it stumbles from place to place,
06:55 knocks from door to door hoping to get some kind of relief from somewhere. Multiple partners
07:10 are these feeble and fruitless knocks on several multiple doors. That does not mean that knocking
07:23 on just one door is better than knocking on several doors. It merely means that whether
07:29 you knock on one door or on several doors you will return disappointed. You will not
07:35 get what you want through the physical or sexual route. It is not possible. So if you
07:45 are someone who is a serial relator, one relationship after the other or several relationships
07:55 at a time, whatever, one and the same thing really, you must tell yourself that you really
08:06 have not a physical but a spiritual urge and therefore you should stop your mad nonsensical
08:16 method of looking for the ultimate in some man or woman. You will not get it there. You
08:27 will have to find it using other means. You will have to find it in wisdom literature,
08:35 you will have to find it in a deep understanding of life. You will find it in a love that is
08:44 far more inclusive, a love that is more pervasive. You talked of the rabbits. Was it in this
08:55 discussion itself? Somebody said, it was such a beautiful quote that a part of your
09:05 consciousness remains unawakened until you fall in love with an animal and all that you
09:16 are looking for is some sexy woman. Chances are very feeble that you will get it there.
09:27 Were it possible to get it there, millions and billions would have obtained it. So sit
09:41 down with yourself and honestly question yourself, what is it that I really want? Another man,
09:49 another woman, is that what I want or is it something deeper? And once you receive the
09:56 answer, don't unhear it, don't unsee it, don't avoid or ignore it. The answer is there,
10:07 very large on the wall, inner wall. Now act as per your understanding.
10:14 Indeed, Acharyaji painted a hopeless picture that one is not going to get it in women in
10:25 partnerships and I have tried to say that it has to be sought in wisdom literature in
10:33 relations that are inclusive. Why is it that it is received through certain things and
10:39 it is not received? No, you see, when I say it has to be an inclusive
10:45 way of relating to the universe, obviously that does not exclude men or women. When I
10:52 say that your love has to include even animals and plants and ecologies, then do I mean that
11:02 your love would exclude women or that a woman's love would exclude men? Obviously not. But
11:10 then this is pathological. Sticking to a woman or sticking to a man, inwardly aiming for
11:21 his or her genitals is sick, it stinks. And when you are fed up with one set of genitals,
11:33 then you hunt for another set, makes no sense, bears no fruit.
11:47 There are beautiful ways of relating to men, relating to women. Relate to them in higher
11:59 ways. I am not a body hater. I am just clear on what the body can and what it cannot give.
12:14 There are certain things for which the body is indeed useful and there are certain things
12:19 which cannot come via the body. Once we are done with this, you know I would be rushing
12:28 out to the tennis court. That's something my body can give me. It can win me a great
12:38 point. It cannot win me realisation. I need a healthy and good body to serve an ace. But
12:54 my body will not render me salvation. On the tennis court, love all is just a score, at
13:07 best. That's the utmost the body can give me. Love all. And that love all is so very
13:21 transitory and ephemeral. Very soon it changes to 15 love. That's your multiple partner thing.
13:33 Love all is gone. Now it's 15 love.
13:51 If physical nearness happens smoothly, incidentally, as a result of spiritual nearness, then it
14:11 is unavoidable. But only then must it be unavoidable. Physical nearness has to be the tail of the
14:22 elephant. Are you getting it? Once the entire elephant has passed through, only then you
14:34 must see the little tail. Only that much importance it must have. Instead of that, the sexual
14:46 aspect becomes the elephant. As far as the real, truthful, spiritual aspect is concerned,
15:01 you keep waiting for the tail to come and when you come to the rear of the animal, you
15:06 realise it is tailless. Because spiritual aspect cannot follow physicality. But physicality,
15:19 means it can follow the spiritual part. Not always. Sometimes.
15:35 [HORN BLOWS]