*Magic* ~ *Magia*
“If you love someone, set them free. If they come back they’re yours; if they don’t they never were”
Richard Bach said that and today that phrase made me ask someone “are you mine?”. I guess my question took him for surprise, so he asked, and I told him the phrase. I don’t remember exactly how the conversation went, but it was almost at the same time that I was telling him I had set him free that he said “I set you free”. I think after that I said “you came back to me”, to have him tell me “or you came back to me”.
In the dynamic of human affections… when we love someone and set them free… are we also being released? And who is the first one to come back? Is it as valid for the other one? Is it a mutual, bilateral action setting the other free? And how do we live those experiences? Who sets who free? Who goes back to whom? Who belongs to whom? Are those even valid questions?
If when we release we are also being released… are we, therefore, also loved when we love? And then when we go back, is the other one also coming back?
Is this a general rule or do some of us get touched by magic sometimes?
“Si amas a alguien, déjalo libre. Si vuelve a ti es tuyo; si no nunca lo fue”
Richard Bach dijo eso y hoy esa frase me hizo preguntarle a alguien “eres mío?” Me imagino que mi pregunta lo tomó por sorpresa, así que preguntó, y le dije la frase. No recuerdo exactamente como fue la conversación, pero fue casi al mismo tiempo que le decía que lo había dejado libre que él me dijo “yo te dejé libre”. Creo que después de eso le dije “regresaste a mí”, para que él me dijera “o tú regresaste a mí”.
En la dinámica de los afectos humanos… cuando amamos a alguien y lo liberamos… estamos siendo liberados también? Y quién es el primero en regresar? Es igual de válido para el otro? Es una acción mutua, bilateral el liberar al otro? Y cómo vivimos esas experiencias? Quién libera a quién? Quién regresa a quién? Quién le pertenece a quién? Son siquiera válidas esas preguntas?
Si cuando liberamos estamos también siendo liberados… somos, entonces, también amados cuando amamos? Y cuando regresamos, está regresando también el otro?
Es esta una regla general o somos algunos de nosotros tocados por magia algunas veces?
posted by Monicaatje at 6:36 p. m.
15 Comments:
Muy, muy interesante... creo que son unas de las preguntas más
complicadas de contestar porque creo que sería necesario
conversar con "el otro" y llegar a un acuerdo... pero como tú
dices: es la dinámica de los afectos humanos y esos, por lo
menos para mí, suelen ser muy complejos.
PS: This post is not only about romantic love, but about all kinds of love (anyways... doesn't romantic love seem to be the most complicated of them all?)
PD: Este post no es sólo sobre el amor romántico, sino sobre todos los tipos de amor (aunque... no parece ser el amor romántico el más complicado de todos?)
I guess the essence of that
"You are free to go, so you stay"...so none goes and noone comes back either...
I remember another nice thing said about love.. Love is like a water in palm..if you try to posses it then it escapes through your hand...all you have to do it is to set it free so it stays...I guess Richard Bach conveys similar ideas....
Hard to practise it....my girlfriends never came back ;-)
@Phoenix: water and sand (separated of course) in my hands are complicated things... I wonder if it's just me and my small hands, or everybody :P
Well... maybe ur GFs haven't gone back but.. what about friends? who are free to go but stay ;)
Not all love is the romantic-couple kind ;)
I hadnt htught about the possibility of staying besides that one of leaving and then coming back... I guess sometimes trees don't let me see the forest and this time I was focussed on the part where we left and then came back :P
Thanx for the comment! gave me new elements to add to the brain salad, and I always appreciate that :)
'..set them free' of expectations,let them be and respect their individuality and space is the essence of what Bach says (atleast thats what I understand it as)
When you do let someone free this way, you grow more closer to them. You feel free of trying hold back something which is not to be held back.You feel your space. Coming back to someone happens only when you have distanced yourself from someone intentionally. When you set somebody free (the way I understand) even if they go away physically/emotionally, when you do unite eventually its like coming home. The essence of any relationship is that we dont own/belong/possess, we just come together like two forces who are bound by some magical power.
@Wookie: wow, two Bach fans with two different opinions for a third Bach fan :P
Set them free of expectations...
But if coming back to someone only happens when u have distanced from that person, why does he mention it? One of the things I lkike baout bach is his use of language and how I feel he never uses words just to use them, but always when necessary... so if he mentioned the going back part, then there must be a prting at some point, musn't there? That question goes also for Phoenix, who also mentioned the not going away part.
I think I'm liking this discussion... stirring my ideas is something I enjoy most times :P makes room for new ones ;)
I guess the thing with Bach is the abstractness that makes people interpet their meaning of what he tries to say.
To me set free doesnot restrict only to expectations but everything. Khalil Gibran says in the prophet about marraiges "Let there be spaces in your togetherness, let you be the strings on the lute which are apart yet quiver to same music" (I think i have paraphrased it)...
Another example of not going away part is something like railway tracks...they are together always but have a distance between them...
I guess ideal relationship should be that way, being for each other, giving a distance yet quiver to same music...
Setting free is something in the same context....
@Phoenix: I think we people interpret whatever we want always, no matter how abstract or concrete one thing is... it's the way we make it ours that has that interpretation part to it.
Theory and practice and all that? Yes, head is a mess :) but a happy one this time. IDK why this confussion that's stirring everything insie my head has brought such a smile to my face :P It doesn't really matter why, I'm really enjoying everything these days.
Quiver to same music... I feel it's one of the phrases most full of love that I have heard...
So... is setting free a very abstract thing that also means the other is free to go but sometimes decides to stay and that's like coming back... no?
I think I should ponder on this, take my time to think only about this and get some ideas in places so new ideas can acommodate in between or whatever... I need time for that... maybe today at the beach while I walk my dog :)
Thanx for the comments :)
Totally agree with Phoenix. To answer your question MOn, I guess he was telling all the poeple who hold back something they love to set it free so that it blossoms. Ofcourse, what they were holding back was indeed true love, it would love them still. And if it was not meant to be and they were forcefully holding it, it will galdly fly away once its free.
Amiga!!!
Claro que estoy de acuerdo contigo en que eso de se amas a alguien dejalo ir... quién mejor que yo pa saberlo! todo mal... pero al final siempre vuelven, sean amig@s, parientes, etc... yo creo que la gracia del amor veradero está en la libertad que te da el querer a esa otra persona, y si esa persona realmente te quere... no es necesario estar siempre a su lado... creo que las relaciones tienen etapas... y definitivamente a veces es mejor dejarlos ir!... Besos Mapaches!!! chaolin.
When it comes back, it is with more passion and more admiration, or it will not be back.
@Wookie: I think that is the purest form (and the only one possible for true love) there is. Without tricks, bounds, restrictions of any kind... almost inhuman...
@Amalia: la libertad que te da el querer a un otro? Uf! es complicado eso... a veces te libera, pero a veces... serán esos los amores enfermos, los cariños malos, no?
Gracias por el comment querida! Besos mapaches para usted tb =)
@Jac: with the effects of the longing produced for by the distance... sometimes I doubt such love is possible... but I hope
Trust me, it is possible.
@Tchorix: yo lo entiendo como un "te amo, por lo tanto te libero de tener que estar conmigo, te libero de lo que espero de ti, de cumplir con cosas que yo quiera, de presiones sociales, de todo". Eso de que es tuyo o no es tuyo lo leo como un "esa persona elige libremente estar contigo, y está ahí para ti, es tuyo para construir juntos, para que cuentes con esa persona, pero no para abusar de ella, sino para contarla en tu futuro, porque libremente ha elegido estar contigo, y mientras permanezca a tu lado lo hará con plena libertad"
Entonces esa posesión (o como quiera que se escriba) no es una posesión enfermiza, sino un... contar contigo, contarte entre "mis" personas, mi círculo, mis íntimos, mi red...
Por ejemplo los papás. Te aman tanto que te dejaron siempre libre, de ir, de hacer, de todo (algunos de esos pueden ser discutibles o no), y tú vuelves a ellos. Ellos te han liberado de tener que volver a Chile porque ellos son tus padres, y tú has vuelto, porque los amas también, entonces ellos saben que el amor es recíproco, y que "te tienen", que es una muy mala expresión para algo que al parecer todavía no logro explicar con palabras... ese contar contigo, ese saber que si necesito una mano estará la tuya... que de alguna forma es un compromiso aceptado y renovado libremente.
And no, it does not mean that the one who comes back is not free anymore, as I said before, the one who comes back chooses to stay and is free to stay by ur side for as long as that lasts.
Love, like true, sets people free. For me the "possesing" part is like... the freely chosen compromise, which I think many times is necessary in love, to keep it, to take care of it, etc.
Music... when a person truly loves music and decides to dedicate their life to it, it also needs a compromise, to learn, practice, rehearse, etc. Doesn't it?
@Tchorix: creo que esa es una de las cosas buenas de ciertas frases, permiten distintas interpretaciones. (Claro que no es bueno en todos los casos). Bueno... pues.. como escribirías lo que digo con tus propias palabras?
Yo sigo sin verla como un amor posesivo (si es que cabe el amor dentro de los posesivo, o viceversa)
@Tchorix: I think that is one of the good things about certain phrases, they allow several interpretations. (of course it's not good in all cases). Well... then... how would u write what I say in ur own words?
I still don't see it as a possesive love (if love fits in possesive, or viceversa).
Publicar un comentario
<< Home