Emotions in mutual relations

In any romantic relations each of partners should be able to consult as own emotions, and with emotions of other person. This one of obligatory and, by the way, absolutely simple conditions of maintenance of relations.

If your partner is angry, the main thing - not to counteract its emotion, not to oppose the rage of its rage. If the rage does not have serious bases, long it will not last. It will be dissolved, as soon as the energy feeding it and when it will occur will be spent, you will have a possibility to understand the reasons of its occurrence. If the rage is caused by the serious reason, agree with this emotion, tell something like: "I understand, you have serious reasons to become angry", - and tell so that the person has believed, that it not an excuse.

It not game in diplomacy because to hide true feelings it is impossible. Accepting a partner rage, you accelerate development of this emotion, helping it to pass all necessary stages. If you oppose own rage the stranger only will strengthen this feeling, strengthen it. It is better to allow to flow to it free, and it will leave. The main thing - to give it necessary time and space. Do not try to constrain a partner rage, do not try to block a way of this rage, but at the same time do not force its display. Direct, but do not adjust. It is the best way to resolve a problem and to return to the counterbalanced condition.

Very important constantly to remember, that the soul in the higher understanding remains invariably pure. As they say in one Zen koan: "the Body - a wisdom tree; reason - a mirror". The primary nature is always pure and sparkness. Negative energies pass through us, not being late because they are not a part us. We represent of what we think. Ten thousand Dharmas are shown through thought; ten thousand troubles also are shown through thought. Thought process creates and supports suffering.

Take, for example, stress. This condition is a product of mad rate of a modern life. But it is necessary to stress to appear in the centre of public attention - and we there and then add oils to fire, recognising as its natural phenomenon. There are programs of struggle against stresses, even more legalising existence of this phenomenon, doing its by normal element of a life.

Any small problem outgrows in big and invincible as soon as there are approved and legalised official techniques of its "treatment". The idea of "attack" to stress and uneasy conditions creates visibility of necessity of such "attacks", as hardly probable not a unique way of struggle against these phenomena. Actually the similar approach quite often appears doomed to defeat. As well as in cases with other kinds of emotional frustration, it is necessary not to attack frustration, not to throw to it a glove, and to realise its existence, clearly to see its roots.

Having understood components of emotional frustration, having seen circumstances causing it, we will understand, that it has under itself no serious bases. In other words, clearly enough and accurately to see the reasons of disturbing emotion that it has vanished into thin air. To create strong relations, you should resound with positive feelings of your partner.

Concentrate on positive emotions, and to negative emotions let's to them pass through you and completely to be dissolved in world around. If the problem situation remains before to analyze your partner, try to understand itself in the beginning. Do not forget: under the theory the In-Jan, an In and a Jan always exist together. Recognising, for example, that the problem is an In, and its decision, accordingly a Jan, we will agree that existence of a problem assumes existence of its decision. Thus the natural decision always is the most simple and accessible.

And still: always leave to the partner a place and possibility for self-display. Never conceal in a soul of insult as the weapon of the future revenge - to these you will exhaust only your own energy. In the past the majority of marriages was arranged with parents young, is frequent without their choice or desires. And still those marriages appeared happy much more often, than many modern. In what a problem: in a society? In our partners? And can, in ourselves?