I think the concept is worth meditating on as either way (polar couples or individuals considering the concept) the necessity is to pursue the work.
People long for the type of love connection that is described as a polar couple, this may be our spiritual destiny. It is written about by great minds through the ages and is not frivolous at all.
True. But then again, I think it's healthy to question it. Many people also long for perfect happiness, a higher degree of spirituality, etc. But we know that at least in part, that has been programmed. In both cases (longing for the perfect/ideal something) is, IMO, an illusion in
this reality, and a product of our society, that removes responsibility and agency. At least for me, fairy tales and Disney created more of a distortion than many other things when I was younger. Mouravieff and others gave different explanations, of course, but in the end, I was often left with the impression that they were talking about a state were things "happen" (instant recognition at first sight, etc.), which is the opposite of the Work. Sure, one could say it happens in stages, and he explains that. But in life, I've never seen those stages either.
For example, from the text you quoted:
This would relate to the idea of the 3 stages in the Work: the work begins with work on oneself, then progresses to work with others, and finally working for the Work itself. In each stage one expands to include more and more – from the selfish concern of one’s own development, one moves on to include another, and from there, opens out into a larger whole.
This is so different from my experience, that of many others and what is just visible, that I can't relate at all. For me, they all go together. You will work on yourself THANKS to the fact that you are working with others, and receiving a mirror from your interactions. You will let go of your "selfish concern of your own development" because you are working towards something higher than yourself to begin with. And so on. See what I mean? IMO, that 3 stage division is so artificial that it can't apply to "polar opposites" either, unless you are talking about a different reality. I get over myself whenever I can because I love my husband, and because we have aims that are higher than our petty issues. If I had only worked on myself, to then meet him, to then be part of something bigger, then... I don't think that's even possible, because the "working on ourselves" part would remain very self-centered and limited. There are SOME things you can do in separate stages, but not a whole bunch, me thinks.
The best advice I read was that people should pursue the work (Gnosis) and act in a way that their current partner is their polar opposite. This is because any genuine pursuit of this knowledge will move you towards your polar opposite [what ever lifetime that may be].
Hmm, I have a problem with that. Being STS, I doubt that with that idea in mind, any human being can have a "pure intent", a "genuine pursuit of knowledge". To me it reads more like, "Hey honey, let's stick together in this life and pretend that we are Polar Opposites. I'll learn a lot with you, and in another life, I can meet the real deal".
I know it may be an exaggeration, but it's pretty shit*y if you put it that way.
Mouravieff also said that "polar opposites" may not even recognize each other in one life. Then, as much as he talks about the more "lofty" and spiritual aspects of the work, that statement is quite telling. It means that in order to love, you must know. And to know, you need a lot of efforts and suffering in most cases. But the idea of Polar opposites is, from the get go, an "easy path". We are together because it was meant to be. We don't make our relationship work, it works because we are advanced and opposites. We don't decide every day to be together, we just are. Etc. Well maybe, but I don't see how that marries with the Work in this reality, at our level. (His explanation is in the levels/stages, but see above.)
Do Polar Opposites exist, and is it close to what is described in the literature? Well, why not? But I wonder if there isn't a big portion of symbolism in the idea, and if taking it literally is part of the illusion. Very often miracles happen in life, but we are so busy anticipating and determining what a miracle should look like, that we miss the real deal. In some cases, we have to
make the miracle happen, but we don't act because we think miracles happen. It's like the difference between "waiting for your other half" (passive), or working (active) to become whole. 1/2 + 1/2 = 1, as opposed to 1+1 = 2.
I don't know, maybe I'm too "practical", and not imaginative enough. But to me, there is a lot more appeal in the idea of two people BECOMING "polar opposites" in the process of learning to give, to know themselves, to share knowledge with others, etc. in this life. That could be predestined, if you wish, but it still involves a lot of conscious effort and agency. Without the latter, it may amount to nothing, just like a genetic predisposition towards a skill is nothing if the person doesn't work hard to achieve competence at that skill.
FWIW!
