delara, interrupted

I love this topic - being, by all accounts, a rather passionate person. I always think of passion in terms of constructive and desctructive. Constructive passion leads to building great things. Things like cities, art work, civilizations, marriages, healthy families, happy communitieis.
Destructive passions tear these things down. They take over and instead of feeding the creative process, they become an end to themselves. Being passionate to the point of not being able to see beyond, beside or behind the passion is the destructive force of it.
Being passionate is important- but the challenge is to have passion tempered with wisdom.

OK, you've put two sets of questions out there:
1. What is passion?/How can we use it in helpful ways?
2. How do we negotiate our passions with our partners?

Here are some thoughts...

First the first. I think passion can stream from two different sources: (1) the noble self and (2) the insistent self.

Passion that streams from the noble self is often referred to as a "holy passion," and the kind that streams from the insistent self usually appears with a less savory partner as in "self and passion" or "egotism and passion" or "passion and vain desire," "prejudice and passion," "conflict and passion," "passion and strife" and so on (care of MARS).

And the two have very different tastes and outcomes. Passions that stream from the noble self feel joyful and creative in the process, and lead to outcomes such as the generation of knowledge, expansion of unity and joy, and the advancement of the individual and/or the world materially and spiritually. Passions that stem from the insistent self feel frivolous, or worse, consuming in nature; they suck up joy and lead to abasement and destruction. Progress or regress, no in-between.

I think the main distinguishing feature is the source, not necessarily the object and not the volume. I'll explain what I mean. The object can actually be the same, but the motivating power makes all the difference. We can have passion for science, art, even religion and can use that passion constructively--to uplift the human spirit and improve the quality of life--or destructively--to degrade ourselves, others, and wreak havoc in the world--depending on where we're coming from (which self).

And by volume I mean the intensity of the passion. Volume--loving something too much--is a linear conceptualization that leaves two choices--more or less. Another way to conceptualize it might be within a broader context of the interaction of a number of qualities and virtues--a systemic model. Here the goal may be to balance love with other virtues and attributes, such as wisdom and detachment and justice, thereby moderating the whole system.

As with any conceptualization of living the life, the real challenge is application. We have a couple of tools: (1) deep self-reflection, in the daily task of bringing oneself to account for growth, and (2) rich consultation, for solution-seeking in relationships.

And that brings us to the second question. I think and hope that if two people are willing and able to come to the consultation table with love, and put the insistent self aside, and consult openly, honestly, and "dispassionately" about their passions, they will be able to negotiate a system that honors each person's passions, moderates the attributes needed, and works for both of them.

Of course, not easy, and may not happen in one shot, but consultation allows for refinement through a continued cycle of action-reflection--consult, apply, reflect on the process and outcomes, consult again, and apply...

Doable as long as both people stay open and loving and keep striving in the "crusade... against the insistent self, the evil promptings of the human heart." (Selections from the Writings of`Abdu'l-Baha, Page: 256)

Just some thoughts that help me navigate.

Delara,

Great topic. When the answer to a question is both yes and no, I think you've found a subject worthy of discussion.

First, the second question: can we be happily partnered with someone who doesn't understand or appreciate our passions?

Yes, if your passion for each other is stronger or more important than your other passions.

No, which is why I find it so hard to settle down.

Of course the real answer here is compromise. Which as a word, just like passion, is often misinterpreted. I mean compromise in the positive sense, a mutually beneficial outcome. NOT as in "compromised principles."

The first question: passion is several things, with several connotations beyond its official denotations. The first thing that pops into my mind is physical passion, lust. It's such a beautiful word because of the associations: the things I'm passionate about in life evoke emotions that are just as strong as lust, and if not properly managed can, in the same way, cloud reasoning, judgement, and reflection. Still, ardent love for something is not categorically wrong.

So while I just argued for the compromise and moderation that Shok mentioned, let me throw something else in: the arts. Are there any truly great, masterful, evocative artists who weren't consumed and often driven mad by their passion? Didn't they produce the best examples of their art...without compromise, beyond mediocre? Was it even possible for Mozart to be a family man? Could Schumann have remained sane? Doesn't genius preclude a normal life?

As far as the quotes you mentioned, I think it's important to understand the type of passion the author was describing. Some of them are obviously lust. But the poetry of the word passion, and indeed of life, is in its ability to be simultaneously and without remorse both good and bad.

interesting... ok. so, i think you're on to something. my next question would be about "when it stands between you and god, you and your family..." - how does one determine this? who gets to decide when passion goes too far? por ejemplo, if a person is passionate about techno music and creates it and is married to someone who hates techno, would we say that person's passion might stand between them? can we be happily partnered with someone who doesn't understand or appreciate our passions?

I think this is where moderation comes into play. While "passion" and "moderation" seem counter to each other, I don't think they are. Being passionate about something is different (hopefully) from being consumed by that passion. I think passion becomes a problem when it stands betweeen you and God, or you and your family, or you and carrying out other responsibilities.

The examples you used seem to be about people who are moderately passionate. Okay. But what if the man with the passion for his career allowed that passion to cloud his life to the point that he never spent time which his children or never went to Feast, because he was addicted to work? Or if the poem writer was writing poems at the cost of eating, sleeping, praying?