There Is No Real Love In This World.

[Loreena]

There is no real love in this world.

 

 

Or is there

[Prabhaker]

14 minutes ago, Loreena said:

Or is there

In real love there is no division. The lovers melt into each other. In egoistical love there is great division, the division of the lover and the loved. In real love there is no relationship. Let me repeat it: in real love there is no relationship, because there are not two persons to be related to. In real love there is only love, a flowering, a fragrance, a melting, a merging. Only in egoistic love are there two persons, the lover and the loved. And whenever there is the lover and the loved, love disappears. Whenever there is love, the lover and the beloved, both disappear into love.

Love is such a great phenomenon; you cannot survive in it.

Real love is always in the present. Egoistical love is always either in the past or in the future. In real love there is a passionate coolness. It will look paradoxical, but all greater realities of life are paradoxical; hence I call it passionate coolness: there is warmth, but there is no heat in it. Warmth certainly is there, but there is also coolness in it, a very collected, calm, cool state. Love makes one less feverish. But if it is not real love but egoistical love, then there is great heat. Then the passion is there like fever, there is no coolness at all.

If you can remember these things you will have the criterion for judging. But one has to start with oneself, there is no other way. One has to start from where one is.

Love yourself, love immensely, and in that very love your pride, your ego and all that nonsense, will disappear. And when it has disappeared your love will start reaching to other people. And it will not be a relationship but a sharing. And it will not be an object/subject relationship but a melting, a togetherness. It will not be feverish, it will be a cool passion. It will be warm and cool together. It will give you the first taste of the paradoxicalness of life.

[SFRL]

I figure you don't have kids. 

[Prabhaker]

Love Basically Is a State of Being

"The real thing is not a relationship but a state; one is not in love but one is love. Whenever I talk about love remember this: I am talking about the state of love. Yes, relationship is perfectly good, but the relationship is going to be false if you have not attained to the state of love. Then the relationship is not only a pretension, it is a dangerous pretension, because it can go on befooling you; it can go on giving you the sense that you know what love is, and you don't know. Love basically is a state of being; one is not in love, one is love. 

"And that love arises not by falling in love with somebody. That love arises by going in – not by falling but by rising, soaring upwards, higher than you. It is a kind of surpassing. A man is love when his being is silent; it is the song of silence. A buddha is love, a Jesus is love – not in love with a particular person, but simply love. Their very climate is love. It is not addressed to anybody in particular, it is spreading in all directions. Whosoever comes close to a buddha will feel it, will be showered by it, will be bathed in it. And it is unconditionally so. 

"Love makes no conditions, no ifs, no buts. Love never says, "Fulfill these requirements, then I will love you." Love is like breathing: when it happens you are simply love. It does not matter who comes close to you, the sinner or the saint. Whosoever comes close to you starts feeling the vibe of love, is rejoiced. Love is unconditional giving – but only those are capable of giving who have."

[Prabhaker]

6 minutes ago, SFRL said:

I figure you don't have kids. 

The class of children is the most harmed, oppressed, exploited, distorted class of all classes -- and the most helpless. And you are taking advantage of the helplessness of small children. But you are also not responsible. The same has been done to you.

The child comes into the world without any ambition, without any lust for power, without any idea that he is higher, holier, superior. We corrupt their minds. The basic conditioning, the basic imprisonment is created in childhood when the child is so helpless that he has to accept whatsoever conditions you put upon him just to survive.

They cannot survive without you. It is a question of life and death! They have to be Christians, Hindus, they have to be Mohammedans, they have to be Jainas, they have to be Buddhists, they have to be communists. Whatsoever you are interested in putting into their minds, you go on putting it in. Instead of making them more alert, more aware, more alive, more reflective, instead of making them more mirrorlike, pure, you make them full of ideas...layers and layers of dust. This is not real love.

[Loreena]

4 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

 Love basically is a state of being; one is not in love, one is love.

 

You put it very beautifully. Only if it were that easy.

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

 

 your pride, your ego and all that nonsense, will disappear. And when it has disappeared your love will start reaching to other people. And it will not be a relationship but a sharing.

 

yeah. But even when my ego disappears and when my love is radiating to my family, I still don't feel it coming back to me. maybe I am asking for more affection, maybe I yearn for more affection, but isn't this need the most basic of all human expectations ?? Then when I give love, why do I feel like I am not receiving it back. They say - in giving we receive, But how come I never seem to receive. Is this a paradox where you are made to believe that real love exists. go search for it. go give more love and you will get it, but when you end up getting frustrated in the endless search for that wholesome love, isn't it just another paradoxical illusion our mind believes in, like all other illusions societal conditioning has fed us.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

 

"Love makes no conditions, no ifs, no buts. Love never says, "Fulfill these requirements, then I will love you." Love is like breathing: when it happens you are simply love.

Has anyone ever loved you this way. Now be honest. That's what I was really talking about. if there was real love, it would have been without the ifs and buts. Haven't you ever yearned for this kind of love. Can you say that you really got it. Does anyone ever gets it or we just keep running and chasing the rainbow that we will keep chasing till the end and it will  never come to us because it never existed in the first place.

 

 

 

[Prabhaker]

4 minutes ago, Loreena said:

I still don't feel it coming back to me.

When you remove passion and attachment from love, when your love is pure, innocent, formless, when you give in love and don't demand, when love is only a giving, when love is an emperor, not a beggar; when you are happy because someone has accepted your love and you don't trade love, you ask nothing in return, then you are liberating this bird of love into the open sky. Then you are strengthening its wings. Then this bird can set out on the journey to the infinite. 

[Loreena]

Just now, Prabhaker said:

When you remove passion and attachment from love, when your love is pure, innocent, formless, when you give in love and don't demand, when love is only a giving, when love is an emperor, not a beggar; when you are happy because someone has accepted your love and you don't trade love, you ask nothing in return, then you are liberating this bird of love into the open sky. Then you are strengthening its wings. Then this bird can set out on the journey to the infinite.

Don't these words look really good only in the books and movies. You can obviously love a child that way without attachment and expectation, but what about loving an adult ? Expectations are obvious. Can you live without love ? Can you really live a life loving everyone deeply and never getting any love in return. How can that be. Such a love would be saintly love and we are humans  with human failings and cravings. How can you live a loveless existence and still keep loving.

[Prabhaker]

11 minutes ago, Loreena said:

what about loving an adult ? Expectations are obvious. Can you live without love ?

When expectations are there , don't call it love. It may be an attachment, possession , infatuation. 

I don't expect love from anybody. 

[philosogi]

24 minutes ago, Loreena said:

Don't these words look really good only in the books and movies. You can obviously love a child that way without attachment and expectation, but what about loving an adult ? Expectations are obvious. Can you live without love ? Can you really live a life loving everyone deeply and never getting any love in return. How can that be. Such a love would be saintly love and we are humans  with human failings and cravings. How can you live a loveless existence and still keep loving.

Substitute "human" with "ego," and then realize that ego can be transcended. There is a difference between "love" and "need," what you're describing looks more like "need" than "love." 

[Loreena]

Just now, philosogi said:

Substitute "human" with "ego," and then realize that ego can be transcended. There is a difference between "love" and "need," what you're describing looks more like "need" than "love." 

Isn't love a basic need ?

[philosogi]

@Loreena Is that your belief?

[egoeimai]

There is Love. 

If one doesn't believe LOVE exists,they are miserable for thousand lifetimes.

LOVE IS EVERYWHERE.

EVERYWHERE IIII LOOK AROUND.

Love is in the air.

❤❤❤❤

Love is everything. 

[Loreena]

@egoeimai    ❤❤

 

[Prabhaker]

59 minutes ago, egoeimai said:

If one doesn't believe LOVE exists,they are miserable for thousand lifetimes.

There are many, many layers, many planes of love. It all depends on you. If you are existing on the lowest rung, you will have a totally different idea of love than the person who is existing on the highest rung. 

At the lowest, love is a kind of politics, power politics. Wherever love is contaminated by the idea of domination, it is politics. Whether you call it politics or not is not the question, it is political. And millions of people never know anything about love except this politics – the politics that exists between husbands and wives, boyfriends and girlfriends. It is politics, the whole thing is political: you want to dominate the other, you enjoy domination.

And love is nothing but politics sugar-coated, a bitter pill sugar-coated. You talk about love but the deep desire is to exploit the other. And I am not saying that you are doing it deliberately or consciously – you are not that conscious yet. You cannot do it deliberately; it is an unconscious mechanism.

Hence so much possessiveness and so much jealousy become a part, an intrinsic part, of your love. That’s why love creates more misery than joy. Ninety-nine percent of it is bitter; there is only that one percent of sugar that you have coated on top of it. And sooner or later that sugar disappears.

When you are in the beginning of a love affair, those honeymoon days, you taste something sweet. Soon that sugar wears off, and the realities start appearing in stark nakedness and the whole thing becomes ugly.

Millions of people have decided not to love human beings any more. It is better to love a dog, a cat, a parrot; it is better to love a car – because you can dominate them well, and the other never tires to dominate you. It is simple; it is not as complex as it is going to be with human beings.

44 minutes ago, Loreena said:

 ❤❤

You started topic about 'real love'. Now you talk about 'trade love', in which you can get returns for your investment.

[egoeimai]

1 minute ago, Prabhaker said:

 

Millions of people have decided not to love human beings any more. It is better to love a dog, a cat, a parrot; it is better to love a car – because you can dominate them well, and the other never tires to dominate you. It is simple; it is not as complex as it is going to be with human beings.

Yes!

[Guest Annetta]

I don't think so, look at the state of the world, it's in shambles.

 

[Shin]

When you first feel love for someone, this isn't a fake emotion, it is very genuine.

It seems to "go", but it isn't, it's just clouded by the mind and its incessant needs and conditions, that it thinks it is required to feel love, but ...

... Love can only appears when nothing is in your mind.

@Prabhaker Lol dude, this is a whole passage of "From sex to superconsciousness" from Osho, now I understand why all your message are so god damn long, they're all quotes !

Can't you just talk with your own words ?
You know it's ok not to impress, it's ok to just be you ...

Edited April 23, 2017 by Shin

[Prabhaker]

2 hours ago, Shin said:

Can't you just talk with your own words ?

Sharing each other's experiences are of little importance. There are so many people around to share their experiences. 

Each person is different, what is correct from my perspective can be useless for other.

Only sharing of words of an enlightened master can be meaningful. A blind man can't guide other blind man.

[Shin]

21 minutes ago, Prabhaker said:

Sharing each other's experiences are of little importance. There are so many people around to share their experiences. 

Each person is different, what is correct from my perspective can be useless for other.

Only sharing of words of an enlightened master can be meaningful. A blind man can't guide other blind man.

Well, if you like being a parrot, be a parrot, I guess that's a calling.

You could also tells in your own intimate way what you understand about a passage from a Master, without even reading the passage, and just using your intuition,

You know that thing we each have in common, since we're all one.

@Prabhaker The harm is to yourself.
By doing that, you don't develop your potential, you limit yourself to be a simple parrot, instead of being a individual with its own understanding, its own preference, its own style.
That also limit you in the sense that you glorify this master, but he's just a dude, like you and me.
By putting him on a pedestal, you limit your own capacity to transcend, and to actually really understand what this guy was saying ...
It is also feeding your ego, since you never quote your source...

Edited April 23, 2017 by Shin