Understanding Love

[key]

@Salaam

To me, love is attachment, attachment is suffering. 

What we call 'unconditional love' isn't love at all, it's pure acceptance of what is. 

[philosogi]

@Kenya But attachment isn't love. 

[Nexeternity]

I think love in an intimate relationship is unconditional and about giving your trust to them.

Its about letting yourself be vulnerable.

Its also about wanting them and yourself to be totally free because love cannot be an obligation.

I feel monogamous love is a more evolved and mature form of intimate relationship, but both people decide to only share their body and spirit in this intimate way totally freely, they do it for themselves not for the other person.

Freedom is a prerequisite, so developing ones freedom and authenticity is primary.

I think this vídeo is relevant.

 

[Nexeternity]

I also think that its important that the love in your intimate relationship fuels your enlightment and life purpose.  

All three should be interdependent, each one fueling the other two.

Edited August 27, 2016 by Nexeternity

[key]

@philosogi

What would you say love is then? 

Scientifically its chemical release in the brain, mentally it's cherishing someone for either what they've done for you in your life or how they've acted to you & others within your experience. 

Our experience is nothing but ever changing moments, and our ego is attached to those experiences trying to make them into something solid (now we have an identity) either with desire or aversion, and what is true detachment from your ego but ultimate acceptance of what is, for what is should be, within its entirety. 

[Kevin Dunlop]

It might be important to look into yourself and realize what you personally are doing in the love situation you are creating. It takes some deep analyzing to see what you are doing and why. I dont pretend to know what love is for everyone at every level but I can see what I am doing in my relationship and how it changes. Maybe these examples could be helpful

Learned ego programming and decisions I made in early childhood still give me objectives in my relationships. This is no sin its the way we all start out and go from there.

For example when I was a kid I thought ¨My Dad is mean, I wish he could learn to be nicer¨ So without knowing it I chose a girl to be with who could get mean because I always wanted to teach someone I love not to be mean. This is a tough job not really happy work, but until we understand why we are doing it, ( a childhood desire) we unconsciously hammer away at the silly plan. I was trying to understan the dynamic of love and meaness that I couldnt get anywhere with my Dad, so I unconsciously push someone into role playing until I understand the mystery enough and move on. 

Also my Dad had a partner like mine at this point in his life, I am just copying his formula without even knowing it. 

When I was growing up racism made girls I went to school with ignore me. I always wished for a girlfriend and a sexlife so finally I achieved that teenage goal.

So the point is that the identity has tons of goals,and reasons, and objectives all planned for you from what you learned you should want and how you should feel etc. 

Some people never see these things and inocently go along trying to fulfill all of these ego objectives. Once this impossible feat is revealed one has to unravel themselves from this messy situation and learn some better ways of being. 

I dont want ¨my relationship¨, I dont call it ¨love¨ but I do want what is. Its a place where I cant have expectations but I can learn, enjoy and improve myself. I cant expect my partner to do or learn anything she is free to decide that for herself. I dont have to roleplay for her either, if I need space its no insult, no one is perfect, no one taught us how to have a great relationship, we have to learn that for ourselves over time or do something else.

[key]

4 hours ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

@Kenya But what if the ego is no more attatched to love than it is attatched to your toothbrush?

The experience of a toothbrush would happen freely, and love would happen freely. 

I implore you to ask yourself; what is attachment really? What is free really?

What do you mean by those words & where does it incorporate itself within our experience 

Edited August 28, 2016 by Kenya

[philosogi]

 

10 hours ago, Kenya said:

What would you say love is then? 

Scientifically its chemical release in the brain, mentally it's cherishing someone for either what they've done for you in your life or how they've acted to you & others within your experience.

I think it's non-definable on human terms. So it's easier to say what it isn't, than what it is. I disagree that scientifically speaking it's chemicals in our brain; I think that's the infatuation period. I also don't think it's linked to things that people do for us. This is human "love," which isn't real/true love.

But maybe, in the consciousness that we participate in as illusory individuals, one part of the consciousness connecting with another part of that consciousness could be love. It could last for an instant of human time, or it could last forever.

11 hours ago, Kenya said:

Our experience is nothing but ever changing moments, and our ego is attached to those experiences trying to make them into something solid (now we have an identity) either with desire or aversion, and what is true detachment from your ego but ultimate acceptance of what is, for what is should be, within its entirety.

Or maybe, true love is achieved when we can love everything and everyone unconditionally - aka love reality. Is that similar to what you're saying?

[key]

14 hours ago, philosogi said:

I think it's non-definable on human terms.

'love' is 'pleasure'

They're both symbols for experience.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Kenya

[Prabhaker]

@Raquel

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. Adolf Hitler will have one idea of love, Gautam Buddha another; and they will be diametrically opposite, because they are at two extremes.

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.

Only at the highest peak, when love is not a relationship any more, when love becomes a state of your being, the lotus opens totally and great perfume is released – but only at the highest peak. At the lowest, love is just a political relationship. At the highest, love is a religious state of consciousness.

 Buddha loves, Jesus loves, but their love demands nothing in return. Their love is given for the sheer joy of giving it; it is not a bargain. Hence the radiant beauty of it, hence the transcendental beauty of it. It surpasses all the joys that you have known.

[LifeLife]

@philosogi Love can drive someone to do many things; e.g die for someone, feel compassion for others and everything, feel connected etc. etc. all these things must be beyond the brain and body since its pre-occupation is not of survival or reproduction but for no reason at all. It is self-less. Perhaps love is beyond our chemical soup in this instance then, if its motives lie beyond it.. I have no clue I'm just making this shit up but hey who knows

[Raquel]

What I came to realize is that words are not enough in quality and quantanty to express meanings and interpretations of Love. We need a new language to comunicate True Love. Is beyond all we can say in words.

 

 

[Salaam]

On 8/26/2016 at 5:46 PM, Frogfucius said:

It's cool, brother. I don't have anything against relationships one way or another. Your values are equally as valid as mine.

If we were to observe the universe scientifically, every single sub-atomic particle has an energetic force (what we call gravity) on every single other sub-atomic particle. That means your fingernail has a pull on billions of stars, in billions of galaxies. It's a stunning realization that everyone and everything in this universe are connected, as if we're part of one organic being. The elements that make up you and me were created from a supernova - a giant stat's explosion. Our lineage traces back to a giant star, and if we want to go back farther, just space and gas.

These are merely ideas and concepts that hold no truth or value, but I find the idea of oneness as beautiful. Loving you just as I would myself feels peaceful.

Ah nice, cool man. See I view it in much the same way, but the difference is I don't let it all collapse into my mind as one thing (not saying/assuming you are, just speaking in general)... I protect the nuance of it all from being discarded in the name of simplicity. There is connection, but not as complete fusion or nothingness. Instead I see multiple tiers of ecosystems and sub-ecosystems, all connected, but distinct. SHARING sovereignty, as well as sharing in the ability to be moved and influenced by the confluence of other systems moving and inter-relating near each other.

I've devoted myself for many years to studying and living and expanding my senses in regard to the actual "substance" that connects and chains all these micro and macro systems together. The push, pull, and balance of connective tension, which in other words could be labeled as attraction, repulsion, and harmony (a flavor of balance akin to what is known as the goldilocks zone). Working to harmonize greater and greater degrees of inter-connectivity, protecting them from collapse into polarities of extremes with their consequent extreme influences of attraction/repulsion, and expanding deeper from the understandings gained from the details in between these shifting tiers of connection.

I don't let who I am be consumed by my connections to the rest of the universe. I am both an individual and a part of a larger system, with my own conatus (innate inclination of a thing to continue to exist and enhance itself), just like the cells and organs and bacteria in my body have their own conatus. But, also I have my own sense of satisfaction in devoting myself to something greater then I am, which I also depend on, much like my organs, cells, and bacteria also do. I balance both. Personally, I feel people who don't balance both and let their identity and individuality be consumed or discarded limit themselves from certain thresholds of development.

For instance, internalization is the degree to which new information/patterns/connections embed themselves within our body and mind and is a required part of all learning. However, there are different degrees of internalization and one of the deepest tiers is identity level internalization, where information/skills/abilities become a part of who you are and can be accessed and expressed with as much ease as breathing, due to harnessing the automation of such skills that come when one's level reaches such a threshold of integration. What this means, is self-referencing, identity, and many other things are all system level functions with a purpose that is not to be discarded, because of some story of penultimate oneness people are chasing, but instead it is to be balanced and harmonized. Synergized, for continued expansion and evolution.

On 8/27/2016 at 4:37 AM, Kenya said:

@Salaam

To me, love is attachment, attachment is suffering. 

What we call 'unconditional love' isn't love at all, it's pure acceptance of what is. 

I can see why a person might think that way, but if such a statement attempting to describe reality crossed my mental landscape, I'd be wary of attributing such a simple generalization to such a wide and deeply nuanced topic as connection/attachment.

There are many different kinds of connection/attachment and there are many different kinds of ways to relate to different kinds of connection. Is it the attachment itself that causes suffering or the LOSS of connection that does? Is it really suffering we feel or does that label depend upon a multitude of other things, like abundance/diversity of other connections, individual levels of resiliency, chosen ways of relating to the connection and it's impact on our reality, and the meanings or stories we ascribe to it? How does the connection balance in contrast to other ones? Is it a connection that consumes and shrinks who we are or does it expand and nourish us?

For me love isn't pure acceptance... acceptance is kind of meh, it's more comfort than love based when it comes to my personal feels. It helps with engendering ease and aiding flow, but that isn't always a constructive thing, because there are shitty patterns in the world that aren't worth accepting and internalizing, like depression patterns or forms of oppression and marginalization.  Just like there are gasses and climates physically speaking that would kill me if I just passively accepted them and allowed them to connect and inter-mingle with my body's system. 

In my experience, intimate, deep-abiding love is a living thing nurtured and protected over time between people. With all due respect, I'd caution you to hold some space for your view of what unconditional love is until you've built that love over many years with another person in an intimate setting. I'm not trying to belittle you with that statement, but instead share with you the realizations I had that only came after I did experience such a thing myself after many years of devotion... I can feel connection and love with everyone, but it's nothing compared to the deep, intimate love that comes from my connection with my wife. They're both nice of course, but there is a difference and we can have both.

@Raquel

Our first show is up. I thought we did pretty good, it was a little rough and all over the place in some spots, but hopefully people liked it. If you give it a listen, please let me know what you think

 

Edited August 31, 2016 by Salaam

[Frogfucius]

@Salaam I think that's a perfectly valid interpretation if it works for you. I just also think there's room for ego to rear its head if we are not conscious of why we are doing something. For example, in the purposes of this topic, let's say I love my children more than other children because they're an extension of me. By claiming this, my ego is building a sense of identity and self, which leads to suffering if threatened.

Yes, relationships and connections between people are a natural instinct, because it ensures our survival. But one relationship isn't inherently more valuable than another. My kids, my genetics, aren't inheritably more valuable than other kids. Our minds place value on things, when there ultimately is no value. The reality is that we are all going to die, everything is going to die, even the world we live on. For our mind to still believe that one relationship holds any type of value, despite this fact, is an illusion.

I'm not saying intimacy is wrong, but the problem that causes most suffering in relationships is that most people go into them with the idea of the other person 'fulfilling' them. That never happens, because the other person is going to have their own agenda, and never be able to 100% satisfy the needs and expectations of the person wanting fulfillment. If both partners are fulfilled without each other, and can be happy without each other and not need the other person for happiness and joy, then that is true intimate love. Anything else is egotistical and comes from the place of "Well, you should be acting this way for my benefit!"

[Dodo]

Love is when a man and a woman /or an lgbt and an lgbt/ make sweet sweet love and share their lives till the end. Because they see the truth in the other and the other sees the truth in them and so... You know, helping each other overcome struggles and have spiritual growth together. Peace

Edited September 1, 2016 by Dodoster

[Raquel]

@Salaam really nice. I  share the same opinions about relationships. Respecting each other individuality is one of the things I  most see couples struggling with..and from there triggering other problems.

Very strong and wise woman you have there. Suffering is a great "teacher". It really deepens us to search for ways out of that dark place in our mind and body. 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2016 by Raquel

[Salaam]

On 8/31/2016 at 6:03 PM, Frogfucius said:

@Salaam I think that's a perfectly valid interpretation if it works for you. I just also think there's room for ego to rear its head if we are not conscious of why we are doing something. For example, in the purposes of this topic, let's say I love my children more than other children because they're an extension of me. By claiming this, my ego is building a sense of identity and self, which leads to suffering if threatened.

Yes, relationships and connections between people are a natural instinct, because it ensures our survival. But one relationship isn't inherently more valuable than another. My kids, my genetics, aren't inheritably more valuable than other kids. Our minds place value on things, when there ultimately is no value. The reality is that we are all going to die, everything is going to die, even the world we live on. For our mind to still believe that one relationship holds any type of value, despite this fact, is an illusion.

I'm not saying intimacy is wrong, but the problem that causes most suffering in relationships is that most people go into them with the idea of the other person 'fulfilling' them. That never happens, because the other person is going to have their own agenda, and never be able to 100% satisfy the needs and expectations of the person wanting fulfillment. If both partners are fulfilled without each other, and can be happy without each other and not need the other person for happiness and joy, then that is true intimate love. Anything else is egotistical and comes from the place of "Well, you should be acting this way for my benefit!"

Ah, I get what you mean and those are completely reasonable lines of thought. I've thought about similar things myself, however allow me to share a couple different expansions along those lines and maybe some perspectives that at least for me, create different conclusions.

First, lets focus on a love that is derived from recognition of who a person has chosen and built themselves to be rather than a love that is derived from biological similarity (or a love derived from entitlement). There is nothing wrong with the latter love as a base, BUT love is much more rich and abundant with meaning, satisfaction, and character if the former is also included. Neither of the two are mutually exclusive of course, but it is better across most commonly held standards to develop and devote ourselves to both.

Second, how about we differentiate suffering from pain and stress? And how about we differentiate our fears and reactions to those three? Personally, I am not frozen by either three and actively embrace both pain and stress towards constructive directions. In my view stress, pain, and fear are not inherently bad things, they just seem "bad" in isolation, or when there are not other things in place to counter-balance them. With a counter-balance, they can be great things. Like, I love having a little bit of pain sprinkled across passionate sexual pleasure. A woman's nails across my skin, bite marks in the muscles around my neck...

Then with stress, it can be positive or negative, often times pleasure can be intense and include stress, but we're too involved with the pleasure to even notice it, like when playing sports or practicing something we love. Then there is fear. Personally, I enjoy adding a little bit of fear to myself for important situations, because it makes me more sensitive to my surroundings. I find it quite useful.

Building something and having it threatened does not need to have us draw conclusions that such an endeavor is useless, a waste of time, or an illusion.

You say everything is going to die, so why place value on them? Well, first I say we should take a closer look at what death and loss really means and second, why focus on value, when we can focus on preference? Why look to some outside standard for what is valuable, when we can choose for ourselves what we prefer and what choices we make, that connect us and create experiences and understandings that are precious?

We do not have to give up in the face of loss. And we don't have to give up on expanding our understandings of what loss really is. I have a lot of experience with loss. Every time I make a choice, I lose out on something else, but that loss does not invalidate the life and expression I have touched and experienced.

And finally with regard to the "other person fulfilling them thing" I talk about in my show with my wife a core concept for relationship balance called "my world, her world, shared world" that basically means every relationship we have with a person has three worlds or zones and each one must be cared for and nurtured. The shared world cannot consume the two individual worlds and a relationship between two people with no shared world is not much of a relationship at all. All three have to be protected and all three have to BOTH counter-balance AND synergize with each other, for the most healthiest of relationships. When this relationship trinity is in place for both people, then behaviors that threaten the integrity of all three worlds get filtered out and instead a goldilocks zone of positive/constructive efforts become the lens of activity. Which basically means the kinds of things people in such a relationship will do, will fall in the zone that actively benefits all three, or at the least creates a balance between all three.
 

Edited September 7, 2016 by Salaam

[Capethaz]

@Raquel  Since childhood we accumulate so much bullshit that prevent us from feeling true love, but when the self falls away, love appears. Love is our natural state. 

[Salaam]

On 9/1/2016 at 8:05 AM, Raquel said:

@Salaam really nice. I  share the same opinions about relationships. Respecting each other individuality is one of the things I  most see couples struggling with..and from there triggering other problems.

Very strong and wise woman you have there. Suffering is a great "teacher". It really deepens us to search for ways out of that dark place in our mind and body. 

 

 

Thank you! She is so amazing. She is truly a person who has felt the force of life and rather then being twisted by it's fire, she softened and strengthened. Creating grace and beauty in her wake. Of course she's got her fire and claws too of course, she's a warrior, but that heart and courage and care.

It's an amazing thing to feel like the person you married is not only your best friend, but also in a way your hero.