What Love is according to me

[TheAlchemist]

@Zigzag Idiot That's very interesting. It seems to be true that the sense of being a separate self only stays alive because we believe in the reality of the "negative" emotions. Fear tends to be retractive/restrictive and Love seems to be expansive. So the only way we hold "ourselves" together is by believing the fear which is necessary for the illusion to exist. By letting go of the insistence on fear being real we are released into the base state of infinite Love. 

Let me know if this sounds right from the course perspective, I'm a new student

[The observer]

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There is certainly a why.

Love must be a mytery so that you can recieve the greatest gift in the universe: it's discovery.

You hid Love from yourself precisely so that you could receive the gift of realizing that all is Love.

If Love wasn't hidden, it wouldn't be Total.

??

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You are totally deluded.

?

[The observer]

@Nak Khid Don't bother dude. It's denial taken to its extreme.

https://www.simplypsychology.org/defense-mechanisms.html

"Denial is a defense mechanism proposed by Anna Freud which involves a refusal to accept reality, thus blocking external events from awareness. If a situation is just too much to handle, the person may respond by refusing to perceive it or by denying that it exist."

[Leo Gura]

@The observer

LOVE!, you imbecile.

 

 

 

 

 

P.S. If you don't wise up soon you're getting kicked outa here for wasting serious people's time.

[The observer]

@Leo Gura

Imbecile: noun

1 a rude way to describe a person that you think is very stupid

Thanks Leo. At least, I'm learning new rude/offensive words to avoid using since that's not allowed here according to the guidelines. But hey, that's your place and you can be rude as much as you want. Name calling is love. But truth demonstrating is not. I see.

Have a good day..

[mandyjw]

7 hours ago, Zigzag Idiot said:

In a nutshell, the more conventional view of nondualism says that opposites (like good and evil, life and death, or spirit and body) are all manifestations of the One. The Course’s nondualism, on the other hand, says that only the positive side of certain fundamental opposites is a manifestation of the One (God); the negative side is not a manifestation of God at all, but is instead solely a mistaken product of our own minds.

I don't see them as having any conflict. 

You are not the story, but the story has to have drama (perceived negativity) to be a story in the first place. No one complains that J.K Rowling is a horrible person because she kills Harry's parents and creates Voldemort as the basis of the Harry Potter story, the the character of Harry himself. We don't point out these things because we know it's a story. She wrote it out of creative love, to inspire, entertain and make people feel. That's what most people glean from the stories, because that was the author's intention for the books. 

You are Harry Potter. You can bitch and moan at the world and "God" (JK Rowling) for killing your parents and stay stuck living at the Dursley's or you can go live your adventure and transformation. You came to live the adventure, that's alignment with love. Why is JK Rowling not evil for dreaming up Voldemort? Because Harry Potter doesn't exist. 

Likewise you do not exist outside this story. 

Edited June 4, 2020 by mandyjw

[JayG84]

2 hours ago, TheAlchemist said:

So the only way we hold "ourselves" together is by believing the fear which is necessary for the illusion to exist. By letting go of the insistence on fear being real we are released into the base state of infinite Love. 

Yes. Infinite Love can also be looked at as complete acceptance because anything that you can't accept is a distintion you made seperate from Love that has an emotion attached to it. The emotion is something that's trying to bring you back to Love, meaning your authentic self. Self-Love.

Edited June 4, 2020 by JayG84

[Nak Khid]

21 hours ago, Zigzag Idiot said:

More grist for the mill-

THE COURSE’S NONDUALISM: LOVE IS A LAW WITHOUT AN OPPOSITE

A Course in Miracles is often described as “nondualistic.” Many compare it to the nondualistic Hindu philosophy known as Advaita Vedanta—it has even been called a “Christian Vedanta.” It seems to be a nearly universally held view that the Course and the great nondualistic sages of the world are saying the exact same thing in different words.

I agree that the Course is nondualistic and shares many commonalities with other nondualistic paths. However, I also think there is at least one crucial difference between it and most other forms of nondualism out there—a difference that is the focus of this article. In a nutshell, the more conventional view of nondualism says that opposites (like good and evil, life and death, or spirit and body) are all manifestations of the One. The Course’s nondualism, on the other hand, says that only the positive side of certain fundamental opposites is a manifestation of the One (God); the negative side is not a manifestation of God at all, but is instead solely a mistaken product of our own minds.

This snippet from - https://circleofa.org/library/the-courses-nondualism-love-is-a-law-without-an-opposite/

This is an interesting essay and I recommend  everybody read it at the above link because it brings up many points of view. 

Traditional oneness traditions (nondualism) or monism do not say love is all that exists. 

It seems the thinking is this, there is no separation all is one and since this is the case we get to choose what we want it to be so we choose "love".   

And then we see in the essay once this is done other thinkers come in and may then start redefining love as they want it do be and the Course in Miracles version is described in another essay on love:
https://circleofa.org/library/what-is-the-meaning-of-love/

The Course in Miracles does not use the term nondualism but some say it has an aspect, a Christianized one,
resembling nondualist concept.  

___________________________________________________________________________

 "love" is not the oneness described in Advaita Vedanta or Buddhist nonduality

 

THE NOBLE EIGHTFOLD PATH (Buddhism) 

1. Right understanding (Samma ditthi)

2. Right thought (Samma sankappa)

3. Right speech (Samma vaca) 

4. Right action (Samma kammanta)

5. Right livelihood (Samma ajiva) 

6. Right effort (Samma vayama)

7. Right mindfulness (Samma sati)

8. Right concentration (Samma samadhi)

 

Although Buddhists advocate right action which is moral, honorable, and peaceful conduct, they  prefer not to advocate love and instead compassion because love can include love of power, food, money, sex, etc,
attachments and desires they believe lead to suffering (although some might not deny or advocate certain forms of love)
However they don't say that this feeling compassion is all that exists.  

Bhakti yoga is more focused on love. Bhakti yoga is focused on loving devotion towards a personal god. 
The Sanskrit word bhakti is derived from the root bhaj, which means "divide, share, partake, participate, to belong to". The word also means "attachment, devotion to, fondness for, homage, faith or love, worship, piety to something as a spiritual, religious principle or means of salvation". According to Samrat Kumar, bhakti yoga is an Indian tradition of "divine love mysticism", a spiritual path "synonymous for an intimate understanding of oneness and harmony of the eternal individual with the Divine (the universal Being) and all creatures, a constant delight"

Neither the Course in Miracles with it's LOVE IS A LAW WITHOUT AN OPPOSITE not Bhakti yoga teach that rape and murder are love. 

from the essay at top 

Quote

Esther Veltheim: “What one culture sees as bad, another finds quite acceptable. You may say they are wrong, but who made you the morals police?”

In fact, Veltheim claims that love is not a positive virtue at all:

When it is said that “God is Love,” the world love signifies neutrality. It has nothing to do with the opposite of hate. God is just another word for neutrality, and neutrality denotes “not helping or supporting either of two opposing sides….”…[T]here is no point, no purpose, and no meaning….

You see if you understand your True nature IS neutrality, caring and making things matter is really missing the mark.

This material illustrates perfectly the difference between Course nondualism and conventional nondualism (at least the Neo-Advaita variety). In Course nondualism, God is Love and nothing else. “Hate must be the opposite of love” (M-7.4:7), and God is wholly on the side of love, which alone is real. His love means that He cares for us. “You are His care because He loves you….His concern and care for you are limitless” (T-5.VII.1:5, T-15.VIII.1:5). And He has given each of us the holy purpose of caring for each other: “And to each [person] has He allowed the grace to be a savior to the holy ones especially entrusted to his care” (T-31.VII.8:3). But in Veltheim’s nondualism, God is neutrality. He doesn’t really love or hate, for to do either would be to take a side. He doesn’t care for us and doesn’t want us to care about anyone or anything. Veltheim calls this “Love,” but what a strange kind of love! Imagine someone saying to you “I love you,” and then clarifying it by saying, “Well, I actually mean that I’m totally neutral toward you. I really don’t care. After all, there is no purpose or meaning to anything so you don’t really matter to me.” Would you feel loved by this person?

As I’ve said, the great nondual sages don’t travel this cold, amoral path (and I should add that more than a few Course teachers and students interpret the Course in a Neo-Advaita way), but it is an easy path to slip onto if your very vision of reality is of God the Great Neutrality. To me, the beauty of the Course’s non-dualism is this: The fact that God Himself is only loving gives us a firm anchor in reality for a life that is a true imitatio Dei, a life of pure love. True, the Course never gives us a list of behavioral norms, but it does constantly call us to live a life in which all of our thoughts, words, and actions are reflections of the purely loving nature we share with God. To use the list of characteristics of God’s teachers (see M-4), the advanced teacher of this path lives a life of perfect trust, honesty, tolerance, gentleness, joy, defenselessness, generosity, patience, faithfulness, and open-mindedness. This person is far more appealing to me than the one who is “beyond” right and wrong, and too detached to even care.

 People who say everything is love often will say rape and murder are love,   everything is included. 
 some will articulate this a neutrality.

I think rape and murder are not love.   Love is a feeling.   You can love to murder people but that doesn't mean love is murder.
Love is an affection, preference or devotion to something. It is not the object itself.  And if you claim to love everything, you love eating shit, you love torturing animals.  That still does not mean love are those things. 
And there is a word for neutrality, it's neutrality.   Neutrality is not love, love is not everything and love comes and goes it is not infinite. 
You can maintain a belief in oneness of all things (and I prefer this to nonduality which is a negative term) but that does not mean the oneness is love.  What you have done is decided the oneness have a particular character love. 
So what's wrong with advocating love?  Why knock that?   Isn't  it a wonderful thing?   
No, it can be hideous if love evil things.  And it's worse if the word stripped of it's natural meaning by saying everything is love,  evil is love, hate is love, police brutality is love, racks are love, puke is love   etc.  
That to me is spiritual violence.  It takes a word which in it's highest form is caring and helping each other and living things and then say it includes everything including evil and harming people and then tries to hide behind being pro-love in saying everything is love. 
It is not being pro-love.   It is a false empty love, a facade
The traditions that nondualism comes from have ethical codes and these ethical codes are part of how their version of nondualism is realized. 
If you take that away it can potentially become very dangerous, where everything is accepted and some things should not be accepted. 
 

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by Nak Khid

[roopepa]

You guys are completely misunderstanding what Leo means by Love. 

Think about it this way:

1. You are creating the universe.

2. Why would YOU create it? What would be so fucking amazing that YOU decide to create all of this for YOURSELF?

3. The answer is INFINITE LOVE!!!!

WHAT COULD BE A BETTER REASON FOR ANYTHING TO BE?? WHY THE FUCK WOULD GOD CREATE ANYTHING FOR ITSELF IF NOT BECAUSE OF LOVE???

This is not some random shit happening here. How stupid do you think God is? Of course it's Love.

God has no reason to be anything else than Infinite Love. Why would YOU decide to be anything else?

Edited June 4, 2020 by roopepa

[Nak Khid]

34 minutes ago, roopepa said:

1. You are creating the universe.

 

or is this another grandiose fairy tale leading to narcissistic delusion ? 

[Alex bAlex]

I see that many here are just on a purpose to get Leo wrong :)) Ok, and then? 

[Consilience]

@Nak Khid as long as you THINK love is a feeling, you wont understand what Leo is referring to. There exists a formless quality to the universe which is rightly defined as Love.

Imagine this, if you loved something  you would allow it to be exactly as it is. You would not need this thing to be a particular way at all, you would allow this thing to fully express itself without your influence, you love it completely as it self after all.

This is the nature of existence, in case you've missed it. Existence is so loving, it fully accepts the manifestation of form, in all forms, completely and wholly, even rape and murder. It is radical and completely transhuman. You cannot comprehend this Truth through the lens of humanity. As an ego, we think “how horrible murder is!” But to existence, murder is like a single raindrop creating a ripple in an ocean. Less than that... it’s heart wrenching really. But its the truth. 

The universe is so loving, so unconditional, even atrocities are permitted to be, freely expressing themselves. 

Why some dont use the word “Love” I cant explain. All I can say is when your heart opens up to this truth, you will understand. Perhaps many spiritual traditions see the risk of the ego taking snd running with the word love. I mean look at how Christianity, a religion based on the teaching of love, has completely bastardized the teaching. But our concern is not with Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Cheng Hsin, Advaita Vedanta, Neo Advaita, Non dualism, Actualized.org or anything that can be turned into a teaching, our concern is with Truth. 

I hope you can find Truth = Love in this lifetime but even if not, we have eternity. 

[EnlightenmentBlog]

I'm not on the "Love-bus" either. I understand what Leo and others try to explain logically, but I haven't awakened to it.

That doesn't mean I don't keep an open mind and I won't accept it if it turns out this way. Don't close your doors. Be open-minded.

Just entertain this as a possibility.

[Nak Khid]

30 minutes ago, Consilience said:

@Nak Khid as long as you THINK love is a feeling, you wont understand what Leo is referring to. There exists a formless quality to the universe which is rightly defined as Love.

 

a formless quality is a formless quality
not love 

 

Quote

@Nak Khid as long as you THINK love is a feeling, you wont understand what Leo is referring to. There exists a formless quality to the universe which is rightly defined as Love.

Imagine this, if you loved something  you would allow it to be exactly as it is. You would not need this thing to be a particular way at all, you would allow this thing to fully express itself without your influence, you love it completely as it self after all.

If I imagined loving something, loving something is a feeling.  Therefore doing so would not lead to the idea that it is not a feeling. 

Also if  I loved something I would not always allow it to be exactly as it is.   If it was going to harm itself or others I might try to stop it .
Love is not accepting everything. That is apathy pretending to be love

 

Quote

@Nak Khid

This is the nature of existence, in case you've missed it. Existence is so loving, it fully accepts the manifestation of form, in all forms, completely and wholly, even rape and murder. 

 

Again you are talking about a behavior "accepting" and what you are saying here about accepting rape and murder is very wrong. 
Accepting raping and murder is not loving.   This is the danger I am talking about that occurs when nonduality is divorced from it's traditional and then when further confusion is added by attempting altering to change the meaning of the  word love.
Love is a simple thing available to us all in it's higher and lower forms.   
It is not an obscure intellectual concept only available to a few in some kind of rare solitary altered state that only certain people can understand

. 

 

 

 

 

[Consilience]

Smh alright dude. Cling to your paradigm then. 

[roopepa]

@Nak Khid Jesus fucking christ dude. You completely missed my point by focusing on just one detail.

Let's say then that you are not God but separate from it, (which is not the case but let's assume that for the purpose of this argument), why would He then create anything else but Love? How could Infinite Intelligence be so stupid that it created anything less for itself than Infinite Love? Or can you think of something better to do?

All That Is has no reason to be anything else than Infinite Love. So why not be that? Why would God decide to be something less than perfect self-love?

[Leo Gura]

@roopepa Namaste

[JayG84]

@Nak Khid Isn't everyone just looking for Love in their lives. It guides everything we do. Love and acceptance. Is it so hard to believe that it's all that we are too? That it's home. Where everything stems from.

[Nak Khid]

9 minutes ago, roopepa said:

@Nak Khid Jesus fucking christ dude. You completely missed my point by focusing on just one detail.

Let's say then that you are not God but separate from it, (which is not the case but let's assume that for the purpose of this argument), why would He then create anything else but Love? How could Infinite Intelligence be so stupid that it created anything less for itself than Infinite Love? Or can you think of something better to do?

 

That's a good question.  Why would an Infinite Intelligence create a world with murder, torture and painful disease? 

Why wouldn't he create a world where everybody loved one another and people would never suffer painful debilitating diseases and animals would not hunt down and tear each other apart for food?  

Do you think by calling these things "love" such a God did not create a world that has much joy and also much suffering?  

If you looked out your window and saw someone being raped or a child being severely beaten might you call the police
or would you sit there and not do anything and call it "love" ? 

That type of love is not love. It is excuse to not to care 
 

[Nak Khid]

16 minutes ago, JayG84 said:

@Nak Khid Isn't everyone just looking for Love in their lives. It guides everything we do. Love and acceptance. Is it so hard to believe that it's all that we are too? That it's home. Where everything stems from.

There is nothing wrong with looking for love.

If everything was love there would be no looking.
But since it's not everything we look. 
The way to find it is to love somebody first.