?

Log in

I had an IM discussion recently with theangst about what love… - Leave your Ego at the Door [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
tao_talk

[ website | Daily Tao - just a random good site ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Qi Journal Homepage, Qi Gong (Chi Kung), Qi, World Tai Chi & Qigong Day, Welcome to Xiang Qi - The Art of Chinese Chess, ]

[Oct. 31st, 2005|10:45 pm]
tao_talk

tao_talk

[trevoke]
I had an IM discussion recently with theangst about what love was, and he told me that he wanted to try and be able to fall in and out of love on purpose (based on a website like howstuffworks.com or something) by controlling the hormones that create the feeling. I vehemently disagreed with that, essentially calling it 'unnatural'.
Now, tonight I had a thought. Pick someone; anyone. It is possible to love them. I don't really want to use 'fall in love', as I still make this refer to that particular emotion that I don't know/understand. It is quite possible that they are one and the same, experience will tell. However, the way I was suggesting to love the person was not an active process, but merely a conscious opening up of the self to love. Agape, I guess, or simply just plain love.
There is more to this, of course, but that's your appetizer and my reminder of where my thought process started, should I ever forget.

Namaste.
linkReply

Comments:
From: bodhistate
2005-11-01 05:31 am (UTC)
Each person contains some good thing, some part of them which provides others with a benefit, provides themselves with a positive direction. I would imagine that if you found and focused on this positive aspect, you would be able to forgive the "faults" the person contains as well. And isn't this a main part of love, to accept another regardless of their imperfections?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trevoke
2005-11-01 06:08 am (UTC)
That was were I was going with it.
An unconditional love; wouldn't that be an important step in the pursuit of enlightenment?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: catkin
2005-11-01 12:43 pm (UTC)
I've been pondering and experiencing this lately. Though I'd like to inject another thought here... I'm not sure if it is right to just love the good part of a person, or to love them unconditionally in the sense of 'I love you despite your flaws'.

A more complete feeling comes from realising you love someone BECAUSE of their flaws. It is the flaws and imperfections that make us human, and the love for living breathing humans is perhaps somewhat different to the more distant love/attachment of concepts, gods etc...?


(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trevoke
2005-11-01 12:52 pm (UTC)
That's a subtle difference, and I don't think it's right, either. Love should just be, beyond the flaws and qualities, I believe.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: catkin
2005-11-02 01:02 pm (UTC)
I think it might depend what kind of love you're talking about, a more distant/abstract/appreciative one or one which is visceral and full of experience. People love Jesus as god but how many loved him also as a man? I quite like the greek way of referring to erors, agape, philia though I'm not sure if I'd use those definitions per se. Like anyone else I don't pretend to have the answer to this subject but it is good think about!

I don't think it's a subtle difference. People talk a lot about "forgiveness" and loving someone anyway - but for me, that's just denying them part of their humanity. I think the core of love has got to be to do with open-eyed acceptance for everything that person is at that time. I also don't think love has to be kept seperate from flaws/qualities - because if you take that away, what is left? perhaps some divine spark but surely the grittiness of humanity is worth some love as well?

nb - I'm not getting riled here, just enjoying a bit of debate/discussion. I have no problems with criticism. :-)


(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trevoke
2005-11-02 02:54 pm (UTC)
Well, actually, since I mentioned 'agape' in my post, do you want to reconsider that a little? :) My ideas probably resonate with yours more than you think.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: catkin
2005-11-02 01:06 pm (UTC)

a question

what then, is meant by unconditional love? Is it, seeing an ideal/eternal person in someone no matter what else is in the way, or is it seeing everything they embody now and loving it all, even the painful nasty dirty parts?
And more importantly, how would you go about feeling it, in the face of a lot of angry difficult people?

I enjoyed your original post and would love to hear more of your thoughts :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trevoke
2005-11-02 03:03 pm (UTC)

Re: a question

Something that akurei_kami wrote is interesting. He refers to love as a living entity. I don't know if I agree; I haven't thought about this long enough... But what I do agree with is that love, this kind of love, is separate from whoever is in front of you. As far as angry difficult people, think about Mahatmah Ghandi.

Let's go back to the Tao for a second. When you practice wu wei (non-action, or the effortless action, the spontaneous action), I think it is pretty hard to feel anything but a sort of love for people.

When you have a complete and thorough understanding of people, and you do not judge at all, I believe that you have no choice but to love people... At least, that's my current understanding.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: immoralusername
2005-11-09 04:08 pm (UTC)

Re: a question

>Something that akurei_kami wrote is interesting. He refers to love as a living entity

I didn't read his post but from that snippet, I agree. I feel love, especially agape has nothing to do w/ the other person or people...al about how one sees things.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: akurei_kami
2005-11-01 04:00 pm (UTC)
Is love then selective. Can I love one person and not another? I don't think so. I think I can be filled by love, or possessed by love, and when I am, all is beautiful in the world and I love everyone and everything. But I personally do not think I can obtain love or possess it. If I did I think it would go against everything love is and would in turn push love to leave me. I believe love is a living entity that wants to permeate every cell in my body. When I am wrapped up in anger and tension and such, it prevents love from entering me. I believe love is the universal intelligence and is the source of all creation.

I do, like you mentioned, believe that every human being has at least one cell that has love in it.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: catkin
2005-11-02 01:49 pm (UTC)
what you say here matches very well with my experience of love - that it is somehow something 'outside' your being but can fill it and flow through you and outwards. This is different to the kind of grasping love that happens when you try and pull a person's life into you because they have something you need(?)

I tried to write about this a little more here, but you have expressed it much more eloquently :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cleo_magick
2005-11-01 11:31 am (UTC)
oo, you're on livejournal too?

very interesting, by the way

~Tracey
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trevoke
2005-11-01 12:51 pm (UTC)
Hmm... Where else am I? I have to admit that I can't think of many Traceys that I know.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cleo_magick
2005-11-01 07:36 pm (UTC)
myspace, haha
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: trevoke
2005-11-01 07:37 pm (UTC)
I, er, ?
Have we friended each other? Now I'm confused... Help me out ;)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)