Copyrighted Logo

css menu by Css3Menu.com


 

Bruce's 5th book, a Home Study Course, is now available.
Books & Tapes by Bruce Moen
    Bruce's Blog now at http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/blog....

  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegister  
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Love - is it or isn't it for real? (Read 6742 times)
pulsar
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 163
Europe
Gender: male
Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #15 - Dec 29th, 2007 at 5:25pm
 
Greetings,

by reading through the posts, one urgent question is still on my mind.
How much love is healthy?

yours sincerely,

pulsar
Back to top
 

it is determined.
 
IP Logged
 
dave_a_mbs
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 1655
central california
Gender: male
Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #16 - Dec 29th, 2007 at 5:32pm
 
It seems possible to become like Ramakrishna and totally devote yourself to bhakta yga, immersed in love. Whether this is "healthy" in material terms, is a bit arbitrary. If you're asking a top dog capitalist, you'd probably be told that love is a worthless emotion that makes you weak. From a mendicant monk you'd get the opposite opinion, that any materialism is unhealthy, and love is everything.

As God, what kind of world would you prefer? That's your answer.

dave
Back to top
 

life is too short to drink sour wine
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pulsar
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 163
Europe
Gender: male
Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #17 - Dec 29th, 2007 at 6:41pm
 
Greetings,

@dave

It is rather a question of finding the right balance. For example, over-focussing on hate in the end leaves one acerbated (something I recognized for myself, so I do not speak of anything unknown, or pitch-black theory).
You see, I do not search for any material worth of love, as it has no material values, but interpersonal values, what is in fact its nature.
To clear the arbitrary statement a bit, I am afraid that too much love might cause a view through the rose-tinted glasses (@ all : don't take it as an affront, it is just my humble opinion!), an over-romanticised twist (don't get me wrong, but I get really mad, if I e.g. visit myvideo or youtube and find obituaries/necrologies for teenagers, having killed themselves because their love-ideals remained unfulfilled, that is the point where I start to think for what it is good for! What kind of torment have they gone through, if an emotion/ a part of life/ a part of the afterlife, that is stated positive, caused such a bitter ending? A psychological phenomenon? Fraudulent teachings? Closed view?).

I think, if you combine the top dog capitalist/materialist and the mendicant monk, you are somewhere around "health", maybe it is infantile to think like I do, but to have a moderate outlook on ANY part of the big puzzle called life, is what I would call "healthy".
The point is, that it is somehow a task to find a way through any kind of confusion, and it doesn't matter what part of ones personality caused the confusion, to find balance, the way out, to have a clear view.
So it is obviously also important to learn how to treat love in an appropriate way, that does not hurt others and yourself, if love becomes an addictive phenomenon, it is a thing that should not be. Because if it becomes addictive, it is possible that it makes oneself weak!
So it is a part of reality, but not reality itself. For me the human mind's reality is balance (but that lies in the eye of the beholder, I do not dare to speak for anyone else), a moderate state of mind, where just "to be" is possible. Like life (in a universal sense) itself, it has been, is, and will ever be in the state of just "to be".

I am not a god, it does not lie within my abilities to get what I prefer, I am just a humanbeing for now, and get what I deserve (better said, the results of my actions), it is my task to make the best out of it.

@ Alysia

So your higher idea of love is compassion?

yours sincerely,

pulsar
Back to top
 

it is determined.
 
IP Logged
 
vajra
Ex Member


Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #18 - Dec 29th, 2007 at 9:32pm
 
Thank you again guys. No question that the impetus to love seems to be the natural state of all. And that it's our selfish egotistical urges that seem to obscure this.

I'm less sanguine that it's slam dunk easy peasy to live from love so to speak, and as a result been driving more at the question of what practically is expected of us. Maybe I'm just making something simple complicated, i probably need to relax and just go with the flow, do what comes naturally.

It's fairly clearly the case anyway that we can only express love at the level of our consciousness, so perhaps all is revealed so to speak as we progress.

I'm a little cautious though that conditioning perhaps means I'm not seeing the wood for the trees. The  questions are kind of implicit in what you guys have to say - especially Kathy, Alysia, and Dave.

I tend towards your view that first off we need to follow our heart, and that if we can do this (easier said than done with ego blocking all the way) life will bring us what we need to do our bit. One size pretty clearly does not fit all.

We pretty much have to trust in this anyway I guess  - we can never truly know the import of our actions: what seems trivial can ultimately have earth changing implications, while what we're conditioned to regard as a big deal or important can be inconsequential.

But there's still hard questions in there. Your point about self denial, about the need to have compassion for ourselves as much as others is central Kathy. But just where does this balance lie?

The spiritual traditions teach unconditional love. Here's a page of Buddhist teachings on love, compassion, equanimity and so on: http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/immeasurables_love_compassion_equanimity_rejoi... (there's a link to a page on attachment too Kathy - there's another way to look at it, it's a blocker to loving behaviours when seen this way)

There's opposing sides on the issue. Overcommitment to others that destroys one's health, wealth and happiness clearly can become counterproductive. If you are ill, dead, exhausted, penniless or depressed your ability top help is clearly very limited. Walking away from your family to pursue a life of Bhakti Yoga is clearly not an option for everybody, yet it's probably very important that some few pursue this or other paths to enable spiritual leadership.

On the other hand we face very serious circumstances in the world. Yet most of us tutting about it just get on with living as comfortable a life as we can. We take the odd token action here and there, but studiously ignore many other issues. How many people for example spoke up publicly when the war rhetoric was at its height and to do so was likely to result in pretty unpleasant responses from others prior to the Iraq invasion? (if 10% of the population had stood up to really be counted it very possibly would have stopped the invasion) How many have ditched their auto (or even their second auto) given the climate issue? How many have dumped their aircon? How many refuse to buy cheap imported products which are the result of sweatshop labour?

Even if we are motivated enough to act how do we know the right thing to do?

There are people like say Martin Luther King who laid it all on the line. Or who from this distance seem to have done, and were turning points in terms of influencing the issues they engaged on. The spiritual traditions are full of people having devoted their entire lives to practice and teaching.

An alternative view is to say that it's all rolling out exactly the way it's meant to. That we should trust.

My personal sense of the whole issue seems somewhere around here:

Our task is to become able to live unconditional love. (not the egotistical attachment based variety that is selective and has an agenda)
Unconditional love does not imply a lack of care for oneself.
Living love entails skill and right intuition as well as a loving intention - we can do a lot of harm while attempting to do good. Or can expose ourselves to unnecessary harm which in the end will prevent us from fulfilling our role.
We're guided in terms of life direction, although we may not always listen or hear that well.
Depending on our life we may be required to make enormous commitments to others, or may seem to live relatively ordinary lives.
It's basically about going with the flow - what's needed will happen.
We're not all required to be martyrs, and our love should be natural and real - not some act of will that suppresses egotistical urges that have not been worked off.
Its a learning experience and a moving target - with time we become more and more able to live from love, and presumably as this happens our role and responsibility increase.

Justin may have something to say on this as I know he's a fan of Edgar Cayce who had a lot to say about finding our life path. (see 'Soul Purpose' by mark Thurston. Harper and Row/St. Martin's Paperbacks)

I've been slightly tongue in cheek in posing this question as I guess it's in truth what our entire journey is about. We're probably not going to have the whole answer until we return to Source.

But I can't help thinking that we're individually and collectively quite limited in our ability to live from love right now. My personal experience though is that the spiritual path can produce quite definite opening of the heart. And that with opening we get better at it - we increasingly both see what's needed, and find ourselves less able to ignore it/more motivated to act....

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
dave_a_mbs
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 1655
central california
Gender: male
Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #19 - Dec 30th, 2007 at 12:10am
 
In our current culture we have a strong bhakti emphasis - everything reduces to love. However, that is only 1/3 of the story. To model reality there are three components - the dynamic aspects, the static aspect and the relational and intermediary aspect. These are called, in Sanskrit, satyam, anandam and chittam, which are the names for the three gunas (gunas meaning aspects of reality) of Hindu philosophy.  In quantum, mechanics we have them as processes, structures and as relationships and conjunctions.

The initial state in this world is one of confusion. The first lesson we learn is of love - nirtirance by Mom. However, this is only part of the world. The stage of "liberation" or "satchitananda" involves also our activities and our awareness.  Activity involves everything we do - to be done as a gift to God, as an act of value in and of itself, and without regard for minor benefits such as being paid for our work, or hopes of a distant pension plan. This is the essence of karma yoga. In the case of awareness the issue is meditation and awareness of the nature of reality. The more we release presuppositions and expectations, the more we are able to experience reality. Ultimately, we wind up with an experience of the wrld as a single system, in which we too are part. These three attainments are termed "liberation" because they liberate us from creation of negative karma.

The idea of love alone is OK, but the other aspects of metaphysical reality are also necessary in order to progress.

dave
Back to top
 

life is too short to drink sour wine
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pulsar
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 163
Europe
Gender: male
Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #20 - Dec 30th, 2007 at 10:14am
 
Greetings,

@dave

The way you describe it, makes it reasonable!
Like an analogy: static + intermediary= dynamic > causes progress.
Referring to expectations and prosuppositions, the more we want, the less we might gain (material and spiritual goods!)

So if taking what you said about, doing things as an act of value in and of itself, would be like overcoming a too emotional outlook.

yours sincerely,

pulsar







Back to top
 

it is determined.
 
IP Logged
 
Lights of Love
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 881
Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #21 - Dec 30th, 2007 at 10:23am
 
Thanks for the link Ian.  I understand the use of attachment/detachment in Buddhist thought and the meaning of this in that tradition.  Since these words are defined differently in dictionaries I see their use limited to the Buddhist tradition because the ordinary person not knowing this tradition is going to interpret them differently.  I have other pet peeves when it comes to word usage, too.  The words ‘should’ and ‘could’ for example.  Should limits our thinking where could implies that we have a choice.  I guess my only point is that we limit ourselves even with our language.

Quote:
But there's still hard questions in there. Your point about self denial, about the need to have compassion for ourselves as much as others is central Kathy. But just where does this balance lie?


I think balance happens automatically once we let go of our limiting ideas. To the degree that we love, understand and have compassion for our self, is the exact same degree that we love, understand and have compassion for another.  

I think love is probably one of the most misunderstood concepts we humans have. Most of the confusion comes from us dissecting it and labeling it in so many different ways. I suppose we gain greater understanding from doing this at least once we work through all of the confusion.  Until then, I think you’re right in that we do limit ourselves, but this isn’t the end of the story by any means.  Wink

Love, Kathy
Back to top
 

Tread softly through life with a tender heart and a gentle, understanding spirit.
 
IP Logged
 
vajra
Ex Member


Re: Love - is it or isn't it for real?
Reply #22 - Dec 30th, 2007 at 6:02pm
 
To paraphrase where we all seem to be on this. The ability to live from love is an emergent capability, one that reveals itself as we shed egotistical delusion and start to 'see' - to connect with the multidimensional internal and external reality you describe Dave. Kathy too.

In other words we'll know how when we become realised. The journey to realisation is the journey to living from love. It's a totally holistic deal - it requires our getting our total existence internal, external, conventional and esoteric all figured out.

It's kind of re-assuring that it's a work in progress, that we're probably only required to do our best at our current stage of development. This too fits with the teaching that karma arises primarily as a result of intention. Meaning I suppose that responsibility for much of the outcome of the world is out of our hands, at least viewed from the perspective of a single life.

The rather sobering aspect of it all though is the enormity of the task - and the strength and the power of the 'cocoon' to blind us. As demonstrated by the often quite minor distinction that exists between the behaviour of most of us fairly high minded conscious 'seekers', and the more general population...


On 'attachment' Kathy. For sure this sort of special usage of words must lead to confusion.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print


This is a Peer Moderated Forum. You can report Posting Guideline violations.