finding out what love is

True love - the koan worth considering.

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by janielee

True love - the koan worth considering.

janielee,

When I noticed your sign off message from Sparrow, my first thought was maybe I should have used 'surrender' of the ego instead of suspension in my previous post. On second thought I decided 'suspension' was OK.......:) If surrender means 'give', I would not wish my ego on my worst enemy.....lol. It is solely my problem......my burden. So it remains either suspension or eradication.....:)

Dear Molearner,

It's always such a pleasure to talk to you.

In Buddhism there is the saying to study Buddhism is to study the self, to study the self is to forget the self, to forget the self is to be enlightened by the ten thousand Dhammas.

Something like that.

I think it's more like seeing with clarity what the ego is, is to see with increased clarity what the ego is not. Who or what sees?

Suspension to me suggests resistance. To accept is to see and then choose. Surrender to me suggests to "give up". Give up attitudes, knowing, beliefs for vision, letting go, release, acceptance, not knowing.

Apologies if I have worded this clumsily or misunderstood anything above. I have the greatest respect for you and everything you do here and there.

JL

LOVE = The word I use for that which is indescribable and unspeakable but can be known and is the one Truth of ALL, source of ALL.

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by janielee

I think it's more like seeing with clarity what the ego is, is to see with increased clarity what the ego is not. Who or what sees?

Suspension to me suggests resistance. To accept is to see and then choose. Surrender to me suggests to "give up". Give up attitudes, knowing, beliefs for vision, letting go, release, acceptance, not knowing.

Apologies if I have worded this clumsily or misunderstood anything above. I have the greatest respect for you and everything you do here and there.

JL

janielee,

Thank you for your kindresponse. Right now it is a mutual admiration society....let's keep it that way.....:) Perhaps this is semantics or perhaps more fundamental(re definitions and understanding). "Give up" works for me if I am permitted to think of it as "let go". My trouble is what I view as the persistence of the ego viewing it as, unfortunately, a means to survival. So I am rather skeptical about shedding ourselves of it totally. I accept that in rare cases it is possible to put the ego to death........but documented cases of this carry the caveat that it becomes necessary for others to step in and lend assistance to your survival....:) In regards to my "let go" understanding, it means these things remain within reach when we are threatened in any way and the temptation will remain to fall back on these ways of responding to being assailed, etc.

Because this thread is about 'finding out what love is' I would suspect that you share some of my thoughts from my previous posting concerning my assertion that ego(as we know it) is an impediment to love. If so, that is a foundation to build from. Not quite sure, however, if you and others can or would agree with what I described as the divine nature of love(particularly the sourcing of it).

Once again thanks for your response and all the contributions that you are making to this forum.......:)

Originally Posted by Molearner

"Give up" works for me if I am permitted to think of it as "let go". My trouble is what I view as the persistence of the ego viewing it as, unfortunately, a means to survival. So I am rather skeptical about shedding ourselves of it totally. I accept that in rare cases it is possible to put the ego to death........but documented cases of this carry the caveat that it becomes necessary for others to step in and lend assistance to your survival....:) In regards to my "let go" understanding, it means these things remain within reach when we are threatened in any way and the temptation will remain to fall back on these ways of responding to being assailed, etc.

Works for me as well. I think the difference to me is, it's not an intentional giving up. You, Molearner, see the ego. It arises, abides and dissipates. It is that which changes. Love/hate/desire/attraction - it is all the same.

Letting go, in my opinion, is borne of practical experience. We know "its" story, inclinations, tendencies. We know ultimately where it will take us. We can choose ego or choose ourselves.

So yes, let go. But..

I have to say I am not very experienced. Death? I have experienced complete silence before. It was a long time ago. It was utter peace and tranquility - complete beauty. It was different.

I had no Guide (External) nor teacher. I didn't know what it was.

My teacher has said ego is not the problem, it is incomplete ego. I took that to mean when the ego is completely under the wing and manifestation of Self, then it is a helpful tool, it the toolkit we use to navigate our, this, life.

Does it ever die? I guess we would have to define what we mean by ego. When or if one manifests fully as the Unconditioned, Absolute, God head so to speak, the consciousness is elevated (so to speak) - unity consciousness of sorts. From here, the tools at hand are the ones once relegated as practice ie. thoughts emotions physicality and such.

But again, I am no adept - my experiences are but minute, and I retain many many flaws

Originally Posted by Molearner

Because this thread is about 'finding out what love is' I would suspect that you share some of my thoughts from my previous posting concerning my assertion that ego(as we know it) is an impediment to love. If so, that is a foundation to build from.

When ego, one is selfish.

When one sees ego, one has a choice and yes it is definitely known as anti-love instinct.

When one lets go of ego, ego was the one that helped us choose love, i.e it had a function. Ironic but perhaps this is why God is great, God is All.

When ego is dropped, ego can be reborn as Christ, precious and full of capability and potentiality for the goodness in life.

But first yes, ego must first be seen, being seen, its impulses must first be worn down so that one can become an agent of Love, God, Buddha, whatever one resonates most with in Love.

These are my inept thoughts only of course.

Originally Posted by Molearner

Not quite sure, however, if you and others can or would agree with what I described as the divine nature of love(particularly the sourcing of it).

Thank you........this, IMO, is the best description offered of the qualities of love. In order for these qualiies to manifest it is helpful to understand what makes these possible. I believe that these qualities are made possible by what I would characterize as the suspension of the ego. Every item that you mentioned is a result of the absence of ego. I say 'suspension' because I have never viewed 'eradication' of ego as either realistic or, perhaps, even possible. I would mention another element of love. A third party becomes present in the appearance of love and that, IMO, is the divine. I believe that the divine is the only source of love. There are not 7 billion sources of love...ie....all the population of the world.......but love can flow through all people. We are conduits for love rather than individual sources of love. By the way(and perhaps needless to say) suspension of the ego is also the gateway to experience of the divine.

The third party .. I have had some experiences which I cannot speak of so well, but...in my experiences of love.

1. Yes I would call love divine. Truly the most divine thing. Beauty. Bliss. Peace. sure.

2. We are conduits yes. In my readings and appreciation of mystics and adepts, I see commonality in all. So I believe for now that yes, ultimately, it is All One and Love is the Commonality. We are conduits of something deeply shared, and it is my belief system that says that thing is Love. Unity. Oneness.

3. See my comments above re: suspension of the ego

Originally Posted by Molearner

Once again thanks for your response and all the contributions that you are making to this forum.......:)

Thank you for your kind words - as I said I am just an inconsistent, yet avid, but bumbling along individual, but I appreciate the friendship.

I appreciated this dialogue also.

JL

[Heatherkey]

Originally Posted by happy soul

According to Socrates, Plato, and J. Krishnamurti, what's necessary is the apprehension of virtue, or to put it another way, knowing what love is.

They believed that if we really knew what love and virtue are, we would naturally and automatically CHOOSE them. Socrates said, 'To know the good is to do the good,' and Krishnamurti said, 'The seeing is the doing.'

Kant on the other hand thought that we ALREADY know what's right, but that most people just don't follow through and consistently choose the good.

Jesus seemed to believe the former of these, as he said on the cross, 'Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do.'

And of course, much of Jesus's teaching was centered on clarifying what love is, and what the will of God is. The sermon on the mount in Matthew chapter 5 is where his main teachings about love and virtue are.

I believe that 'everyone always does their best' and that we always make the choices that we think or believe are the right choices. So I agree that what we (btw I'm including myself in this - I definitely stand great room for improvement in my apprehension of love) need is to really know what love is - to 'find out what love is', as Krishnamurti often put it.

An example of this is when I attended a cookout party at a lake for the black belts at my Tae Kwon Do school. The main Tae Kwon Do instructor threatened to give his 3 year old son a 'whoopin' because the kid was being rambunctious. The guy was 6 foot 4, probably 250 pounds of mostly muscle (of course even if he was much physically weaker it wouldn't really matter as any adult would be far stronger than a 3 year old), and I can only imagine the hell the poor kid went through getting 'whoopins' from his dad.

My point is that the man thought, he BELIEVED, he was doing the right thing by spanking his child. Imo he was definitely mistaken. But if the man really 'knew what love is', if he KNEW the right thing to do, he would have done it.

Krishnamurti asked, 'Can you put your whole being into finding out what love is?'

Can we see and admit to ourselves that we DON'T KNOW, and then take Krishnamurti's advice and devote ourselves to 'remembering', to really 'seeing the light' and finding out what love is?

HOW can we do this? I don't know, but I believe we have to really have the desire to, and make an effort. It may mean facing our fear. It may mean admitting we've been wrong. It may take courage, but it's surely worth it.

It's your life. Love yourself enough to be utterly honest with yourself. Be the best you can be. You're worth it and it matters.

This is an interesting thread. There are many replies offering an answer that fulfills an appetite for knowing love. Yet to me, the wisdom in the original post seems to be with the notion that we could admit to not knowing love in order to devote ourselves to remembering.

If knowing is doing, then each new moment or circumstance in our lives requires a different action. Therefore, it would seem wise to start from that place of accepting that we dont know love in each new moment, in order to find love anew in thte choices we are faced with.

[Molearner]

Originally Posted by Heatherkey

This is an interesting thread. There are many replies offering an answer that fulfills an appetite for knowing love. Yet to me, the wisdom in the original post seems to be with the notion that we could admit to not knowing love in order to devote ourselves to remembering.

.

Heatherkey,

You have made this even more interesting by the simple use of one word....."Rembering". The literal meaning of 'remembering' broken down is re-membering.....i.e. reconstituting...as in bringing to life again. Reconstituting the 'members' of the body.

When I was growing up, the words on the communion table at church were "this do in remembrance of me". The significance of those words probably escaped the understanding of most of the congregants. In essence they were saying that by partaking of communion we were bringing Christ alive again in our lives....in spirit. So, yes, the act of re-membering is an act of recreating, of bringing to life, something we once had or experienced....in this case, love.

[Shabda]

Originally Posted by SlayerOfLight

I do believe in compassion, even though most compassion shown by others is fake and deceitful. I also strongly believe in respect. But I really hate the word 'love'.

Why that particular attachment to the word? Is that based on words or actions or usage and misuse by others? I mean no offense, but I notice your dislike and am curious as to why that exists. It IS just a word, a mental creation that we use to communicate, and being such the definitions, interpretations and meanings are wide open and ever changing.

Some don't much like that but it isn't a thing of my creation, people just tend to do it over time, pretty much everywhere, whether right or wrong interpretations and use change over time and often become something completely different than what it began as.

Of course, you are free to your own opinions and all, so I am not trying to change them or to persuade you in any way, just asking why.

In my own experience, there are a great many words that we use that are, in my opinion, aspects of love. Having said that I must also say that this list is not complete and I find others to add to it sometimes. For example, patience, humility, understanding, compassion, detachment, tolerance, non-interference, gratitude, and forgiveness are but a few. And of course this is only my own point of view, so no one is bound to agree with me, least of all you, I only threw my two cents in and asked a question because I was curious.

In my opinion, many of the meanings and uses of the word love do indeed fall short, and humans do little better in their attempt to display their understanding of it at any given moment, but just the same, I cannot necessarily say that any of these limitations that we humans have have anything to do with the concept of love, whatever it truly is in its truest form.

I personally do not believe it to be an illusion, and would instead make the distinction that WE create the illusions ourselves and place those on the word and the concept more than it being an illusion in and of itself. To me, the reality of love is beyond the constraints of a simple word, emotion, or mental concept, and even beyond duality, time, and space. Not easily defined but sometimes able to be recognized to some extent or another, although those are highly changeable too.

Just a few thoughts on the subject of love, whatever it truly is. And a Sufi quote at the end, that to me paints a good picture of the way that I see love's status as a thing that is just a wee bit beyond where a person is looking at it from. For it to be real, it would have to be alive, and able to grow and develop as any other living things would, although perhaps in ways no one expected or foresaw.

" A life without love is of no account. Don't ask yourself what kind of love you should seek, spiritual or material, Divine or mundane, Eastern or Western. Divisions only lead to more divisions. Love has no labels, no definitions. It is what it is, pure and simple. Love is the water of life. And a lover is a Soul of fire! The universe turns differently when fire loves water. "
- Shams-i Tabrizi

[hallow]

Originally Posted by SlayerOfLight

Love is an illusion. A waste of time.

if someone told you, you cannot listen to heavy metal anymore. Would you fight for it? Would you defend it? That's love.