Your take on love! 

I was watching a short video in which a man states that he loves eating fish.

And the other person claims, that the man doesn’t loves fish, he loves himself. Since, the fish tastes good to him, he goes all the way to take out the 🐠 from water!

And this is not love towards fish, it’s love towards self. Gratifying self! 

This made me think about what love is then?!

I feel that love is about giving. And we can only give, when our cup is fully filled! 

I would like to know your take on love?

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Your take on love! 

  1. My take on love–do you want the short version, or the long one? OK, let’s start with the short one. Here’s how love works, and yes, it is a force that does do work. Love is filled with expectation, or as you put it, we can only give when our cup is fully filled. Love is reciprocal, a “gimme, gimme” kind of energy (with variations, but on average, it’s a taking force that gives to get). Many will deny this, usually because it’s a very uncomfortable general truth, and often because they just haven’t thought about it, or bothered to observe love in action. Personally I don’t do love, it’s too childish an energy. I have found compassion to be a much more reliable companion for the self-empowered person.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks Sha..I would like you to throw more light on how you differentiate between love & compassion! A long version : whenever you find time! 🙂

      Like

      1. Love versus compassion: let me preface my comment with this: the following is strictly my opinion, based on a lifetime of observation and experience in and out of various institutions of family, marriage, religion, and “charitable” organizations. I am not quoting anybody, whether famous or infamous.
        It is a deliberate misdirection to make people confuse or equate love and compassion as if they were basically the same thing but with compassion as somehow located under the aegis of love, as a lesser adjunct. We are told people need love, we are not told people need compassion and so we go on seeking love, all the way from our favourite deities to the family dog (or car!) but we mostly ignore compassion, or relegate it to those special people who have a gift, or calling, to give their entire lives to charitable service. We see love everywhere, from a mother’s love for her new born all the way through society. We “love” basically everything, unless of course we don’t because it threatens our love, then we hate that. The thing we don’t stop to realize is that without hate we would not love. Love is never without its counter, its enemy. Thus when we love, we also hate with the same intensity, only we don’t call it that, or we try to immerse ourselves in our “love” so as to ignore its opposite. One aspect of love usually missed is that what you love, owns you.
        At this point, I could write a 500 pp. tome to illustrate from history and current events. But I won’t – not today anyway! I will simply state that “love” is essentially possession: either you possess “it” or “it” possesses you. For example, someone deeply in love with another will experience intense, perhaps insane, jealousy, if the loved object shows affection for another in competition with the one who loves. This is a powerful theme in all religions: all gods are insanely jealous, the Christian God in particular that He created an eternal abode of the most excruciating pain for those who do not love Him. With love, it’s “if you’re not for me, you’re against me.” I may have quoted this before, but I remember a defense in a local murder trial, a man accused of murdering his girl friend. His defense? “I loved the bitch so much, I had to kill her; she was going to leave me.” And that in essence, is true love. It is possible, in the realm of romance, that two people fall in love with each other and remain so even after the marriage, never straying from their commitment to one another, sharing their lives, yet allowing each other to have normal relationships with others, to have friends, to make personal decisions, etc.: I don’t call that love, I call it friendship. Let’s quickly look at patriotism, or love of one’s country. If your country decides to go to war with another, anyone in that other country who was your friend, or even your lover, is now the enemy, your enemy, and if you do not act accordingly, you are a traitor to your country. Now you must go and kill these other people, these enemies, because your love of country orders you to do so. The same is true of religion: if you love someone whose religion hates your family’s religion, then what? One or the other must convert, or trouble will erupt sooner or later. Love is a needy energy, or force. It needs, either to be loved, or to have an object upon which to cast its magnet. Love doesn’t just exist to project itself freely into the world – it needs feed-back; confirmation that is is being received, and that it’s source is being acknowledged. It’s a world of give and take. Thus love functions only through collectives, whether of two (as in a couple of lovers) or the nuclear family, or larger social collectives, all the way out to the nation, the empire… and heaven! Love cares nothing of individuals – and note. To find love an individual must “join” up with another, or others. Love is reciprocal, always. Love is also feelings-based and emotional.
        Let’s look at compassion now. Compassion has no use for any of the relationships I mentioned above. Compassion is a state of mind (a personal choice) entered into by one self-empowered individual, and it remains ever that same choice. It’s never a “done deal” as love can be. You can’t join up or sign up to do compassion like you must to do love. No one, not even God, or some god, can ever tell the compassionate person how to act in any given circumstances: the individual mind does that. Speaking for myself now, I choose to live compassionately, through an inner path and an outer one. The inner is always open and active – it’s where I walk. The outer is circumstantial, approached on a case-by-case basis, using awareness, common sense, experience, avoiding response to feelings as much as possible because feelings can seldom be trusted. Compassionate response is never emotional – I repeat, never emotional. Compassionate living gives clarity of thought and destroys the attraction of vices such as greed, lust, jealousy and bigotry as well as canceling out fear and depression. This happens because the compassionate being lives, not for herself, but for this power she is becoming and it changes her life completely and irrevocably. Faith, hope and love, the three great virtues of Christianity I know about, all fail ultimately (except in pretense) but compassion doesn’t fail because it is an evolutionary mind energy: it changes the mind, then the personality and there is no turning back. The great secret of being “in compassion” is that one lives as if already dead and that, I have discovered, is the ultimate freedom. If I am already dead, what can I lose? What can hurt me? I have no attachments to anything, or anyone, just the everyday flow and adjustments to that flow, whatever it may bring me into.
        And there you have it, Amrita. Thanks for the space to write my thoughts on a very important, topical and relevant topic for today’s world.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Shaa.. this was an eye-opener write up on compassion and how it differs from love.
        You mean love involves give and take deal (at some point), however, compassion is an attitude to chose (going beyond the philosophies, rules and conditions!).
        What you think about unconditional loving? Is it equivalent to compassion?

        Like

      3. Finally, a moment of peace to respond somewhat coherently to your question.

        Unconditional love, a concept I tried to work with for many years, is actually an oxymoron, since “love” is supposed to be an “absolute” value. If love is made up of degrees (when it isn’t “unconditional) then it has no value and it is a mockery because it can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean. If it must be qualified as “unconditional” – and we must pay attention to the full meaning of the world “unconditional” – then that is the proof anyone needs to realize love is a false value, and false virtue. Who could do unconditional love? No one, not even God could do it. Hence the travesty of Religion. Compassion, on the other hand, doesn’t require qualification. It depends entirely on the nature of the compassionate individual. It’s not a virtue, or value, it’s a choice, or path, one enters into and grows into, step by step and each day it demonstrates its power to change me, not anyone else. It doesn’t matter how anyone else responds to “my” compassion, it’s my nature that approaches others, and the world; it’s my nature that seeks its own fulfillment this way. Compassion doesn’t seek reciprocity, which “unconditional” love would try to emulate but cannot because, well, it doesn’t work the same way. I think, sadly, that love is a competitive force, loaded with preconceptions of success and sense of failure; attachments, belief systems, traditions, and these things become poisons in the heart of those who seek to give love.

        Compassion is free of all of those things: it has no conditions, no beliefs, no rules to go by. It flows, or emanates from the mind and heart of the compassionate being (from free choice and self-empowerment), never seeking any “support” or “help” from other sources. Unconditional love, even if such a chimera were possible, would still be in need of a power source such as a god or goddess, an institution, a group of committed individuals, a lover, a family, something, someone, to sustain it. That’s why it can’t work like compassion, though it may attempt to imitate it. So I was taught by my Teachers, and so I learned as I went through life. The compassionate being no longer needs to seek or express, love.

        Some day in the far future, this concept will be standard fare for the people of this world but for now we suffer the consequences of stubbornly holding on to the old traditional beliefs, values, and teachings offered by our ruling institutions and their leaders.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Thanks Shaa for taking out all the time to elaborate on how empowering compassion is! As it’s free from how others reciprocate, it’s more of a nature and attitude.
        I would like to notice and explore on the differences you stated about love and being compassionate.
        Thank you so much Shaa!

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s