DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Gmvkgkmn** · 03-11-2012, 12:44 PM

Hello Joshu!

Love is when I am not. When I am, love isn't. We tend to exist from the inside out, starting with me, or I. Love cannot be when the me is at the centre. The me is always there of course, but it doesn't have to be at the centre. Less me, more room for everything else, most importantly love. That's why it is refered to as impersonal. Actually, love is only a word. A word which is not easily understood. Like beauty, and intelligence. Maybe these are different words that we use to understandthe same thing? maybe these different words reflect our understanding of something that is very difficult to understand? Love, beauty, intelligence - what is the difference when ther is no me?

To my surprise, I find myself understanding exactly what you are saying. After thinking about this topic some more, maybe love can be categorized still differently, but more simply. I believe we exist as a soul, mind/ego, and body. Maybe each one has it's own form of love?

The body's love must exist as lust. The soul's love must be the true, unconditional love you wise people are mentioning. The ego's mind is probably the one you are speaking of; where the self-centered "I" comes first. Unconditional love, of course, is the most important and most desirable, but the ego is always trying to trick us and make "I" come first. I'm thinking that sometimes it disguises itself as true love sometimes, even though it is not. Like becoming infatuated with someone before you even know them. Someone might think they are "falling in love" with someone just because they are attracted to them.

I hate to admit this, but I think with my first posting of this topic I was a bit confused. I believe I was mixing up unconditional love with ego love and giving examples of both. Ego love might inspire people to become entertainers or become rich and famous doing something that brings attention to them, but unconditional love is something better entirely.

By the way, Joshu, I think I admire your attitude after reading your history. Personally, I'm here on this website because I believe have a lot to learn from Buddhism, but by no means would I call myself "religious". I am really an individual trying not to get sidetracked. For example, I am not out to memorize a bunch of quotes, but instead I pay more attention to the concepts.

03-11-2012, 12:44 PM	#24
Gmvkgkmn Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 451 Senior Member	Hello Joshu! Love is when I am not. When I am, love isn't. We tend to exist from the inside out, starting with me, or I. Love cannot be when the me is at the centre. The me is always there of course, but it doesn't have to be at the centre. Less me, more room for everything else, most importantly love. That's why it is refered to as impersonal. Actually, love is only a word. A word which is not easily understood. Like beauty, and intelligence. Maybe these are different words that we use to understandthe same thing? maybe these different words reflect our understanding of something that is very difficult to understand? Love, beauty, intelligence - what is the difference when ther is no me? To my surprise, I find myself understanding exactly what you are saying. After thinking about this topic some more, maybe love can be categorized still differently, but more simply. I believe we exist as a soul, mind/ego, and body. Maybe each one has it's own form of love? The body's love must exist as lust. The soul's love must be the true, unconditional love you wise people are mentioning. The ego's mind is probably the one you are speaking of; where the self-centered "I" comes first. Unconditional love, of course, is the most important and most desirable, but the ego is always trying to trick us and make "I" come first. I'm thinking that sometimes it disguises itself as true love sometimes, even though it is not. Like becoming infatuated with someone before you even know them. Someone might think they are "falling in love" with someone just because they are attracted to them. I hate to admit this, but I think with my first posting of this topic I was a bit confused. I believe I was mixing up unconditional love with ego love and giving examples of both. Ego love might inspire people to become entertainers or become rich and famous doing something that brings attention to them, but unconditional love is something better entirely. By the way, Joshu, I think I admire your attitude after reading your history. Personally, I'm here on this website because I believe have a lot to learn from Buddhism, but by no means would I call myself "religious". I am really an individual trying not to get sidetracked. For example, I am not out to memorize a bunch of quotes, but instead I pay more attention to the concepts.
	Quote