On the idea of love: I have often thought that we could interpret each
person's behavior as reflecting their understanding of love. There is no
objective definition of this word. For those who would abuse and
manipulate others, this shows what they have understood love to be about.
For those who would be considerate, kind, and civil, this likewise
reflects what they understand love to be about.
Why would I say the above? If we are all in this together, if the idea of
oneness is as close to the truth as we're going to get, then I might say
that love is all there is. Love, in this sense, suggesting that we're all
connected, all related, and we all affect one another in known and unknown
ways. We have the gift of self-awareness that allows us to get a glimmer
of this idea, and the implications of this--to be kind to others is to be
kind to ourselves.
Parents have one responsibility that they absolutely cannot avoid: to
teach their children what is love is. Many children have gained a very
distorted (from my perspective) sense of this word and idea from how they
have been treated by their parents and others. This is reflected in their
behavior as they grow up. It is a sad commentary that so many of us have
come to misunderstand that we are all connected, that love is all there
is. The consequences of that misunderstanding are all around us. The
good news is that we are slowly but surely waking up, and that, since we
really are all in this together, those who acknowledge and work to
propagate this understanding will prosper.
John Woods
jwoods@execpc.com
>On 15 Dec 1995, Barry Mallis wrote:
>
>> I am moved to a further rejoinder in the form of a poem by the Persian
>> poet Rumi.
>>
>> No one can claim to be sincere in love
>> Who doesn't forget the sting of the Master's whip
>> In the presence of the Master--
>>
>> Just like those Egyptian women
>> Peeling fruit in the Pharoah's kitchen
>> Who cut their hands to shreds when they saw
>> Beautiful Joseph stepping in the room,
>>
>> And didn't even know it.
>>
>[snip]
>
>> The concept of love is not so simple to decipher.
>
>Ahhhh, yes, Barry, not so simple, indeed. I was reminded as I read your
>last line of a comment made by a fellow student in an English essay in
>1969. It has remained with me since then. "Love is a condition which is
>easily defined until it has been experienced." (Landon Shultz).
>
>You and Rumi have once again called me into exquisite confusion....
>
>I'm grateful,
>
>Tobin
>quereau@austin.cc.tx.us
>Tobin Quereau <quereau@austin.cc.tx.us>
-- jwoods@execpc.com (John Woods)