Don't confuse loving someone with being in love with them. He wasn't talking about romantic love. You can love a person you dislike severely. |
|
“Through my love for you, I want to express my love for the whole cosmos, the whole of humanity, and all beings. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Don't confuse loving someone with being in love with them. He wasn't talking about romantic love. You can love a person you dislike severely. |
|
I'm not. I am completely aware of the distinction. Hence why I asked how to love. Falling in love seems to be automatic. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Ok, this is going to sound like a total derp, but I think underneath it all we already all love each other unconditionally - it's just that the ego gets in the way and builds up resentments and hatreds that obscure it. The hard part is getting the ego out of the way. |
|
I understand the logic to that. It's repeated in much of what I've read. The greeting, namaste, basically means that. |
|
Last edited by Original Poster; 03-12-2013 at 08:11 AM.
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Not that I feel I can really tell you anything here - you're far more advanced than I am - but what you're saying is bringing these ideas up, so consider me a mirror reflecting them back to you. |
|
Last edited by Darkmatters; 03-12-2013 at 08:31 AM.
I don't really know what enlightenment is so I can't answer that question, but I would wager the answer is yes. I'm not actually trying to have the perfect relationship. I am no longer concerned if things work out for me and this particular person at all. In fact, oppositely, I've met my final disillusionment. The only thing left for me is unconditional love. Perhaps another way to phrase what I currently seek is an invincible heart. "The world breaks your heart again and again until it stays open." I've gone through more heart ache than I'd wish on anyone. It has practically defined me. It has reached the brink, I've found and lost another one of the plentiful fish in the sea enough times to realize that I cannot find happiness through relationships. But allow my heart to remain closed, and I continue to be plagued by loneliness whenever I meet someone I want to be closer to. There's got to be a way to have the cake and eat it, too. I don't need the relationship, I only wish for action to become irrelevant, for it to be irrelevant whether or not we're together. For me to be open anyways. And staring down this daunting accomplishment, it seems if I can open to one person on that level, and get in touch with the greater parts of ourselves that recognize each other, then I would instantly do so for reality itself. In other words, there is no selectivity regarding unconditional love. The selected target is merely the vehicle of suffering that propels me to this new perception. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
I do understand exactly what you're saying, and I agree - as in the microcosm, so in the macrocosm. Your ability to relate to one subject is also your ability to relate to the universe. On the one hand I kind of want to say the universe is much easier to relate to than a human being, and yet I know that's not true. In order to truly relate to the universe you need to be able to relate fully to a human being. |
|
Last edited by anderj101; 03-13-2013 at 02:16 AM. Reason: merged
READ CAREFULLY. |
|
Last edited by tsiouz; 03-12-2013 at 11:53 AM.
What an interesting little conversation. |
|
The ego is not awareness, in my opinion. It is the delusion of separation. Awareness resides apart from it. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
The delusion of seperation is not the ego, though it occurs in the ego. For weather feeling seperate from others as we are, or feeling connected to others as we are, it is the ego which is responsible. |
|
Ego is our beliefs in large part, so you're right in saying that if we "believe" we are connected with the whole universe that is ego. Beliefs create an arbitrary identity that stands apart from pure awareness. Pure awareness has no belief, and does not need to define what it sees. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Of what do we have pure awareness? |
|
Last edited by lucidianDreamer; 03-12-2013 at 07:43 PM.
We can be aware of our thoughts, we can also be aware that they are only thoughts. That is the step I'm at right now. |
|
Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.
Well yes, our ego is by definition only our thoughts. |
|
Are you sure? |
|
First of all it is our personality who carries our beliefs not the ego.this is why our beliefs can bring us to a conflict,because the personality is a mask which just immitates and that mask can lead you to stray away from you, |
|
I generally don't agree when people say ego is a bad thing, or that it get in the way of stuff. To me ego is extremely important. Your owe your entire existence to your ego and without it you wouldn't be anything. |
|
No guy ego doesen't mean personality.Ego MEANS ME. |
|
Ok, so you refuse to accept that it's only a semantic difference - but still if I go through your posts and replace your Ego with awareness and your Personality with ego, then we're basically in agreement. All you're really arguing about is the definition of a couple of words. |
|
Last edited by Darkmatters; 03-13-2013 at 01:43 AM.
If you didn't have ego you would be suffering from a dissociation disorder. To me you want to be strongly attached to your sense of self, and being detached is a bad thing. I think you can find peace, and love and even enlightenment through ego. By being detached from your emotions you are basically ignoring your wishes and wants and accepting that nothing matters. That isn't a happy state, and it is unnatural. You are denying your self all the things you want in life. In a way you are not even living, you are just there. |
|
Ok, thanks for explaining that. I believe different people need to live in different ways. For some it works best to live through the ego and accept the emotional roller coaster that comes with that, and for some detatchment is a better course. |
|
Bookmarks