Thoughts on Love
Mar. 19th, 2008 06:00 pmI hopped over to the forums of a site I frequent, today, looking for some food for thought and ran into a thread that saught to define love. There's a conundrum indeed, and one that's been on my mind a great deal since roughly last October, so I thought I might as well get it down. On that thread, I found this quote, which I wanted to put up here and chew on for a while. (And pay attention, because I won't do this often, given that I generally consider the Bible to be overrated. :-P)
~1 Corinthians 13:4-7
Love is patient, love is kind.
It does not envy.
Love is never boastful, nor conceited, nor rude;
It is not self-seeking, nor easily angered.
It keeps no record of wrongdoing.
It does not delight in evil,
But rejoices in the truth.
It always protects, trusts, hopes, and preserves.
There is nothing love cannot face;
There is no limit to its faith, hope, and endurance.
In a word, there are three things that last forever:
Faith, hope, and love;
But the greatest of them all is love.
I think there's a good bit of truth to that, though I don't fully agree with the bit about self-seeking. This is because I think the addage is true that if you cannot love and respect yourself (and as you truly are) , you cannot know how to love or respect anyone else.
So, there's a start. Love starts with the self. If it is real, I think it is also self-sufficient. The focus is not on them loving you back, because you provide love for yourself. (Though, by the same token, if you love and respect yourself, it is only right that there be boundaries so far as what kind of treatment you recieve. They don't have to love you back, but that doesn't give them the right to make you suffer.)
Now, I do think there's some truth to love being in part a willingness to serve--a willingness, but not a compulsion. If you love someone, their needs and well-being become important to you, and it is natural to want to see them fulfilled. By the same token, it doesn't have to be done by you. (There are times when it can't be, whether because of your own bounds, or theirs, or those set by the situation.) Trying to limit the means with which it can be achieved also limits the likelihood of success. If it is genuinely important, it seems to me that it doesn't matter whether you do it, or others do it, or they do it for themselves, so long as it's done.
By the same token, love does not mean never saying "no". It means being able to say (and hear) "no" without any hard feelings. Love is the acceptance of difference, even to the point, for example, of letting go and moving on if a relationship is not mutually fulfilling. You cannot love a person if you do not want them to grow freely and happily--even if that means without you, or (in the case of loving yourself and recognizing your own needs) you without them. Real love is as much about letting go as it is about holding on.
Love is recognizing a person's full humanity--both flaws and strengths. It is also recognizing their full human rights and wanting to do nothing to obstruct them. It is recognizing that human beings cannot be posessions or territory. As Heinlein puts it: "Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy —in fact, they are almost incompatible; one emotion hardly leaves room for the other." (Thanks to![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
noctiferfor that one, being as I found it on his profile. ;-))
Real love, I think, cannot be divided or categorized into things like "romantic love" or "familial love" or "God's love"... It's just love. The only difference between any of them is in their expression, not the feeling itself, if it's real.
In regards to love and sex, the two have no more connection than the individual assigns to it (be it by their own thoughts on it, or in aquiesence to the society they live in). This is not for any moral reason, but simply because they spring from different places. Love comes from the mind and the heart. Sex comes from the biological drive to reproduce, or simply from a desire for pleasure (if it's done right). While they can connect, the rule that says they have to is artificial, and adhering to it or not is a matter of personal taste. It cannot be dictated, only chosen.
~1 Corinthians 13:4-7
Love is patient, love is kind.
It does not envy.
Love is never boastful, nor conceited, nor rude;
It is not self-seeking, nor easily angered.
It keeps no record of wrongdoing.
It does not delight in evil,
But rejoices in the truth.
It always protects, trusts, hopes, and preserves.
There is nothing love cannot face;
There is no limit to its faith, hope, and endurance.
In a word, there are three things that last forever:
Faith, hope, and love;
But the greatest of them all is love.
I think there's a good bit of truth to that, though I don't fully agree with the bit about self-seeking. This is because I think the addage is true that if you cannot love and respect yourself (and as you truly are) , you cannot know how to love or respect anyone else.
So, there's a start. Love starts with the self. If it is real, I think it is also self-sufficient. The focus is not on them loving you back, because you provide love for yourself. (Though, by the same token, if you love and respect yourself, it is only right that there be boundaries so far as what kind of treatment you recieve. They don't have to love you back, but that doesn't give them the right to make you suffer.)
Now, I do think there's some truth to love being in part a willingness to serve--a willingness, but not a compulsion. If you love someone, their needs and well-being become important to you, and it is natural to want to see them fulfilled. By the same token, it doesn't have to be done by you. (There are times when it can't be, whether because of your own bounds, or theirs, or those set by the situation.) Trying to limit the means with which it can be achieved also limits the likelihood of success. If it is genuinely important, it seems to me that it doesn't matter whether you do it, or others do it, or they do it for themselves, so long as it's done.
By the same token, love does not mean never saying "no". It means being able to say (and hear) "no" without any hard feelings. Love is the acceptance of difference, even to the point, for example, of letting go and moving on if a relationship is not mutually fulfilling. You cannot love a person if you do not want them to grow freely and happily--even if that means without you, or (in the case of loving yourself and recognizing your own needs) you without them. Real love is as much about letting go as it is about holding on.
Love is recognizing a person's full humanity--both flaws and strengths. It is also recognizing their full human rights and wanting to do nothing to obstruct them. It is recognizing that human beings cannot be posessions or territory. As Heinlein puts it: "Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy —in fact, they are almost incompatible; one emotion hardly leaves room for the other." (Thanks to
noctiferfor that one, being as I found it on his profile. ;-)) Real love, I think, cannot be divided or categorized into things like "romantic love" or "familial love" or "God's love"... It's just love. The only difference between any of them is in their expression, not the feeling itself, if it's real.
In regards to love and sex, the two have no more connection than the individual assigns to it (be it by their own thoughts on it, or in aquiesence to the society they live in). This is not for any moral reason, but simply because they spring from different places. Love comes from the mind and the heart. Sex comes from the biological drive to reproduce, or simply from a desire for pleasure (if it's done right). While they can connect, the rule that says they have to is artificial, and adhering to it or not is a matter of personal taste. It cannot be dictated, only chosen.
