question for Buddhists

[I_amp_zachariah]

@scythekain

love is suffering. The classic myths show that, the greatest of all being christ, who suffered on the cross for humanity. (like Krishna did on a tree with an arrow in his foot.)

Is this mythology teaching that one must suffer to love, or that one must be willing to suffer to love? Also, should we continue our focus on the Buddhist teachings or are we going to examine other religions as we look into our conceptions of love?

@scythekain

The transcendental love of humanity is different, then the intimate love you have of your spouse and the protective love you have for your children.

I agree.

@scythekain

I think the word “love” is really all to encompassing, we really need about 4 or 5 different words for love. as for attachment being the cause of the suffering of love, I think attachment is important. When you are attached to someone or something you feel the need to protect it and care for it.

I agree with you that we need more words to express these different loves. C.S. Lewis offers us Affection, Friendship, Eros, and Charity (or Love of ‘God’). You have proposed ideas of Trancendental-Love, Intimacy, and Protective-Love. Before Lewis proposes these four specific loves, he makes it a point to differentiate between Need-love and Gift-Love.

@C.S. Lewis

“The first distinction I made was therefore between what I called Gift-love an Need-love. The typical example of Gift-love would be that love which moves a man to work and plan and save for the future well-being of his family which he will die without sharing or seeing; of the second, that which sends a lonely or frightened child to its mother’s arms.”

“There was no doubt which was more like Love Himself. Divine Love is Gift-love. The Father gives all He is and has to the Son. The son gives Himself back to the Father, and gives Himself to the world, and for the world to the Father, and thus gives the world (in Himself) back to the Father too.”

“And what, on the other hand, can be less like anything we believe of God’s life than Need-love? He lacks nothing, but our Need-love, as Plato saw, “is the son of Poverty.” It is the accurate reflection in consciousness of our actual nature. We are born helpless. As soon as we are fully conscious we discover loneliness. We need others physically, emotionally, intellectually; we need them if we are to know anything, even ourselves.”

“I was looking forward to writing some faily easy panegyrics on the first sort of love and disparagements of the second. . .I still think that if all we mean by our love s a craving to be loved, we are in a very deplorable state. But I would not now say (with my master, MacDonald) that if we mean only this craving we are mistaking for love something that is not love at all. I cannot now deny the name love to Need-love. Every time I have tried to think the thing out along those lines I have ended in puzzles and contradictions. The reality is more complicated than I supposed.”

– from the Introduction to C.S. Lewis’ The Four Loves (pp.1-2)

As I have less time to reply than I had imagined, I’m not going to make a solid claim. There is obviously a lot to think about and digest when questioning the nature of love. I hope these passages are of some interest to you.

@scythekain

What we fall in “love” with is where I think we should draw the line, we shouldn’t fall in love with the material world. Like lets say you get a new car take it out for a drive and it gets a big ding on the hood. Your immediate reaction is going to be anger. why? it’s just a thing. You are ok, and the rock didn’t hurt you.

Agreed. Through buddhist teachings I have managed to quell that anger regularly before it rises after considering the root of this suffering. Definately not all the time, though.

@scythekain

Now if the rock flew through your windshield hit your child or your wife, would you feel that getting angry in that case would not be the right solution? your suffering and longing would drive you to action so that it couldn’t happen to someone else, force a bill through the senate to force dump trucks to have covered loads.

Anger may be the catalyst for a solution, but nothing more. The solution lies in staying calm and resisting violent action. Making sure your family is safe in the present moment. The passing of the bill however shows me a bit more about your point when I consider the suffering one would have to go through to accomplish this task. But is this suffering still neccessary?

@scythekain

I think material suffering should try to be purged suffering for other humans I think is completely acceptable.

Again, I agree. Here’s where I’m going to bring in the attachment to the transportational gains from automobiles. OK, lets say that this proposed bill goes through the Senate. What about all the other risks associated with motor vehicles? You could get side-swiped next week due to a malfunctioning traffic light. Should one not consider suffering through a change in transportation habits?

@scythekain

this is an incredibly deep topic

True, indeed.

I’ve got to think about this a bit more so I may offer some more coherent thoughts. Till then.

[scythekain]

@I-&-zachariah

Is this mythology teaching that one must suffer to love, or that one must be willing to suffer to love?

perhaps that one must suffer to truly love humanity? I mean I look back at my ghandi example and his willingness to self suffer for the good of the greater whole.

Also, should we continue our focus on the Buddhist teachings or are we going to examine other religions as we look into our conceptions of love?

well I think now we’ve stepped outside the bounds of just traditional buddhist teachings of suffering into something far more infinitely complex.

(if that’s even possible )

I agree with you that we need more words to express these different loves. C.S. Lewis offers us Affection, Friendship, Eros, and Charity (or Love of ‘God’).

C.S. is an incredibly insightful writer. That recent “documentary interview” between him and freud was really interesting. I wish they would replay it though I had to leave at the time and couldn’t watch it all.

You have proposed ideas of Trancendental-Love, Intimacy, and Protective-Love. Before Lewis proposes these four specific loves, he makes it a point to differentiate between Need-love and Gift-Love.

there is definately a difference but I think the two are intertwined. We give love to our spouse knowing that she’ll love us back. When our children grow up and become teenagers and reject our love (thankfully that’s still years away for me.) we feel “let down” so to speak. Like when you are dating someone and you say “I love you” leaving it out there in the open. If they don’t return that statement and feelings you feel dejected. So while the two are very seperate, they can intertwine. I think it’s important for us to try and keep them seperate though, only then can one truly have “agape” love for humanity. (i’m no where near that myself )

– from the Introduction to C.S. Lewis’ The Four Loves (pp.1-2)

which I’m not going to requote, absolutely insightful stuff though.

As I have less time to reply than I had imagined, I’m not going to make a solid claim. There is obviously a lot to think about and digest when questioning the nature of love. I hope these passages are of some interest to you.

absolutely.

Agreed. Through buddhist teachings I have managed to quell that anger regularly before it rises after considering the root of this suffering. Definately not all the time, though.

I had to quell my angst without buddhist teachings, that was no easy task.

know though I laugh at stupid situations that life presents to me, but still occasionally feel the flash of anger try to take me over. So perhaps I should spend some time in meditation to try and quell this? I would agree, that “anger” is not the best response, “action” is, as you say to make sure your family is ok.

The passing of the bill however shows me a bit more about your point when I consider the suffering one would have to go through to accomplish this task. But is this suffering still neccessary?

well that depends on what stance you take. If you try getting money for personal gain then no. If you try incorporating a law requiring dump trucks to have tarps over there loads, then yes. as the secondary will prevent it from hurting someone else.

Again, I agree. Here’s where I’m going to bring in the attachment to the transportational gains from automobiles. OK, lets say that this proposed bill goes through the Senate. What about all the other risks associated with motor vehicles?

tons of other risks. You could get hurt checking your mail. But preventable risks vs computer glitches that cause the lights to malfunction? (though that could be prevented if they used linux instead of windows. )

The way I look at automobile safety is this, it’s dangerous riding in a box traveling 60+ mph so I want to be as safe as possible, and would like other vehicles to be the same. I don’t even think large double trailer dump trucks should be on the road during rush hour, they are a huge danger to commuter vehicles.

anyways the safest stance while traveling this fast is to be buckled up in the back seat since you can’t do that while driving make sure that your airbag is working. from there you go down in safety.

driving without an airbag, driving without a seatbelt, driving in a vehicle with bad windows, driving in vehicle with bad tires. The list goes on and on. You can’t control what other drivers do to be safe, but big rigs should be stricly controlled.

talk about a wild tangent.

I’ve got to think about this a bit more so I may offer some more coherent thoughts. Till then.

I’d definately be interested in reading them.

[I_amp_zachariah]

Too tired for an in-depth response, but so you know, the PBS website has the the discussions transcripted available for free.

As to whether or not you should pursue some meditation, I’d say it couldn’t hurt. Anything that involves serious consideration and analysis of oneself and the world in which we inhabit is going to do some good. Even just sitting on the edge of your bed pondering for 20 minutes. The best form of meditation that I have tried is simply writing. Writing things down is the best way to think since our memoral (is this a word?) capacity has its limits. It’s a great way to become focused when thinking, as I’m sure you’re well aware of anyways. Just thought I’d promote writing, in all it’s grandiosity.

I’m enjoying this topic, and will be back to post more.

Perhaps we could take PFloyd148’s lead and look further into some other Buddhist teachings? Like, as you suggested, the notion of Karma.

I-&-zachariah

[Vimut2020]

The real love which will not bring us sadness is the love with out attachments.

You have to be clear about it.

Hi every one, this is my first post here.