Love, Define Please
Posted by Mo Gillis at 5/4/2009 10:17 AM 
Categories: Relationships,Philosophy,Attitudes and Emotions
Tags: meaning of love
Categories: Relationships,Philosophy,Attitudes and Emotions
Tags: meaning of love
Love! To love someone, to be in love or to be love, are these all the same, or are there subtle differences between them? We use the word love to encompass meanings immeasurable.
Perhaps a look at the way the greek language distinguishes between several types of "love"might open up our thinking on this word that we so freely fling about. I will do my best to briefly describe each.
Phileo, best known as brotherly love, is most commonly observered as the love between friends.
Agape, a higher order of love, is the kind that causes us (even if just for a moment) to forget ourselves in order to "serve", help, or assist another. One of my favorite descriptions of this type of love is found in the bible, in I Corinthians 13:4-8, "Love suffers long (is patient), and is kind. Love envies not; it vaunts not itself. Love is not puffed up; it does not behave unseemly. Love seeks not its own; it is not easily provoked. Love thinks no evil (there's another loaded word). Love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things. Love never fails." This is a description of the love Christians are supposed to work towards. This higher order of love is written of by prophets, poets, philosophers, visionaries, and artists. It is something the noblest part of us aspires to, if we allow ourselves to dream, hope and work for a better self, world, and beyond.
Eros does not need much defining, although it can mean different things to different people. It is usually based on mutual attraction and often has a sensual aspect to it. It seems to be the most widely emphasized type of love, but interestingly enough it wasn't much considered before "Romeo and Juliet's" time. Arranged marriages to strengthen the clan or tribe was more important than romance in the early days of our human his/herstory. Side thought: We need a new word for "history", maybe "ourstory". After all it is not just "his story", it is the shared story of all human beings. Another side thought: The advertising biz has sure milked a one sided view of this type of love for all its worth; sex sells.
Here are a couple more types that I do not have a specific name for, but warrant mention.
Affectionate love implies a comfortable level of familiarity. This could be towards a person or animal, like a family member or pet, and/or towards an object like an old worn out t-shirt, full of holes, that you are just not ready to part with.
Possessive love relates more to desire and/or attachment. From my personal experience I understand this type of "love" to create the most confusion and suffering for us human beings. I almost don't want to call it love because it has so much fear mixed in with it. This love sees the other more as an oject to posess and/or control.
Extremes are the norm in this type of love relationship. The love object is placed upon a pedistal to be "woshipped", "I love you! I love you! I can't live without you." But, at the first sign of human frailty (what a dissappointment that you are human after all) the love object is knocked to the ground and derided. This is the type of "love" that threatens "I love you so much, if you try to leave me, I will kill you." Now, you may understand why I don't really want to call this love. I consider it to be the most unconscious and dangerous kind of human love.
So, what , if any, is the difference between to love someone, to be in love and to be love? The following is from my point of view with regard to what I've studied, experienced and learned. The nuances are probably just a case of semantics. That there are differences in the qualityand/or energy of these "loves" is obvious. Likewise it is obvious, we make choices. Here are some thoughts on the "differences". To love someone could include any of the above; it seems like a more broad, general statment about love. When I think of the phrase To be in love, I think of falling in love, which implies the possible opposite, falling out of love. It also implies, something that happens to us, grows on us, or we become accustomed to, and not so much a conscious decision of will. Maybe these are unconscious choices we make out of habit or fear. Eros, phileo, affectionate love and possessive love seem to exemplify this description. In contrast, To be love, the recognition that we actually are or can be love stands out as very different to me. It's a love that seems higher than we think, or as Deepak Chopra puts it, it may be "higher than we can think", beyond our ability to truly comprehend. That aught keep us humble. It's a love that lifts us to be more than we dared imagine we could be. It's not something we "fall" into, or happens to us when we are not paying attention. No, this love, to be love, I associate with agape, the higher order of love. It's the kind of love Jesus was talking about when he taught "Love God; love your neighbor as yourself". It requires asking love in. It requires making a determined decision to do whatever it takes, no matter how difficult it may seem to let go of all that is an obstacle to love. It requires great courage and patience, and a willingness to let go of all, if that is what is needed. I actually would take off the to be. Love, that's it; that's us. I have no doubt love, the higher order of love, divine love, is who/what we are, our very essence. It's a life choice to acknowledge this, here and now, in the deepest way we are able. To choose love in all, great and small, over and over again, and over and over again changes our character, our countanance to line up with what all the poets, philosophers and prophets tell us we can be. Love is a very broad subject. I have made my choice; I go for the gold, agape. Why settle for less than the best? To me, it's worth the effort to attend to it.
Perhaps a look at the way the greek language distinguishes between several types of "love"might open up our thinking on this word that we so freely fling about. I will do my best to briefly describe each.
Phileo, best known as brotherly love, is most commonly observered as the love between friends.
Agape, a higher order of love, is the kind that causes us (even if just for a moment) to forget ourselves in order to "serve", help, or assist another. One of my favorite descriptions of this type of love is found in the bible, in I Corinthians 13:4-8, "Love suffers long (is patient), and is kind. Love envies not; it vaunts not itself. Love is not puffed up; it does not behave unseemly. Love seeks not its own; it is not easily provoked. Love thinks no evil (there's another loaded word). Love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things. Love never fails." This is a description of the love Christians are supposed to work towards. This higher order of love is written of by prophets, poets, philosophers, visionaries, and artists. It is something the noblest part of us aspires to, if we allow ourselves to dream, hope and work for a better self, world, and beyond.
Eros does not need much defining, although it can mean different things to different people. It is usually based on mutual attraction and often has a sensual aspect to it. It seems to be the most widely emphasized type of love, but interestingly enough it wasn't much considered before "Romeo and Juliet's" time. Arranged marriages to strengthen the clan or tribe was more important than romance in the early days of our human his/herstory. Side thought: We need a new word for "history", maybe "ourstory". After all it is not just "his story", it is the shared story of all human beings. Another side thought: The advertising biz has sure milked a one sided view of this type of love for all its worth; sex sells.
Here are a couple more types that I do not have a specific name for, but warrant mention.
Affectionate love implies a comfortable level of familiarity. This could be towards a person or animal, like a family member or pet, and/or towards an object like an old worn out t-shirt, full of holes, that you are just not ready to part with.
Possessive love relates more to desire and/or attachment. From my personal experience I understand this type of "love" to create the most confusion and suffering for us human beings. I almost don't want to call it love because it has so much fear mixed in with it. This love sees the other more as an oject to posess and/or control.
Extremes are the norm in this type of love relationship. The love object is placed upon a pedistal to be "woshipped", "I love you! I love you! I can't live without you." But, at the first sign of human frailty (what a dissappointment that you are human after all) the love object is knocked to the ground and derided. This is the type of "love" that threatens "I love you so much, if you try to leave me, I will kill you." Now, you may understand why I don't really want to call this love. I consider it to be the most unconscious and dangerous kind of human love.
So, what , if any, is the difference between to love someone, to be in love and to be love? The following is from my point of view with regard to what I've studied, experienced and learned. The nuances are probably just a case of semantics. That there are differences in the qualityand/or energy of these "loves" is obvious. Likewise it is obvious, we make choices. Here are some thoughts on the "differences". To love someone could include any of the above; it seems like a more broad, general statment about love. When I think of the phrase To be in love, I think of falling in love, which implies the possible opposite, falling out of love. It also implies, something that happens to us, grows on us, or we become accustomed to, and not so much a conscious decision of will. Maybe these are unconscious choices we make out of habit or fear. Eros, phileo, affectionate love and possessive love seem to exemplify this description. In contrast, To be love, the recognition that we actually are or can be love stands out as very different to me. It's a love that seems higher than we think, or as Deepak Chopra puts it, it may be "higher than we can think", beyond our ability to truly comprehend. That aught keep us humble. It's a love that lifts us to be more than we dared imagine we could be. It's not something we "fall" into, or happens to us when we are not paying attention. No, this love, to be love, I associate with agape, the higher order of love. It's the kind of love Jesus was talking about when he taught "Love God; love your neighbor as yourself". It requires asking love in. It requires making a determined decision to do whatever it takes, no matter how difficult it may seem to let go of all that is an obstacle to love. It requires great courage and patience, and a willingness to let go of all, if that is what is needed. I actually would take off the to be. Love, that's it; that's us. I have no doubt love, the higher order of love, divine love, is who/what we are, our very essence. It's a life choice to acknowledge this, here and now, in the deepest way we are able. To choose love in all, great and small, over and over again, and over and over again changes our character, our countanance to line up with what all the poets, philosophers and prophets tell us we can be. Love is a very broad subject. I have made my choice; I go for the gold, agape. Why settle for less than the best? To me, it's worth the effort to attend to it.
Mo~~~This was such a beautifully written and well explained article regarding LOVE. I have a very dear friend whom I truly love and he has asked me a few times over the years what the difference was between "I love you" and "I am in love with you". I explained it the way your words meant it to be, but unfortunately I did not clarify it nor expressed it in words as well as you have. Reading this has helped me in regards to the words and phrases that I need to use that I believe he will THEN begin to understand. And you are the first person that I have "met" that has understood when I told them that I wanted to be love. They would then say, "Don't you mean that you want to be loved?" (Well of COURSE I want that). But I would have to explain to them the difference. Just as God the Father IS love, the Holy Spirit IS love, Jesus IS love,~~~I can also be LOVE because the Holy Spirit dwells in me. God dwells in me. But we humans in our fallen state, do have to practice it to attain it.....to STAY "being LOVE". It is something that one works at daily . It is a choice to let the God living in us show through to others.....and one day, maybe it will become so habitual that it then becomes so much a part of us that we and love are one. We ARE love~~~withought even thinking about it. It's our very essence. Agape love IS the very highest form of love~~~the truest and purist, the most transparent and the ONLY divine love. (in my opinion).
Thank you for writing such a wonderful article......your thoughts are beautiful so I know your heart is also.
Many blessings~~~~~Ginny
Ginny~~~Thanks for sharing your thoughts. My focus, at this time, is to simply, over and over again, remove the obstacles (in myself) to being love. It seems like I have made some sort of a shift from working on "it" to being aware and experiencing life/love more fully.
Reply to this