Unconditional love

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Parthon

I love this topic. So many great expression on what unconditional love is.

Parthon, what you write is so beautiful, and so poetic! I loved reading it when I read it when you originally posted it, and I loved reading it again just now.

The hard question though is: how do you get there? I started out by realising that we are all human, and we are all in this together. If I'm deserving of love, then everyone is. Now, if you don't think you are deserving of love, then there's a deeper issue going on, sort that out first.

Hmm, I might have an issue with that myself. I dunno, I've never consciously sought out to be loved, nor cared about it. Maybe subconsciously I craved it though...

Originally Posted by Parthon

The way to get out of that trap is to just reconnect with love itself. Love for the sake of love, and leave off the attachments. Love doesn't require you to do anything, but if you wish you can. Love permits all and accepts all. Love for love's sake, not for some "because". Give up the notions that it has to look a certain way, or that it has to be proved or that you have to prove it. Love because you want to, not because you have to or feel like it. Love because you don't want to. Love today, love tomorrow and love yesterday. And most of all: Love yourself, just as much as you love everyone else.

So, how do you do that - how do you just "love for love's sake"? How do do you just love? In other words, if I was a robot, I'd ask you, what lever do I pull in myself?

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Magicinthenight

This thread has been a real eyeopener! Thank you Parthon and Angela especially for making this a lot clearer. I've got new things to learn and this one seems like one of the most important lessons!

Indeed, I've gotten so much out of it!

I tried to just apply the concept of unconditional love toward someone I was romantically involved with. I just played with telling myself ok "Love this person unconditionally" and I did it to someone I'm close to. When I'd tell myself that, I'd generate this feeling down in my gut or deep inside of me that I just love her unconditionally. Dunno if I'm completely wrong on how I'm doing this since I'm still trying to grasp this concept.

Originally Posted by Ontowhere

AWARENESS is a good book from Antony de Mello. Very simple to read too, if you have trouble, understanding the concept

Thanks, I'll look into it.

[Eric Roosevelt]

I think Angela worded it beautifully. In any case, it may be worth pointing out that unconditional love is a skill, just like everything else. I don't think you can wake up one morning and just say "from this point on I will always generate unconditional love", although that would be nice. First it's probably best to sort out the practical aspects of your life. If you're frustrated about practical problems or feeling out of balance, it's hard to generate any kind of higher consciousness.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by seeker5

So basically unconditionally love is meaningless, and action-less? So...what good is it?

It feels really, really good. Maybe better than anything.

What's the big deal of loving someone unconditionally? (seriously) You're talking about being unconditional love.... That seems to me to be different then loving someone unconditionally, no? Also, can you love one person unconditionally, without loving everyone unconditionally?

The way you word this has me thinking that you're still thinking of unconditional love as something that you have "for" particular people. If you are loving one person unconditionally, but not loving everyone unconditionally, then that is conditional love. There is a condition that must be met by the other person before you are willing or able to love them unconditionally. So, what are your conditions? What do you require that a person do, be, think, or say before you will love them unconditionally? Or is it just the luck of the draw? Are some people inherently loveable and others not?

What if you were to let go of needing reasons to love someone or not, and BE unconditional love, regardless of external circumstance, just because you choose to? You don't have to, of course, and if it doesn't feel good you'd be a dummy to force yourself or pretend. And just speculate -- how might your life be if you were harboring no requirements, if you were simply BEING love regardless of the thoughts, actions, or words of others?


p.s.... loving unconditionally doesn't mean you have to invite everyone over for dinner.

[Speckler]

Wow, just reading steves website is inspiring. He makes sense. I was linked to the site cus I hate working or so I thot. I discovered I hate working for a boss.

Anyhow.. I kept reading and reading and came up against UL. Polyamory.

I kept reading, it makes sense to me... however is scared the heck outta me no matter what I do to overcome the fealing. Fear sucks but I am not sure I want to experiment with my wife having other lovers, especially physical ones!

Im sure I am being my usual conditioned self. anyhow.... just being supportive of these great materials but expressive of how a newb feels when reading probably too much material here in a few hours time... LOL

[Ontowhere]

There are actuall clips on youtube, from Anthony De Mello's speaches about Awareness. If someone wants to check them out. The book was written based on those lectures. I just love it so much!

The clips start from:

YouTube - Anthony de Mello - Awareness pt.1 on waking up

[The NorthStar of Hope]

I believe parents "mostly" mothers love their children unconditionally.. Or so I think...

[ns123]

Originally Posted by The NorthStar of Hope

I believe parents "mostly" mothers love their children unconditionally.. Or so I think...

This made me laugh. Because, as a mother myself, I believe that I love my own child unconditionally. But as a child, I also know that my own mother does not love me unconditionally.

I think, from reading many posts in Social & Relationships, my situation is not unique.

[Parthon]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Parthon, what you write is so beautiful, and so poetic! I loved reading it when I read it when you originally posted it, and I loved reading it again just now.

I had to read it again as well.

Hmm, I might have an issue with that myself. I dunno, I've never consciously sought out to be loved, nor cared about it. Maybe subconsciously I craved it though...

This ones tricky, it's the difference between actually being deserving of love vs being loved. Being deserving of love Is what I see as a fundamental truth about people. They live, so they can be loved. A person doesn't need to be loved in order to be deserving of it. They also don't need to seek it out. But it does mean being open to it if it appears, and being willing to accept it, putting no blocks on receiving love.

So, how do you do that - how do you just "love for love's sake"? How do do you just love? In other words, if I was a robot, I'd ask you, what lever do I pull in myself?

That's a tricky question. The easiest way is to relate it to hate. A person might hate another person for some reason, some slight that was done against them, but that hate will eventually devolve into just general hate against that person. As they keep living and hating this one person, hate will slowly creep into the lives. They will get hate more people as they get slighted. They will start antagonising people, encouraging people to act out against them, causing the person to hate more. Eventually they will hate what they've become and hate themselves and the world.

It the same with love. First you start out loving a particular person for a particular reason. Then as you keep loving them, it slowly changes into love for the person, for who they are to you. Then as you look into them, and realise the connection that you both share, you love them just beacuse you can, not for any particular reason. You love them, full stop. And that's where you have UL, but for one individual. UL for all is expanding that idea to all people. You can love them, so you do, not for any particular reason.

If you want a magic lever to press though, I think you have to find the lever, or discover it. Everybody's lever is different. There is a path though, and all you do is just be willing to travel it. This means following love whereever it takes you, and be willing to allow it, accept it and let it grow. Give it to others and be willing to share.

As for why UL? I'm not sure. It kind of changes the world, makes it a much nicer place to live, all without changing anything. Everyone is your friend, even if they are a complete stranger. Saying thank you to others becomes an act of love, when said with love behind it. Genuinely being thankful to others, and saying so. People tend to pick up on that too, when you are genuine. Then of course there are the interactions. When you don't fear anymore and you can really connect with others. You get to the heart of matters and really confront what's going on. There's lots of benefits to unconditional love, but they really need to be experienced.

[pokilty]

Parthon, your explanations are inspiring, they really changed my way of thinking. I'm completely baffled by this idea of unconditional love, but after practicing it on and off for the last day I feel like I understand it. When I get it right, it's like situation falls away from consideration. I feel like everybody is doing the best they can and I love them for that, despite failures, misunderstandings or hurt. When I get this feeling, I feel more comfortable, less judged, more willing to try things, and generally more confident that every situation is a good situation because I've experienced it. Thanks for this amazing mind opener!

[Parthon]

pokilty: that's awesome to hear, I'm glad I'm not the only one that came to that conclusion about life.

It's totally true though, everyone really is doing the best they can, because if they could do better they would. They may not be living up to their magnificent human capacity due to their beliefs and learned limitations, but they are doing the best they possibly can. And you are too.

Love also makes all the small stuff disappear. The pettyness just stops being important, and the freedom of realy living opens up.

Love is the basis of freedom, courage and honesty, strange as it is.

[Sanity Panda]

To what extent does unconditional love interact with conditional love?

The only things that scare me and draw me towards unconditional love, is that it's not possible to direct love towards someone. It's an extremely non-attachment notion...

I always remembered in movies how tragic it seemed when monks would leave their family and later greet them lovingly but there was no more attachment to them, it'd be the same if they were a stranger.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Sanity Panda

...that it's not possible to direct love towards someone.

Who made up that rule? I reject it.

I always remembered in movies how tragic it seemed when monks would leave their family and later greet them lovingly but there was no more attachment to them, it'd be the same if they were a stranger.

Really, tragic? You might want to frame it another way: wouldn't it be great if every stranger you greeted felt like family?

[Parthon]

Originally Posted by Sanity Panda

To what extent does unconditional love interact with conditional love?

The only things that scare me and draw me towards unconditional love, is that it's not possible to direct love towards someone. It's an extremely non-attachment notion...

I always remembered in movies how tragic it seemed when monks would leave their family and later greet them lovingly but there was no more attachment to them, it'd be the same if they were a stranger.

It's totally possible to focus your love on someone, whether it's unconditional or not. Unconditional love though, you love them because you do, not because they are a particular person, but you can still focus as much as you want. It's also natural that those you have the most contact with would gain a greater share of your love just due to their accessibility, but you aren't limiting your love in any way. It's not conditional apon who they are.

As for attachment, it's not distance and removal. It's not the kind of emotional distance that people seem to get it confused with. It's giving up the irrational connection to the outcome, or to a particular person or thing, but at the same time, you can cherish your family and friends are really appreciate who they are for you, no strings attached. No attachment means also recognising that things come and go, that nothing in reality is permanent, it's all temporary. When it's time for a relationship or friendship to end, then you can do so with peace and love. But until then, you appreciate it for the small time it's around. In fact you focus on building the relationship, because by it's impermanency, it's better to have a great relationship in the present rather than mourn it's eventual loss.

As for how monks and spiritual people are portrayed in movies. Who wrote those movies? Why are they portrayed that way? Are those monks really spiritual, or just pretending to be? I had the same experience when I visited a buddhist temple. I saw all the monks who were studying and praying, and the only thing I could think of was "Are these people really living?"

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Angela

It feels really, really good. Maybe better than anything.

So basically Angela, the only reason you're into unconditional love is because it feels good for you, not because of anything it does for others?

The way you word this has me thinking that you're still thinking of unconditional love as something that you have "for" particular people.

I see from what you're saying here, that for you unconditional love is not something you have for someone, but rather it's a state you generate of being.

If you are loving one person unconditionally, but not loving everyone unconditionally, then that is conditional love.

So, a mother who loves her child unconditionally, but doesn't love other people doesn't really love her child unconditionally? I know someone who loves almost everyone unconditionally, except she can't love certain gruesome criminals unconditionally - does that mean she doesn't truly love all those other people unconditionally? I find that hard to believe.

Your definition of unconditional love is different from what I hear other people, including in this thread talk about. You seem to talk of unconditional love as something you are, whereas others seem to talk about something you do to someone. Am I wrong?

So for you, you are love unconditionally, but you don't love anyone in particularly unconditionally, since your unconditional love isn't targeted toward anyone, but it's simply a state of being?

p.s.... loving unconditionally doesn't mean you have to invite everyone over for dinner.

Yeah, so you love someone unconditionally, but no way you'd want them over for dinner. I dunno, I feel I'd rather have someone who doesn't love me, but who'd love to have me over for dinner compared to someone who loves me unconditionally but doesn't want to eat dinner with me.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by seeker5

So basically Angela, the only reason you're into unconditional love is because it feels good for you, not because of anything it does for others?

It's all tied up together. When you generate a state of being that feels good, you generate it for yourself, for your friends, for the world.

I see from what you're saying here, that for you unconditional love is not something you have for someone, but rather it's a state you generate of being.

Yes.

So, a mother who loves her child unconditionally, but doesn't love other people doesn't really love her child unconditionally? I know someone who loves almost everyone unconditionally, except she can't love certain gruesome criminals unconditionally - does that mean she doesn't truly love all those other people unconditionally? I find that hard to believe.

Sure, the love she has for her handpicked people (or the love a mother has for her child) can be truly unconditional. But that's not unconditional love as a state of being, because there is a condition involved: you must be one of the chosen people or I will not love you. Certain gruesome criminals need not apply. That's conditional love, as a state of being, and it doesn't mean that there are conditions for you loving any particular person, e.g. your own kid. (who is hopefully not a gruesome criminal -- that would be hard.)

Your definition of unconditional love is different from what I hear other people, including in this thread talk about. You seem to talk of unconditional love as something you are, whereas others seem to talk about something you do to someone. Am I wrong?

No, I'd say that's correct.

Yeah, so you love someone unconditionally, but no way you'd want them over for dinner. I dunno, I feel I'd rather have someone who doesn't love me, but who'd love to have me over for dinner compared to someone who loves me unconditionally but doesn't want to eat dinner with me.

It sounds like love, for you, equals wanting to spend time with you (or have dinner with you), is that right? Like, what kind of love is this if you don't want to eat with me? In that case I can see where hearing about love that doesn't involve a shared meal (shared time together) would strike you as false or offensive. It does actually sound to me like you are getting emotionally reactivated by this conversation, is that so? This last paragraph you wrote sounds a little snide to me -- like my perspective of unconditional love pisses you off. Is that right?

[Bud921]

From my perspective this is unconditional love..

Unconditional Love | A Boundless World

[Parthon]

Just to piggy-back on what Angela has said:

Unconditional Love is both a state of being and an expression. You are unconditional love, and you express that love to others. IT's both a state and a flow, at the same time.

Now, you wouldn't express your love in the same way to different people, even if you love them all unconditionally, you would express it differently. Your family would of course receive the most concentration of your love, and your friends a close second(or maybe they are first? ), along with the others in your life. Then there are those where you can't express your love directly, so you send love to them.

As for criminals: I unconditionally love criminals. They are human, and it's their human folly that's led them into the downfall. Perhaps on a different path in a different time they would have been different people, but it wasn't so. They have my compassion, and my condolences for a misspent life. However: I also don't feel the need to be friendly with them, I don't need to get close to them, nor do I need to invite them into my home. Based on self preservation, that would just be stupid. Now, if you can't separate love from having to do something, then you're still attached to how love should look, or should appear. It's possible to love people unconditionally and still do absolutely nothing about it.

Peace out to all you crims out there. I hope you find contentment at some point.

[Ontowhere]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Yeah, so you love someone unconditionally, but no way you'd want them over for dinner. I dunno, I feel I'd rather have someone who doesn't love me, but who'd love to have me over for dinner compared to someone who loves me unconditionally but doesn't want to eat dinner with me.

Would you rather, spent time at dinner with someone, who doesn't accept you for who you are, or not have dinner with someone who accept every part of what you are? In wich case, would you feel more freedom?
That is where most problems originate from and that is why it's called conditional love. We always ecspect people, to behave the way we want them to behave in order to be able to love them. We go through life doing things for people, when we don't feel like, others are doing the same for us. A whole world of unhappy people, trying to please, in order to be loved.
What about free choice. That is what unconditional love is, let people be. Love the life and it's expression in all it's forms. Don't expect to get nothing out of it.

[Sanity Panda]

I'm having difficulty in the idea of unconditional love being expressed differently to different people. Surely that'd instantly transform it into conditional love? (That is merely more accepting than your usual person)

I can however grasp the notion that the people you are around will naturally receive more love, as they are within your radar. But otherwise it doesn't make sense to limit or increase unconditional love around certain individuals, they should all experience the same thing depending on how you are feeling.

Guess I'm dabbling with semantics. Generally when people talk about unconditional love towards someone, they mean that almost all conditions are removed.

I remember vividly a previous thread talking about how a practioner of UL could not get into a relationship with others because... well hes not attached to one individual, he offers love to all. Most people see attachment as love. Overall it doesn't seem possible to live a life only with unconditional love, since it seems like human nature (or habit) to have conditional love. (Yeah I realise I'm being really contradictary there)

[Parthon]

That's where it gets tricky. People say that the expression of love should be the same for all, but it's really not. :P It's actually rather natural to have complex varying expressions for all kinds of people, much in the same way you might have different ways of expressing your true self to different people. It's hard to grasp, this disparity between unconditial and total love, and the idea that expressing it changes, but ones you experience, there's no disparity, it's just natural.

But you are right when you say you don't limit or increase your love between people, because that would be conditional, apon who that person is. In real unconditional love, you just let what comes up arise and go with it.

As for "relationships" and unconditional love, that's a tricky one. A regular traditional relationship is a way of saying "Lets own each other temporarily to increase our security and sense of safety." It's very exclusionary, and is based on fear of loss. Now, two people can come together, enjoy each others company tremendously and because they compliment each other, choose to participate in life together. This shared bond creates something stronger than both of them alone, but it's inclusive. It doesn't prevent new connections from forming with others, and doesn't stop either of them from living their lives fully and doing everything they can. That's the sort of relationship that would be created with Unconditional Love. I agree with what the other person says though. How can you love one person the most, when you really love everyone just as much?

Expanding on that last line one last time: You might love everyone without limits, but it's not equal, it doesn't have to be, it just has to be unconditional. I see validity in a mother loving their own child more and having a deeper connection with them, than with anyone else in the world, but that's natural. As long as that deep connection and great love doesn't limit her love for anyone else, then it's still unconditional love. The greater than or less than, or "what if?" arguments all stem from an idea of lack, or that there's not enough love to go around. Honestly, the only question with unconditional love is: Do you love everyone without limits, or not?

[Ontowhere]

Originally Posted by seeker5

So basically Angela, the only reason you're into unconditional love is because it feels good for you, not because of anything it does for others?

I see from what you're saying here, that for you unconditional love is not something you have for someone, but rather it's a state you generate of being.

So, a mother who loves her child unconditionally, but doesn't love other people doesn't really love her child unconditionally? I know someone who loves almost everyone unconditionally, except she can't love certain gruesome criminals unconditionally - does that mean she doesn't truly love all those other people unconditionally? I find that hard to believe.

Your definition of unconditional love is different from what I hear other people, including in this thread talk about. You seem to talk of unconditional love as something you are, whereas others seem to talk about something you do to someone. Am I wrong?

So for you, you are love unconditionally, but you don't love anyone in particularly unconditionally, since your unconditional love isn't targeted toward anyone, but it's simply a state of being?

Yeah, so you love someone unconditionally, but no way you'd want them over for dinner. I dunno, I feel I'd rather have someone who doesn't love me, but who'd love to have me over for dinner compared to someone who loves me unconditionally but doesn't want to eat dinner with me.

I belive it is posible to get in a reletionship, based on unconditional love , only. However, it would probably take another soul, who is able to love unconditionally to make a perfect match. Pretty hard, I would say.

[seeker5]

Sure, the love she has for her handpicked people (or the love a mother has for her child) can be truly unconditional. But that's not unconditional love as a state of being, because there is a condition involved: you must be one of the chosen people or I will not love you. Certain gruesome criminals need not apply. That's conditional love, as a state of being, and it doesn't mean that there are conditions for you loving any particular person, e.g. your own kid. (who is hopefully not a gruesome criminal -- that would be hard.)

Maybe the conditions for loving someone can simply be "You're in my field of range, I see you around, I spend time with you, therefore I choose to love you unconditionally"

But frankly, in my OP, despite my wording, I really wasn't asking how to be loving unconditionally, I didn't mean to ask about that state of being. I meant more about how to love people unconditionally.

It sounds like love, for you, equals wanting to spend time with you (or have dinner with you), is that right? Like, what kind of love is this if you don't want to eat with me? In that case I can see where hearing about love that doesn't involve a shared meal (shared time together) would strike you as false or offensive. It does actually sound to me like you are getting emotionally reactivated by this conversation, is that so? This last paragraph you wrote sounds a little snide to me -- like my perspective of unconditional love pisses you off. Is that right?

You're correct in your perception on how I felt.

I can imagine this:

Someone: "Seeker - I love you sooooooo much!"
Seeker: "Ah, that's nice, hey wanna grab a bite to eat, I'd love to talk with you"
Someone: "Oh hell no, you're too disgusting for me to want to sit down with."
Seeker: "..."
Someone: "But I do love you so much though!!!"

I see now the wisdom that Steve has in frequently telling people "You are loved." instead of him telling people "I love you". It clears up a lot of potential misunderstanding that can arise.

Originally Posted by Ontowhere

Would you rather, spent time at dinner with someone, who doesn't accept you for who you are, or not have dinner with someone who accept every part of what you are? In wich case, would you feel more freedom?

You're equating love with acceptance. While loving someone can mean accepting someone, it seems to me you can fully accept someone without loving them in the way Angela means to love. I can and do fully accept people as they are, I fully accept their choices and freedom of being without having to love them.

So yeah, I'd rather have someone who doesn't love me, but accepts me as I am and feels connected with me and wants to eat dinner with me (assuming I also connect with them), then someone who fully loves me unconditionally but would never want to eat dinner with me.

[Sanity Panda]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Someone: "Seeker - I love you sooooooo much!"
Seeker: "Ah, that's nice, hey wanna grab a bite to eat, I'd love to talk with you"
Someone: "Oh hell no, you're too disgusting for me to want to sit down with."
Seeker: "..."
Someone: "But I do love you so much though!!!"

That's rarely going to happen, an unconditional loving person would not say that. You wouldn't disagree with this example of unconditional love.

Person A: I love you, but when we are together. There are massive conflicts which bring out the worst in both of us.

In which case it's a much more loving action would be to seperate rather than be togther and have the other person become destructive. Thats my understanding of unconditional love, it might be different for the others.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by seeker5

Maybe the conditions for loving someone can simply be "You're in my field of range, I see you around, I spend time with you, therefore I choose to love you unconditionally"

Sure, but that would be conditional love, of course.

But frankly, in my OP, despite my wording, I really wasn't asking how to be loving unconditionally, I didn't mean to ask about that state of being. I meant more about how to love people unconditionally.

Okay. From my perspective, that's ordinary love, as I described in my first post in this thread: that is, you pick out certain people and love them unconditionally. Why those particular people? Because they qualify in some way -- you find them loveable for some reason. Then you decide you're going to love them no matter what -- but what happens when your reasons for loving them are withheld or change? What if they kick you in the shins, or become a gruesome criminal? Then you're up a creek with your unconditional love. Still, you can love them unconditionally. How? You choose to. Easy as that. You might have to give something up, though. Like your commitment not to love someone who is a gruesome criminal, or someone who treats you badly, or whatever your deeply-held convictions about who deserves your love are.

You're correct in your perception on how I felt.

I can imagine this:

Someone: "Seeker - I love you sooooooo much!"
Seeker: "Ah, that's nice, hey wanna grab a bite to eat, I'd love to talk with you"
Someone: "Oh hell no, you're too disgusting for me to want to sit down with."
Seeker: "..."
Someone: "But I do love you so much though!!!"

That doesn't feel like love to me, on the part of Someone. If Someone is Being Love, they probably wouldn't tell Seeker that he is too disgusting to sit down with. Someone might say: "I'd love to talk with you and have a bite together, too, and I don't feel strong enough right now to encounter what feels to me like unremitting anger and combativeness. Is there something you would like from me, is there something I can do, to generate peace and easy flow of good feelings between us? Do you have a request you'd like to make of me, or something you want to say, so that you can feel complete?"

Or in the case of the gruesome criminal, Someone might just say, "I'll pass," unless she's incredibly resourceful and willing to take on the risk.

You're equating love with acceptance, and that's not what I get at all here in the definitions Angela gave. While loving someone can mean accepting someone, it seems to me you can fully accept someone without loving them in the way Angela means to love. I can and do fully accept people as they are, I fully accept their choices and freedom of being without having to love them.

Actually, acceptance is a big part of what I mean by unconditional love. You can have acceptance without love, but there's no love if acceptance is missing. You can fully accept someone and withhold your love, but if you're not fully accepting someone and granting them the freedom to be exactly who they are and exactly who they are not, I wouldn't call that love.

[Angela]

So, seeker5, is there some request you'd like to make of me, or something you want to say to me, to be complete? Would you like to have an easy flow of good feelings between us, or would you rather continue to be snide to me because my perspective on unconditional love pisses you off (or any other reason)?

I'm fine with your choice, whatever you choose.

[Ontowhere]

I agree, with Angela.
I think we people always need to reason, with our minds. In reality things don't happen in the future or the past. Everything exist this moment only.
So maybe, if one tryes to look at it this way, it might get easier to grasp the mening, of unconditional love. More like experience each moment in full. Why can't one love the glass in a hand at this moment the same, as the person infront of you the next. What need needs to be furfilled, in order for you to feel love.

[Angela]

It occurs to me now that maybe you are irritated because I have told you that I love you, and now, talking about unconditional love as a state of being, you're thinking that means that when I said "I love you" to you, it was meaningless and empty, because if I love everyone, then so what if I love you? You're just one non-special part of the humanity soup that I love. Could that be right?

And when I was unavailable to you when you needed some love, maybe that is reminding you of the "love doesn't mean you have to have dinner with someone" feeling -- like, who cares if you love me if you won't be there for me when I need you? That's a nothing sort of love, Angela, and you're full of crap! Is that resonating at all?

Just so you know, when I have told you that I love you, I may have been being unconditional love or not, but the love I feel for you that I was expressing is ordinary love -- that is, I was recognizing qualities in you that were beautiful, and they inspired me, and make me feel good, and who becomes special to me. I love you because you are special to me, aside from generating love because I choose to generate love. My love for you is not conditional, there's nothing you can do to make me not love you; but spending time with you (the dinner thing) is conditional, just as it is with anyone else in my life. If I'm at a point where my well-being is taking every ounce of my attention, that's one condition that would certainly preclude me from spending time with you (or anyone else). If I don't feel I have access to the resources to effectively deal with your angry feelings toward me, that would be a condition, too. I don't think I'm doing you any favors if I get reactive about your reactivity. It would be great, I think, if we could find a way to interrupt the reactivity and get back to love, as Erin says, don't you think?

It would mean a lot to me, anyway.

[NyraSponge]

Unconditional Love: Limitless. the end.

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Angela

It occurs to me now that maybe you are irritated because I have told you that I love you, and now, talking about unconditional love as a state of being, you're thinking that means that when I said "I love you" to you, it was meaningless and empty, because if I love everyone, then so what if I love you? You're just one non-special part of the humanity soup that I love. Could that be right?

No, that wasn't it.

And when I was unavailable to you when you needed some love, maybe that is reminding you of the "love doesn't mean you have to have dinner with someone" feeling -- like, who cares if you love me if you won't be there for me when I need you? That's a nothing sort of love, Angela, and you're full of crap! Is that resonating at all?

No, it doesn't have anything to do with you being unavailable, it wasn't oriented toward you at all. But it did remind me about things in my own life, about my own social life, independent of you. I still don't see the point of telling someone "I love you" when it doesn't really mean anything about them but it's only about you. But that's no reason to be upset or anything.