08 March 2011

What “Is” Love?

Let me make sure I am clear about the question. Most of the time, when people answer the question "What Is Love?" they almost always give connotative feeling answers. Example, "Love is that feeling you get when you are embraced in the arms of your parents." or, "Love is that thing that can crush you when you get dumped." Ok, so I'm not very good at giving examples, if you want better ones, just Google the question and look at the myriad of answers that come back. Now if you actually happened to Google it and look around for a moment, see if you notice the trend that I am talking about. The answers all say how Love effects a person, not what Love itself "Is”"
It's funny, I never really thought much about it till a friend of mine discussed this topic with me, posing this same question. She couldn't quite put it in words yet but she had this feeling that there were not different types of Love, as some would suggest, but that there was one type of Love and that it only varied by strength or intensity. To explain the differences manifestation of Love, such as the difference between parent and child, and two lovers, were due more to natures of the relationships themselves.
Both she and I continued to ponder the matter for the next few days and independent of one another came to the same conclusions.

Love "Is" a condition of connection.

At it's raw, rudimentary, base, it is a literal connection between two people. I don't mean the superficial connection such as, "you like basketball, I like basketball, We're connected." I mean a connection that begins to break down all barriers, and begins to make two things more like one thing. It can be strong, or it can be weak. Nurturing it makes us feel better. Neglecting it, or intentionally trying to break or weaken it, can make us feel horrible. But in every relationship that has any chance of lasting, the connection is the constant.
I can keep going on and on. I'm not 100% sure if this train of thought is right or wrong. At best, the train of thought is still un-polished and messy. But it does introduce several new questions that never could have occurred before. I'll stop here and pick back up with some of those new questions another day.

1 comment: