What Love Means (To Give of Yourself?)

I've been pondering the idea of personal love - specifically things like love for a cause, love for a person.

I heard somebody say "To love means to give of yourself to someone or something."

When I think about this, a very clear view of the meaning of love comes into view.

When two people Really love each other, they give themselves to each other.

Then I think of the idea of "taking"... and something comes to mind...

I'm not sure about anybody else's experience, so I can only speak for my own... but in every situation where I thought I loved someone where the case simply was I "wanted to have them", it never ended up in a good situation, with genuine causes. But in every case that I met somebody and longed to be there for them, to give of myself, regardless of if they wanted me or if I was never a part of their life, the situation was always much more genuine, real, and in the case where nothing happened, I never really got burned, because I wasn't aiming for "having" them just to be disappointed to not get to.

After this thought, when I think of marriage vows, I think of the question asked "Do you take, such and such as your lawfully wedded wife/husband". Now when I think about it, the beginning of the ugly aspects of marriage manifests its face right out the gate to me, with the word "take".

If the question, instead was "Do you give yourself to such and such as their lawfully wedded wife/husband" it might be different. But it seems that the traditional concept of love and marriage is that of ownership, territory, and property - very similar to that of a slave and their owner. The thought spirals into the idea of the "servant woman" who stays in the kitchen and cooks and cleans for the husband. I can't say whether or not that is a bad thing or not. Some people like this, but others not, and customs are changing.

But would you say that, according to this idea, is love, to you, more real and genuine, when its based on giving of yourself, instead of taking, of a person or cause?

I think that those vows were written in a time when marriages were arranged. It was for the two to take each other into their lives and then learn to love one another.

The ceremony is perhaps outdated and could probably use a “re-vamp.” But of course… now days, the couple being married can choose how they are married and how they want their vows to be.

I like this train of thought Proteus.

I've always thought of love as being a give-and-take sort of thing. As you said, I have found it a better, more meaningful experience when I want to "give" to another because of my feelings for them. Whether it be time, attention, help, compassion, understanding or anything else of that nature, the urge to give of one's self to another is vital in love.

However, on the flip side, I think we must also be willing to take from those we love, to the extent that they are willing to give to us. After all, if we want to express our love for another by sharing ourselves isn't it only fair to allow them to do the same by accepting what they want to share with us?

Though my experience in this domain is not so very rich :

http://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/General-Discussions/58251-From-time-to-time-a-poem?limit=10&start=10#59373

Proteus, can I just say that I love your posts?

This is a really great discussion topic... I think that you're right on one side of the coin; love is about offering yourself to someone else, placing a part of your life and energy in the grip of another part of the universe outside 'yourself'. One could also give oneself to an object as well of course, but that strikes me as shallower form of love (attachment?). Love to another being is complicated because other beings are complicated - which is why even animals can hold such power over our lives if we give our love to them.

Your point about 'taking love' is what really caught me though... I've been thinking a lot about this sort of subject lately, and I've run into much the same idea - that our expectation of love, our grasping for such from another person, leads to regret and pain. A love not freely given doesn't have the same force or weight as a love shared mutually between two people. And that is, I think, one of the most potent ideas of all time for it speaks worlds about how we as a society understand and relate to love.

I have come to understand that there is a form of desire that exists which reaches out from our being and latches onto another person, and more often than not it seems that the object of our desire doesn't share our feelings. This is the sort of desire that manifests within the 'Darkside', it's the sort of desire that creates strife in our lives. As I have experienced it, it is powerful, wonderful in brief fiery bursts, and yet overall feels cold and lifeless. Personally I'm always aware of the fact that the desire will lead to nothing good - I can see the path stretched out before me and I almost always know where it's going to end; this knowledge manifests itself mentally as mood swings and strange dreams and sometimes (in the more severe cases, usually where I attempt to resist my inner realization that this is the wrong path), as physical symptoms, some of which can be as severe as physical shakes. I wonder if anyone else experiences it in this fashion, I'd be really interested to know.

The flip side that I've experienced is what I understand as something "real". It's the feeling you get around a person you really like who returns your affection. I'm not talking about anything so grandiose as love here even, just simple friendly affection - where the other person is glad to see you and you are glad to see them, for no reason other than it's nice to have them in your life for a few moments or more. There may be physical attraction and the like of course, but that is not what rules the urge to see them or the pleasure at their company, it is merely background noise to the experience of sharing some part of your life with someone who accepts you into their heart and offers up a part of their own soul for you to hold. This is a fire of a different sort it seems; it is not the cold fire of the false love-desire, nor is it the burning froth of a passion kindled; it's simply the steady warmth of two people who have shared, on some scale, a piece of their life with one another.

I've been meaning to write about this for a while, thanks for giving me the chance. Can't wait to see this discussion develop.

Proteus is really wise; I learned this very quickly, and I'm one of the newest here! We should buy him a nice long white fake beard to wear so he can look the part of the wise old man (Gandalf, Merlin, Dumbledore, what have you).

I like this topic And I agree that love is best when you wish to see the other person/animal/plant/what have you be happy.

Though, does this include self love? Because I know a lot of people who feel selfish if they spend time doing things for themselves...when sometimes you need to just take care of yourself in order to be better at loving another.

The 'giving' of yourself...is this always an indicator of love?

Perhaps it is...

Sometimes I wonder about to what extent we give selfishly...

You know how sometimes you give in some way, because it helps your conscience, or it makes you feel good about yourself and gives you a sort of pat on the back?

I know I've done that sort of giving before...

Sometimes I think perhaps it's hard to tell the difference between giving as a method of satisfying yourself, and giving selflessly.

I don't think that the two are entirely unconnected. Recently I've come into contact with a young woman who I find myself drawn to, and we've become friends. Just before Christmas I went into her place of work wearing my Doctor Who scarf and discovered that she's a huge fan of the show. She obviously loved my scarf a lot, and I know she doesn't make much money, so when Christmas came around I put the scarf in a nice little box, brought it to her and told her not to open it until I wasn't around. Later on she thanked me for it and started wearing it.

Point is, I got a great deal of pleasure out of the experience, and I improved our friendship. From one angle this could be construed as a selfish act (I wanted her friendship so I bought it with something she wanted), but does my knowledge that giving it to her would make her appreciate me more make it a selfish act? My happiness at her happiness was real. What about my pleasure in giving the gift itself?

It's a specific example, but I do not believe that it is as easy to separate what we see as "selfish" and "Selfless", simply because the two are not meant to be separated - they are merely two different points of view of the same thing.

The greatest thing one can achieve is to provide service to another or others. The same of love...

Every action you ever do will be in the interest of yourself. Even such actions that are deemed involuntary are done with you in mind... Maybe you trained yourself to act as such... well... you acted with you in mind when you trained yourself...

Maybe the Taoist is perfectly in harmony with his surroundings and simply acts as things arise with no thought behind it... well they had to act on their selfs to reach that point...

Maybe you wanted to save someone's life... well you acted on your self thinking that you would rather they lived... you act on your self when you want to give to charity or when you help people overcome their difficulties

Even things you don't like doing are acted from the self. Maybe you are between a rock and a hard place and you think that the best decision is the better of the two bad ones... that is acting on the self because you want to do the least harm

There may not be such a thing as true 'selflessness'... but maybe selflessness is s synonym of kindness...