There is no other ‘love’ than unconditional love.
Love is the most important thing throughout AURELIS, as it is of course in many other traditions.
So, from AURELIS viewpoint also: love is the most important thing of all.
BUT: love is obviously just a term, a reference to a quite abstract concept. People may, as always, refer to the same concept with different terms and to different concepts with one and the same term.
Are you following me?
The latter does not necessarily mean that there are different ‘loves’. Perhaps two persons use one and the same term but to the one person it means something completely different than to the other.
What is then the concept that I’m here referring to with the term ‘love’?
Which is also the question: what is AURELIS?
Paying attention to the total person.
This already brings a lot to light. It’s about open attention, so: unconditional attention. The person who is giving open attention, doesn’t first look at the situation with closed attention. If he would do so, he would be unable to be in open attention.
Real love can be poetically expressed in thousands of ways.
Real love is a few words in the desert, while the sun is coming up, after a night of meditation.
“It has always been YOU.”
The common factor is the deeper self that makes contact with the deeper self of someone else. Overlap. One’s ‘purely-ego’ is being transcended.
A sea of complexity flows into a sea of complexity without losing simplicity
This shows itself in for instance:
- We do not think of love in case of a stone. Complexity is needed, at least enough for the sake of attention. Life, thus. Without ‘life’ there cannot be ‘love’.
- We do not think of love as ‘something very complex’. On the contrary. Love… loves to be simple. In the face of complexity, love easily becomes difficult.
When simplicity is being engaged, an immense depth and amount of communication is possible. As through a wide open tube. Touching. Being touched.
Love is ‘unconditional’
not because one is taking a futile leap into the unknown just like that, but because one is relying on the other as on oneself. There are no conditions for the flow of love itself. One grants the other what one wants oneself.
“You treat the other like you want to be treated yourself.”
Note that this is not ‘inconsiderate’.
I would even say: on the contrary. You think carefully about it, because you only want the best. Inconsiderate is not unconditional, but un-conditional: it doesn’t care. That’s no sign of great love.
On the other hand, you can hardly label any conditions by themselves as a sign of love, such as in : “I will love you if…”. Besides, this way, the ego-defensive wall is readily getting higher. The tube is far from open. Simplicity takes a huge hit. Love vanishes.
As in many cases, we can learn a lot from nature. Nature itself is also about simplicity, in the sense of ‘as simple as possible in all circumstances’, while unconditional.
Viewed as such, is nature not simply based on love?