Earlier this evening -- in one of my derivation posts -- I talked a bit about the concept of love. If you will recall, I mentioned that it is often said that we must climb outside of ourselves to experience love in its fullest sense.
I find it interesting that people think of the two dominant forces in the cosmos -- love and hate -- as somehow being divorced in some way from the centralizing self. While love is depicted as going high, hate also seems to exist or be expressed beyond the basic core.
When we become enraged -- a brief expression of one or more forms of hate -- what is that people typically say? Bill was so dang mad that he was beside himself! Not inside, below or above himself, but beside.
As with love, an aura-like thing moves away from the housing to stand next to the personalized self. Does it recognize that it belongs to the thing it is next to? Does it think of itself as an independent self that can unilaterally control the other?
This idea of part of us moving above and beside to express the baseline emotions tells me that we humans simply are trying to avoid ownership of these two forces. We want to divorce them from the self that we claim (or claims us). The problem I see with such a formulation is that without the self we do not exist.
In my mind's eye, when I love or hate, it comes from inside. My undivided self is responsible either way.
I find it interesting that people think of the two dominant forces in the cosmos -- love and hate -- as somehow being divorced in some way from the centralizing self. While love is depicted as going high, hate also seems to exist or be expressed beyond the basic core.
When we become enraged -- a brief expression of one or more forms of hate -- what is that people typically say? Bill was so dang mad that he was beside himself! Not inside, below or above himself, but beside.
As with love, an aura-like thing moves away from the housing to stand next to the personalized self. Does it recognize that it belongs to the thing it is next to? Does it think of itself as an independent self that can unilaterally control the other?
This idea of part of us moving above and beside to express the baseline emotions tells me that we humans simply are trying to avoid ownership of these two forces. We want to divorce them from the self that we claim (or claims us). The problem I see with such a formulation is that without the self we do not exist.
In my mind's eye, when I love or hate, it comes from inside. My undivided self is responsible either way.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are unmoderated, so you can write whatever you want.