Let's talk about love

Dear friends,
Despite all the diversity of opinion among us, I think all of us on this forum feel deeply the power and value of true love. So I am moved to initiate a discussion on the teachings of love by that cosmic lover of God, sage Narada. These are in the sutra form - short, punchy statements that go to the very heart of the issue. I would love for you all to share your experiences and insights as they relate to these teachings. I think this would make a wonderful tack for a healthy and enlightening discussion.

So here goes with the Narada Bhakti Sutras:

1. athāto bhaktiḿ vyākhyāsyāmaḥ: Now let us discuss devotion.

2.sā tv asmin parama-prema-rūpā: Devotion is of the form of total love for God.

 

The second sutra has some nice layers of meaning. The word asmin could mean "for God" or "here" or "in this life." Thus it brings the tone of urgency, that that love has to be cultivated here and now, in this life. Let us not wait for better circumstances - when I am richer, when I have more time, after I retire, etc. The time for love is now.

And it is not the half-hearted lip-service to love that has become so common. Parama means "total" or the "highest". Sri Krishna gives a beautiful description of such a devotee:
adveṣṭā sarva-bhūtānāḿ maitraḥ karuṇa eva ca
nirmamo nirahańkāraḥ sama-duḥkha-sukhaḥ kṣamī
santuṣṭaḥ satataḿ yogī yatātmā dṛḍha-niścayaḥ
mayy arpita-mano-buddhir yo mad-bhaktaḥ sa me priyaḥ (Bhagavad Gita, 12:13-14 )
One who does not have hatred for any being at all, but is full of only love and compassion for them; is totally free of ego and possessiveness; is equipoised in joy and in sorrow; is totally forgiving; is always contented; has complete self-control; is determined; has surrendered the mind and intellect completely to me; such a devotee is most beloved to me.


Note Krishna says that he loves such a devotee - when our love for God is complete, we begin to receive the fullness of God's love for us, because our mind/intellect (which are totally absorbed in the Divine) no longer stand in the way.


Such total love for God means also withdrawing our love from objects and pleasures of the world. At the same time it means loving all beings totally as manifestations of the Beloved.

 

Its so interestingly ironic that you have chosen to start a post on the Narada Bhakti Sutras.... firstly, I bought a translation of them when I was in Haridwar at a road side stand... because it was the only English book I could find. Secondly, if you have been reading the quotes thread you may have noticed that my new thing lately is this show called Joan of Arcadia... which is about this girl who talks to God ... as in God comes to her in different forms (human) and gives her advice or tasks to help her learn to be a better person or as a catalyst to help others around her. So in this show, Joan gets very sick and is diagnosed with lymes disease making her think that all her visits from God were hallucinations. However, despiter her attempting to shut God out now that she thinks he might not be real...he keeps coming back, incredably hurt that she won't acknowledge him anymore. The most poignet scene, which I posted in the quotes section and I will repost now.... is a scene where she "breaks up" with God....


You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJe09LRIo9Y (this particular scene starts at 1:11)

Or read it:

Back to the store. Joan finds God reading a book.
Joan - We're closing. Everybody get out. (She leaves)
God - Where's Sammy?
Joan - Oh, he had A... family emergency. I'm covering.
God - Want me to walk you home?
Joan - (Locking the door) Nope.
God - Why not?
Joan - Because you're not real.
God - Then why are you talking to me? (Outside walking on the street) You know I'm real, Joan. You've always known you're not crazy, then you got a chance to see what it really looks like. Crazy is destructive. It tears down. I'm all about building up.

Joan - Then I suggest you take up carpentry.
God - What do you think this is all about?
Joan - Uh, you, I suppose.
God - It's a creation, Joan. It's not a destruction. And that's what I want you to do. I want you to be creative. I want you to build things.
Joan - I build lamps!
God - Relationships, possibilities, connections. Look, have you read this?
Joan - You stole that!
God - Well, technically, everything's mine. It's about a house called howard's end. The house is symbolic.
Joan - Yes, I know. I read it in lit class. All these English people running around misunderstanding each other because of their manners. Everything goes horribly wrong, just like in every English novel.
God - You know, I like what's written at the beginning here. Would you read it for me?
Joan - "Only connect." [Tearfully] You hurt me. Really bad. Why should i trust you again?
God - Why did you ever?
Joan - Look, we had some good times. And I'm fine with you being, you know, the divine "it." But I don't want to see you anymore. It's not you. It's me. I--I'm just-- I'm not the girl for you. I--I had... a taste of normal, and...I really liked it, you know? I really enjoyed being optimistic and... making my lamps.
God - (a hint of being teary) Don't you miss me a little?
Joan - No. (She‘s lying) [Sniffles] Please go.
God - Do you miss yourself? Because I do.

Joan of Arcadia, Episode 24







...so what does this have to do with Narada? Well, this made me think of the Divine relationships (which I'm pretty sure arein the Bhakti sutras)... the one being expressed here of God as a lover. When she eventually does return to God , God appears as an older woman, who consoles her and gives her a hug, taking on the role as God as a parent.....and I was actually reflecting on this in my own journal the other day...and then I saw your post on the Bhakti Sutras and I thought it was great....

....so long story short.... What do you all think of the Divine Relationships? Seeing God as a lover, child, master , parent, or friend? Is this essential or non-essential to practicing the bhakti path?

 

Further on the NBS, Sri Narada says:
One should at all times love God and love God and only love God, whether as a servant serving his master, or a lover serving the beloved. (66)

In the Bhagavatam, Narada muni tells Yudhishthira: The Gopis attained Him out of lust; Kamsa out of fear; Shishupala and others out of hatred; the Vrishnis out of family ties; you Pandavas out of friendship; and out of devotion we (the sages) attained the Lord. Therefore, by any means possible, fix your mind in Krishna.

I think this is why Christ taught us to look on God as the father. The Lakotas refer to the Great Spirit as the Grandfather.

My Guruji told me about a person who used to relate to Sri Rama as a son. Whenever someone even mentioned Rama's name his mouth would fill with a sweet taste, his eyes would well up and his skin stand on end. When Ramayana was taught he used to weep and faint during the portion when Rama leaves for the forest.

So yes, it is very helpful to create a relationship with the Lord. I myself think of Krishna as my little cousin who comes to visit me now and then. And we have a great time together!

 

Like that story you told me about the little boy who saw Krishna as his older brother... I love that story.

----

For me, it depends on what I am feeling at the moment...as how I relate to Krishna (or any divine manifestation)....

 

I'm not sure about that. It seems to me that we can love the divine and love the world at the same time. Sensual pleasures can be seen as one interaction between the soul and God. In fact it is only the consciousness of the divine that can give us the balance not to be carried away by sense pleasure.

Take beauty in nature for example - I think that is sensory pleasure, but it can actually lead us closer to the source rather than taking our consciousness away.
Similarly with love - I have always found that when I've fallen in love with someone, I get this inner wonder and gratitude to God springing up inside.

But of course we need to be able to detach from sense pleasures.

I think William Blake put it well:

'he who binds himself to a joy
doth the winged life destroy.
but he who catches a joy as it flies
lives in eternity's sunrise'.

 

That is exactly what I meant Bill. So long as you see the divine in the world, it is fine to revel in it. But the moment that vision is lost, indulgence leads to attachment to that particular object and the resultant cycle of desire, anger, etc.

 

amṛta-svarūpā ca: It (such total love) is eternal by nature.


Since such absolute love God does not leave room for any desires and attachments for other things, there is nothing to rival it in the devotees heart.

Sometimes people who are very religious stop their worship and spiritual practices because they did not get something they asked God for. Such cases are common, where love for God is used as means to attain some worldly end. And when we don't get what we want, that love evaporates.
But where there is no craving for anything else, and love for God is the end in itself, then it is naturally eternal.

 

Yes that's true.
I made my previous post though mainly because some people come across an idea like this and think a kind of harsh ascetic type of approach to life is indicated, where everything agreeable to the sense has to be rejected. Often though, that can lead to a sterile kind of existence, and can close one off to the divine just as can unbridled indulgence.

I once visted Belgium and saw there a cathedral smashed up by iconoclasts during the reformation - they were rejecting the high art of medieval catholicism becasue of the too ascetic approach. They thought contemplation of beautiful works of sculpture was a distraction from God, whilst the catholics thought the reverse - that contemplation of such works can bring us closer towards the spirit.
Personally, and this is only my view, I'd go farther than that, and say that some art, esp. some of the rennaisance painting (Raphael for instance - who in an argument with Michael Angelo one said 'what I have I have from God') is actually divinely inspired, and is a kind of proof or evidence of God's Love for us.
Because such art seems to create a kind of higher atmosphere, we can be drawn into it, beyond the merely personal stuff we spend so much time on, and become open to something higher, we may even feel a sense of awe. See a different vision of human life.
A beautiful painting of say Mary can induce a sense of the spiritual, and a sense also perhaps that the actual Mary must be beauty on an absolute level which we can barely imagine.

Anyway, I ramble as usual.

Love though is a very big topic - I hope this thread will produce some interesting discussion.

 

Again this raises some interesting points. No doubt it's true, that we should want God for God's sake, not because we expect this or that blessing.
However, I think it's also useful on another level to ask for the things we need or want. For one thing, it's better to pray even with an impure motive than not to pray at all. It may be a first stage.
I think it was Crowley who said:
'if a man prays with his lipsfor long enough, one day he will find himself praying in his heart'.
At least in such prayer there is an acknowledgement of the existence of the divine and of our state of dependency.

But when one actually feels the Love of the divine, nothing else seems important. Or at least, personal goals and desires take second place.
We even begin to see which of our personal ambitions, desires, neeeds are helpful on the path, and which are an obstruction.

Also, as JC said, God knows before you pray what you need.

 

I was not saying don't pray, but I was talking about how we tend to put our desire for things above our love for God. This is a stage as you said, and by prayer much can be achieved. But it is only meaningful if it leads us to recognize God's infinite love and kindness and inspire our hearts to seek Him alone. Seek first thy Lord and all else shall be added unto you.

 

I totally agree with you. I think that beautiful art, music, poetry... whether intentionally or non-intentionally spiritually inspired can lift us to a higher place of Love for God...just as nature (the Art of Universe! ha!) can bring us to a higher place or a deeper contemplation... one of the most beautiful things to me is flowing water.... in any body... ocean, river, creaks... even fountains! I love fountains.... for my own particular experience, moving water is an incredible part of my spiritual experience. And I know I'm not alone, think of Ganga!

 

Sutra 4:

yal labdhvā pumān siddho bhavaty amṛto bhavati tṛpto bhavati

Having attained which a person becomes perfect, becomes immortal and is completely satisfied.


The word siddha, which I have translated as perfect has a lot of other tich meanings: fulfilled, one who has attained his object, sacred , holy , divine , illustrious,effective , powerful , miraculous.

It is love that truly satisfies our hearts. And when we gain infinite love for God, then our satisfaction is also infinite. Such master no longer demands anything for the world, needs nothing, wants nothing and is completely satisfied in the fullness of love. In fact such a person becomes love. Which may be why the previous sutra defines love as immortal and this one says the true lover also becomes immortal. She becomes love itself.
And in this fullness of love the lover and beloved become one. Meerabai merged with Krishna - her body was never found, only a beautiful idol of the Lord.

 

Love is patient, love is kind.
It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
It is not rude, it is not self-seeking.
It is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth.
It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails.
I Corinthians 13:4-8

 

I think some definition of 'love' might be useful, because it seems to me the word is used to describe a variety of things which are not on the face of it the same.

For instance, when it is said 'love is immortal' that can hardly be applied with accuracy to most cases where the word is used.
I may be madly in love with another person, but also realize that unless I beleive in something like the popular, sentimantalized christian idea of 'heaven', that love simply isn't immortal, as both myself and the person I love will one day cease to be.

When it comes to 'love of country', or 'I love music', thats even more a temporary and constructed thing.

So I think that the problem lies in the paucity of terms in the english language to describe very different things.

What this thread seems to be about is love of the divine - not 'love' in general, whatever that might be.

Maybe so, but does it satisfy our heads necessarily?

I've never been happy with the use of the word 'love' in modern translations of this passage. It makes a heck of a lot more sense to use the more precise term 'charity', as in the King James Version.

1COR 13:4 - Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.


Charity perhaps might allow us to be 'nice' to those we don't really 'love'?

In fact, this passage, or the use made of it, also supports my general idea as stated above, because it is used at weddings, yet really has nothing to do with sexual love at all. In fact, there's a thread about this here http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=356203&f=88

 

Bill, in my earlier post on Sutra two I discussed the definition of love that is being used here.

I do believe this agrees with what you are talking about.What passes for love in common parlance is only attachment and lust, not truly love. And of course when there is real love, charity is spontaneous. And when there is real love for any one thing, there is real love for all, because real love shows us the One that is in all things. Therefore the question of how we treat those we don't like never comes up. A devotee sees all beings as a manifestation of the divine source, and has nothing but love and love and love alone. One great teacher said that if you dislike even one single object in the entire universe, you are not truly a lover of God.

In this sense alone is love immortal. Because when love is so complete, so transcendent, then there is no more any physical barrier or limitation, as identification is not with the body but with the All. I have discovered myself in all beings, and in that total empathy and deep communion, there is no I and other, there is no birth and death, there is no longer even a lover and a beloved, love and love alone remains. We become love, and that transcendent, all embracing love exists as long as existence exists, as long as there is eternity, there is love. And it is in this sense, I believe, that we can say truly, God is love.

And it is this kind of love that is truly transformational. An extreme example is of the brutal murderer Angulimala who used to make necklaces of his victims fingers and wear them with pride. A chance encounter with the Buddha completely transformed his personality, and he renounced his earlier ways and did all he could to heal his past, make restitution for his sins and eventually he attained enlightenment.

Even the most terrible sinner, if brought in contact with such a Master, can be transformed into a divine soul.

 

A great post Bhaskar

 

I disagree with this last statement. There are many things that are simply not loveable and are manifestations of ignorance only.
Back again to the divine and the undivine?
Jesus for instance showed very little love for the money changers. I have no love for neuclear missiles, the HIV virus and many other things. Does that take away from my spiritual path? I don't think so.

.

I think knowledge is also necessary, because God is also knowledge.
Again using the story of Jesus as an example - the very people who shouted 'crucify him' were the same ones to whom he had preached, and they'd even witnessed the miracles. So even the direct presence of Christ was not enough to transform them.

 

I think Jesus showed tremendous love for the money changers. Why else would he try to change them and bring them to a way of life that was better for them? Loving someone is not about coddling them and telling them how lovely they are. It's about helping them to grow and become stronger, more happy beings.
Same thing with HIV. It's not something to hate. It is not the virus at fault for anything. Humans fail to live prudently and the disease spreads. And the virus is simply what it is. It is living. And by its natural living process it harms humans, but its not to be hated for that. Otherwise you would have to hate every carnivore, and even every herbivore and everyone that takes antibiotic medicines. These things are what they are.

Anyway, what we have is a confusion of standpoints as always. From the standpoint of names and forms and perception at that level, you have to respond appropriately to each situation and thing. But from the standpoint of the spirit, they are all manifestations of the divine. No names and forms are there at all, so what can you hate and what can you be attached to? God alone is in everything.

And if hate of these things creates agitation in your mind (and it clearly seems to) then it very definitely is an obstacle spiritually.

I said can, not will. These things work over very long periods. Possibly lifetimes. Those who came in touch with Christ were not unaffected. he change may have manifested much later, perhaps in a subsequent birth. But if you believe Christ could not bring even a minute change in a person, how can you have any hope for the world?