absolutespiritdotco

“LOVE IS NOT AN EMOTION”

The “love” spoken of by sages is never an emotion; it refers to the existence itself, divine nature at different dimension form “I.” It is openness and unconditional embrace itself.

In contrast, what the mind (the “I,” thought, or the ego) calls “love” is merely attachment. Because it is influenced by the neurotransmitter oxytocin, it fosters generosity and a sense of group identity toward those perceived as “one of us.” However, it just as easily gives rise to the exclusion of outsiders, a protective instinct for the group, and the resulting hostility and aggression.

These are the known natural effects of oxytocin on the human body.

Therefore, if we label this attachment as “love” and attempt to build a world upon it, rifts among the “in-group” will naturally occur due to the various unresolved pains—spiritual challenges—carried by each individual as they percrive themselves separate entities. Furthermore, hostility and conflict toward those outside the group become inevitable.

It is self-evident that oxytocin is not something where “simply increasing the amount” is the solution. Yet, how even does the mind (the “I,” thought, or the ego) think to measure and regulate its levels within the brain?

Moreover, even if one were able to regulate it, would the world truly become peaceful?

The reality is that the spiritual challenges each person harbors unconsciously vary widely. Any phenomenon that manifests is merely the temporary result of immeasurable engi—dependent origination—arising from the convergence of diverse causes and conditions. In short, all phenomena are impermanent; nothing can exist eternally.

However, the mind (the “I,” thought, or the ego)—harboring the illusion that it can control things that naturally change—insists that everything should and can be controlled through mere knowledge, interpretation, and fantasy (such as the idea that “if everyone consciously chose love, the world would be at peace”). By clinging to this kind of notion, the mind unconsciously leans ever more toward behaviors intended to protect itself from fresh hurt.

Furthermore, by quantifying everything and obsessing over “correctness,” it can even unconsciously give rise to new forms of discrimination.

Can it truly be called “love” to insist that this is love, while simultaneously dismissing those deemed to have not consciously chosen it as “wrong,” or suppressing negative thoughts and emotions simply because they are judged to be “bad”?

࿓࿓࿓࿓࿓

The reality is that the mind (the “I,” thought, or the ego) cannot see the full scope of engi—the web of dependent origination—nor can it comprehend those interconnections; this is precisely why conflicts and wars repeat endlessly.

This is not to say the mind is foolish or wrong; rather, it is simply a collection of thoughts and memories cultivated unconsciously within the brain. Because such a mind is incapable of “unconditionally seeing facts exactly as they are,” this outcome is merely a natural consequence. Yet, because the mind cannot see even this fact, it points the finger at others—declaring “you are wrong”—thereby inevitably fueling further separation.

However, reality is always as it is and so this phenomenon is nothing more than a single moment of impermanence—a fact that simply repeats itself as a mere occurrence, appearing and vanishing within consciousness. Thus, the question of “love” is, in reality, a profound inquiry into “being”—one that cannot be grasped through mere intellectual or conceptual knowledge, nor resolved through thinking alone, even if spiritual wisdom is shared.

Because all of falseness as the “I” (thought, or the ego), which doesn’t exist is definitely dismantled and dissolved by seeing through the fact of what is with the clarity of innermost stillness.

࿓࿓࿓࿓࿓

While the mind (the “I,” thought, or ego)—trapped in “doing”—obsessively clings to the idea of ​​“right actions” and “right choices,” the sage declares that no such thing as a “right choice” actually exists.

In truth, even the choices the mind proudly proclaims as “my own” are merely phenomena that have temporarily emerged as the result of a complex web of dependent originations.

The sage invites us to turn attention from “doingness” and toward “beingness.”

We as awareness are told to simply observe everything that merely arise and pass away within the consciousness, which is a narrative of the mind (the “I,” thought, or the ego), such as claim of ownership; the aversion, hatred, or attachment that is amplified unconsciously; self-hypnosis as unconscious thoughts that keep repeating as “mine”; clinging to emotions and values ​​born of assumptions; the automatic interpretation of sensations; and the appropriate various experiences as “mine.”

These things, the sage affierms, are not “you.”

࿓࿓࿓࿓࿓

The world of relative duality perceived by the mind (the “I,” thought, or ego) and the non-dual world in which the sage as awareness abides are not separate; in fact, they are looking at the very same reality.

However, the sage—through self-observation and self-inquiry grounded in the clarity of the innermost stillness—perceives that very self-concept of “I,” which is as a small entity influenced by environment, but is actually thoughts and interpretations, claiming ownership of shifting emotions and their experiences is the root of all suffering. Having seen through this, the sage awakens completely from a dream of separation and simply abides in the present moment—in reality just as it is.

This is neither indifference to the current situation nor irresponsibility.

On the contrary, while witnessing head-on everything the mind (the “I,” thoughts, or ego) fails to see, the sage remains entirely non-judgmental, dedicating themselves simply to abiding in the present moment and calmly doing what can be done right now.

The reason the sage makes no judgments is not so much because they can see the entirety of engi (dependent origination)—but rather because they sincerely accept the fact that it is impossible to ever fully fathom that web of causes and conditions.

Or, even if they could be to perceive all the causes and conditions that led to an event—and moreover, even if the mind (the “I,” thoughts, or ego) in the head were to criticize it—they deeply understand that these are merely phenomena arising and vanishing within consciousness. Recognizing that these thoughts are neither the essence of “Being” itself nor something belonging to “Being,” the sage simply witnesses their arising and passing away.

In this way, the sage simply observes the fact that all things inevitably arise and pass away, while remaining as the pure presence that is utterly unaffected by impermanence.

In truth, this ever-present, pure presence is the ultimate divine love—it is the true “You,” the very essence of impersonal Awareness which is far behind the “I.” (OM 🙏)