The Soul of Love
By C.W. Adams
The Soul of Love
Copyright © 2011 C.W. Adams
SCIENCE OF TRUTH PUBLISHING
Wilmington, Delaware
www.science-of-truth.com
All rights reserved.
Smashwords Edition
Publishers Cataloging in Publication Data
Adams, C.W.
The Soul of Love
Smashwords Edition
1. Spirituality. 2. Philosophy
Library of Congress Control Number: 2008902202
ISBN paperback: 978-0-9816045-1-0
ISBN ebook: 978-1-936251-15-5
License Notes: This ebook is licensed only for the use of the person who downloaded it. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please download an additional copy for each recipient. Furthermore, the copyright prohibits the copying and/or plagiarizing of any of the text contained in this book.
For my Teachers
Table of Contents
___________________________________________
Conclusion: THE SOURCE OF LOVE
Introduction
Today our society throws the word “love” around as if it were a flag or emblem. We might invoke this “love” to communicate our dedication or our commitment to something or someone. “I just love that,” we might say about an activity or material object. “I would love to go,” we might blurt as we suggest our inclination for an activity. Often people say, “I love you” to our family members as a matter of responsibility— feeling we are communicating the need to respect our genetic connections. We might also proclaim our love to our spouses or mates as an obligatory statement—professing our allegiance to them only.
What exactly is love? What is the true meaning of love? Where does it come from? Why do we all have this common need for love?
Certainly, love is not just a word. It is one of most important aspects of being alive. We all need it. We need it from the time our bodies are born to the time of their demise. All of our family members need it. All of our friends need. Every politician needs it. Every famous person has needed it. Every king has needed it. Every slave has needed it. Every poor person and every rich person needs it. No one has been able to escape the need for love.
Love is not just needed by every human either. Every animal needs it. This is quickly observed among pets and their masters. The pet wants to be stroked and cared for. If it is a dog, for example, the dog wants to run and get the ball or bone we throw and bring it back to us. If it is a cat, it wants to cuddle up to its master and be stroked. We can also easily see that animals need love as they go about their lives in the wild. Even the most vicious of animals—such as the tiger—needs the stroking, fondling and playfulness of their mothers and fathers as they are reared. Even fish perform dancingly swim to impress their mates and find union with another fish. Even insects perform mating ceremonies, as the males or females attract the other sex. Every living being needs some form of love and attention from others. As we travel up the scale of consciousness, from plants to animals, we find the activities of love between living organisms become clearer and expressive.
In the human form of life, we are able to more completely express love. Because of our refined evolution, intelligence, mind and brain, we have the ability to discern between the physical aspects of mating rituals and the feeling of true love that has no physical boundaries in its finest and purest manner: That is, if we come to understand it.
While many scientists are proposing love is merely a biochemical or animalistic sexual urge, most of us know better. Must of us know better because we feel love when there is no sex at issue. We feel love when there is no genetic qualification. This inner feeling tells us love is a deeper part of us.
This collection of essays covers some of the finer aspects of love, as they relate to the self—the living being. Here we emphasize the self as distinguished from the physical body: The real person within the temporary physical body. This personality—our self—is the central character of the discussions of love. This is because only the self is able to exchange love. The physical body is simply a temporary vehicle of the self. One physical body may touch another physically, but touching hardly defines love. We might see two sets of couples walking down the street, both holding hands. One couple might be exchanging love while the other is not, however. Although handholding might be an expression of loving feelings, it could also be done without the feelings. This is because love comes from the self, not from the physical body.
We should further clarify the difference between the physical body and the self before we delve further into the topic of love. We have done this more specifically and scientifically in The Science of Truth. To summarize the points made there, we can explain that while the self is changeless and eternal, the physical body is temporary—undergoing dramatic change throughout its short lifetime. We can see this when we notice that our body as a baby was quite different from our adult body. Yet the same person inhabited both bodies. The person looking at a picture of the baby body is the same person who was in the baby body years earlier. We also instinctively accept this when we look in the mirror as we age. We are surprised at the amount of wrinkles and grey hair growing on our bodies. For this reason, many people strive to make their bodies look younger than they really are. Here the self—the real person—is feeling an incongruity between the body and our real identity.
This identity is confirmed by science. Researchers have determined that every cell of the body has a limited lifetime, whereupon it is replaced through mitosis. While intestinal cells may only last a day or two, skin cells will be replaced within a week. Blood cells will be replaced within a month. Brain cells will be replaced within a few years. Nearly every cell in our body is replaced within five years.
Furthermore, the molecules within those cells are replaced even more readily. As we breathe in and out; eat and defecate; drink and urinate; we exchange billions of molecules and atoms in a free flow exchange of matter. Just as a waterfall might look in a photograph, our bodies appear to be unchanging, yet the components are changing by the second.
It is our self—the living being—who is the constant. The living self is the entity that drives the body. Each of us is an individual living being. Each of us is non-material in essence. While some have referred to this non-material self as the soul, the soul has also been used to describe the personality or character of a person. The soul of something is also often considered the center or its source. Here as we discuss the individual self or the soul, we refer to the non-material being—each of us spiritual beings.
The essays here discuss some of the heavier lessons we are being taught to us during our embodied physical existence. Each topic relates to a different issue we face, as we travel through the relationships of this world and struggle with inner conflicts. For this reason, we might suggest the reader read no more than one essay per sitting.
We also give a gentle warning: In some cases, these discussions are not accommodating to certain sensitivities. They may address the ugliness and sadness of the human existence along with the beauty of its design and process. They may also question our own integrity and motives. They may dig at our pride.
In the end, however, we also provide viable solutions to many of the dilemmas facing us as we struggle with love and faith. We note these discussions are not sectarian. They are not denominational. They do not promote a particular group to join. They do not promote a particular sect of religion to change to.
The potential solutions provided here should be easy to understand, yet may be difficult to master. They require a determination to dedicate oneself. They require us to probe our hearts critically and honestly. Whatever the result, we must know that any progress made on the path towards real love is beneficial. There are no vain attempts on the journey towards The Soul of Love.
The information presented in this book has descended from a long line of devoted teachers who have lovingly passed on knowledge as given without speculation or interpretation. I thank these teachers, and hope this writing continues that tradition of giving and love.
Chapter One: The Hole
As the woman drove through the desert, she was captivated by its mid-day beauty. The golden sand and green cacti set against the layered pastel colors of the desert hills quieted her busy mind for a few minutes. Frustrated about her money problems, she was grateful for the distraction a little scenery brought her.
Just then her car’s engine stopped. After trying to restart the car, she decided to hitchhike. After waiting a full afternoon in the hot sun on this lonely desert road for someone to drive by, she figured she had better start walking. She thought there might be a small town or market nearby.
For three long hot days, she walked a barren, treeless road without seeing any signs of humanity. By the third day, her body was completely dehydrated, and she felt close to death. Her feet were on fire. Her tongue was swollen. Her body was dying of thirst. She began to see mirages of water where there was only sand. She could hardly walk any further.
Just as she was ready to lie down and give up, she heard the rumble of an automobile in the distance. She looked up the road to see a fast-approaching car. She stepped out onto the road, waving in distress to stop the car. This is the only car she’d seen in three days! The man driving the car stopped. He rolled down his window, and asked, “you okay?”
“No,” she said. “My car broke down 3 days ago and I am dying of thirst. Can you give me some water and take me to the nearest town please?”
The man slumped in his seat, dropped his head for a moment and suddenly reached under his seat. “Take this. I’m sure you’ll be fine.” He handed her a small paper bag, rolled up his window quickly, and sped off without saying good-bye.
She watched in horror as the car shrank in the distance. She slowly opened the bag and looked inside. It was a wad of cash rolled up in a rubber band. It looked to be about $200 in small bills. Angrily she tossed the bag and the money onto the ground. “A lot of good money will do me right now,” she muttered, as she dropped to her knees in desperation.
Why do we feel empty inside?
Consider some of the most wealthy and famous musicians and movie stars over the last fifty years who have either committed suicide or died of drug overdose. What happened? Why did these successful people, some with just about everything a person could desire—fame, fortune, sex and success—become so miserable? Why did they resort to the most desperate measures? How could they be miserable when they had millions of dollars and millions of adoring fans?
There is one common thread amongst these famous and wealthy people: They each complained that despite all their fame, despite all their wealth; despite the millions of adoring fans; and despite being able to get just about anything material they desired, they felt a hole or inner emptiness they couldn’t seem to fill. They were lonely. They were depressed. They were unhappy and miserable. Nothing seemed to fill the hole.
Our society is driven by consumption.
Most of us in modern society have an abundance of physical objects to consume. Most of us have plenty of food, clothes, comfortable houses and apartments, cars, TVs, DVD players, computers, large malls where we can buy any number of objects: We have an over-abundance of things. Despite having so much, most of us live our lives looking for the next thing to consume. We seek that next something. The thing can be a type of food or toy. It can be a show on television, or a movie at the theatre. It can be a computer game or a video game. It can be a new mystery novel. It can be a baseball or football game. It can be sex. It can be a date with a new person. It can be a new hobby or sporting match. There are so many choices for entertainment and leisure time in today’s modern society. Someone from a third world country or tribe living in poverty might look at our culture and be shocked by all this excess.
The problem is these things aren’t making us happy. Most of modern society is miserable, lonely, and desperately seeking happiness. We simply haven’t found happiness within the physical luxuries we’ve attained. As a result, suicide rates and drug abuse rates are increasingly high. Alcoholism and other addictions are also common—most adults in modern society think nothing of drinking to escape reality for a while. Why would we need to escape reality if all these things were making us happy? Why would we want to escape the comfort and excess we’ve created for ourselves?
Instead of solving this puzzle most of us simply look for more, new luxuries to consume. As we move through our day we move from thing to thing, we’re continually thinking the next thing will do it. We invent new, more extravagant things: More elaborate dishes of food; more kinky sex; more extreme sports; more thrilling movies; more exciting video games. We push the limits on our consumption because consuming them is not enough—we must consume them to an extreme degree. This is because we have put so much hope in these things satisfying us, that when they don’t, we figure it is because we haven’t consumed enough of the thing, or we haven’t consumed the thing perfectly yet.
We look for happiness in success.
Most of us live our lives in this physical dimension trying to achieve some sort of success. We may see success as wealth, because with wealth we can buy various physical comforts and pleasures. We might even see success as the adoration and respect of others. Some of us might even see success as being surrounded by a happy family. Some may only feel successful if we have accumulated all of these things in combination. Success is typically just around the corner for most of us. The prevailing attitude in modern society is that we will feel successful if we have achieved recognition and material wealth. We yearn to accomplish these achievements because we feel that by accomplishing them we will become happy. However, we must logically ask ourselves: Why are the most successful people—who have achieved these things to the ultimate extent—still not happy?
Some of the superstars who committed suicide or died of drug-overdose achieved cult-like success rivaling historical figures and religious leaders. People throughout the world would read and watch every detail of these superstars’ lives, collecting even their most trivial possessions as objects of great value. These superstars had more attention and admiration than most of us could even imagine. Still they remained unhappy. Not only were they not happy; they were miserable, succumbing to chemical dependencies to escape their depression. Considering these successful mega-failures, is it logical that the smaller degrees of success most of us seek in modern society—just a portion of this wealth and recognition—would bring us happiness?
Indeed, there are numerous people over the last 100 years who have simply obtained wealth beyond our imagination: Billionaires who accumulated enough wealth to buy just about anything or do just about anything in modern society. Despite these people’s incredible wealth, they also complained of the hole. They too complained of the emptiness inside. As a result, many of these billionaires sank into locked-up lives of miserable paranoia and seclusion.
We haven’t been learning from the experience of others.
Because wealthy and famous people appear in the news media so often, their problems with substance abuse, divorce, etc. are on daily display. It is thus easy to see so many cases of misery and loneliness despite great wealth, admiration and material success. Although we could easily learn from these people who have ‘made it’ that physical success does not bring happiness, most of us are so entrenched in our own plans for success we hardly notice. Despite seeing misery amongst success all around us, we continue to work hard for this success, as if we were being led by a rope tied to a ring through our nose. Every day we see successful people who have enough money for several lifetimes of comfortable living continuing to work hard for the next success. Achieving wealth or success simply isn’t enough for us. We must achieve more success; more wealth. One must do the next thing successfully.
As we look around us at our society, so many of us are increasingly struggling and toiling for material wealth and the admiration of others. Even when all the physical needs of our bodies are met, we keep pushing, endlessly wanting more. Despite seeing the misery among those who already have what we want, we choose to push on, sacrificing our time and efforts to achieve these things. As a result, our endeavors can be arduous and sometimes punishing. We will struggle with competitors and rivals, dealing with so many difficulties in order to achieve more. In this way, the hole seems bottomless—huge and gaping.
All this stuff doesn’t bring us happiness.
No matter how much material wealth and adoration from others we have, it does not bring us happiness. Not only will it not bring us happiness, but we are tricked into continuing to work for more of it, trapped in the continued illusion that the next achievement will make us happy. Like the mirage of water in the desert, happiness from physical consumption and achievement is an illusion.
Why don’t physical things satisfy us? If we were merely physical bodies, wouldn’t consuming physical goodies make us satisfied?
Assuming we are intelligent, we might jump to the conclusion that we need something else besides physical goodies or name and fame to bring us fulfillment. The endless parade of material toys and goodies teaches us the same lesson the thirsty woman was taught in the desert: That won’t do it.
The logical reason why physical things don’t satisfy us is simply because we need something else. This is because we are not physical. We are not the physical body we dwell within. The physical body is a temporary vehicle. A person who is starving for physical things should be satisfied with physical things. Like money to a thirsty person in the desert, a person starving for something will not be satisfied until they get what they are starving for. Since we continue to crave for more while having an abundance of physical things, the emptiness we feel—our hole—indicates we need something outside of the physical world.
It is rooted in understanding our identity.
How could a physical person want something outside the physical world? This would be a contradiction. In order to utilize something outside of the physical world one must have the ability to exist outside of the physical world. In order to be able to exist outside the physical world a person would need to have a nonphysical existence.
In other words, the existence of our perpetual hole amongst physical consumption indicates that we are nonphysical living beings by nature, and we are starving for what our nonphysical nature needs. Because our real existence is outside the physical body, our happiness lies outside the physical body. This is because the physical body is not us, but rather a temporary vehicle we occupy for a specific period of time. We are not these physical forms:
Just as a driver of a car is not made of the metal in his car, the living being is not physical.
The admiration of others doesn’t touch us.
Most of us feel that if we received the respect and admiration of others we should be happy. Many of us strive to achieve success because we think that this admiration will somehow make us feel complete. Superstars have achieved the ultimate in admiration. With millions of adoring fans struggling to see them, touch them or get close to them, it is easy to see that they receive admiration at an extreme level.
Yet it is also easy to see that this admiration doesn’t actually touch them, nor does it fill their hole. After a few years of adoring fans, most superstars, instead of attention, strive for privacy. They want to hide away from the adoring fans. The adoring fans have become a burden and a nuisance. This is because this sort of admiration does not satisfy the self. Someone who gives us attention just because we are famous has ulterior motives.
A person’s motives for adoring a superstar are not connected to love. If they don’t know them they certainly don’t care about them. They might be attached to the fact that they liked their music or feel that they are physically attractive, together with the fact that they have many fans. Some may feel that other fellow fans might be impressed with our adoration or closeness to the superstar, or feel a sense of belonging with other fans. Mostly ones motives for adoring a superstar stem from the same hole of loneliness the superstar is trying to fill with his or her quest for stardom. Both the adoration of the fans and the star’s superstardom are thus façades. Both are simply seeking to fill their lonely holes. After awhile, most superstars realize the fans are not delivering the expected fulfillment, and become jaded by the attention, seeing the adoration as insincere. It just wasn’t the love they were seeking. Meanwhile, most fans will eventually outgrow their superstar adoration.
We are lonely—and looking for a friend.
When we look around us, we see so many lonely people, including ourselves. We see dramatic loneliness amongst crowds of people. One of the most common places we see loneliness is amongst people in a big city. How could this be? Where reaching out to someone else would be as easy as extending ones little finger or hand, crowded cities tend to amplify loneliness. Amongst these crowds of people we can literally look into the blankness of people’s eyes and peer right into the hole. In such a sea of loneliness, we can see that we are all looking for a true friend.
We all look for a true and reliable friend: We look for a constant companion. We look for someone who will listen and care for us. We look for someone who understands us, and won’t question what we do. We look for a person whom we can trust. Someone who is will sometimes sacrifice a little to come to our aid. We look for someone whom we can share things with. We look for someone to fool around with and play games with. Mostly we look for someone to exchange a true friendship with.
Many of us have friends with whom we can exchange some sort of relationship. We are not usually satisfied with these friends however. Most of our “friends” are too busy with their own lives to really give us the kind of focused friendship we desire. Sometimes a person will come to the realization that all of the “friends” they think they have are really not true friends, but rather, they are convenient friends. Their relationship with us is one of convenience. They spend time with us because they have nothing better to do. Or we do things that they like to do because they don’t want to do those things alone. We can easily see these types of “friends” because they will often fade away from our lives when they move or they change hobbies. We usually do not put a lot of stake in these types of friendships, although we often dream of having such a complete friendship. When we look around us and see all these convenient friends, most of us begin to see our gaping hole quite dramatically. As a result, many of us feel lonely, with no true friend to turn to.
Some feel that a loving family will fill the hole.
What about the love and friendship we receive from our family? Won’t this fill the hole? What about exchanging relationships with family members who seem to truly care for us? Won’t this make us happy?
Most people in modern society—including superstars after losing faith in the fans—feel the family unit offers a more promising opportunity for filling the hole. Family members know us well, and seem to express more sincere feelings than do adoring fans who don’t know us. The family unit also promises us an exchange of something we critically need: Unconditional love.
Although the family unit can provide tender relationships, which give us a glimpse of love, unfortunately the family unit doesn’t last, and its love is not unconditional. Many marriages break up in divorce, with each person feeling the other didn’t bring them the happiness or unconditional love each partner needed. Children will grow up and leave the nest, many unhappily rebelling against their parents and fighting with siblings along the way. Parent-teenager hostilities and screaming matches are prominent in the modern-day family. Those remaining family relationships, even lifetimes of marriage, will also end, as death causes the ultimate heartbreak. One of the spouses will die first, leaving the other distressed and lonely. A family death, whether a parent or spouse, brings great sadness and distress, regardless of how poor the relationship was. Many people stay depressed for many years after a parent or spouse dies. Some will say that it was the saddest event of their lives.
It is safe to say that eventually all family relationships break up, leaving emptiness and sadness in their wake. We can also say that family relationships do not ultimately bring us happiness, or fill that hole. They may bring us a glimpse of loving relationships, but what little love is there is conditional, and thus shrivels up, leaving that gaping hole even wider.
The hole is revealed through relationships.
As mentioned, when those we share a relationship with in this world die, change or go away, there is usually a residual depression and empty feeling. This is the result of the loss of that relationship. This feeling of loss following such an event is usually described as an empty feeling, or hole. In commercial love songs and love stories, the emptiness a forlorn lover feels is often referred to as an empty heart or a hole in my heart.
All of us seek to love and be loved. When we exchange a little love in this material dimension we experience a temporary, partial filling of that hole. The hunger to fill the hole remains, but for awhile at least, we taste the type of thing we’re hungering for. For this reason, we will often keep returning to that person we shared a relationship with, even if we know the relationship is destructive. This is why women often return to abusing husbands, and men keep dating hurtful women. We need some kind of love. Unlike physical things, which we will discard quickly for the next thing, exchanging even a little love with another person hooks us. The taste we experience when we exchange love with another person is an indication of the nature of the hole. If a loving relationship fills part of the hole better than physical things or the adoration by others, and the emptiness increases exponentially when a loved-one dies or leaves, this shows us that the hole we all perpetually feel in life is due to the loss of a deeper, permanent loving relationship.
When we experience the loss of someone near to us or a breakup of a relationship, we usually will experience an even greater hole than we might have if we had never had the relationship. Similarly, superstars often relate that the more famous they get, the larger the hole feels. These experiences are because temporary relationships in this world serve to remind us of our hole. They put a microscope over the problem, and we become more aware of it. Seeing the many lonely people in the city also will remind us of our hole. Events such as holidays, and anniversaries also serve to remind us of the hole.
One reason why conditional, temporary relationships in this world only serve to remind us of our hole is that these temporary relationships are not deep enough to fill it. We can quite quickly see that they are not the loving relationships we need. These relationships will not last because they are usually based upon convenience or exchange. If we base that exchange upon identifying the person as their body, that body will eventually die or go away and the exchange will cease. It is inevitable. We need a much deeper relationship in order to fill that hole.
We’ve experienced a deep relationship in the past.
Since we are trying desperately to fill this hole, we must accept that this hole wasn’t always there. Why else would we try so hard to fill it? If we were used to it there would be no problem. At some point in the past we didn’t have this hole, because at some point we experienced the permanent loving and friendship relationship we are searching for. When we lose a temporary relationship, we can see a glimpse of how devastating it would be to be separated from an even deeper permanent relationship.
If we consider that true love exists on a permanent basis, and temporary relationships only remind us of our need for them, then it makes sense that we need to reconnect to whatever permanent relationship we lost. Permanent loving relationships require a permanent person though. A permanent person is one who does not die or go away. A permanent person is someone who will not change suddenly, deciding they don’t like us anymore. A permanent person is someone who we can rely upon—forever.
We had a supremely deep relationship.
The hole we feel is deep because the Supreme Being runs deep. When we think of the Grand Canyon and how deep it is, we can reflect on how powerful the water had to be to make that canyon so deep. Our very being is designed for a deep unconditional relationship with the Supreme Being, and the size of the hole we experience is due to our forgetting this very deep relationship. At one time, each of us enjoyed a deep and loving relationship with the Supreme Being, and at some point or another we lost this deep relationship.
Like water to a thirsty person in the desert, we need a true and loving friend we can trust: Someone who loves us unconditionally. We once had such a relationship, and took it for granted. At some point we lost that deep relationship with our Best Friend. Ever since that time, we’ve carried around this deep hole, trying to fill it with other things.
***
Conclusion: The emptiness we experience throughout our lives cannot be filled with the temporary, conditional things and relationships of this world. The hole we feel throughout our lives is due to having lost and forgotten our relationship with our Supreme Friend. By ignoring this essential relationship, we leave a deep hole we cannot fill with anything else.
Chapter Two: What is Love?
As they stared up at the twinkling stars on a clear moonless night, the boy considered saying those three special words. After three years of dating, the boy’s fondness of his girlfriend had grown, and he felt it was finally time to express his feelings.
“I love you,” he softly said, his voice dropping off in expectation of a quick reply.
A long silence followed. “I don’t believe in love,” she finally blurted. “I believe that love is an evolutionary mistake—a form of insanity. I believe that love is a nothing but a chemical: a genetic mutation.”
Stunned at this statement, he quickly changed the topic, face beet red: He was thankful it was at least dark. Through the rest of their talk that night, he could not get her statement out of his mind. He silently concluded to himself as they parted that evening that he’d be looking for a new girlfriend.
Modern science proposes that love is chemical.
Modern chemistry and physics theory tells us that life is the variegated composition of smaller and smaller units: Cells, molecules, atoms, neutrons, electrons, subatomic particles, photons, quarks, strings, etc. These ‘units’ are assumed to be the sum and substance of our existence.
Where then does love come from? Which units contain this substance? Modern scientists theorize that love is simply the result of certain chemical reactions combined with neural events within the brain—an accidental twist of evolution. While some of these scientists propose that love is a product of the brain, others propose that since certain neurochemicals are present in certain tissues such as the brain during times of emotional response, the emotion of love must be come from these neurochemicals. Does this make sense? Can the emotion of love be captured within the physical tissues or neurochemistry of the body?
Emotions do not come from the brain.
Brain surgeons have been able to for instance, provoke certain emotions by stimulating particular areas of the brain. We may have also seen brain images with PET and other types of scanners showing us how the various brain cells and areas will signal with specific thought patterns. From these observations, it has been assumed that emotions come from these brain tissues.
However we must question this logic, because stimulating other body parts will also stimulate emotions; and we don’t say those emotions are contained in that body part. For example, tickling someone under the armpit will provoke laughter. Does this mean that the emotion of humor is contained in the armpit?
Although a stimulation of that body part can evoke a particular emotion, the body part isn’t the source of the emotion itself. Consider how the eyes are sensitive to certain wavelengths of light and color. Certain images will strike the back of the retina and travel through the optic nerve to the cerebrum. These images can provoke a variety of emotional responses including anger, envy, fear or even attraction, but only after the images were flashed onto the mind and observed by the living being. The responses took place as a result of the observation. Would it make sense to say that these emotions were contained in the eyeball or the optic nerve? How about within the actual object, or radiated energy from the object which struck the retina? Or could the emotions be contained in the impulses traveling from the retina through the optic nerve?
Many doctors and other observers are swayed by the scenes of the brain being stimulated by an electrode, causing a subject to recall memories, or trigger specific thoughts and emotions. However, medical doctors have also long observed that many people who experience a stroke will continue experiencing emotions even though parts of the brain known to control particular emotional responses were damaged and not functioning. The subject will continue to communicate those emotions and emotional memories without that brain area functioning at all. The brain is not the source of the emotions. Rather, the various brain cells and neural networks form a bridge between the gross physical body and the mind. The brain is therefore simply a relay facility of emotional signals from the living being via the mind, and a relay facility of feedback and sensory signals from the physical body to the mind and living being. The brain cells do not contain the emotions, including love, any more than the armpit contains humor. If they did we could transplant emotional identities and memories from one person to another by transplanting brain cells. If they did we could remove a love chip from the brain, put it in another person’s brain, and the other person would start caring for the same people the donor had. Although we can certainly damage or remove the ability of a person to express love through their physical body, we cannot take the emotion of love from the living being.
Love comes from the living.
Research has shown that particular neurochemicals will saturate certain tissue and nerve sites following or during an emotional response. These chemicals are released either in response to external stimuli or from an internal emotion. Vasopressin, dopamine and oxytocin are the neurochemicals most associated with emotions of love, although more recently a neurochemical called nerve growth factor (NGF) has been linked with these emotional feelings.
Does this mean those emotions are coming from the chemicals? Or perhaps, as some scientists purport, do the chemicals contain the emotions?
Since the mid-twentieth century, neuroscientists have been toying with areas involving cellular receptors for these neurochemicals in an attempt to connect emotions to chemicals. The primary research method was to inject particular body tissues with radioactive isotopes, which bind to these neuro-chemicals. This allows the neurochemicals to be seen by radioactive imaging cameras. By tracking the occurrences of particular neurochemicals and their receptors, these scientists have been able to connect certain emotional states with specific neurochemicals. They have also been able to isolate which cells in the body and cells typically release or receive these neurochemicals. A number of organs and tissues have been identified as neurochemical releasing agents, while specific cell membrane areas have been identified as their ‘receptors.’
Biochemicals are messengers.
The eyes, optic nerve, the brain cells, the muscles and the neurochemicals are all tools the living being utilizes to transmit emotions and desires. The self or living being, a creature of a substance beyond the physical dimension, operates the physical body as a person might operate a machine. These tissues and chemicals are therefore merely messengers of the self. They receive and transmit messages. The process the self utilizes with the mind and the body might be compared to the operations of computer and computer operator:
Once the computer operator enters typed-in commands, the computer’s programming performs the appropriate functions, and sends the resulting feedback to the screen for the operator to interact with.
In the same way, the self sends commands through the mind to the physical body, and using the programming of the mind, the body is stimulated into activity. After and during this process feedback from the body is sent to the screen of the mind where the self can view that feedback and respond to it if necessary.
We could compare the sending of emotions from the mind through the body to sounds from a radio:
Talk-radio plays from a radio in someone’s house. The radio picks up broadcast signals from a nearby radio station. The radio station sends the impulses through a broadcast tower. The impulses travel through space and are picked up by the radio’s antenna. The impulses are then converted to sounds representing the voice of the announcer. Although the sound comes out of the radio, its source is the announcer at the distant radio station.
We would probably laugh if someone were to say that the radio talk show host was in the radio. The radio and the station are only instruments used to transmit the voice of the talk show host. His voice is being beamed through these instruments in order to communicate his opinion. In the same way, all of the body parts and chemicals involved in emotional responses are also instruments. They convey the emotions of the original sender—the self. Just as the sound impulses are carried to the speaker cone, emotions coming from the self through the mind are sent through specific parts of the body trained to reflect the emotion (e.g., tear ducts for crying; legs for a quick getaway, etc.). Just as the radio speaker reflects the voice of the talk show host, the human body reflects the emotions of the self.
Love runs beneath the physical.
While at a public aquarium, a woman walks over to the shark tank to watch a shark being fed. The first thing she notices when she gets to the tank is that there is blood in the water and the shark is in a feeding frenzy. She erroneously thinks that the shark became hungry because of the blood in the water. She didn’t see that the aquarium staff fed the shark clean fish and the bleeding followed the shark’s feeding frenzy.
There are many instances where we might put together two observations (such as the shark eating and the presence of blood) and think we can associate the events in a cause-and-effect relationship. It is possible this association will even be correct. However, especially in cases where we do not have the ability to see all the processes going on beneath the obvious, the possibility of being wrong is great. In the case of neurochemicals and emotions, there is a whole lot of guessing going on. Because these well-intentioned neuroscientists don’t see the process of exchange between the self and the physical body, they are making assumptions based upon limited information. Just because we can see a few chemicals during an emotional response doesn’t mean we know where the seat of emotions is, just as taking apart a radio won’t tell us who or where the radio announcer is.
The self utilizes a subtle response-feedback loop with the physical body. Utilizing the mind, intelligence, and false ego as translating mechanisms, the self receives feedback from the physical environment through the senses of the body. Once the self receives feedback, the self, typically seeking enjoyment from the physical body, initiates a particular response:
A person is told that a parent died. The sound of being told, moving through the ears, will affect a part of the brain, which relays the message onto the screen of the mind. The self, misidentifying as a physical body through the influence of the false ego, hears that someone “related” has gone away. Understanding this, the self, feeling sad, will send that sad emotion back to the mind. Through the neural network, the mind will stimulate glands such as the hypothalamus and pituitary to secrete neurochemicals, which, among other things initiates the physical action of crying.
This emotional response is initiated by the living being who is feeling sadness due to hearing of the loss of someone close. Certainly, the living being is the entity that feels sad, not some brain cell or chemical. Who else would be able to initiate such an emotional response other than a living, feeling person?
In this way, not only is the body a messenger for the emotion of sadness, but the mind is a tool used to translate that message into a physical response. The mind stimulates the physical system to affect the release of neurochemicals. These transmit the message through cell receptors to initiate physical responses. The neurochemicals are merely carriers of the emotion coming from the self.
Sometimes the response by the body to stimuli is reflexive rather than directly from the self. This response is set-up by the self using a pre-programming feature of the mind. The mind is designed to be programmed to do many functions, including automatic responses to certain stimuli. This programming is done through the facility whereby the living being’s desires set up a sensual/mental feedback-and-response operation. One might compare this to a computer ‘if-then’ statement. An emergency-response program might be developed from the living being’s desire to protect the body to assure continued attempts at physical enjoyment, for example. The mind will be programmed to respond automatically to any threat to survival by instantly sending neurochemical and nervous system commands to the muscles and heart to run or defend itself. Or a similar program might be set up as: If the hand touches something hot, then the hand will quickly pull away before the skin gets burnt. When the actual event—such as heat— is received through sensory input, the response is initiated without the living being’s conscious participation. The mind’s programming takes over. The living being's initial desires to enjoy through the body initiate the mind to program the neural network to react automatically to certain stimuli. This might be compared to how a commanding officer initiates objectives and commands for lower officers to complete without his further involvement:
A commanding general determines the objectives of the troop and the operations of a troop by orchestrating certain policies and activities. Then he delegates the oversight of those operations to the lieutenants. The lieutenants will pass on specific orders and design the work of the sergeants, who shout specific commands to each private in the troop.
In the same way, regardless of whether it is via a direct response or a programmed response, the living being is at the root of all physical emotional responses. Some stimuli will initiate only an immediate, automatic (or ‘autonomic’) response to an emotion, while stimuli considered more important to the living being will typically sink in directly to the living being who will react directly, much like the general might consider larger strategic issues and issue direct orders. Either way, the self is involved because without the living being’s existence within the body, and without the living being’s desires to enjoy the physical body and thus keep the body intact, there would be no physical response. The mind and the rest of the body are mere messengers and signal carriers, just as the lieutenants and sergeants are messengers for the commands of the general.
When neurochemicals are extracted from a person during an emotional response, that neurochemical may still carry the message of the response, but this message will be a coded message intended specifically for that tissue or cell stimulation. If the neurochemical was injected into another person, the injected person could not experience the same emotions the first person had because the coding wasn’t specific. The injected person’s tissues might still be stimulated with a non-specific instruction of the neurochemical such as “stimulate this particular organ or cell,” but again, the neurochemical doesn’t carry the entire emotional response. For example, a person eating meat will ingest the neurochemical adrenaline produced by the animal when it was slaughtered. This can make the person feel overly anxious. The person won’t actually experience the animal’s slaughter when he eats the meat, however. (He will have to experience that later.) Rather than being random chemicals, neurochemicals should be more appropriately considered specific messengers, as their transmission is specific to that particular organism. This would be consistent with the sergeants performing only the specific instructions from commanding officers. Those same commands would not necessarily have the same results in another troop and circumstance.
The physical body and all its functions are simply tools for the self to utilize. The actual functions of the body, however, are narrowed by the design of the body. The self can dictate the operations of the body through desires and objectives, which set up programming for specific responses:
A doll is designed to smile when its hair is pulled. The doll may not be alive, but the child who pulls the hair to make the doll smile is. The doll has thus become a surrogate of the child, and its smiling response reflects the intent of the hair-puller.
Though the smile may reflect some emotional intent of the child to make a smile, the smile doesn’t necessarily relay the exact emotion of the child. The doll can only reflect an intention to express something within a limited range of possible expressions. In the same way, a person might cry when sad or cry when happy. It might even be difficult to tell the difference. The crying is not the emotion itself, but a response triggered by the emotion. The specific neurochemicals, which stimulate the lacrimal tear glands, were initiated through a complex neural network, which can be traced back to the emotion. If we extracted some of those chemicals out of this person’s body and injected them into another’s body, they might cause the other body to tear, but the specific emotion that caused it (happy or sad) could not be communicated through the neurochemicals.
Emotions originate from the self.
The emotions elicited from a response to an observation or other stimuli would logically have come from someone who was able to make an interpretation of and select a resulting response to the interpretation. For example, visual radiation is received by retinal cells, initiating a pulse that travels through the cells of the optic nerve. Once these impulses are carried to the neural network, the image is then reflected onto the mind of the self. If the neural network is pre-programmed to react to the image, the body will be stimulated automatically. If the self wants to interpret the image and respond to it using the intelligence and false ego, then that response will be ushered back through the mind, which will direct the appropriate physical response. Even in this case, the mind will respond in a manner consistent with how it has been designed and trained by the self and the world around it. In the physical world the living being is limited to interacting with the mind’s images, which come from external sensory input and feedback from the body. This could be compared to a person playing the video game through the computer and computer screen. The player responds to only what images are seen on the screen. The computer is programmed to convert the 0s and 1s into graphic display, and the person responds only to the converted graphic display.
The programming of the mind is ultimately directed by the self. The living being projects its desires onto the mind, where they are mixed with sense perception in an attempt to achieve those desires. In most cases, the self desires to enjoy the world, and thus a concoction or formula to achieve those goals will be created by the mind and living being using the catalog of sensory input. Once the mind is programmed with this concoction, it will be able to direct the flow of neurochemicals through the body, responding to events and sensory input in particular ways. In some cases the self can control the response of the mind, but most of the time the mind is functioning on cruise-control—following programs determined by prior concoctions. It is designed to respond automatically to these programmed concoctions. The decision directing the mind’s response was already made prior to the event or sensory input. Just as proper training will prompt a person to perform a particular task, the mind is trained by the self, blending its desires with sensory input.
These cruise-control responses reflect the mind’s ability to not only record and retain sensory input from the outside world, but to respond to it through programming created by the desires of the self. The living being may not be aware of a current automatic mental response because the mind is able to work on subtle levels (some call these subconscious levels). Thus, while its operations are often out of grasp of the living being’s immediate control, the mind’s automatic activities will typically reflect former desires and concoctions. This would be compared to hearing an echo long after the words were spoken.
The self can of course directly stimulate physical responses as well. Should the living being have a particular emotion regarding something, that emotion is sent through the mind to the body. Frustration is an example of an emotion sent to the mind from the self. This will result in the appropriate physical action. The type of response may well be blocked or negotiated somehow by the mind due to other desires of the living being, however. For example, if a person desires to keep the respect of others, the mind may hold the body back from physically expressing that frustration. As a result, the body may be instructed to bite the lip in order to block the complete expression of the emotion. This process allows the self to express certain feelings translated into physical responses and actions, utilizing the training of the mind to negotiate those expressions.
Both pre-programmed response and direct emotional expression utilize the mind, which not only stimulates the nervous system to initiate muscular response, but stimulates certain neural centers to release specific neurochemicals. The release of these specific neurochemicals—hormones like endorphins, growth hormones, ACTH, LH, FSH, estrogens, testosterone, thyroid hormones; and neurotransmitters like adrenaline, serotonin, dopamine and acetylcholine—all drive secondary physical responses initiated either by direct or indirect emotions of the living person present within the body.
Emotions stimulate chemicals that stimulate action.
So what is it about love that stimulates the flow of certain neurochemicals? Modern scientists have said that during feelings of love or compassion certain chemicals like serotonin will be released into the body from certain endocrine centers, sparking feelings of relaxation. They also correlate feelings of anger with the release of certain other neurochemicals such as adrenaline. What is going on here?
In a healthy physical body of a conscious, aware person, direct emotions from the self spark clear physical responses. This is normal. In some cases the emotion of caring for someone else may stimulate certain activity such as hugging or stroking. This is a natural physical response to the living being’s direct emotion of love. However a person covered by greed and lust may convert this basic need for loving relationships into an attempt for sexual satisfaction—which in the end frustrates the person. In most cases among physical organisms, the need for loving relationships is translated into a desire for physical relationships.
The reason our bodies are designed for relationships and emotional expressions in sharing relationships is because of our very nature—we are geared to connect with others in the exchange of loving relationships, and thus we treasure relationships. The mind or body doesn’t need initial training in releasing emotions related to the hope for loving relationships because love is an inseparable part of the living being. The physical body of the self reflects not only our desire to enjoy the world, but reflects an even deeper desire to love and care for others. The mind and the physical body will thus instinctively reflect this emotion because this is our very nature. We cannot be separated from love. Every organism is thus designed to facilitate and attempt to form loving relationships in some way, depending upon the level of self-absorption covering the living being. This is why it is instinctive for animals to care for and respond to their mothers, their mates and their offspring.
We all need loving relationships.
A few decades ago, psychologists studied relationships between monkeys and their mothers, or in many cases, surrogate mothers. Some baby monkeys were cruelly pulled away from their mothers at birth and put in isolated cages. The scientists observed that these monkeys quickly became hostile, depressed, and unstable as compared with caged monkeys united with their mothers. Some of the baby monkeys were left alone with wire-built frames made to look like the shape of a monkey. Some of these frames were even built with milk bottle-breasts so the monkey could feed from a pair of fake nipples. Although the baby monkeys would try to hug the fake monkeys and suck milk from the fake breasts, they also became hostile, depressed, and unstable. Some of the monkeys isolated or caged with wire surrogates were introduced to live monkey surrogates who were not their mothers. These monkeys immediately began to hug the surrogates, and these stressed and hostile monkeys gradually became “normal” (for being cruelly imprisoned in cages).
The instinctive exchange of a loving relationship with another living being is critical to our existence. Once baby monkeys were allowed to exchange a relationship with a living being, they normalized. This is because every living being needs to exchange loving relationships. Contact with a physical form without a living being inside of it (like the monkey wire frames) will not replace our need for a relationship with a living being.
The case of instinctively needing relationships is also made as we’ve observed human babies. Preemie babies who were held more often and stroked or massaged, grew as much as 50% faster; were significantly more alert; and were more responsive to the world around them than preemies who were more isolated during incubation. The touched babies were shown to also be calmer and better adjusted later in their childhood than babies who were not touched as often.
Real love has several key characteristics.
Here are a few commonly accepted characteristics of love and loving relationships that illustrate love’s real existence within each of us:
Loving relationships are our foremost focus from the time we are born into this physical body through to our leaving the body. As babies, we seek the attention and admiration of the people around us through physical contact, approval, and acceptance with other living beings. This drive for loving relationships via these external attempts continues throughout life, becoming the central rationale for our choices of mates, houses, cars, sports, careers, etc.
People will sometimes endanger themselves to achieve loving relationships. Some may climb mountains or perform other death-defying feats to gain the attention and admiration (thought of as love) from others. Due to the quest to achieve or maintain particular relationships, a person may put themselves in harm’s way. Some may sacrifice their lives in a war while others may sacrifice money, an organ, or other material possessions on behalf of or in search of a loving relationship.
Love is held up in society as an aspiration every person should seek—the key to happiness. It is assumed that a successful loving relationship is the ultimate success in life. No one really understands why love has such a high priority, but most agree that those who love the most are also the happiest.
Love requires a lover and a beloved; the acknowledgement of two distinct individuals. For love to exist there must be a loving relationship between at least two living beings.
True love is selfless and unconditional. It is the caring of another without any expectation of a return. Loving someone is the act of humbly giving oneself to ones beloved. True love will overwhelm all other aspects of ones life—minimizing one’s self-regard.
Love is connected to service. Service is thus the ongoing expression of love. Service is performed both as a means to accomplish love along with a natural activity of love.
True love brings joy to both the beloved and the lover. True love is the food of the living being. We all need it because it is part of our constitutional nature: it is our actuality.
Download this book for your ebook reader.
(Pages 1-27 show above.)