Love and caring for someone are often used synonymously, but I want to introduce a new definition in which they are actually opposites. Really, I'm just using these words to express ideas, but words are handy things given that's how we communicate.
Love is a pure, unconditional feeling. Love is the energetic expression of appreciation and wonder for the beauty of a person; for their personal Godliness. It is in the untwisted delight in the mannerisms and supposed imperfections that make Joe uniquely Joe and give Jill her Jill-ness. Love has no sense of time, no agenda, no momentum or inertia. It simply is: a flowing of energy from one person to another. Love allows us to fully and totally trust others to live their lives as they need to, for themselves and not for us.
Caring for someone is the root of care-taking. Caring is a perversion of love: caring comes with message, an agenda, something to accomplish. Caring is needing Holly to find a way out of her unstable relationship or wanting Dan to stop talking to himself when he walks outside. Out intentions may very well stem out of wanting what is best for someone, but in caring we forget that we don't know what is best for someone else. Caring leads to meddling and invasion and evasion. caring is the word we use to make it sound ok that we have agendas for people, and that we need for them to act and react in certain ways to gain our full approval.
Caring for someone and loving them are opposites. Love is genuine acceptance and appreciation, and having the complete trust in another person to know and do what is best for themselves. Caring for someone is having a need for them to change or have a particular experience and influencing them, however subtly, in that direction. Caring is harmful and can lead to the destruction of another's psyche if practiced too intensely, too often, or by too many people. While love is a wonderful thing, caring is to be avoided at all costs.
Not all those who wander are lost...
3 comments:
Caring is dangerous IF...yet it is not intrinsically dangerous. The misuse of it does the damage. Kinda like guns, or splitting atoms, etc...
M. Scott Peck's 'The Road Less Traveled' defined love for me as wanting the greatest spiritual growth for another. What you say is true about trusting in--whatever you trust in. However, sometimes part of loving, as defined above, means making the judgment call to step in and present another "agenda" to a loved one...because we care. It is a heavy responsibility-which is often misused-that we are given as a result of our ability to love.
I agree, presenting an agenda is fine. So you say "Hey, here's my idea. What do you think?" And then you trust them to be their own best expert in their answer. If its important to you, try again. But don't act on your idea without permission from the person whose life you are trying to change.
Your paragraph on love is simply beautiful to me. Thank you.
I agree with all - and justme's comments also. In addition, for me, caring can be a very pure and simple feeling without agendas. The difference is that I just don't know the person that well to say I love them. For example, I am meeting so many people in the waiting room for radiation. We get connected quickly in there - we all are strugggling with a common challenge. People share their stories. I am thinking of one lady in particular right now, but this applies to many. I care about her so much. I want the best for her. Not my agenda for her, but what she wants for herself. I want her to heal physically and I want her spirit, mind and soul to be at peace and feel God's support. With her permission, I pray for her often. Maybe that is a degree of love, by your definitions, but it feels different from how I feel about the people I say I love. That love goes deeper. My sorrow at the loss of someone I love would be so much deeper than my sorrow for someone I care about.
Just some thoughts.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It helps me think and grow.
Loveya,
Breezelight
Post a Comment