What is love?

The discussion at dinner turned to the topic of the most searched questions on Google. Evidently topping the list is 'What is Love?'. Typically discussions about the trials and tribulations of romantic love ensured. Later on as I was reading in bed psychologist M. Scott Peck's book "The Road Less Travelled" and coincidently the chapter I began reading was titled love. He admitted it was indeed such a large and deep topic and that using words to define what is love or to trying to measure or qualify what is love would be in some ways inadequate. But nonetheless a worthy and valuable topic for people attempting to make sense of their experience and the meaning of life. He had observed in his practice the nature of love was one of reoccurring and great importance and often a great source of confusion and misconceptions. He somewhat boldly defines 'what is love' in one sentence as "the will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another's spiritual growth".

We all like to think of ourselves as loving but I must admit I am somewhat confronted by aspects of this definition - it is not quite the 'feel good' or soft explanation I may be after. Choosing the word "will" implies a sense of ownership or choice in that one makes a conscious decision to love. It is sobering to see that I can choose to love or not to love in any circumstance. There are two options in front of me for which I am responsible for if I have "the will".

"To extend oneself' is another confrontational term. Love is not without effort or exertion it seems. Good intentions to be loving does not seem to suffice if it is not converted into action.

This definition embraces the notion of self love. At first this seems to me to be narcisstic and indulgent. Isn't love about what we do for others without concern for ourselves? But on further reflection why should one separate oneself from the human race? Are we not all part of the same species suffering from the same human condition, are we not all in this together, a level playing field? If we can't love ourselves as a member of the human race how can we love fellow members. It is a challenging concept to embrace loving ourselves and loving others goes hand in hand.

Scott's definition of love seems to suggest a purpose or goal ie. 'spiritual growth' in others or in oneself. He indicates that love is transformative of the human spirit as it allows us to evolve to a larger state of being. Again if I am honest this is difficult - change is scary, seeing others grow is scary, allowing myself to grow is scary. I recall Nelson Mandela's quote "Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us... And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others."

As I look into the question more deeply I discover the writing of Australian Biologist Jeremy Griffith. His definition of what is love is even more succinct, simple and bolder then Scott's: "love is unconditional selflessness". (Elsewhere he writes about our soul and even addresses the question of good vs evil, how we can save the world and what our conscience is.) Now I am feeling incredibly confronted because if I am honest I am rarely, if ever, unconditionally selfless. But before I can wallow in self pity that my search for what is love has not given me much love, Grifith goes on to explain that this feeling is legitimate and as such accepting this definition can leave one feeling "unbearably condemned for being divisive" because of the very nature of our human condition. But after he explains this paradox or conflict between human's instinct and intellect through a biological framework all feels defended and my guilt is alleviated. And I am left feeling love, not one that I expected, a love for humankind.