In this essay, one of a series of studies of Platonic Forms 1 we're examining the Form Love. Love has a reality that humankind has been attempting to understand and achieve since its beginning: with Hermes, Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, and later, by the Perennialist teacher, Jesus of Nazareth.
"To you whom I love I say, let us go on loving one another, for love comes from God. Every man who truly loves is God's son and has some knowledge of him. But the man who does not love cannot know him at all, for God is love."
Love is one of the most fundamental aspects of God, so much so, that from a very important perspective it is said that God is Love.
The Deity is the creator of being and existence, as of the female/male human gender distinctions. The female aspect of the Deity was earlier represented by goddesses during the matriarchal period, prior to the rise to power of the exclusive masculine imperium.
The male conception of and relationship with the female has evolved over many centuries, and is continuing to develop at present.
In Plato's dialogue The Symposium, Socrates says that he was initiated into the Greater Mystery of Love by Diotima, "a wise woman" or sage. This Greater Mystery is essentially a procedure for ascending to the supersensible realm where we experience "eternal possession of the good" and "engage in dialectical interchange with Higher Souls and know of ourselves the clear light everywhere, the light of Truth."
Plato and the later neo-Platonists divided the concept of Aphrodite into Aphrodite Ourania (Spiritual Aphrodite) and Aphrodite Pandemos (Terrestrial Aphrodite). This constituted an effort to rescue the concept and reality of Aphrodite from the primarily sensuous nature she had assumed over the centuries. The spiritual and maternal aspects of the Deity as represented in Aphrodite were reinvigorated, while the sensual aspect was given full scope as well.
The Greek language refers to Love through the use of three different words:
This conception of love as "consciousness of our unity with one another and all else in the universe" was echoed by F. W. H. Myers (1843-1901) in his Human Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death, 1906:
"Love is a kind of exalted but unspecialised telepathy;--the simplest and most universal expression of that mutual gravitation or kinship of spirits which is the foundation of the telepathic law."This is in keeping with the conception of creative inspiration in Perennialist thought. Perennialist savants are able to reach out through physical and extra-physical frequency waves to communicate meanings and energy to and elicit similar elements from another entity (person, object, event). They receive and transmit using resonating frequencies which are "invisible" or "inaudible" to ordinary persons. What is called "receiving inspiration" is actually the ability of a seeker to register frequencies of thought, sound, and energy from Perennialist teachers--carnate and discarnate--which are indiscernible to untrained persons.
Interaction and communication within dialectical relationships evince an uncommon, supernormal openness, considerateness, and honesty which can be experienced in no other atmosphere. Once a person has experienced this kind of loving relationship, the "small talk" and inanity of ordinary relationships seems unrewarding and repugnant.
Participants in dialectical relationships are better able to "see" and "listen to" others--in the interchange environment and other areas of life. Ego distractions no longer blind and deafen us, and we suddenly discern deeper meanings within persons, events and objects, enabling new, more potent responses and life-satisfaction.
As indicated in the essay on Supersensible Sexuality, sexuality is one of the primary manifestations of love; sexual love involves valuing and caring for another through desiring to provide that person sexual fulfillmlent, pleasure and ecstasy. Perennialist supersensible sexuality involves the expression of the highest form of love: Agape (άγάπη) philosophical and spiritual love.
Advanced Perennialist teaching concerning supersensible sexuality is a major part of the Perennialist teaching about Unconditional Love. The Loved One must be felt by the lover as Supernally Valuable. The Loved One must be felt by the lover as so precious that there would be nothing that the lover would not do for the Loved One. If one's own proclivities, biases, and preferences are more important than the Loved One, then the lover's love is flawed. To participate effectively in supersensible sexuality, a person must be intellectually discerning enough to realize that genuine love involves giving oneself entirely to the beloved, not stupidly allowing oneself to believe that they should allow their privacy, their work, their family, their friends, or their time to themselves to become a breach or separation point between themselves and their beloved.
Supersensible sexuality, as an expression of unconditional love, requires that lovers give themselves to their beloved totally, without limit. One's love for the beloved becomes more important that one's own life; the beloved becomes the center of one's life, one's being. This requires that lovers attain a level of psychological sophistication and intelligence which allows them to discern how indisensable the beloved is to their very existence. Lovers must be wise and disciplined enough to order their lives in such a manner that nothing extrinsic is allowed to interfere with one's expression of love for the beloved.
Through studying and engaging in Perennialist supersensible sexuality, a person attains the ability to eagerly, unstingingly proffer oneself (present oneself for acceptance) and give oneself (make a present of oneself) in sexual love: the highest expression of Agape (Supersensible Love). This High Achievement allows a person to experience the Essence of Love as engaged in and enjoyed in the Higher Realm, the Plenum.
2 I select J.B. Phillips' translation of many New Testament passages, because I consider him one of the most astute interpreter-translators of Koine Greek.
4 The domination of society by males who do not see females as equals
5 Partnership model of society: "Even in the nineteenth century, when archaeology was still in its infancy, scholars found evidence of societies where women were not subordinate to men. But their interpretation of this evidence was that if these societies were not patriarchies, they must have been matriarchies. In other words, if men did not dominate women, then women must have dominated men. However, this conclusion is not borne out by the evidence. Rather, it is a function of what I have called a dominator society worldview. The real alternative to patriarchy is not matriarchy, which is only the other side of the dominator coin. The alternative, now revealed to be the original direction of our cultural evolution, is what I call a partnership society: a way of organizing human relations in which beginning with the most fundamental difference in our species the difference between female and male diversity is not equated with inferiority or superiority . . . What we have until now been taught as history is only the history of dominator species--the record of the male dominant, authoritarian, and highly violent civilizations that began about 5,000 years ago." Source