Love Is Incapable of Adjustment (((Love is not a Thing of the Mind.

[Guest guest]

>

> " Love is not a thing of the mind, is it? Love is not merely the

> sexual act, is it? Love is something which the mind can not possibly

> conceive. Love is something which cannot be formulated. And without

> love, you become related; without love, you marry. Then, in that

> marriage, you " adjust yourselves " to each other. Lovely phrase! You

> adjust yourselves to each other, which is again an intellectual

> process, is it not? . . . This adjustment is obviously a mental

> process. All adjustments are. But, surely, love is incapable of

> adjustment. You know, sirs, don't you, that if you love another,

> there is no " adjustment. " There is only complete fusion. Only when

> there is no love do we begin to adjust. And this adjustment is

called

> marriage. Hence, marriage fails, because it is the very source of

> conflict, a battle between two people. It is an extraordinarily

> complex problem, like all problems, but more so because the

> appetites, the urges, are so strong. So, a mind which is merely

> adjusting itself can never be chaste. A mind which is seeking

> happiness through sex can never be chaste. Though you may

momentarily

> have, in that act, self-abnegation, self-forgetfulness, the very

> pursuit of that happiness, which is of the mind, makes the mind

> unchaste. Chastity comes into being only where there is love. "

>

> " Love Is Incapable of Adjustment " - The Book of Life (April 16)

>

> http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/index.php?

>

 

What is said here about " adjustment " is quite interesting.

 

There can only be adjustment as *to* some " other " ...

that is clear. *Adjustment* then is by nature not of

oneness, and so conflict is woven into it from the

start.

 

And then he says, " love is incapable of adjustment... "

 

Why? Because love (actual love) is not something " one

has " toward another. Love simply is. Love is a dissolving

of separateness into What Is.

 

And there can be no separateness in What Is.

 

So love and What Is are different terms that really

mean the same.

 

But what is What Is but complete/unconditional

acceptance?

 

So it is clear then that love is acceptance.

 

Love is not, " I wish you/he/she were different in

X way, " or, " I wish life were different in X way. "

 

And so then, love is not about " relationships " , is it?

Rather, love is *complete relationship*.

 

If there is complete love, complete acceptance of

What Is, then there is no barrier, no resistance,

and hence no conflict.

 

So for there to be love the battle must be given up.

The struggle *for* (it doesn't matter what for)

has already died when love is realized as What Is.

 

 

 

Bill