We might as well, try to define ‘love’ for one billionth time, and I dont want to pretend to be some genious philosopher who finally ‘cracked’ it. Perhaps nobody ever will, and all the attempts simply bring us closer to understanding, and more importantly - enacting love in our lives.

There have been many worthy thinkers and artists who did give a definition a try over the years. Here are a few that have shaped my own understanding:

“The will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth.” M. Scott Peck.

“In the most general way, the active character of love can be described by stating that love is primarily giving, not receiving.” E.Fromm.

“Love is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own.” R. Heinlein

One minor shortcoming that I see in these definitions (as well as many others), although they are indeed incredibly beautiful, insightful and important, is that they focus on the descriptive aspect of the act.

That is to say, everyone is trying to describe what love looks like, or feels like. It is like a physicist trying to describe how an atom will behave under certain conditions, without really attempting to explain what the atom itself really is.

More specifically - the definitions invariably include one of the following aspects:

1. Another being.
2. An action.
3. An effect.

This is where they falter. Oh no, my language is becoming technical and boring - somebody, please stop me. Let’s try again.

Let’s imagine, just for a second here, that love is everything, and that it is indeed the answer, as John Lennon claimed it to be. When I say ‘everything’, I mean ‘EVERYTHING’. Everything there is, everything we can experience, everything we can do and see. Let’s imagine that all of that is love.

Sure, we need to ignore some obviously painful things that people do, but let’s do that for a minute, as I dont really want to jump into explaining why even the bad things are full of love just yet, maybe later, or in another book, or as a reply to your e-mail that you are very welcome to write to me.

Now that we have imagined this world, let’s take our imagination skills further, and imagine a room in the aforementioned world, that is for all intents and purposes completely separate from the rest of the world. Nothing can get in or out. Not even love. The room itself and everything in it, is of course still - love. Now, let’s place a random human being into this room, it can be Fjodor, or it can be you, or me. Just pick one and place him into this room already.

Now, let’s imagine that this individual is also love, and knows the true definition of love, and is in fact the embodiment of love. I am not sure if anyone who is named Fjodor ever felt as the full embodiment of love, so maybe pick someone else. If you know a Fjodor that matches the description, you must introduce us. Also, did you see what I did with the whole ‘imagine’ and John Lennon thing here?

Anywho, as any self respecting scientist, as we have placed the subject into this room, we have controlled all the variables, and we can be sure in this perfectly controlled world that this indiviudal is indeed pure love.

Now that ‘pure love subject E4245’ is under careful observation in room #5, if we will try to notice ‘love’. What will we see?

Since there is nobody in the room with subject E4245, they have no way of showing their love abilities and skills to anyone in that room. They can’t love another being (and they probably will not jump at the walls of the room, trying) in this simulated room.

Since there is nobody there, they can’t also take a loving action towards anyone (and we asked them not to do it on themselves during the experiment) or anything, as the room is completely empty.

Since there is no action, and no human being (or animal being) in the room, nothing is in fact happening in this room that can be observable to us, the scientists. There is no effect.

This is beginning to sound like a very silly experiment, but here is the crux of the matter. We need to ask just one question. Does subject E4245 still experience love? Let’s do it.

Scientist (through the microphone): Hello. Thank you for being the subject of our experiment. Do you currently experience love?

Subject E4245: Yes, love is all around me.

Scientist: How could this be possible? There is nothing around you. The room is basically a void.

Subject E4245: True, and although I could focus on the beautiful tembre of your voice, doing so would defy the whole point of the experiment, so I will stick to the rules. There is nothing here externally, but I still experience love internally.

Scientist: Thank you for not destroying the experiment. How are you able to experience love internally, when there are no external stimuli of any kind? There are no people to give you love? There are no people or objects to which you could give love yourself? There is nothing loving in this environment.

Subject E4245: It is because the core of my love is not in the external environment. It is not in the need to help others. It is not in the need to express love. It is not in the need of any kind. It is in fact in the ability to choose the good in any given moment, for each moment is neutral, and it is our choice that gives it color, so to speak.

Scientist (Somewhat shocked): So what you are saying is that reality itself is neutral, and our ability to choose to paint it into ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is the essence of love?

Subject E4245: Correct. Love is not merely an action, an interaction of an effect. It is an internal choice of seeing the good in any given moment. For this, you must learn two core skills. One - to be in the present moment. If you can’t be in the present moment, you will always be either anxious or depressed. Two - to consciously choose to see the good in every present moment, because each moment is neutral, you always have the possibility of an internal choice.

Scientist: That’s it? Love is a choice?

Subject E4245 (Maybe we can still call them Fjodor, I am starting to like the name): It is never ‘it’. No definition using words will ever suffice, because people reading the words will always be able to still choose to focus on the ‘good’ aspect of those words, or the ‘bad’ aspect of those words. Hey, but that is not the key part yet!

Scientist: There is the key part?

Fjodor (Formerly Subject E4245): Well you put me into this room for a reason, right? Just knowing that love is a choice is not really enough. The final piece of the puzzle is that from choosing the good in the present moment, you can then act ‘out of love’, and thus your action will cause you personally - joy.

Scientist: Will cause me, personally, joy? What about other people? Other beings?

Fjodor: Take it from me, the person sitting in a void, who is by definition - pure love. It is NOT about other people. It never was. They are just there to help you find that love is your inner, personal choice. What they do with your love is up to them, your payment is not their acceptance or reciprocity. Your payment is that when you take action from the place of love - you get instant joy, no matter what their reaction is.

Scientist: So, just hypothetically, and I might be breaching protocol here, and I hope this is not recorded anywhere. If I am in the present moment, and my annoying boss, no names will be mentioned, tells me that I am doing my job poorly, I need to find something good in that moment?

Fjodor: ‘Need’ is not ideal, but we can work with it. You can choose to focus on the ‘good’ of the moment, on the ‘love’ of the moment, if you will. Let’s try it. What could be a good thing in this totally made up, not real scenario?

Scientist: Well, I guess, if I get annoyed, I might know that I am not working for the right company? Maybe I can also see that my boss is also not annoyed at me but at his own sadness? Possibly I can also notice that even if the boss is annoyed, I still have a good salary for doing a very easy job - talking to people about interesting things. Hey, maybe there is something to this whole love thing!

Fjodor: Good, we are getting there. Now that you see the good in the moment, you are either close to or are in fact in a place of love. What action can you take from here?

Scientist: Well, I guess I could make a joke, or laugh in response. Or maybe I can focus on my wife instead of listening to my boss, and bring her flowers in the evening?

Fjodor: Amazing! Now you are acting out of love!

Scientist: Wait a second, but what if she is having a bad day, and when I give her flowers, she says ‘Thank you’ with a frown, followed by ‘I am not in the mood’.

Fjodor: Well, if you truly acted out of love, then you would not get triggered too much as a result, because you already got paid by feeling joy instead of feeling the pain that your boss tried to inflict upon you by sharing his or her pain with the world. Right?

Scientist: Right. Still, what if I do get triggered?

Fjodor: Not to worry. You can come back to the present moment, realize that it is not about you being a bad person, but about her deeper needs. You might notice that she is in pain, and instead of making it about yourself, you can help her deal with her troubles. Its a choice, remember?

Scientist: It is really starting to make sense.

Fjodor: I certainly hope so, because as much as I love experiencing the void, and talking to you, I only get paid $15 an hour for the experiment, and I feel like getting out of here already, if you don’t mind.

Scientist: Sure, sure. Thanks! Love is a choice, I get it. Let me get you out.

< Loudspeaker: Scientist conducting Love Interrogation Experiment #415 in cabinet #5, please report to you supervisor at the end of the shift for a disceplenary hearing >

---

There you have it. Love is a choice to focus on the positive in any given present moment of time. Let’s get onto figuring out how we can do that exactly.