It struck me the other day to ponder on the difference between ‘being loved’ or ‘to be love’. The more I explored this the more I noticed how prevalent the concept is that before I can love myself, I need to see that someone else loves me.
My parents need to love me or I am not worthwhile.I need to find a partner to love me or I am not complete.I want to have children that unconditionally love me.I need to be part of a certain group so I can feel loved and accepted etc.
All of this is essentially saying I have a need to ‘be loved’ before I am willing to ‘be love’.
There are many outfits that say ‘being love’ is the key to life. Serge Benhayon is one such proponent of this message. However, there is something different about how he applies this concept.
The key message was/is that to ‘be love’ you need to first ‘self love’. This concept seems so simple; of course, if you want the jug to be full, you had to learn how to fill it yourself, and then there is enough to share.
Even though this message was/is very simple, it was amazing how complicated I made it, and more recently I am realising how often I put a condition on my own self-love. For example, I will only look after myself (be loving to myself) if I can see the benefit, if people will still accept me or if someone around me ‘goes first’; i.e. “they need to be love FIRST, before I will be love”.
In truth, that last one, “they need to be love first” is a big one. In essence I was holding myself to ransom based on the behaviours of someone else. I noticed this week, that after close to 10 years studying the teachings of Universal Medicine and the principles of The Way of the Livingness and reaping benefits in my life that I did not think possible, I still had a condition that “they need to be love first”.
I noticed that there were still elements of me relying on the unconditional love being shown to me by Serge Benhayon and the other practitioners and students of The Way of the Livingness to make it okay to make the changes I had already felt I needed to make. In essence, there was still the pattern of ‘being loved to be love’.
So the question this week is; can I be love without being loved? Am I willing to love myself, even though others may not respond the way I think they should? Am I willing to accept myself and in turn others for wherever they are at? Am I willing to see the love that is present in everyone and connect to that regardless of how they behave (lovingly or otherwise)?
It’s a big question and one I am sure there will be more layers to… I’ll keep you posted…