This Tuesday is Valentine’s Day so I thought this would be a good time to take a look at the question, “Is it love or is it attachment?” As all of you know the Buddha taught the four noble truths stating that attachment is the cause of suffering. Because of this many people have the mistaken notion that we therefore should not engage in intimate relationships – that they should be avoided. After all the Buddha left his family & friends behind in a solitary quest for awakening. Does this mean that the world of passion, love, and sexuality - the world of relationships, life partners, marriages and family is inherently entrapping and the antithesis of what the Buddha taught? If that is so, then shouldn’t we all become monastics or a yogis and live in solitary retreat and reject relationships all together?

If this is our view – it is a very dualistic view that contrasts the secular with the sacred. It implies one must choose one over the other. It is a view that the mundane world is dirty, low and spiritually bankrupt. It is a view that only the life of a monastic is the only path to awakening.

However, which life do you think is more difficult, more challenging? The life of a monastic, that is devoid of romantic relationships, where your entire life is regimented and devoted to spiritual practice. Where you don’t have to worry about a job, paying bills, family or intimate relationships? Or a secular life filled with the challenges of work, relationships, and all of the myriad mundane things we must do each day?

It is risky entering into a relationship. There is not a person alive who has not been hurt – hurt right to their very core by a relationship that ended badly. So why do we take this risk? It is because the rewards of spiritual growth are so great. Some people choose to avoid intimate relationships because the risk of pain is too great. I work with an inmate at Crossroads who is like that. He has built an impenetrable wall around him. Because of the fear of emotional pain he doesn’t allow anyone to get too close or anyone or anything to touch his heart.

in the “The Four Loves” C.S. Lewis said, “Love anything and your heart will be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact you must give it to no one, not even an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements. Lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket - safe, dark, motionless, airless - it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable. To love is to be vulnerable.”

It is the challenges of every day secular life that provide us with the opportunity to grow spiritually. And nothing provides us with a better opportunity to grow spiritually than the act of loving another person in a committed relationship.

But what is this thing we call “love”? There are different kinds of love. “Eros” finds some larger fulfillment through the union with the beloved. “Agape” goes beyond desire, willing the good of the other regardless of the consequences to oneself, and “philia” is a type of friendship. Then there is: romantic love, perfect love, imperfect love, unconditional love, conditional love and so on.

In Afghan culture there is a mythical character by the name of Nasrudden who is both the fool and the wise sage. There are literally hundreds of stories about the adventures of Nasruddin that every Afghan has heard since childhood. They are told and retold in the tea stalls of Afghanistan. All of the stories are funny, but at the same time also contain a gem of wisdom. I’d like to share one such story with you.

“One afternoon, Nasruddin and his friend were sitting in a cafe, drinking tea, and talking about life and love. “How come you never got married, Nasruddin?” asked his friend at one point. “Well,” said Nasruddin, “to tell you the truth, I spent my youth looking for the perfect woman. In Cairo, I met beautiful and intelligent woman, with eyes like dark olive, but she was unkind. Then in Baghdad, I met a woman who was a wonderful and generous soul, but we had no interests in common. One woman after another would seem just right, but there would always be something missing. Then one day, I met her. She was beautiful, intelligent, generous and kind. We had everything in common. In fact, she was perfect.” “Well,” said Nasruddin’s friend, “what happened? Why didn’t you marry her?” Nasruddin sipped his tea reflectively. “Well,” he replied, “it’s a sad thing. Seems she was looking for the perfect man.”

Like Nasruddin we often look for perfection outside of ourselves. It is the Western notion of “romantic love” that is about finding perfection. It is this concept of love that causes much suffering. Scott Peck in his book “Road Less Traveled” says, “I believe the western notion of romantic love is a myth that causes incredible unnecessary suffering. We are taught from an early age that love is some idealized state that will solve all of our problems. We are told that love is a feeling rather than action and that there is only one person for us, and that this one person will fulfill our every need.” And Eric Fromm author of “The Art of Loving” said: “There is hardly any activity, any enterprise, which is started with such tremendous hopes and expectations and yet which regularly fails

So what is this “love” that causes so much suffering?

Peck’s definition of love expresses what I believe is the true meaning of this word. He defines love as, “Love is the will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth.”

From this perspective love is about spiritual growth. Like Peck, I believe love is not a feeling, but rather it is a conscious choice. We chose to love another

The movie “Shadowland” is about the life of C.S. Lewis. In this movie, Lewis falls in love with the American poet, Joy Gresham. Later she learns she has terminal cancer. There is poignant moment where she and Lewis are talking her imminent death. C.S. Lewis says he can’t imagine life without her. He can’t imagine the pain of going on without her. She says, “The pain then (after she dies) is part of the happiness now… that’s the deal.” Later in the movie after her death and he is grieving a friend asks him why take the risk love if it hurts so much. He responds, “Why love if losing hurts so much? I have no answers any more. Only the life I’ve lived. Twice in that life I have been given the choice - as a boy and as a man. The boy chose safety the man chooses suffering.” Then Lewis reverses what Gresham told him earlier, he says, “The pain now is part of the happiness then…. that’s the deal.”

To love is to risk pain. Even the best relationship, one that lasts 60 or 70 years, will one day come to an end, when one or the other partner dies. How many of you have a pet? You go into that relationship knowing it will end badly - that you will (most likely) outlive the pet. And when the pet dies - you know it will break your heart. But we do it anyway. Why? Because as Lewis says the pain of love is part of the happiness. Also because the rewards of love are so great and because we grow spiritually.

It is through the challenges and successes of a relationship that we have the opportunity to grow spiritually. Where else but in an intimate relationship with another will we learn what life and the sacred are really about?

My best spiritual teacher is my wife of 30 years. She has taught me more about compassion, unconditional love, commitment and forgiveness, than all of my Buddhist teachers combined. It is possible to be in an intimate relationship with another and hold the other person in our heart without attachment. For example if you hold a coin gripped tightly in your hand (facing downward), if you release your grip the coin will fall to the floor. On the other hand, if you simply turn your hand upward, you can release your grip and still have the coin. I believe the same is true with relationships. You can be in an intimate relationship without the grasping, clinging and attachment.

Robert Johson calls real love “Stirring The Oatmeal Love.” This contains the very essence of what love is about. It shows the difference between real love and the myth of romantic love. Stirring the oatmeal is a humble act - not thrilling, not exciting. It symbolizes a relatedness that brings love down to earth. It represents a willingness to share ordinary human life, to find meaning in simple unromantic tasks: earning a living, living within a budget, putting out the garbage, feeding the baby in the middle of the night. It is not a love that demands constant cosmic drama & entertainment.

The same qualities that go into making up a fulfilling relationship - qualities such as love, commitment, forgiveness, surrender, and honesty are also the same qualities that contribute to our spiritual growth. Because in reality there is no separation between us; to give, is to receive.