Love’s Pain Is Its Own Redemption Essay

What is love life? According to Joseph Rey F. Celestino, M.A, this is a examination that excites and stirs a thousand fold of antithetical points in our minds. Thats a verbatim of what he had verbalize in an oblige he made, c exclusivelyed cuts Pain is Its Own Redemption. It is an article that opened my eyes to the reality of love. Its an article that never seizes to amaze me, to amuse me, to make me question my beliefs, and change my views and opinions (in a good panache), no librate how many judgment of convictions I read it. It continues to serve as an instrument of wonder, chall(a)enging me to go place, explore, and become the magic, the marvel, and the astounding beauty of love.Its an article close the enticing world something that we all know of, that only discombobulate a glance of its true form. I have never viewed love in a way thats even just a tiny bit close to the way I see it now. I gained a deeper understanding of how love moves and works, but I know tha t I assuage have a long way to go before I figure out what love rattling is, or who knows? Maybe Ill never relegate the right words to circumscribe what it is. Maybe Ill never know what love means. The possibilities atomic number 18 endless. exactly this article is my guide, so that I wont desexualise lost, as I come my quest on finding clues that capability lead me to the answers Ive been supposeing for, to questions I never purpose I would ever ask, well-nigh things I never thought Id be curious roughly.According to the author, What is love? is a question that knows no barriers, knows no bounds, and knows no age and generation. He also made a statement which I find very agreeable. He said that love is the most celebrated theme of gentleman institution () I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. No matter who you are, w here youre from, how old you are, or what gender you are, you absolutely, positively have something to say about something is related to love, or w hen love itself is universe talked about. We distributively have our knowledge views and opinions regarding love. These whitethorn be brought about by mere sees, or our beliefs, or other(a) factors that may equal or form our views and judgments.He further stated that the untangled web of mystery of love is what binds us all. He said that As we are drawn to the nearness of its answer, the more that we find ourselves confused and puzzled. Pertaining to the question beingness discussed. He explained how love or the question of what it is, is in fact too close to being a paradoxical phenomena. Maybe thats why people try so hard to find a explanation for love. Maybe thats why people try to put love in words. Because people do non ask things and questions left unanswered and undefined.Being curious is in our nature. We famish and thirst for answers to things we do not even fully understand. We find it hard to let things be. Because we mortalify questioningly. And we do not e asily let things go. Thats why, each of us, whether we say it or not, has our own definition of love. We on our own try to define it, or share our ideas about it to find common things with others ideas, and chew over a concrete explanation or definition of love. For what reasons, at that place may be a lot. barely the point is, the mere battlefront of love in a parley, or discussion, or anything, really, we automatically get excited and pay attention, because we want to know what it is.The author, through the article, further explained thing about love that major power deepen, or cut our curiosity about it. He explained that the on-going controversy about the definition of love is not new to the world. He said that that controversy went even way, way back before some of us equaled. He said that Philosophy has been trying to reckon prominent questions, such as Is love and incontestible question, or an unquestionable answer?, and Why is there love, rather than no love at all?. As I said earlier, according to the author, Philosophy has been trying to reckon these questions for more than two and a half millennia of its existence. This means that Philosophy has been trying to approach these problems for over 2,000 years.He further stated that Socrates and Plato, on the sensation hand, and the poetic movement led by Homer, on the other hand, opened their respective conversation tables on the subjects of love and intimacy in that ancient far away. He also said that scholars of the pass day, still linger on the ideas left by these past masters. Countless books have already been published, (and still publishing), of millions of films have already been produced, just to give us an inch of hope or a glimpse of the definition, or the answers to the questions about love. Its taking so long, for people to find loves meaning. And yet, we never get tired.With each experience we gain, we get bits and pieces of ideas of how we can define love. But still, despite all e fforts given(p) by our ancestors, and us, people in the present, we only see a blur, of loves true form. Maybe its about time we stop trying to define love, and just let it be. Let love be love. Maybe, we should start experiencing it, and enjoying it, instead of stressing ourselves trying to find meaning to something this mysterious, this big, this amazing. Yes, maybe we should do that. But theres something about trying to define love, that gives us this sense of satisfaction, because that more we try to find meaning for it, the more we get to experience it. Our hearts burst with so much happiness when we know that we are in the presence of love.Mr. Celestino, got into a deeper explanation of tons more interesting topics, like, the myths created by society, about love, about Aristophanes narrative that concerns human relationship, and a lot more, Part of this a lot more topics included on of my favorite arguments ever. make do at archetypical can. I have never been a believer of love at first sight. This may sound offensive to those who believe, but, I think the idea is pretty unrealistic. Yes, its a really good idea. I mean, wouldnt it be nice to see someone and automatically know that that person is the one? Isnt that what happens in most romanticist movies? Two people just happens to be in the same place,, at the same time, and look at each other at the same moment. They look into each others eyes, and poof Theyre in love. It would be nice. I really would. But as I said earlier, thats what happens in most movies. Thats what happens in most romantic books or novels, even.These are made to tickle our systems and trick us into believing that these things could actually happen in to us real life. Truthfully speaking, nothing that perfectly constructed, and well-made could happen in real life. We exist in reality. We dont live in some 2-hour-or-so film that is so beautifully made, it may be close to perfection. Thats not how life works. Thats not reality is all about. On the contrary, in reality, nothing happens the way we imagine it would, let alone like what would happen in films or books. Thats exactly why people make films and movies. They make things that they imagine come to life. They make their imaginations have the appearance _or_ semblance real, by putting them into films or books. This is where people get the concept of love at first sight. And upon teaching through the article, I just found more proof to what I believe in. Mr Celestino said that there is no such thing as love at first sight. In verbatim, he said Love does not bite on a first sight.He explained that The presence of the other that is brought to ones sight appears as an assembly of physical qualities and in turn, the one beholding such sight finds himself or herself being caught in a feeling that is simply stated as drawing card. This statement sums up my thoughts, and puts them into words. As I most unremarkably say it, Love takes time. Baka infatuation l ang yan. He further explained that the attraction brought about or formed by meeting or seeing someone particularly attractive, may breathe two things. Infatuation and affection.He said that infatuation is a shadow of loves true form. He said that infatuation is confined as mere liking of corporeal qualities that are usually pleasing aesthetically to ones sight for a short-lived time. Affection, on the other hand is love in its potential state. Affection is something that may grow to be love. Love is neither infatuation, nor is it affection. Although affection may grow to be love, it is not love. At least, not yet. These two are commonly mistaken to be love. But as I always say, love takes time. It doesnt happen in a blink of an eye.He explained other topics, like the famous clichs, Love is blind, First love never dies, what love is in the Philippines, and another one of my favorite topics, rejection. According to the article, Rejection is hurtful but it is liberating in the sense that the self that is being refused is set free to reclaim himself/herself in order to heal the wounded soul and to love again when the right time comes. Yes, love is liberating, it may take some time to make all the pain go away, because nothing hurts more than the refusal of one to receive the self that is being offered. It traps the soul of the lover into a world of agony and pain, and sometimes, the lover finds no other meaning in life, since he and his love had been rejected. This is why rejection is crucial in a lovers life. Simply because the pain inflicted to that person, may cost him his very life.The author also explained what pain is, and what its all about, selfishness, and divorce and separation, how matinee idols love for humanity, and Christs crucifixion is the concretion of love in an ultimate sense. And he ended this beautiful article with a just conclusion, he said, To love, therefore, is to face even what is uncalled for and to manifest altruistic goodwill towar ds the other. It could be painful in the process but love will find a way to surpass it. That is why there is resurrection in every instance of death. I was left with no words, as I reached the last page of the article. It was beautiful, breathtaking, and heart stopping. It spoke from a view that is totally different from others. And it may still not contain answers to my question, but it made me hunger for more, thirst for answers, and crave for the experience of love in its fullest.For me, to earn a symbiotic and intact relationship, there are a lot of values needed. Love, as there core, with others such as trust, understanding, disciple, respect, etc. In spite of all these, I think a symbiotic relationships would not exist without respect. Because, well, love and respect would not be right without one another. If you love someone, you are going to respect him/her. And the everything else will follow. Respect comes with trust, and understanding. If you respect a person, you will t rust him, that he/shes doing things for the better. You would come to a deeper understanding because you respect each other, and each others opinions. You will be discipline, because you respect your loved one, and if you respect them, you wont do anything that would bring them harm. All, in all, I think respect is an essential in a mutual sweet relationship.after reading the article, honestly, I was left with no words. I was too breathless, too astonished, too gravel to even speak. I had to process my thoughts, and get the thoughts of the author in synced with my own. I had to clear my head and take my breath. Im not saying that the article gave me too much to handle. All Im trying to say is that the article is something different from all others that I have read. And now that its been a while since I last read the article, I can finally confide with my thoughts and put them into words. After reading this article, I have learned so much, and I can easily say that I have more kno wledge about love than I could ever imagine. I never thought Id see myself writing this essay about love, (which isnt really my specialty), yet here I am, close to my fourth page.I never knew I had so much to say about love until now. I never knew the impact and effect that article had on me. And all my thoughts, put into a statement after reading Loves Pain is Its Own Redemption is found in the very first sentence of this entire essay. It seems to me like I just went back to where I started, and let me state (or ask) it again. What is love? I learned that no matter how hard we try to define love, its just too big of a paradox to start with. Its too broad of an idea to put in just a few words in the dictionary. Its too exceeding to try and figure out. Its to magical, to be given any scientific explanation. So I want to end my essay the way I started it. After reading the article written by Joseph Rey Celestino, M.A., Im left with only one question (and a gazillion more underneath i t). What is love?