Love vs lust

Chappani,
Let me clear you my stand.. I am not talking about the love / affection part of it.. Love can exist with any relationship... even we might be in love with pets, some non-living creatures etc.

But here we are discussing on Love vs Lust part of it. I think this one should be viewed from the appropriate angle. That is, The influence of Love and Lust in our life.

I think it is not a general one like friendship, love with mom, dad, sister, brother etc.

We can have lust on only somepeople.. But love - we can have on anyone..

that is why, I suggested the title, KAADHAL VS KAAMAM.. You also agreed with that one

I think u r referring ANBU part of it.. I am just expressing my opinions about KAADHAL VS KAAMAM and not ANBU VS KAAMAM (as how u interpreted it). HOpe I am clear.


Beg to differ with your likeness and Hunger part of it.

Love and Lust are like "Interest" and "desire".. The next step in love results in Lust ... i.e., Interest becoming a desire and a burning desire or passion..

Great interpretation Selva :clap:
As rightly said ... Love n Love cannot be seperated ...

n for obvious reasons Anbu is very different from KaaDal !

Good Post Selva !

I think if u had read his post carefully he had mentioned about some distant relative who lead a love filled life without lust (NOT BROTHER, SISTER, DAD MOM) with her husband.

love is basis..... basic.........

lust arises when needed and IF needed.

lvoe can strive on its own.

powerful than lust.

I disagree, for successful love(between married couple) LUST is compulsory.

i FEEL LOVE is compulsory

Even the very feeling ......is LUST ! Doesnt mean that it has to be physically felt !

The very feeling of liking the physical appearance is also LUST !

it runs in ur mind ... n not necessarily known to everybody !

???????????????????

YERkanavE Radha-Krishna paRRi pEsi pathetically misunderstood aanathaal thesis ezuthum aLavukku matter uLLa topic paRRi moochchu vida bayamaayirukkiRathu!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shakthiprabha

I think if u had read his post carefully he had mentioned about some distant relative who lead a love filled life without lust (NOT BROTHER, SISTER, DAD MOM) with her husband.

---

If u do have a relook into that post, you can understand that they are not able to deal with the lust part of it now.

But if u ask them, then they will agree with the fact that Lust did play a great role along with love(like a partner) in improving their married life.

Currently, they cannot deal with the lust part of it. But if it is, then it might have increased their love definitly.

But in the old age, love that was developed by lust over the years, dominates lust, In the young age, Lust dominates love and helps love in converting itself into a burning desire / crazy love.

I do agree with you that love is the basic thing when starting our married / love life. But the kick start is always provided by Lust. Without lust, the feeling of oneness never arises. Even if it arises, that will be a bit weak and won't be that much powerful when compared to Lust part of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bingleguy

Even the very feeling ......is LUST ! Doesnt mean that it has to be physically felt !

The very feeling of liking the physical appearance is also LUST !

it runs in ur mind ... n not necessarily known to everybody !

???????????????????

---

Again a good one BG. :clap: Many people misunderstand Lust thinking that it has only physical connections.. IMHO, Lust is one step next to love in converting ourself from saying "both of us" to "we" / "us"

Lust - Higher version of Love / crazy / mad / etc

Love - a bit lower which can be depicted though somethings.

pp maam,

we are eager for ur views.

LUST IS HIGHER VERSION THAN LOVE? :roll:

I am clueless what to say.

SP,
Most of u people misunderstood my point. I never hailed Love above Lust and vice versa..

What I said was - Both work together and the effects of Lust are much more in uniting the people and creating a feeling of oneness.

Both work together at many times. That is my point. I never said that it is lust that creates everything blahblah.. HOpe I am clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by selvakumar

I agree with you that we cannot separate the two. IMHO, Love makes the people connected for a long period of time. But during the initial years, it is the lust that increases their love life. Though lust has little presence when compared to love, that little presence indirectly influence the love on the concerned person. My point is : Lust has an indirect impact in increasing the love on a particular person. I am talking about pure love and the lust that is connected with it. I am not referring the plain lust that we can have on anybody. Ultimately, during the initial bonding, lust dominates love and opens the doors the pure love.

---

I agree with you....I think during the intial stages of a relationship between a couple (not family, pets, etc.), lust dominates love because you need to have the desire/want to see, talk, hang out with that individual. There is something about him/her that makes you want to be with them - initially, that's lust. Obviously, we can't say that lust can turn into love. In some cases, the lust is simply a crush-and you get over it; and in other cases, it blossoms into love, which is real. I believe, that can happen with only one person - you better half. Lust is natural - it's like a crush.

So, you can't have pure love without lust - it's part love. Ultimately, to maintain and strengthen the relationship over the marriage years, pure love should rise above lust. And even then, you need a little bit of lust. Either way, I think lust and love go hand in hand; can't have love without lust.

<dgn>
sinthu,
Got to go now.. will reply to this one tomorrow..
</dgn>

SP, naan intha aattaththukku varala! "perusukalukku" ennaththa perusaa therinjsirukkap pOkuthu??? :wink:

YEn iraNdu pEr orE avathaaraththai eduththurukkiReerkaL???

Some people like my cousin :banghead: fall in love through internet....

she lives here in england her boyfriend that she has never met :rotfl: lives in Sri Lanka, in jaffna.....

possible? :roll: :oops:

why are you laughing at your cousin gaayini..i feel that you shouldnt be making fun of her situation..well.it is something that she and her bf have to decide for themselves..whether it is possible or not..not you..not me..and not anyone else..

No no athu ila...i'm laughing and irritated by her cos she doesnt even know if he is a 80 year old stranger playing with her...and she is soo seriously in deep love with him....i mean internet love through which friends connect u with people is fine because u can trust friends and u will know if its a stranger or not...and its more safe...but this girl...my cousins...goes into a chat room and picks out a guy at random and has been loving for 2 years or so....:banghead: what if he is not the person he says he is....riddiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by malsi

why are you laughing at your cousin gaayini..i feel that you shouldnt be making fun of her situation..well.it is something that she and her bf have to decide for themselves..whether it is possible or not..not you..not me..and not anyone else..

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sinthiya

.I think during the intial stages of a relationship between a couple (not family, pets, etc.), lust dominates love because you need to have the desire/want to see, talk, hang out with that individual. There is something about him/her that makes you want to be with them - initially, that's lust.

---

Well.. I would like to say that those initial stages are crucial. Infact lust determines the permanent love realtionship between the two at this time. so, Lust dominates the love more in this time. Eventually, or over a period of time, they understand each other and after that the part played by lust decreases and love that grew out of the lust fills the rest of the life. Again, I don't want to refer lust as mere crush. Crush is not the one that we can have on a single person. Even that can be had on some of our favorite people and others. IMHO, crush and lust are two different things. Lust operates along with love. but crush :roll: it might operate alone (or arise in a single person rather than in both the minds)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinthiya

Obviously, we can't say that lust can turn into love. In some cases, the lust is simply a crush-and you get over it; and in other cases, it blossoms into love, which is real. I believe, that can happen with only one person - you better half. Lust is natural - it's like a crush.

---

NO.. The result of the lust mainly determines the love. It is the lust during the initial days acts as a bedrock for the love plant to grow. I do agree with u that it can happen on only one person. Lust and love goes hand in hand in this part

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sinthiya

So, you can't have pure love without lust - it's part love. Ultimately, to maintain and strengthen the relationship over the marriage years, pure love should rise above lust. And even then, you need a little bit of lust. Either way, I think lust and love go hand in hand; can't have love without lust.

---

No need for love to rise above lust. It depends on the people under consideration. For eg, even in old age, we depict our love towards somebody thru low profile lust like kissing on the forehead etc. It need not be a pure physical relationship. Even they can join hands, stay close together to depict their love through such low profile lust things.

SELVAKUMAR DEFINES lust as anythign to do with physical contact :ROLL:

:|

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shakthiprabha

SELVAKUMAR DEFINES lust as anythign to do with physical contact :ROLL:

:|

---

ofcoure SP.

If we kiss on a baby's forehead then that will depict our love.

But if we .............. then it will be a combination of love+lust.

Hope I won't go further into this. :|

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by selvakumar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shakthiprabha

SELVAKUMAR DEFINES lust as anythign to do with physical contact :ROLL:

:|

---

ofcoure SP.

If we kiss on a baby's forehead then that will depict our love.

But if we .............. then it will be a combination of love+lust.

Hope I won't go further into this. :|

---

Machi, rocking explanation :lol: :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Selva .... yengayo poiteenga ;-)

Thanks great machi :D and vasanth :D

Selva...thanks for your response. I think I've confused my self even more now... :roll: ...but this is what I think:

First, I don't think we can separate the two - I think True LOVE is based on LUST, friendship, trust and many other things. And I think lust is a bigger part of love in the initial stages of love between a couple. Over time...during marriage years, other components such as trust, beliefs and values, friendship, etc will dominate. Yet, lust still exists - like you said, simply kissing on the forehead, holding hands, staying close are lustful, and it happens because even at old age, they are still very much in love.

I think lust is natural for all of us - we can feel lust towards more than one person over our life time. What I mean by lust is the desire to talk, see, be around that individual - not physical relationship. But in the end, lust becomes love (part of) with only one special person and you take it a step further by expressing your love and establishing a relationship. I feel lust is SIMILAR to crush, but they not the same. Crush is a simple feeling of attraction towards someone (ie. 'he's cute...i really like him') - nothing like lust. Then again, I believe crush can lead to lust, and eventually become part of love. And it all depends on the individual and his/her circumstances.

I hope this makes some sense... :roll: .... :oops:

So nobody agrees love can exist with the concern person IWTHOUT LUST>????????????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shakthiprabha

So nobody agrees love can exist with the concern person IWTHOUT LUST>????????????

---

No..SP, several people have already accepted your view. :D

Ofcouse a very few people like selva view it in a different way :)

Selva,

Somehow I just can't accept your arguement that Love can exist only with Lust OR rather it starts off with LUST.

When a person is in true love with the other person he sees to that there is no pain to the other person to the extent to give up sex if it pains the other person, This happend in one of my fiend's life :). Lateron then went to Gynacologist and set things right.

The basic definition of Love is the willingness to give oneself without expecting anything in return, if there is any expectation then there is no love there. In your case Love starts when the partners are satisfied with their basic needs.

You arguement may be acceptable when young people are in love, between the age group 18 - 27 years or so. For late starters in love your arguement may not be valid.

But what is your Signature Selva?? :))
I can make out you are a yet to be married young Man, which endorses your arguements.

chappani

:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chappani

Somehow I just can't accept your arguement that Love can exist only with Lust OR rather it starts off with LUST.

---

I beg to differ. You are viewing lust in the hightest point of it. There are also small things in love, that proves the existance of lust. I hope u might have read my definition on that baby case. Even if a pair walks along the street, keeping their hands together, then there will be some portion of lust associated with that love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chappani

When a person is in true love with the other person he sees to that there is no pain to the other person to the extent to give up sex if it pains the other person, This happend in one of my fiend's life :). Lateron then went to Gynacologist and set things right.

---

Sorry friend. I don't want to discuss whether sexual life has anything associated with love / lust. IMHO, As per the definition, of ancient works, IF WE LOOK AT A PERSON WITH INTEREST, THAT ITSELF IS TAKEN AS THE LOSS OF VIRTUE. In such case, if a pair (who don't have the passibility of sexual life), look into their eyes and do painless things, then that will show the existence of LOVE + LUST.

See, Parasuraama's father asked him to kill his mother just coz that she viewed at Indra for a moment. hope I am clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chappani

The basic definition of Love is the willingness to give oneself without expecting anything in return, if there is any expectation then there is no love there. In your case Love starts when the partners are satisfied with their basic needs.

---

My friend, I never said anything against Love. But the moment Love(kaathal) starts between a pair, that triggers the lust part associated with it. That doesn't mean that lust+love combination expects everything from the other partner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chappani

You arguement may be acceptable when young people are in love, between the age group 18 - 27 years or so. For late starters in love your arguement may not be valid.

---

No.. IT can be equally applied to old people also. Refer my above example. Lust doesn't imply only the sexual contact. Even minor versions of lust do matter a lot in love life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chappani

But what is your Signature Selva?? :))
I can make out you are a yet to be married young Man, which endorses your arguements.

---

My signature meaning:
----------------------

"I am a hero for you babe 8-) ., but a villan for your dresses :twisted: "


------------------

Chappani,
Ofcourse I am not married. (I am not sure whether I will do it in the future).

But just coz that I am unmarried, that doesn't mean that I have not gone through the proess that u have mentioned. :)

selvakumar,

LUST means DESIRE. physical pleasure sought from sexual indulgence. CHECK THE DIC MEANING DUDE.

1. (1) lecherousness, lust, lustfulness -- (a strong sexual desire)
2. (1) lust, luxuria -- (self-indulgent sexual desire (personified as one of the deadly sins))

"kaathal enum ENNam" threadil(poetry section) barani intha subjecttai adiththu thuvaiththu kaayappOttathai kaaNka!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shakthiprabha

selvakumar,

LUST means DESIRE. physical pleasure sought from sexual indulgence. CHECK THE DIC MEANING DUDE.

1. (1) lecherousness, lust, lustfulness -- (a strong sexual desire)
2. (1) lust, luxuria -- (self-indulgent sexual desire (personified as one of the deadly sins))

---

I would request you to do the same with love also. IMHO, Dictionary alone cannot throw a light into this matter. I can show you many popular dictionaries which have defined the meaning in the other way reg love.

here is the sample.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/defi...7427&dict=CALD

to have strong feelings of affection for another adult and be romantically and sexually attracted to them, or to feel great affection for a friend or person in your family:


The fundamental definition of love itself will get a beating if u go by the dictionary.

IMHO, We should view these matters practically.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=love


I) A deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.
A feeling of intense desire and attraction toward a person with whom one is disposed to make a pair; the emotion of sex and romance.

Sexual passion.
Sexual intercourse.
A love affair. An intense emotional attachment, as for a pet or treasured object.
A person who is the object of deep or intense affection or attraction; beloved. Often used as a term of endearment.
An expression of one's affection: Send him my love.


II)
To have a deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward (a person): We love our parents. I love my friends.
To have a feeling of intense desire and attraction toward (a person).
To have an intense emotional attachment to: loves his house.

To embrace or caress.
To have sexual intercourse with.

Love might initially appear to be without lust. However, nature (biology) has different plans. Lust is dormant in the cases where love appears to be without lust, just waiting to surface given the right stimuli, environment and mindset. At a subconscious level, lust is always there. Both are different, but while lust can obviously exist without love, in the case of love, (the repressed) lust eventually catches up.

my 2 cents..:)

of course love can exist without lust..that is the love u have for ur parents,siblings,friends etc...but love for a person's bf,gf,husband,wife,partner has to have some lust thrown in.They can be as old 80 and still feel that elusive emotion.IMO lust is any need to touch another person.It def could be just the holding of hands or an arm around the shoulder.This feeling is special to couples.One usually does not do that to ur parents or siblings.Its reserved to that one special person in your life.I think that is lust too in a way.I also think this lust is what differenciates all other relationships from that of a husband and wife/gf and bf/partners :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssanjinika

my 2 cents..:)

of course love can exist without lust..that is the love u have for ur parents,siblings,friends etc...but love for a person's bf,gf,husband,wife,partner has to have some lust thrown in.They can be as old 80 and still feel that elusive emotion.IMO lust is any need to touch another person.It def could be just the holding of hands or an arm around the shoulder.This feeling is special to couples.One usually does not do that to ur parents or siblings.

---

'found this part of ur 2 cents good, SS! :clap: :D
So wud this be like, 1 3/4 cents.....hmm....I think......:roll:
'was never good at Maths! :P :lol:
Btw, wait.....jus a 2nd thot- wud a momentary crush on sumone also come under the same category of love w/ lust thrown in?? :?
Ther r cases wher ppl. having a crush on sumone dont hav lust on them.....rather they eventually go to the extent of wishing 4 tat person's family's well-being etc.! :)

what is a momentary crush lamby??
Just a pure affection for another person..without any thought of spending time with that person?U mean to tell me that when ur infatuated with a person u dont give anythot to spending the rest of ur life with that person? And if u do ..what do u propose to be doing for the rest of ur life with that person?Initial Attraction based on sight is a form of physical attraction rite?Neways a crush cannot be classified as love rite?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssanjinika

what is a momentary crush lamby??
Just a pure affection for another person..without any thought of spending time with that person?U mean to tell me that when ur infatuated with a person u dont give anythot to spending the rest of ur life with that person? And if u do ..what do u propose to be doing for the rest of ur life with that person?Initial Attraction based on sight is a form of physical attraction rite?Neways a crush cannot be classified as love rite?

---

Hmm.....r u sure abt tat? :)
Well, as for momentary crush I meant like the "puppy love" or teenage crushes we hav tat seem to last only during tat phase & normally tend to die out.....in most cases of teenage ther wud be lust playing a major role in such crushes but I reckon tat may be bcos of the hormonal effect @ tat age rather than deliberate? :huh:
I donno how common this cud be, I was actually saying this from my personal experience wher at tat age I once had a crush on sumone but never had ne thots abt spending my life/time w/ her wenever I thot of/saw her......as tat 'crush' grew past my adolescence, I found it was hardly based on lust.....or maybe bcos in my mind I'd resolved not to think of her in tat way, feeling tat it was wrong.......?
However to this day I do wish tat I hav a wife who is like her in appearance/attire/attitude but again, honestly no lust in my thots abt her in this regard.....rather I find myself wishing for her husband's/children's well-being etc. wen I think of her.....! :)

Hence my qsn......:)

My two cents.

Love is inward, unconditional and stable. The people you love you always love them even after years and even after feuds and ruffles. Lust is more outward, fluctuates since its conditional based on material and sexual things and even jealousy.

And I find the definitions put forward by Selva, very interesting:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=love


I) A deep, tender, ineffable feeling of affection and solicitude toward a person, such as that arising from kinship, recognition of attractive qualities, or a sense of underlying oneness.

A love affair. An intense emotional attachment, as for a pet or treasured object.
A person who is the object of deep or intense affection or attraction.