Love Itself

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Thu Jul 25, 2002 4:30 pm

Can someone tell me what the line or lines " Then I came back from where I had been. My room it looked the same -But there was nothing left between the nameless and the name" is saying? I think the song is beautiful and those lines are beautiful, but do not understand nameless and the name.

Sohbet · Post by **Sohbet** » Thu Jul 25, 2002 4:50 pm

Dear Linda, One possible interpretation is that the nameless is a reference to God and the name is a reference to a human being. Sometimes, in meditation or prayer, one feels such a sense of joy or happiness or exultation or whatever you want to call it that one loses consciousness of being in the here and now world. When this brief period of transcendence is over, there is a sense of return, which can be rather sad, sort of like sobering up after being happily drunk. This is just how I see these words; you will probably receive many other interesting replies which will be quite different.

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Thu Jul 25, 2002 6:03 pm

Thank you Sohbet, your interpretation adds to the beauty of the song, very much. "In streams of light I clearly saw the dust you seldom see. Out of which the Nameless makes a Name for one like me" Yes, beatutiful!

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Thu Jul 25, 2002 6:27 pm

Dear Sohbet....I also really like your simple, gentle interpretation of those lines.
~Lizzytysh

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 12:15 am

Also in that song I have found the word plunged to be interesting. There plunged the rays of love. Out of the dust that you seldom see, except in the rays of love (that plunged) inside his little room, the Nameless made a Name for one like him. You sure write thought provoking songs LC. Your reply also was that Sohbet.

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 2:19 am

Hi Linda...I've always taken the "plunged the rays of love" to be phallic. However, it could also represent the intensity with which he felt the love from above.
~Lizzytysh

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 10:38 pm

Linda !
I was trying to understand the idea too.
then I read the verse "In streams of light I clearly saw the dust you seldom see..." (in that moment he had Love and in that moment he could differentiate between the Nameless and the Name or anything was possible)
then: AFTER LOVE WAS GONE...."my room it looked the same, but there was nothing left........(I understand that in that moment that he had no Love it was impossible for him to recognize himself between such different things as the Nameless and the Name that can be anything)

linmag · Post by **linmag** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 10:56 pm

'There was nothing left between the nameless and the name.' Do you interpret that as meaning there was no relationship left, or that there was no distance left, i.e. they had become one?

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Fri Jul 26, 2002 11:17 pm

Linda.....Once I got away from the one-afternoon [erroneous] stand interpretation, I took it as a total merging having occurred.
~Lizzytysh

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Sat Jul 27, 2002 12:41 am

He refers to love, as the rays of love that plunged into his little room, and in the streams of light (are the streams of light and the rays of love not the same?) he clearly saw the dust you seldom see. I am wondering if he is not saying in this light (love) you see clearily things you otherwise wouldn't see. He also got tumbled up with them, and out of this (dust) the Nameless makes a Name for one like me. Is there a signifcance in that Nameless and also Name are capitalized? I feel Sohbet's interpretation is right on Nameless and Name. And then there is the words formless circumstance.

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Sat Jul 27, 2002 1:12 am

Hi Linda,
I'd say he definitely wants to make a clear distinction of entities with the capitalization....however, with nothing being left between them, it seems to me that they become one during that ecstatic-state period.
~Lizzytysh

Irene Teresa · Post by **Irene Teresa** » Sat Jul 27, 2002 4:28 am

" Then I came back from where I had been. My room it looked the same -But there was nothing left between the Nameless and the Name"

( probably my favorite on the whole CD ) is very familiar to me and an idea well used in mystic teachings and poetry and in the spiritual teachings I follow.

.....when I heard this line I knew the place and that is what it means to me personally .: a place in the spiritual levels that is sacred between the known spiritual true NAME of God and the great impersonal or void nameless that cannot be explained or defined ( and this does not explain it well) ..and To use captial letters in this case is entriely appropriate.So its like no matter what aspect of the Divine one may believe in ~ when the experience happens one knows it is all the Same One, even the ordinary life in our room is one with it all.....

Whilst in this spiritual state one sees/knows the world or self ( the named) as One with 'all that is' in the spiritual ( nameless) etc

and meaning specifically -Then when there is nothing left between the one that was given a Name ( a place, a persona, a life, a body etc ) by the Nameless-( G..d) so nothing between G...d and I.We become one.

Just some thoughts on a song that expresses in a way so beautiful .....

Thanks leonard for this one

Love Irene

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Sat Jul 27, 2002 4:05 pm

Thank you Irene for that explanation. A beautiful explanation, a simple explanation and I realize there is more there than I can understand with my knowledge of this. You and Sohbet have both given me an understanding of the Nameless and the Name which in turn will shed light on the whole song for me. Love Itself has been one of my favorites on the album it has such a spirtual feeling to it, not just hearing it but also reading it.

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Sat Jul 27, 2002 4:17 pm

Yes, Irene, with your years of immersion in the realm of the mystical path, you are able to "summarize" [as much as can be hoped for] the spiritual aspects and essences of this song, in a way that adds even more beauty to it. Likewise, Sohbet brings much to its interpretation. I personally appreciate both of your input[s] on it. Thank you.

~Lizzytysh

lizzytysh · Post by **lizzytysh** » Sun Jul 28, 2002 3:40 am

Hi Irene, Linda, Sohbet, and other interpreters of Love Itself,
Please clarify for me what your impression is of the sexual nature of this song. From the time I first heard this song, I heard it from that perspective.

My initial view was perhaps a flashback to Leonard's earlier days; however, once past that, my second view was diametrically opposed to that, and in keeping with the songs on the rest of the album. I heard it as a song of sexual spirituality, or spiritual sexuality, and relating to the transcendant power of sexual union. I've already commented on how I hear the description of the rays of love. There was a comment made by Leonard regarding the "nothing left between" that indicated somehow [I can't remember it exactly enough to quote the comment] that the song included a woman being with him. I've listened to the song from a strictly spiritual perspective and the "love goes on and on" phrase could mean spiritual love and a record of a transcendant experience of his one afternoon, in his room.

However, my view has him in his room, making love with a woman in the afternoon, though in equally transcendant fashion. Is this part of your views as well, and you're simply focusing on the spiritual aspects, or do your views not include this at all? I'm simply checking, as it is such an integral part of the way I hear the song. Thanks.
~Lizzytysh

Love Itself

Love Itself

Love itself