..then put down four qualities for each that you find most offensive" (Chopra 121). He now says to look at the list and for each trait say, "I acted like this when I..." And cautions that this is not to wallow in self-criticism but to reclaim feelings rather than projecting them onto others (Chopra 122). Says Chopra, "when you are able to see yourself in what you hate, you come closer to realizing that you contain everything, as befits a child of spirit" (Chopra 122). This is certainly easier said than done. What of an abusive parent, an abusive mate, an arrogant boss, or Hitler? Are we to list the qualities that we despise in Hitler and then compare ourselves to that list? True, most self-help books and psychology do claim that people most often project their own flaws and fears onto the people around them, however, it seems that "relative" plays a large part here. How would you compare someone who is assertive and at times aggressive to Hitler? True if one analyzes and condenses the essence there is a correlation, but it is certainly "relative" to the degree to which these qualities are expressed.

When Chopra discusses attachment and karma, there is again a ring of truth. He gives an example:

if I fall in love with you and you spurn me, my longing doesn't just go away. I still feel a karmic bond, despite your rejection, and until you respond or I work through my emotion of unrequited love, karma will bind us together.

Anyone I love in the future will be filtered through the impression you made upon me;

therefore my old karma blocks the entry of any fresh flow of love" (Chopra 193).

Anyone who has been in love has experienced this. And it is true that most often people who are burned in love will shy away from another new relationship or repeat the same scenario of the past and this usually involves trust. According...

Karma actually means, "as you sow, so shall you reap," sowing and reaping are metaphors for cause and effect (Chopra 194). Chopra says that when people speak of good karma and bad karma, they are confusing karma with reward and punishment.
Ultimately, all karma serves only two purposes: either it is a sign of love from spirit or it is a lesson meant in love" (Chopra 195).

If the theory of karma is valid, says Chopra, then nonattachment is the truest expression of love. So actually attachment is not love, it is control, thus, love is freedom. It seems that this would take a very mature person to practice this within a relationship, particularly when someone is flirting with your mate or your mate is having an affair. How many people in such situations could truly let go and not feel the need to control?

Chopra ends his book with the following advice. "Be kind to yourself and others. Come from love every moment you can. Speak of love with others. Remind each other of your spiritual purpose. Never give up hop. Know that you are loved" (Chopra 328). He cautions to be honest about "your seeking, and be alert to the moments when love is showing itself to you" (Chopra 328). And although the messages of love may not be clear to anyone else "around you...that doesn't matter, they are meant for you and your alone" Chopra 328).

Chopra's book is basically like all the other spiritual and self-help books. The advice is all the same: people create their own realities, if you love something set it free, when you point your finger at someone there are three pointing back at yourself, etc., etc. Basically, living and loving is hard work!

Works Cited

Chopra, Deepak. The Path to Love. Harmony Books. 1997; 1. 2. 3. 4, 64, 65, 67,…