48、凡能洞察爱之本质者，谁看不出这一点？只爱自己，不爱自己之外的某个人并能反过来被他所爱，会是什么样呢？这与其说是结合，倒不如说是分离。爱的结合是相互的，只爱自己不可能有结合。即便以为有，也只是出于对他人有回应的幻想。由此清楚可知，神性之爱必在它所爱的其他人里面存在并显现，它也会被他们所爱。由于一切爱里面都有这种需求，所以它必最大程度，也就是无限存在于爱本身之中。
48. Can anyone fail to see this who looks into the essential nature of love? What is loving ourselves alone, really, and not loving someone else who loves us in return? This is more fragmentation than union. Love's union depends on mutuality, and there is no mutuality within ourselves alone. If we think there is, it is because we are imagining some mutuality in others.
We can see from this that divine love cannot fail to be and to be manifested in others whom it loves and who love it. If this is characteristic of all love, it must be supremely characteristic, infinitely characteristic, of love itself.
48. What person cannot see this who is able to discern the essential nature of love? For what is it to love oneself alone, and not someone apart from oneself capable of returning that love? It results in rupture rather than conjunction. A conjunction of love results from its reciprocation, and no reciprocation is possible in self alone. If it is supposed to exist, it is from an imagined reciprocation on the part of others.
From these observations it is apparent that Divine love cannot but be and have expression in others whom it loves and by whom it is loved. For inasmuch as there is such an ingredient in all love, it must exist especially, which is to say, infinitely, in love itself.
48. Whoever fails to see this if he can discern the essence of love? For what is it to love oneself alone, and not another outside oneself by whom one may be loved in return? This is separation rather than conjunction. Conjunction of love is by reciprocity and there is no reciprocity in self alone; if it is thought there is, it is from an imaginary reciprocation in others. From this it is clear that the Divine Love must necessarily be and exist in others whom it may love, and by whom it may be loved. For when there is such a need in all love, it must be most of all, that is, infinitely, in Love Itself.
48. Who that is capable of discerning the essential character of love cannot see this? For what is it to love self alone, instead of loving some one outside of self by whom one may be loved in return? Is not this separation rather than conjunction? Conjunction of love is by reciprocation; and there can be no reciprocation in self alone. If there is thought to be, it is from an imagined reciprocation in others. From this it is clear that Divine Love must necessarily have being (esse) and have form (existere) in others whom it may love, and by whom it may be loved. For as there is such a need in all love, it must be to the fullest extent, that is, infinitely in Love Itself.
48. Quis non id potest videre, qui potest intueri amoris essentiam: quid enim est amare se solum, et non aliquem extra se, a quo redametur; hoc potius est dissolutio quam conjunctio; conjunctio amoris est a reciproco, et reciprocum non datur in se solo; si putatur dari, est a reciproco imaginativo in aliis. Ex his patet, quod Divinus Amor non possit aliter quam esse et existere in aliis, quos amet, et a quibus ametur; cum enim tale est in omni amore, maxime erit, hoc est, infinite, in Ipso amore.