Adhering to the promise I made to Infinite (the one who commented on Sarabhai…) I am trying not to sound sarcastic or offensive. :-)
Following is an absolutely atypical and one of the most beautiful definitions of love I have come across. AK said this complicated thing (perhaps perceived!) in such a simple way that simply bowled out everyone present at our simple get together. It’s indeed true that, often-superlative things emerge from simplest sources or situations.
“Love isn’t a feeling, it’s a state of mind. And a trigger is required to transpire into that state. And that trigger is no more than grief. To put it in a cause-effect structure, if one feels sad because he cannot see someone in pain, then he is in love with that person. For e.g. if an infant’s death (grief) makes the parents sad because they cannot see the other in pain, they fall in love. Following this theory, the frequent question asked ‘do you love me?’ actually sounds irrelevant. It could better be, ‘do I love you?’ And instead of analyzing if someone loves us or not, isn’t it better to begin with self? To make it finer, every time a couple survives a grievance together, they fall in love with each other. Now, how long this state would last depends on how complementary they are to each other. Two parallel lines never meet; similarly, two identical people would have a hard time maintaining this state. But opposites attract, likewise, complementary people sustain that state longer because one lacks what the other has, fitting the jigsaw all the time. To conclude on this, love cannot happen when everything around is happy. For the only reason, who wouldn’t want to be with someone who has no worries? When someone wants to be with you even when you are in the worst of your phases, then it can be termed as love. If its love, it means to be together forever in the real sense of the term!”
- A.K.
I realized how this theory perfectly fit to all the real life successful relationships as well as the miserably failed ones. The relationships I look up to are of those who have survived several difficult times together. After all a person who has seen life for more than 65 years would state only time-tested things! :-)
3 comments:
Thanks for sharing AK's Philosophy. Love isn't a feeling, a state of mind . Thats beautiful
Love could also be a state of being if you were always in that state of mind such a love would not be personal. Personal love is like A loves B, in that case A is in the love state of mind when it comes to B. Love state of being would be one when you see a bagger and you give him a penny out of love and you see another one and you don't give him anything again out of love...
Now why that example? Love can make you act differently in different situations.
A mother hugs her crying kid when the kid falls, the same mother doesn't ever look at same kid crying because he doesn't want to go to school... both those actions come out of love. Its not the action, its the state of being.
While looking at a 80-85 couple having an ice cream together after 50 years of companionship does reflect love one would long for... the length of a relationship need not be a yardstick to measure love.
Length of a relationship need not mean anything ...
Just like the mother may feel nothing when the kid cries while going to school, people may well separate out of love.
Its like this .. every square is a rhombus, every rhombus is not square.
While its good to ask questions like do i love... I think the whole analysis surrounding love shows that something is amiss. The moment one talks about love, one leaves love far behind and one only talks about the attributes to love. The love state is that when all your actions come out of love.... without you being aware of the love thing....when you are aware of love... you want your actions to conform to your "idea" of love ... which may not be love.
So whenever there is a question like do I love you... one should probably ask as to why where and how does that question emerge
Love is a state of mind, its a state of being, one can experience it, and probably never know it
...
-infinite
i thought of writing anything on love with a neutral aproach.. but everytime i get to write on it, it ends up with couples for focus.. thanks for stating it on a platonic level!!!
Post a Comment