Skip to main content

Is Detachment and Selfless Love a Defeatist Idea

If someone makes a cursory glance through the posts on Social media, detachment is one of the most common theme which runs across. It highlights two things, one is that the sense of loss and the grief arising out of unrequited love troubles a huge number of people, and a huge number of people among them find solace in getting rid of all expectations.
 
I find this defeatist. It defies logic and runs contrary to the sense of justice. Don't get me wrong, It isn't that I am immune to the pain and sorrow attached with unrequited love. I am in fact, prince of pessimism. It is painful and saddening to not receive what you are entitled to on the grounds of justice and love. I writhe in pain when I am let down. But I am also a pampered child of love who believes the right return for the investment made in a relation. I refuse to accept anything lesser. I refuse to betray myself.

I know man is a logical animal, who knows that two plus two equals four. I can not have it otherwise merely because I am not getting it. In Life and in love, don't set the bar low, whether or not you are able to overcome. And whether or not overcoming it seems impossible. This is one life we have and we must not waste it with half-measures. We must give all that we have to it and seek all in return. It might break our hearts now and then to not receive what we know is rightfully ours, but that notwithstanding, a human heart has a right to expect. It is escapist to erase this basic human feeling and utter denial. There is no glory to do good for others without expecting anything in return. Return, we must get, ask any child attending a birthday party.

We live in an unjust world, that doesn't mean we give up on justice. We live in an unfair world, that doesn't mean we give up on the sense of fairness. Don't give up seeking, don't give up asking, don't give up expecting. That is all a part of being human, the pain which is associated with not getting your rightful part is also a part of being human. Bruised, battered, defeated, still seek your space in the Sun. There is nothing divine in self-less love. It is a defeatist idea for people choosing to live in denial, for the fear of hurt. Further, it extends forgiveness to those who neither sought it, nor deserve it. We must also learn, this isn't personal. In love and in life, person is inconsequential, me and you both. It is the idea which we call life, we call love, we call friendship. It floats, it changes and it passes us by. Was it not said,"Seek and it shall be given to ye" - It might be incorrect but seek nevertheless. Do not set yourself up to be short-changed. Divine wrath will not bring shame to those who short-change you, there is no justice in after-life. This is one life we have, to love, to cherish. There is no shame in losing in love, there is a shame in pretending you didn't lose, because you never sought love. Losses in love are sign of an unyielding hope and unyielding soul. Be open about losses you take in the process and wear them proudly on your proud chest as medals.

Love is one war for which we exist, and we might not always win, but to have well-fought is a good enough justification of life. I can keep on loving you even when you don't love me back with the same intensity, but I will not pretend that I do not want it. I will take my losses and bathe in my own blood, but I will not pretend, I will not be ashamed of loving you so much and wanting the same love from you. Let it be a difficult love, but then is there any other kind?

Comments

Hi Very good post and true
saket suryesh said…
Many thanks, Squid..forgive the delay in revert but am truly grateful..

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review- The Waves- By Virginia Woolf

Book: The WavesAuthor: Virginia Woolf (1882-1941)Genre: Fiction (Spiritual/ Philosophical)Style: ExperimentalPublished: 1931Publisher: Hogarth PressRating: Must Read, Classic
“The Author would be glad if the following pages were not read as a Novel.” – WroteVirginia Woolf(1882-1941) on the manuscript of The Waves (Initially called The Moths). It was first published in 1931.  We are close to a century since this book was published, still this book is unparalleled and unequaled. The Independent called this Book of a Lifetime.
This is not an easy book to read. Beauty is never too easy to create, or is it ever too easy to savor to the fullest. Both production as well as the consumption of true work of art needs to be earned. This is a difficult book to read yet immensely elegant and infinitely exquisite. The story, unlike most fictional novels, does not unfold through dramatic events. It doesn’t depend on drama, it deftly steers clear of the mundane. It is sensually sublime and magnificentl…

A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man- James Joyce- Book Review

Amazon Link 
Some books are an act of education; they cannot be read in haste, cannot be understood in one read. James Joyce’s A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man gives one such feeling.
It is a coming of age story of Stephen Dedalus. Nothing extraordinary about that. But then there a rich, slowly flowing lost river of philosophy which moves beneath the surface, turning an ordinary story of a boy growing up, encountering questions about faith, religion and sex, into an exceptional, extraordinary and engaging story. The story moves along the timeline, much in the manner of Virginia Woolf’s To the Lighthouse, where the writer is seemingly a passive narrator. Further, while this book is more of a philosophical essay wrapped around a story, Ms. Woolf’s book, on the other hand, is rather a Story primarily, with a philosophical touch. This book is blatantly philosophical, dwelling into the dangerous territory of religion and how a growing mind looks at God. It begins with his school, whe…

Madam Bovary's Eyes- Flaubert's Parrot - Book Review

Some books are very hard to classify and categorize. This is one such book. Officially, it is a fiction, a novel. In terms of genre, it should be put in the same shelf as Cakes and Ale by Maugham or The Ghost Writer of Philip Roth, both I have read this year. But then, maybe not. The two are totally fictional, in terms of all the characters contained in them, even though they do have a writer as the central character. But then, that is all that has to do with writing. I don’t think we ever consider the writer’s profession as a central point of those novels. Also the characters are out and out fiction. That is where this book is different. It is about the giant of French literary history (and now, of English classical literature)- Gustave Flaubert.
            The characters and references are all real. Julian Barnes throws all his weight behind the genius who is the key protagonist in the fiction, follows the dictum of a perfect biography as mentioned by Flaubert in a letter in 1872, …