Feed on

If we have truly tasted even a hint of self love, it is unlikely that we would allow ourselves to be reliant on love from another. I am not saying in the context where we stop others from loving us, or stop loving others; because that is in fact quite impossible and beyond our control. I am speaking more of self sustenance, without being affected or moved by another’s words, actions, behavior or perception of us – good or bad; pleasant or unpleasant.

And if we have savored a tinge of self acceptance, it is too, not likely that we would not accept others as they are, or fear if others will not accept us. There is no way because everything that revolves around us, is of us. It will come to a point, where we project others already accepting of us, or that we are simply at peace in our own beingness even when others find it hard to accept us. Again, we would not be affected or moved by another’s words, actions, behavior or perception of us – good or bad; pleasant or unpleasant.

We think we can fall in love with someone; or have someone fall in love with us. It is really, just an illusion and an occurrence when the mind is in the state of lack, hence in need of something to fulfill its deficit. Because we love stories, that is how the stories begin – the He and the She, the He and the He, or the She and She; as one ignorantly or intuitively picks up another as a resonating symbol.

The Hes and the Shes we invite to be in relationships with are merely symbols of our inner states; each symbol deferring from one another and dependant on one’s perceived need or lack, also relevant to waving states of the mind. One minute, I need you – so I don’t want another; another minute, I don’t want you – because I need someone else. Depending on my need at that point in time, I am calling out sustenance from different symbols, expecting them to fill up my empty tank.

 When the symbol in the mind is not fulfilling my need, I may feel hurt or anger towards this person who bears the symbol; and when the symbol in the mind is fulfilling my need, I may feel that I am in love with this person who bears the symbol. Over and over, we allow ourselves to be in a state of self betrayal, failing to recognize that it is those very qualities in these ‘symbols’ that we need to acknowledge within ourselves, or give ourselves. Again and again, we find ourselves in a repeated cycle, not being able to transcend the symbols to reclaim ourselves, thus recurring our sufferings.

In truth, I love no one, other than myself. In truth, no one loves me, other than him or herself. Although I’d like to think that he or she loves me, and he’d like to think that I love him or her – it is not possible in the overwhelming sea of defilements. When I don’t have need that needs to be fulfilled by you, I will notice that I don’t really need you to be around; when I have a need in which I perceive only you can fulfill, I claw onto you like an eagle to its prey. This happens the other way round too; never excluding anyone who fails to see that it is he himself who needs to fulfill his own need – of understanding and acceptance – with love and compassion – in reclaiming self.

When will this sickening game ever end? Can it ever end? Until then, the symbols remain; but once transcended – not only the other person is free, so am I. There lingers only pure acceptance and appreciation of what can be experienced as unconditional love.

3 Responses to “In Love with Symbols? You must be Joking!”

  1. htl says:

    That reminds me of these excerpt from a book:

    The ego basis for compassion is depicted in one of the most delightful stories in the [Buddhist] canon. King Pasenadi, in a tender moment with his favorite consort, Queen Mallika, asks her, “Is there anyone you love more than yourself?” He’s anticipating, of course, that she’ll answer, “Yes, your majesty. You.” And it’s easy to see where a B-movie script would go from there. But this is the Pali canon, and Queen Mallika is no ordinary queen. She answers, “No, your majesty, there isn’t. And how about you? Is there anyone you love more than yourself?” The king, forced into an honest answer, has to admit, “No, there’s not.” Later he reports this conversation to the Buddha, who responds in an interesting way:

    Searching all directions
    with one’s awareness,
    one finds no one dearer
    than oneself.
    In the same way, others
    are fiercely dear to themselves.
    So one should not hurt others
    if one loves oneself.

  2. mun says:

    I would think most mothers love their children more than themselves or else they will not sacrifice so much, even their lives for their children.

    • GG says:

      If a mom were to carefully observe her child or children, she will realise that her child or children is an exact replica or reflection of herself – her own mirror, so to speak. However, on another level, to separate the mother and the child, when in truth all are just One, is egoic. Would you give yourself as much as you give your child? Would you give your child as much as you give yourself? Again, on another level, the mind states are always fluctuating – so it is pretty hard to say, depending on mind states.

      If you were to really observe carefully too, sacrificial mother’s love can also be accompanied by guilt and attachment. No right or wrong about it though. It is just an observation. But it is important to understand that what one gives out, one receives; what one receives, one gives; unless mindfulness sets in. We can mindless live ignorantly, or mindfully choose to live with wholesome qualities of wisdom and love. 🙂

      Thanks for dropping by, Mun! *winks*

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.