1.

What we feel for our friend, relatives is affection, or respect or sympathy - these are product of a mechanism called society; these are not love; an object of love must be an undefined one; Society puts every relationship under some definition - and through defining a relationship, it also limits and put constrains on the feelings arising from that relationship; they are conditional by nature; you love your friend, your wife, your near and dear one only when they love you too in return; but loving God is something different - he/she is an object, which is unbounded, she/he has no shape; you cannot just put him/her in a frame; so it is possible theoretically to love God due to his/her indefinable nature. This kind of love can flourish between two person if there is no 3rd creature peeking its long nose to find out what kind of relationship it is i.e. if there exists a relationship out of any social context; when a relation has not taken a recognizable shape to let the society the opportunity to announce that it is this or that, when you cannot tell your friends what kind of relationship you have with someone or when you are confused sometimes if there is any relation between you and someone, there reigns the relationship without any social context : and there it is possible for the grand entrance of Unbound love. If we can live our lives like in our dreams where we are not bounded by the laws of the ethics and rules of the society then we can only hope to find the boundless love we crave for; love is really love for the infinity; how can you find it in defined social relations; again if you can ignore the 3rd OTHER : it is only possible when you are courageous enough, bold enough, confident enough to live in a relation ship which is not certified and attested by the society : then you can hope to contain the boundless love in your unbounded relationship; when through this relation building process where true love gets the required place to stay and flourish by ignoring the 3rd OTHER you slowly "return to the innocence" : remember the story of Adam and Hawa : after eating the fruit of knowledge- for the first time they realized that they were naked, they became conscious about the OTHER and they lost their innocence and they were parted; before long they were happy in the garden of Eden loving each other boundlessly because they did not have the knowledge of limitation; if we can again become unconscious about the 3rd OTHER then it is possible for us to find the love in the garden of Eden; love is possible only in innocence, not in knowledge; because human knowledge is limited- limited by it's senses. Socially successful love gives into marriage through the suicide of love itself. Theoretically what remains after marriage is mere affection not love. May be there is a possibility for love in "living together" situations. You can give it a try! So I must say love is possible only and only in undefined and socially unrecognizable relationships. Socially prohibited relations therefore can be potentially more capable of containing true love!!! So a true lover is always against, face to face, in confrontation to society; so how can there be happy love in a society; you come to the norms of the society, then society would give you the piece of bread it has to offer, it's a somewhat fair deal; love has nothing to do with dealings - debit, credit, balance; Love is only possible in the life of an anti social and in the dreams of a dreamer.

Love is the only spiritual freedom in our day-to-day material hardship of bounded social life. It gives the little escape route to eternity like music or any kind of art. Those who have lost their Gods must become lovers or artists. We are spiritual being. We need love and art or Dharma to touch the untouchable, to bound the un-boundable, to sing the un-singable, to paint the un-paintable.





2.

Sometimes we lust for the piece of bread offered by the society. It's the evil of consumerist society. It always provokes to foot into the deep dark blind canal of society. If we can ignore it's provocative poses and don't forget the job of waiting for the true love: which is an anti social act by nature, then one day may be we hope to discover the infinite love inside our finite existence...otherwise we wouldn’t even realize when we have sunk up-to our nose under the junk of the society.

Only those who are free in soul, may be caged in many ways due to realities call, but free in soul from the rules and norms laid down by the society: have the chance to know the boundless joy of unbound love...

If one can work in the society (through which our different relations build up) without the desire of anything in return, without any expectation that it would bring some ripe fruit at the end of the day: if one can work for realities sake in this way then may be it is possible to remain unharmed at the soul - no web of desire would succeed to obscure the freedom of our soul; thus the joyful soul of the innocent child would be intact in the journey through the gusty path of reality while we probe ourselves into the social life.

I afraid I am idealizing..."Work without the expectation of any fruit"...is the same thing which was told to Arjun by Krishna quoted in the Vagabot Gita...I don't know if human nature permits such impersonal act...but I am sure about one thing: we have to keep our soul unharmed and as innocent as a child from the socially constructed material desires to discover the boundless love within us for the infinite: how one would be able to do that (keeping the soul innocent and pure) depends on one's own creativity, eventually one would find his or her own creative instinct in this search for the process of remain pure in soul while submerged in the social reality. We all have to discover that process by ourselves individually. They would give rise to different processes due to the differences among individuals. So you can say it's a good worthy search to find out the path which would led us to the process that would keep us innocent at soul and at the same time would let us respond to the call of reality.

What do you say?