“What’s the meaning of life?” asked the question-strewn Student.
To this the Teacher replied: “That is a question most worthy of time eternal, but not a few mere words. It is transcendence you seek, and that cannot be fathomed into verbalism alone. You need to observe and behold as everything entwines and commits together. You see, life is not a linear being, it is a cloth that grows in size and complexity.
“Love is a perfect element of life which also translates into an analogy of it. Nobody can define love in one manner after empirical observation, this is an impossibility.” At this, the Student almost immediately began to spoke, but the Teacher hindered this outburst quickly: “Possibility is another element I will soon discuss, but for now, let me retain the subject.” He continued, “Love is a matter most linked to feelings and thoughts, and in some, or rather unfortunately most, cases needs. Because of the first two, love is a highly ambiguous term. It can mean affection, lust, respect, and a plethora of other words and combinations of words. However, love can be translated into one generalized definition of my own devise. This is the inherent wish to maintain contact with the recipient of the love. It is a rather bland-sounding definition, but as you can see, it retains its truth in any meaning ascribed to it. It also does not assume that the “recipient” is human or otherwise living. Blatantly speaking: you can love an object. The analogy I had spoken of with respect to life, is that it is a complex thing. The deeper the love becomes—the longer the love has been committed—the more complex the feelings become. Sometimes this leads to the breaking of the love—the separation of the associated parties—or the growth of it. The more you learn of your love, the more complex the bond will become. In human to human love, this bond is hurtful to break if it has been linked in such a way as to have almost coexistence. This is not to be confused with marriage, for marriage is not the only binding agreement in love’s domain. This is much less linked to obsession, for obsession is not love. The definition does not leave room for obsession, for I specified “wish”, not “need” in a careful choice of words. Obsession is a bane on humanity and love, for it creates a false image of the latter. Obsession could lead to death, while love is a more peaceful rendering of the art of interaction. Please take care in never falling into obsession, for it is never positive nor vital. It is an abhorrence of love and should be discarded from all hearts.
“Now, on to possibility. It is a commitment between the present and the certainty of the future. I do not speak of the certainty of events or facts, for then it would be a prediction. What I speak of is the inevitability of the future’s coming, and the different things it may bring. This means that things that are possible are varied answers to the question, the lot of them, but only one is the real answer. Will be. Impossibility leaves no room for error, however. If one thing is impossible, it is stricken from the sanctioned possibilities, and thus it is a much more closed debate. However, it can be said that something is a possible impossibility, which makes for a much more interesting discussion. Have I confused you?”
“Yes,” said the Student. “You said it is impossible to define love in an absolute way and yet not long thereafter you did so with dreadful ease. Is it not, then, possibly an impossibility?”
With a hint of impatience, the Teacher elaborated: “It is an impossibility to include all that love entails into one single, worded definition. One cannot simply say it is passion, for passion is a condition of love. One cannot say it is drive, for passion—derived from love—inspires drive. Thusly, everything entwines and becomes difficult to manage. Which means love can only be truly appreciated by being individual, which was my next point—individuality. For now, be content in knowing that my definition is an attempt to merely define what can be clearly observed on people who are in love, but it is not the one definition by which love is reigned. Love is in the heart of the lover. Do you now understand?”
“I do,” answered the Student. “What were you to say on individuality?”
“It is one of the bases of life. Individuality may be seen as the repartition of responsibilities among the beings in a society or it may be regarded as the whole (or sum) of the elements that make up the differences between beings. It makes way for the possibility of impossibility, for love, for differences, and more canonically, for discussion and thought. Would there be laws if individuality had not existed? Would there be a world had it not existed? I wager the answers to both these questions are in the negative. If all beings in our Earth were to do the exact same thing, all resources would be quickly disposed of. In fact, not many resources would exist. Though it is true we do share, all living beings, many traits—needs—we do not overcome them in the same fashion. If a carnivore is hungry, it hunts. In general, if a human is hungry, it cooks or (the more conventional) consumes what it has purchased. But these are the superficial grandeurs of individuality. This very interesting element of reality is what makes the world move and continue. From organisms chained to their algorithmic rhythms, to human interaction (contemporary societies), nothing could be accomplished if it weren’t for individuality. Would love occur between two people if the wish to break the barrier of uncertainty between both beings were not existent? This is a possibility. But ponder this: in a chance encounter, one person observes another. This person listens intently to what conversation affords the both of them and analyzes the implications of such words and hungers for an abundance of these thoughts and conversations. But what would they speak of? Who is this person? This would be the barrier of uncertainty. This is the bizarre moment in which one feels nervous, for one fears what is unknown. Love may or may not ensue, only time and possibility would tell. But if individuality were to not exist, what would become of this process? If everyone were the same, everyone would know who everyone was, and thus no love may be, unless if everyone would love everyone. A cycle would emerge, perhaps. Let us hope that this would become an impossibility.”
“I understand, Teacher,” said the Student. “But what is the link between these things—love, possibility, and individuality?”
“Life.”