Some refer to love as what should be meant as unconditional, as though stating it for the sake of promotion. If love is not always unconditional, then how is such able to remain beyond death? How does a person retain memories of what was lost of what was trusted, if the love disappeared with the trusted flesh? When someone dies, we say our farewell to them. Their death symbolizes the death of trust. What remains is love, for that is why a grieving person is in pain.
Being haunted by a memory means that love has no conditions to it, beyond death as it lives. If love could ever be with a condition involved, then grief would never be a thing. Grief would not exist, because to a condition, there is a barrier, while with grief, there are walls being raised. Those walls that the grief-stricken person places up are against future flesh, future humans to be trusted. What is trusted out of being vulnerable in grief might bring on further hurt. It is in losing trust, not love, that a person does not know who to trust because they have all there is to still love.
The grief that displays itself as a condition is the one against trust, not love. Love is kept with the grieving person, because love’s phantasmal presence is the memory. A spirit is merely the memory of flesh, as its haunt reminds a person to either grieve or be as at peace as the dead.
If God is love, then his son is the flesh. The spirit would be the memory of the flesh, as it was lost before Christ had ascended. Love is not trusted, though simply kept. If love was something to trust, we could eject it from our hearts through forced amnesia. If at all to trust love or God, it is, inevitably so. No one is able to eject what is perhaps most trusted, of all things, when it no longer holds a physical shape.
For the sake of something as beautiful as what was trusted, now rested in the earth, we were attached. When the body was rested, there was the physical attachment displaced, while the non-physical or metaphysical attachment remained. It is not possible to release love, bury it in the soil, any more than it is possible to forget a significant memory. If a person made it into a great effort to forget an event, it must be enacted upon only because it was important. That event’s importance, whether of a positive or negative one, holds significance upon its impact. Wisdom is thus the outcome of life that must move past grief, towards a peaceful state of mind.
Grief knows to be conditional, as this is wise when vulnerable. As grief is the state of literal loss, then in being vulnerable, one could lose more when trusting without conditions. In love being inherently unconditional, there is no way to block what comes and remains of it. Significance of event is the place of love, that whether positive or negative, is not ever of specifics. Love is thus gray. Whenever a person should state that someone’s love is unhealthy is not referring to love, though instead is referring to trust. One can be unhealthy through trust, because unlike love, there is bound to be the loss of something alike, while there will be more conditions placed on the future.
It is in being unconditional that, in love, there is its element of being boundless. What is memorable is not able to be conditional, due to its essence of boundlessness towards the past. As the past cannot be altered, then nor can love to be something ever changeable. If the time machine is ever said to be what is only possible for its forward motion, then this follows the unconditional nature of love with the conditional nature of trust. Time is the changeable aspect of future, haunted by what is both positive and negative of the past. The past is black and white, while the future is unseen. This means that the future is bound to what might become dead, a moment later. If the future dies, then so does hope. A life being buried was this, though is not for those who remain. At the same time, love does not represent the future, though the past, as such is only what is being carried forward.
If, in love, one is able to know the past, then the future is kept in ignorance. We are ignorant of what might die, of when we might die, and when the future is complete darkness. However, the future’s light is unable to die, because of the inevitable continuation of existence. What guarantees the continuation of life or existence is the inevitable movement of it. When in grief, a person is stagnated by it. When remembering the good or the light of the past, the hope or the light of the future remains lit.
Existence will remain common, though what is impossible of knowledge for existence is what will halt its movement. That is because what is equal to love is death, out of both residing in what is both a certainty and an inevitability.
Existence cannot be completely halted, because as love cannot die, then to life there must be what is able to end. Life is able to end, though not entirely. It is not, due to something needing to die. If love cannot die, then life must be the volunteer for both love and death. What would define love as life’s creator is being all that is left, upon the absence of life. All of love, in its indefinite presence, is made to reside upon the absence of life for life’s recreation. Life is recreated or created, upon the absence of it, though never the absence of love.
It is due to love’s impossibility in being absent that it remains inherently unconditional. By being unconditional, it resides in the past, though presents hope for the future in how life can remember what was good of deceased life. Deceased life is forgiven, because there is no hope for its betterment. Life’s death is the closest it can come to the perfection of love, now as the absolute of death.
Modern Romanticism 