As an Indian woman who’s hit the three decade mark recently, I am often treated as being doomed. Doomed, because apparently one of the qualifications for success when you are 30 is to have a ‘successful’ married life, perhaps, with a couple of kids thrown into the picture. So, I am often subjected to rather nosy remarks disguised as condolences about my single status. And on the rare occasions that I bother to respond and tell the person I am happy and single by choice (and honestly so), the counterpoint is an ominous “You don’t realise it now, but who will take care of you in your old age? All your friends will get busy with their spouses and children, and you will be left alone…” Really? I don’t particularly bother to retort and tell them the truth about my many frustrated married friends. And when did marriages start coming with an insurance contract for being taken care of in old age?

Let me state here that I am not a misogamist. I am certainly open to the idea of sharing one’s life with a partner if and when one feels like it. But the point of contention is the concept of marriage and family in conjunction with human evolution.

Over millennia, we have evolved physically, mentally and consciously. The evolution of consciousness, individually and collectively, has resulted in development that includes the formation and continual alternations of personal and social relationships. We have moved from being scared, suspicious primates to ferocious, insecure warriors to intellectual, civil technologists, and parallelly, bigoted, rigid fundamentalists. At every stage in this evolution of consciousness, we have seen our social structure change. From the tribal instinct of conquering a partner using physical prowess to the supposedly secure institution of marriage, we have tried to ensure that more and more relationships are based on love rather than mere biological or monetary reasons.

At this point, let us dwell on our understanding of consciousness. In my opinion, it is the force that keeps us alive, makes us use our body and do the things we do in our lives. It is our bridge to divinity. Evolution of consciousness entails increasing awareness of it. In our primal stages, we understood consciousness as a scary unknown (the fearsome, punishing God) that controls us. We eventually moved to mirroring it outward as an external entity (the judging God) that influences us and thus instituted the concepts of religion and worship. Now, we acknowledge, to a great degree, that it is not external, but within us (Love Incarnate). Hence, we find a lot more people being open to ‘new age’ philosophies and practices.

With this change, we also see its reflection in the social patterns of individuals and communities that are more aware. These people choose to base their relationships, actions and work on love. Love acts as the guiding force of their existence. Therefore, the conventionally conditioned need for guarantees in a relationship is minimised. They understand that commitment is merely an insurance against change. By its very nature, it is a fallacy, since change is constant. If we expect our partner to not change, what we expect is for him/her to stop growing. This goes against the very purpose of existence.

One may have a couple of questions now: Firstly, if commitment is unnatural, is philandering our birthright? Secondly, when we speak of some people being more aware and the others still preferring the fortress of imposed loyalty and duty towards spouse and family, are we being separatist and judgmental and categorising people as being superior or inferior?

To answer the first question, no, philandering is simply an individual choice and tendency, not a birthright. If one wishes to use this choice, one has to be ready for the repercussions. Let us go back a few steps and understand the idea of commitment. Conventionally, commitment is understood to mean not changing one’s stance and attitude towards a partner. Now if we as individuals evolve and so do our partners (at different paces), the equations in our relationships are bound to change. If we do not acknowledge and adapt to these changes, the relationship will get uncomfortable. It is as good as not respecting the reality about yourself and your partner. Typically, in a commitment-oriented relationship, after the initial months or years, the romance fizzles off and relationship is sustained due to a sense of duty and obligation. And then it sours, since it is naturally difficult to live an enforced obligation all our life.

The only thing we can be committed towards is change – change towards growth. And since we can control only our personal growth, the only commitment really possible is towards oneself. This is a commitment of true love, for it is love that propels us to live and grow. So what we need to look for in a relationship is not a person who can commit to us, but who is committed to self. For one can only give what one has. If one loves self, then one can love another. In such a relationship, cheating and hurting a partner intentionally is naturally not possible, since the person would realise that what s/he does to the other, s/he does to self.

A relationship based on these values is not a lifetime guarantee or legal stamping, but it is about propelling the growth, joy and love for all involved. The nature of the partnership may change with time, since the partners would allow space for growth, and perhaps, people may decide to part ways. But this parting is merely an output of love; it is about saying, “I recognise the need to release you for your growth and mine. I do so with the trust that our new paths will bring us both joy and more love.” It is about recognising that love is too magnificent a force to be restricted ‘exclusively’ for one person.

Now, the second question: are we being judgmental when we talk of some people being more aware than others? No, it is simply about living our truth. The way we live reflects our connect with the divine – our higher selves. If we are aware of the magnitude of love that we are, we would be lying to ourselves if we complied with existing social norms simply due to fear. Our beliefs, thoughts and actions need to be aligned for us to be honest to self. The truth differs from one person to another, for it is our understanding of our consciousness. So there is no superior or inferior, all is a reflection of God, of Love. What is paramount is living our own truth and not a socially convenient one.

So if we wish to get married at a certain age because society dictates so or produce kids to make our parents happy, we may wish to have a reality check. Are we complying out of fear or obligation? Because ‘everyone’ does so? Are we too scared to even think of an alternative choice? If yes, we are wasting a lot of our time and effort in living a lie. We may fool ourselves into believing that we’ve compromised and ‘sacrificed’ and made others happy in the process. But when we are living a lie, everything that is a part of that lie is an illusion. We may pretend to be happy, others may pretend to be satisfied with us, but what have we really given others? Just a pretence…

Social norms such as legal marriages, the pressure to produce kids, etc. were evolved in an era that perhaps needed the rigidity to help us understand love. It is like how we need the discipline of a school to help us have a strong academic foundation. But now, we have moved on. If we continue to live in the same schools, we will suffocate and not learn. This is not to say marriages are unnecessary and having children is not required. But yes, it may not be everyone’s need. When it is not, it is important to state our truth by living it. That is the only way to live our purpose. Getting married or having children does not make us complete. We are complete in ourselves. Any social relationship is merely a recognition and celebration of that completion.