No higher sentiment is known to struggling humanity than love of each other. "Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his life for a friend."
Oriental or Occidental philosophy, whichever may be presented to the mind, as an unfailing guide, should be distrusted, if that philosophy prescribes the abandonment of lover, friend, relative, neighbor, brother, companion. That is, if we accept the dictionary meaning of the word "abandoned" as translated into English.
A western avatar has said:
"I will not have what my brother can not," and in this we heartily concur, not hesitating to say that until all human life shall accept and realize the fullness of this message, we shall not, as a race, have attained to the inheritance that is ours.
But shall we then believe, that the Oriental doctrine is erroneous? Not necessarily.
Errors of interpretation are not only natural but inevitable, and this interpretation of abandonment is in line with the idea of sacrifice (using the word in its old sense of paying a debt), which prevailed throughout all the centuries just passed—centuries in which the idea of God was estimated by the conduct of the kings and monarchs of earth.
A later revelation or dispensation has given what the Illumined One said was a "new commandment," and it is one more in accord with our ideals of godhood.
"A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another."
But love, like everything which is, means much or little, according as the soul is advanced in knowledge, or is undeveloped.
Perfect and complete love is not selfish; it desires not possession, but union. There is a world of difference between the two words.