Skip to main content

Muntik na Kitang Minahal



William Henry Bartlett, Hesitation (1886)

Inawit ni Carol Banawa

May sikreto akong sasabihin sa 'yo
Mayroong nangyaring hindi mo alam
Ito'y isang lihim itinagong kay tagal
Muntik na kitang minahal
'Di ko noon nakayang ipadama sa 'yo
Ang nararamdaman ng pusong ito
At hanggang ngayon ay naaalala pa
Muntik na kitang minahal

KORO:
Ngayon ay aaminin ko na
Na sana nga ay tayong dalawa
Bawat tanong mo'y iniwasan ko
Akala ang pag-ibig mo'y 'di totoo
'Di ko alam kung ano ang nangyari
Damdamin ko sa 'yo'y hindi ko masabi
Hanggang ang puso mo'y mapagod
Sa paghihintay kay tagal
Saka ko lang naisip muntik na kitang minahal

'Di ko noon nakayang ipadama sa 'yo
Ang nararamdaman ng pusong ito
At hanggang ngayon ay naaalala pa
Muntik na kitang minahal

KORO:
Ngayon ay aaminin ko na
Na sana nga'y tayong dalawa
Bawat tanong mo'y iniwasan ko
Akala ang pag-ibig mo'y 'di totoo
'Di ko alam kung ano ang nangyari
Damdamin ko sa 'yo'y hindi ko nasabi
Hanggang ang puso mo'y mapagod
Sa paghihintay kay tagal
Saka ko lang naisip
Muntik na kitang minahal

Hanggang ang puso mo'y mapagod
Sa paghihintay kay tagal
Saka ko lang naisip
Muntik na kitang minahal

*

Any particular insights, or interesting questions that may be raised, from this song?

      




Comments

  1. I am quite perplexed how can someone, just because he doubts that the other truly loves him, decide not to stand up for his feelings. Is there really such a thing as ALMOST loving someone? Since loving someone is a choice/a risk, what is usually holding us back? Aren't we all longing for someone who we can say is "worth all the risk"? But does it really have to be worth it? Can we just not love "without any hope or agenda"? (I am quoting the latter from... Love Actually. Hehe)

    Does that even make sense? It's finals week and my mind is all over the place. :(

    ReplyDelete
  2. To the point, Trish! Those were exactly some of the questions I had in mind. How was it possible to "almost" love someone?

    I mean, what could that feel like? What keeps one from crossing over from "I almost love you" to "I really love you"? Why do we hold back? From fear (of rejection, embarrassment, uncertainty, etc.)? Or from something greater--like time.

    I like how the song identified that transitional point between "almost" and "already." The hesitation, the double-take, the looking back, two-headed, and most of all--the silent secret that is harbored for a long time that can still never be finally kept secret forever: that I confess I almost loved you. Why even say it anymore?

    Well, you can write about it already. You makes perfect sense to me.

    What else can there be in this song?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous10/04/2011

    Maybe because love isn't a "one time, big time" feeling. For me, I think love does not come instantly. It's a blow-by-blow experience, starting from simple gestures that make you feel giddy, thoughts about your love one 24/7, confession, and will eventually lead to the thought that you already found the "one".

    I think love is "falling in love". That in the process, one can escape the feeling that he/she is about to plunge in. After all, when we love, even if we say that we don't have control over our emotions, we cannot (and not only because we don't want to) always give away our hearts fully. That no matter how much we say that our love ones are the only people who can control our heart, we know that there's a little part of it only us can command. (That's why people CAN move on from bad experiences, from heartaches, from devastation). Try as we may, our love ones cannot control our "will". Love isn't really an inevitable feeling.

    Well maybe, the persona doesn't really want to fall in love. Maybe she found something wrong with the situation, or maybe she isn't ready yet (cliche, I know). I can only guess. But one thing I'm sure of is, despite the halcyon phenomenon brought about by love, she chose not to fall into it.

    -- I must say, we really tend to rant in the morning. Haha! I'm not sure if I even make sense :) Hope all is well with you though! I missed commenting here as a nameless stranger (which I still am right now) :) Take care!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Then I wish we'd take risks more often. I just hate that it still feels more difficult for us ladies to "profess our love" in our culture, despite it being the 21st century. Personally, I don't like to come off as "aggressive", "desperate", etc. But then again I have guy friends who are troubled just the same. But I do believe that finding the right one is all about the perfect timing.

    I wonder too... Why confess that you "almost" loved someone? Why qualify? I will only add "almost" only in two circumstances: (1) If I did really love the person but I want to play safe or (2) I chose not to love the person even if I wanted to (like what anonymous above said). But I can only confess such a thing lightheartedly, as if it's just a matter of fact, when I don't really care how the other will reciprocate.

    But if I find out that the person I've really really liked, or have "almost" loved, has been pining for me too, but has given up, shouldn't I win him back by saying that I DO love him -- and then hope that it's not yet too late? Because what else will hold me back? But then again, as you said, there could still be bigger things along the way.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey, it's good to hear from you.

    True, love takes time, or takes its time--to ripen, bloom, bear fruit. What is interesting, however, is knowing when it is the right time. I always ask this question in class (Modern philosophy, when talking about the certainty Descartes was looking for): So when or how can one be able to finally say, "Yes, I am now certain." That now, yes, I will take the plunge, take the leap, bet all my marbles--because I, finally, am now certain. At what point do I finally surrender my will?

    Because asking for certainty is a very complicated thing. We say that "You'll know when it is time," and to a certain extent that is true; we experience that for the most part. But how does one describe it? Obviously there is no one prescription as to the stages of love, though we may have similar phases. I can easily point out lovers who early on, without taking time or having to go through the "stages," already know that he or she is the one, and that I am ready to jump--without hesitation, without a moment's thought. We already have these experiences. And I can also say deciding early does not necessarily lead to mistakes, and that those who needed certainty can in the same manner be mistaken. We know of the phenomenon of "love at first sight" (something I've long wondered about how it was possible).

    Put in another way, what's the difference between "I am certain that I love you" and "I love you"? Both, to be sure, signify love. But the first is epistemological, meaning it is a question of knowledge; while the other is "metaphysical"--immediate, seen, based on my beloved. Perhaps these two mark also the two kinds of lovers: those who need certainty and those who need immediacy. I wonder who are "better" lovers, or which amounts to "real" love. Or if there is even a difference between the two.

    I like what you said. Yes, maybe the persona wasn't ready. And perhaps she was not ready precisely because she needed certainty--that he does love her, that he was honest, etc. In "real life," these certainties or assurances are indeed asked for, if not necessary requirements.

    (I hesitate to ask: But do ladies need these assurances more than us haphazard guys do? Or maybe this can be said more in our own culture?)

    But again, is certainty truly necessary, meaning does love really need certainty? One can easily argue, at least ideally, that love need not be certain.

    That love is that very plunge, that leap, that reckless abandon, that closure of the eyes--but to be sure, these leaps are not made without some kind of decision, but perhaps such a decision is no longer based on reason but already on a certainty of a higher order.

    *

    I told you. But let's not call morning thoughts "rants." Their just our most fluid, and even most honest thoughts. Perhaps our purest and greatest thoughts are those that are first shot through by morning light. All the rest are deliberated upon, that is, mixed with thought.

    It is sure nice to hear from you. I hope that all is well. Take it easy. I appreciate it when I hear from you. Cheers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey, Trish, sorry this took a while.

    Yeah, my problem is I think most people are shy in admitting their love. They wait for the other to first admit or profess their love, and only then do they say their piece. And I don't understand that, really. Of course, love is still a game of strategy; a dance, chess, a seductive battle. But when it comes to the point when everything is at stake, one must lay it all out, and say it.

    I believe in fighting for love, but only when it's true (whatever that may mean). I believe in saying what your heart feels, but only when it's not to confuse the other. I like saying and saying so that I know I didn't keep anything.

    I agree though with you when you said that confessing ex post facto is a lighthearted act. I say it because it doesn't mean anything anymore; I say it to make him or her think and perhaps blame him or herself. There is some kind of injustice in such an act. Perhaps one should never say it anymore. But I've done this and I know how it feels to be unable to say it. It's like a worm in your heart. Though that need not be a bad thing for someone who failed performing love to begin with.

    Cheers.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Fields of Amorsolo

The first National Artist in Philippine history, referred to warmly as the “Grand Old Man of Philippine Art,” Fernando Amorsolo (1892–1972) still stands today as a looming figure in Philippine art responsible for being one of the artists who helped define what we up to now visually imagine as essentially Filipino. The images of rural life, of golden fields below clear blue, blue skies; the smiles of farmers which diminish their weariness as they plant, harvest, and winnow rice;most especially the iconic figure of the Filipina maiden working in the fields—the beloved dalagang bukid--; these, I believe, even after generations of Filipino painters since Amorsolo, have remained in our hearts and memory. Amorsolo did what great masters do for their country: bestow upon it its own icons, represent its native beauty, that is, to give its people and lands an identity and a face. There are, however, as many intentions for art as there are works of art. And these intentions will always remain in…

[Payapang Daigdig]

Written by Pat Nogoy, S.J.

Payapang Daigdig Felipe de Leon, Sr. 
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik  Pati mga tala      Sa bughaw na langit 

Kay hinhin ng hangin Waring umiibig          Sa kapayapaan          Ng buong daigdig     
Payapang panahon    Ay diwa ng buhay Biyaya ng Diyos       Sa sangkatauhan
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik Pati mga tala Sa bughaw na langit  
Pati mga tala           Sa bughaw na langit


The gift delivers Being/being Jean Luc Marion

There is something about the night.
The blanket of darkness hovering the other half of the day sparks ambivalence. Everything is the same in darkness—fear, joy, pain, triumph, doubt, glory, sorrow. Identities recede unto the vast anonymity. There is a pervading anxiety where existence slips into nothingness. One is never certain what to make out of darkness; maybe that is why the night shakes us because we never know. One cannot avoid imagining a something that is greater, higher, mightier, (even sinister) that lurks (hence the power of ghos…

Without Why (The Rose) II

Lifetime is a child at play; moving pieces in a game.
Kingship belongs to the child.

Heraclitus, Fragment 52


The child at play never asks itself why it plays. The child just plays; and if it could, it will play as long as possible, it will play throughout its life. See its delight and witness its smile.

If it would never go hungry or if the sun would never set it too will never leave its playmates and playthings. Time flies at play because it stops or suspends time. Time -- as we grownups only know too well -- is the culprit for order, schedules and priorities; yet for the child, there is no time, there is only bottomless play. It is we who impose that this or that should be done at this or that time. We stop the absurd and supposedly endless play ("He does nothing but play") because we insist that discipline, order and priorities be instilled in the child at an early age ("He needs to learn other things beside playing"). So that the child will become like us one da…