Is it wrong to move on?

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

Talcum

@Talcum

Dazzler

Posted: 6 years ago

#11

Originally posted by: naaznin
Actually in normal circumstances if a gf bf is there n bf or gf is dead than ppl don't move on so early ..because u r not close to someone..so living alone takes time for wounds to get healed..
V purposely don't allow anyone to come close to us..so their is still cribbing over old love..
but if gf/bf is dead n their partners get married to someone else than moving on is a quick process because of the closeness with their spouse ..

so if any girl would be at bela's place same would have happen and even if maahir is dead n bela's move on from him to I would say still nothing wrong in that too..why should we be sadistic that v want a person to keep crying for old love they lost when they can be happy with someone else ... doesn't divorcee n widows remarriage permitted in law n society than why obsession over 100yrs of platonic love

Yeah...Bela felt that Mahir's love for her was deeper than Vikrant's love. She tried to resist a lot but finally gave in to her feelings. Vikrant nahi tha toh kyu move on nahi kare wo? She did nothing wrong.

Quote

Anju.

@ALUJNA21

Trailblazer

+ 10

Posted: 6 years ago

#12

Not at all this is a fiction leave it aside...

If one has no possibility to marry the person for whatever reason better to move on in life...What's wrong with it.

Married person also whose marriage has not been a success or a widow for some reason can move on in life...

One must be happy to lead a happy life as the death slowly approaches everyone after each second...We see lots of changes in the body with age why not in life a person must lead a happy life and die with no regret well I'm entitled to my pov.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

squirrel

@urmita

Inactive

+ 2

Posted: 6 years ago

#13

This is what I think...true love happens only once...And it's not like there is a book of rules about it somewhere...So yeah Bela loved Vikrant and if nothing had happened she wud hv kept on loving him...But things happened and then she met Mahir and realized she is capable of loving someone even more than she loved vik...but that doesn't mean she was not true to vik while she was with him...And if someday she realizes she loves someone more than mahir that's ok too...Coz no matter how many people she comes to love there will always be a single person she loves most and can't really move on completely from...That is the person she will end up with...

Here that guy is Mahir...So no Bela is not wrong...She loved vik...But she loved mahir more so moved on...if vik was her the one she couldn't hv moved on really...And she wud hv been wrong and cheating if she had tried to go back to vik even out of guilt...But she didn't...She moved on with Mahir and stayed true to that feeling...I m proud of her...

Quote

komlika

@komlika

Inactive

+ 2

Posted: 6 years ago

#14

Nothing wrong in moving on

It has to be individual decision and in this case bela has to decide what she wants and she wants Mahir

Quote

VARUNI2014

@VARUNI2014

Rocker

Posted: 6 years ago

#15

Originally posted by: MallikaDua

Nope ...because you think that Bela doesn't know that Vikrant is negative so she us wrong in moving on...but I don't think so.

No I don't think like that .I always respect individual choices and feel it's their choice to move on from vikrant she can move on and from Mahir also she can move on .that's my view .

I was just saying vikrant not shown negative is giving bashers a chance to bash bela .but I won't support bashing bela .

Quote

DevilHere

@DevilHere

Dazzler

+ 11

Posted: 6 years ago

#16

Originally posted by: VARUNI2014
believe me varuni it has nothing to do with vikVikr being negative it is love for a actor nd thus his character even if they show Vikrant outright negative they are gonna go to any length to prove Vikrant is right nd is a victim it happened in s1 he was a nevla nd was shown as a proper negative character but the fans defended it

Quote

Khalessi

@Khalessi

Beginner

Posted: 6 years ago

#17

My two cents; a good relationship (and by good I mean it has the factors of understanding, loyalty etc) between a husband and wife would always trump a relationship between lovers no matter how many years passed.

Vikrant's type of love is manipulative. Always an agenda somewhere whereas Mahir's type of love allows a person to breathe. Please note I said type of love and not the characters. Having said that, guess who I was choosing😉

Quote

sonie singh shrivastava

@sonie32

Sparkler

Posted: 6 years ago

#18

noo..i dont think that moving on is wrong at all...even after failed marriages people moved on😊

Quote

Bhaskar

@maharathikarna

Voyager

Posted: 6 years ago

#19

Let us imagine that i am in love for 100 years. Then my partner is killed. I believe that Y have killed my partner. I come to take revenge and i fall in love with Y within 100 days even without knowing my understanding is wrong and Y is innocent. Does this stand the test of basic logic. So much for true love never dies.

Instead if sufficient time has elapsed and I get to know that Y is innocent and then I fall in love, will it make more sense.

It is a different matter that I want bela and mahir to live happily every after

Edited by maharathikarna - 6 years ago

Quote

tootyfrooty-

@tootyfrooty-

Voyager

Posted: 6 years ago

#20

Originally posted by: MallikaDua
Tell me guys...what's wrong in moving on? If a person's love is no more, then what's wrong in loving someone else?
People are saying why did Bela choose Mahir over 100 years love. I am asking why can't she?
Bela didn't know that Vikrant was alive. She found someone who loves her so deeply that she moved on from her old love. I don't see anything wrong in this.
Some people are even saying that Bela doesn't know that Vikrant is negative so she should choose him. Why so? Is it necessary that a person should move on only if the old partner was evil ? Even if Vikrant was shown positive, Bela would have been completely right in still choosing Mahir because she started loving him when she was under the impression that Vikrant was no more. So how is she morally wrong?
Love is not a joke that purana pyar wapas aa gaya toh uske pas chale jaao. Now Bela loves Mahir...even if Vikrant is not evil, Bela is doing nothing wrong in choosing Mahir. She didn't love Mahir when she was with Vikrant. So how is she wrong?

posting same comment from another post which i posted

i still feel she was not in love with vikrant he may be wooed her n she went with flow...otherwise its almost impossible to forget first love, ...makers have shown bela a person with stronger gut feeling , she had strong gut feeling anu n mahir r innocent so she was always hesitated to kill them , her heart not let her kill any innocent...same gut feeling stopping her to go to vikrant , i m dead sure he does some jhol in "surviving from bela's poison" he is a fraud he must have lied in that too.

may be thay,s why she is naag rani ,she is different from other naag naagin,as vish dont think before killing someone her heart dont stop her or she dont show any gut feeling only bela show this.

but i think in this case she can forget her first love bcs that person was dead in she started loving more deeply another ,that wound got heel , those ppl whose wound dont get heel they cant make them self love any other but in bela case her heart let her love that means her wound heeled by mahir's care n love.

Edited by tootyfrooty- - 6 years ago

Quote

1 2 3

Wrong

Is it wrong to move on? - Page 2

Related Topics

Explore Topics