SAME SEX LOVERS VERSUS MEERA, JULIET AND HEER
OUTBURST FOR OUTBURST
( A DISCUSSION WITH DEEPIKA CHAND )
DEEPIKA CHAND WROTE:
I'm on a roll today but reading about 'love seeking nothing in return liberates us' and 'love seeking love is good old plain desire leading to pain and enlavement' gets my goat big time.
I would hate to be Meera. I cannot understand being lost in divine cosmic dances or singing songs blindly for the object of my love and desire when he is some distant airy fairy concept instead of a flesh and blood man. Now if that translates the fact that I will never rise to the stature of a Sufi saint then so be it.
Yes Oh I would absolutely refuse to be Meera and be Radha instead. The woman who Khrishna may not have married but who he immensely obsessively loved ( that confusing infamous emotion again ) and whose name would be cojoined with his for posterity and is... ~ Dee..."
HB WROTE :
dEEPIKAJI: :if it seems to refer to the discussion we were having elsewhere, then I have to humbly say this:
First, you are right in cutting Meera down to the size of Heer, Sohni, and Juliet - in fact, even worse, because while each of these girls at least chose a man in flesh and blood to chase, Meera merely chased a phantom.Idiot.
Second, No girl should be stupid enough to follow Meera because that romantic idiot is not into chasing "the object of her love and desire" She is not wise enough to realise that love must have an object of flesh and blood pursue, preferably with a decent income,livable house, reasonable car, designer suits etc.
And to dispel another mystical nonsense, a girl's love must be generally for a member of the other sex, and it must have a "relationship" as its defining feature - unlike many saints who kept loving the same Krishan like modern day moonies dreaming of life under moonshine in the arms of a same-sex partner . (Here, Meera just stopped short of being you know what !!).
Further, that stupid lady is merely confusing her love for the universe through a symbol which she believes represents her ideas of eternal truth and beauty with what a woman really needs.:a man who can be exclusively,jealously, passionately hers, and one whom she must marry and have children with or at the very least have him put his arm around her waist and tell the world ," I love her, and we are man and woman,if not man and wife, and we have no use for airy fairy pursuits of the higher truths of life in the garb of romantic spiritualism . .
Meanwhile, its too late for Meera now to realise that she is merely loving a "male" who doesn't exist, is merely a mirage, can never marry her, much less take her to bed, while she must be secretly desperate to find a man she can love and own and order about - and go and shop with and take to her relatives and friends to be proudly introduced as "the man who will die for me while I live for him",. But she has under some psychotic turbulence, transferred all her suppressed sexual fires and sensual passions to a mere image created by her own psychopathic mind.
There is nothing to Meera's love more than idiocy and no sane girl would or should do anything at her age which does not terminate in her finding a boy of decent marriageable age, who can project his desire for a woman and her desire for a man as " supreme love."
There were some other manics also, in the class of Meera, like . Kabir, Nanak. Bhagat Pooran Singh, Nam Dev, Guru Gobind Singh,
In fact, Meera did better than these male luna-ticks. She at least chose a romantic figure from the other sex while these poet-warrior lovers plumbed for an all male romance with the likes of Rama, Krishna or simply Akal Purakh .
Ab kya keeje.!!! ..In modern times, we would at least have called these folks by their true descriptions, knowing how men with male icons and women with female icons are addressed in Indian society.
And you are so right Deepika ji. One must not talk of love except in terms of equitable deals with material and tangible objects of love. Who were this Jesus and Gobind Singh and Krishan and Kabir talking about love in terms which sound so crazy in the context of absence of marital targets...Look, what does this really mean ," Dhai akshar prem ke pade sopandit hoye" ..I mean wafter all, what did Kabir know about love, having never had a romantic liason with any gorgeous sumptuos stunner. What did Nanak know of love - having stayed away from the only woman in his life all his life......and he talks of "love as the language which God speaks" How can a non-physical God even have the right to talk of 'love' which is an exclusively male-female phenomenon!
And why did Guru Gobind Singh talk of "Jin Prem kyo tin hi prabh payo"....while he and his followers were destined to the life of bitter wars, bloody battles, swords manship, horsemanship and so on......Surely, these non-romantic people were not telling their followers to follow the example of Indian cricketers.
You have delivered a timely road block to this crazy talk of Meera's idotic,unrealsitic,in fact utterly dreamy-breamy nonsense called love.
