Thursday, April 9, 2015

Same sex lovers and Meera, Nanak and Kabir :Debate on FB

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..."
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.
Like · Comment · 
  • Jassi Sangha Loved reading it!:) Thanks for sharing sir!
  • Harcharan Bains Jassi Sangha : Thanks, Jassi ji
  • Saba Tariq I was caught in the thought of reciprocal love for years and as happens, the endings led to thoughts of anger and bitterness of what I thought was 'owed' me. Yet something interesting happened over time. The feelings changed over time. The love did not change or go much as I had thought or expected it to but changed my perceptions around it. I realised I still loved the same way but did not care for reciprocity, presence of the person or frankly anything in return. My feelings were quite enough in themself. I do not claim to have the ability to feel the level of love the great names above had or understood but I may at some level understand what they had.
  • Harman Jeet Harcharan Bains 

    ਹਵਾਵਾਂ 'ਚ ਸੁੱਤਾ

    ਤੂੰ ਰੇਸ਼ਮ ਜਗਾਇਆ
    ਉਨੀਂਦੇ ਥਲਾਂ ਨੂੰ
    ਗਲੇ ਲਾ ਸੰਵਾਇਆ
    ਤੂੰ ਪਾਣੀ 'ਚ ਘੁਲ ਕੇ
    ਮੈਦਾਨਾਂ 'ਚ ਆਇਆ
    ਤੂੰ ਹਰਿਆ ਤੂੰ ਫਲਿਆ
    ਤੂੰ ਲਿਖਿਆ ਤੂੰ ਗਾਇਆ
    ਤਾਲਾਬਾਂ ਕਿਨਾਰੇ
    ਬਨਸਪਤ ਖ਼ੁਮਾਰੇ
    ਨਾਨਕ ਜੀ ਤਪ ਕਰੇ ~
  • Sanjeev Ahluwalia Comparisons should be Apples to Apples and not Apples to Oranges...definition of love can change with a change in the point of reference....hence can not be evaluated or equated in two diametrically opposed contexts...!!!
    April 6 at 5:59pm · Edited · Like · 3
  • Winky Kaur Harcharan Bains....sir...when will I ever be able to think so deep and then put the thoughts into words. ...but I love what @ Deepikaa Chaand writes.
    April 6 at 9:08pm · Edited · Like · 2
  • Saroj Sanwali Harcharan BainsSir..I have liked the comment by Deepika..Because of her confidence and clarity what she wants from life..Expressed freely...But,Your Reply in the Sense of ISHQ HAQEEKI te ISHQ MAJAJI..Wonderful..
  • Deepikaa Chaand Hb... Harcharan Bains Love has many facets as you know. You have delved deep into its whirlpool And divine mystical love that of Nanak Kabir Jesus Guru Gobind Singh and so many others has its eternal expansive respectable space. I am a mere inconsequential mortal. I can never dream of ever reaching their lofty cloud touching peaks of divinity. They were the enlightened ones who lived in a cocoon of bliss. 
    You have cut me down to size by your 'lecture on love'. I am not offended because what you speak of is the ultimate truth. But how can you compare divine love with earthly love. 
    Also I must admit grudgingly so that when you spoke about Meera it hit a nerve. I have been a Meera all my life.... worshipping Khrishn in my heart... but I am also a product of these times so I seek palpability. I have seen unspeakable horror in the name of love and thst may have dimmed my flame abd put it on a low burner but that never snuffed it out. I am a Diya eternally burning, the diya of hope. If you have ever read my poems they are all mystical and speak of soulmates nor lovers. Unfortunately I never found him and if I did or thought I did then it never blossomed into fruition. But I am still alive and there is still time to turn Radha from Meera. Is there not ! 
  • Vinod Sujan Women with no or low self esteem do exist and those who are afraid of or despise the imperfect men or unwilling to face reality may want to opt for a hypothetical character like Krishna
  • Deepikaa Chaand When I said Khrishna I meant a real human being in his likeness
  • Harcharan Bains Deepikaa Chaand I am sorry I am seeing it this late.

    Two things,of which the first is extremely important. If I have to cut you to your size, you will still look a much larger person than I am.. You and everybody else here knows how much I adore you 
    for being the honest, brave girl that you are. So I can't even dare to ever try to touch your size,much less "cut" you to it. Your size is something that others will have to be expanded and enlarged to,not cut to. IfI sounded anything like trifling with your truly great stature, I must immediately step back and apologise.

    The second. You are right. You are talking about love between two individuals - something I would rather call a relationship, no matter how attractive. A relationship always has its bounds and those must be and are respected. therwise relationships wither away. That is the nature of relationships. Its good to recognise that.

    Meera is not into a "relationship."And I neer said relationships are not beautiful. They are very very beautiful. But they are still only relationships, and they have their give-and take limitations.

    When Meera talks of Krishna, she is talking not of relationship with one figure callled .Krishan, though to us it would appear like that. She is talking of her love for the whole universe of which Krishan is only a symbol.

    And there is no such thing as divine love. There is just love. Its a feeling that fills all beautiful hearts. Theonly problem is in our keenness to glorify our relationships, we call them love - which is unjust. Relationships are based on demands, desires and mutual expctations. Its almost a market deal.Its two persons telling each other, " I will do this, So You will do this... If you don't do this, then I will also not do this." 

    Anyone can tell you that love is not a market deal.

    That is why its not even possible for common people like you and me to start talking of love. Its enoug if we can talk of clean, beautiful relationship in which we like people and then have desires from them and they from us .. and each tries to fulfil the other's. When that doesn't happen, there is bitterness.

    Therefore, at least in my book, and I am sure in the books of our icons like Meera, Kabir, nanak, Gobind Singh, love is not a relationship but an act of infinite, endless giving...and getting happiness out of giving alone.

    Nothing divine here. Its just a beautiful glorious feeling. You have it or you don't have it. Kabir had it. I may not have it. But that does not give me the right to call my attractions towards a girl the name of love. 

    Thats all. Nothing divine, again.

    And again, I want and request you to know that your size in my books is so high that I often wish I was equal to it and I wish I had your honest courage. You are one of the great reasons for me to be here at all. 

    With all regards and affection
    April 7 at 5:11am · Edited · Like · 4
  • Harcharan Bains Deepikaa Chaand And in this wonderful universe, no one is a "mere inconsequential person, least of all someone like you who glows with the inner light of energy which this universe is formed from. In a way, we are all scattered points of he same glow and that is why faces and things appear beautiful to wheenever we are relaxed.
  • Deepikaa Chaand Now you make me larger than life (smiling as in chiding). One thing is for sure i am brutally honest and in my honesty I do not spare myself even a fraction bit. Some may accuse me of exhibitionism but then arent all poets and artists exactly that.
     suffices to say that I hold you on the highest of esteem both as a scholar of life and literature. I would love to listen to your pearls of wisdom face to face someday. As I said to you once long ago... Thank you for your existance
    April 7 at 5:37am · Edited · Like · 4
  • Harcharan Bains Deepikaa Chaand You are all that you think you are and much more. And you are THE poetess here. And even someone of my modesty has the courage to declare that I absolutely adore you. 

    Sanjeev Ahluwalia: Apples and Oranges...exactly. 

    Apples =love
    Oranges= relationships.

    And my attempt was to emphasize that the two are not the same thing. The mistake we make is that in our zeal to glorify relationships, we start calling them love. Relationships are wonderful.And so beautiful and so sweet. And they are about giving too, but in the end, they are about give and take. In the end, they are only relationships. 

    Love - and there is nothing divine about it;its just a wonderful human feeling - is all abut giving.That is why I always say that relationships are beggars - the seek, they demand, and if you refuse, they get hurt and turn away from us.

    Love is soverign, love is monarch. it is not dependent on the courtesy and magnanimity of whom you love.. In love , you leave nothing in the hands of someone you love - you just keep loving. And its so easy. Because you are not expecting anything in return. 

    And now you will say this is unrealistic. The problem is that it isn't. Th problem is that Budhha, Kabir and Nanak and Meera were not unreal. And worse, they were not even stupid.

    But wethink we are wiser, because we can measure give and take. Love is like Guru Nanak's idea of trade - tera.. tera.. tera.. But of course you will laugh at me if i tell you that this is not only not unreal but something that is so common and so beautiful. 

    Haan, you and I are not like that. And we think we have a right to patronisingly smile even at Nanak's impractical, unrealistic ways. Secretly, very few of us beleive that its possible to be Nanak. In other words, we seriously do not believe that Nanak and Meera can exist,or that if they exist, its anything sensible to be.

    A person full of love, refusing to distinguish between friend and foe, is beyond our understanding, but not beyond existence. Such people are known to exist. If we can't be them, that doesn't make them unreal, or even unrealistic. Theya re just different.
    April 7 at 5:54am · Edited · Like · 4
  • Deepikaa Chaand Harcharan Bains Hb... I would take a cross breed between apples and oranges any day... since I have not had a bite from either too well and if I did I seem to have forgotten it as it gave me food poisoning each time. 
    Thank you for your adoration. I fe
    el cared for despite rhis plastic virtual realm as a medium of communication. The existentialists and the Quantum Physicists were so right... Thoughts and words are such powerful energy sources, capable of breaking and making a person.
    April 7 at 6:10am · Edited · Like · 3
  • Harish K Monga Enjoyed the world of words.

No comments: