(About a 4 minute read)
It is incredible to me that the Arab and Persian Court Poets lumped possessiveness in with love to arrive at the concept of “romantic love”. But they did. The gods themselves were so disbelieving when they witnessed it that they forgot to wank for six days and six nights, and stars began to fall from the sky. The universe began to end! Nevertheless, it was true. The poets really, honestly did lump possessiveness in with love!
The consequences have been devastating. In effect, the poets created a schizophrenic concept of love.
Love is never naturally possessive. How could it be? Possessiveness seeks to cage, shackle, enslave its object, the beloved. Is that not obvious, O Muses? How can it NOT be obvious? Since when is the desire to possess, to own, to subjugate, to enslave — since when is that desire anything except the desire to possess, to own, to subjugate, to enslave? And is it not just as obvious that the desire to possess CANNOT be love? How can “I love you” be the equivalent of saying “I want to shackle, chain, and enslave you”? How can you say you love a person when what you want to do is unnecessarily restrict or even destroy that person’s freedom to be the very person you claim to love?
Moreover, how can love need to possess anything to be love? Would that not mean love was incomplete without something else? Something more than itself? How can love NEED to possess anything?
SHEESH! Do you know why romantic love cannot sustain passion forever? Do you know why? Because the thing, the physiological reality that inspired the concept, the idea, of romantic love was lumped together by the court poets with the physiological reality of possessiveness. That was like lumping pigs and snakes together. Goodbye noble snakes! It was like lumping water and fire together. Goodbye noble fire! It was like lumping Badran and manliness together. Goodbye noble manliness!
Consider that to be passionate about the person you love (or about life itself), there must be an element of risk, of uncertainty, of danger in loving her or him. That is why Kenko said, “Uncertainty is the most precious thing in life.” Our passion for living depends on it! And our passion for our beloved depends on our beloved being free. Wild and free. “Uncertain”, you might say. But what does possessiveness seek to do? What is the very heart and soul, the essence, of possessiveness? Yes, you are right. It is to confine, to control, to constrict, to cage. It is to suffocate, to strangle its object.
In the end, it is all too obvious, all too simple: Possessiveness destroys passion by destroying the risk of loving someone — or something.
MORAL: Poets! Artists! Cartographers! Muses! Be careful you do not commit mistakes that last a thousand years long! Be careful your poems, your art, your maps do not mislead people for a thousand years!
The above post is an except from a daily email I send out to a small group of people who I call, “The Muses”. Currently, there are two vacancies in the group. If you are interested in joining, please email me.