Love, we can’t talk about because it is what is. It isn’t an objective experience, it’s what is here at every moment, except when I pretend to love or when I want to be loved. When I want to be loved, I want something. When I want something, I don’t love. When I no longer want to love or to be loved, when I set myself free from this desire of owning or feeling something, what is left is love. If there is loyalty to this love, it is true loyalty. But every time I love someone, every time I want to be loved, I betray my autonomy and this betrayal carries a high cost: I cut myself off from my resonance, from true love.
Faithfulness to love isn’t something to do; it is what is constantly revealed, except when I want to love or to be loved; then there is betrayal, deception, the ego trying to catch something.
Loving someone is a projection, a fantasy, as is not loving someone. Saying that I don’t love such or such person is a fantasy. It’s cutting myself off from my own resonance. When I say someone isn’t nice, isn’t friendly, I live in my fantasy, in my arrogance, I am cut off from reality. If I am present, there is nothing that isn’t friendly, but if I live in my fantasy, everything that doesn’t fit my expectation is unfriendly.
So loving or hating belong to the same fantasy world and have nothing to do with reality. The nature of things is love. Therefore I can’t say that I love anything. Loving someone would mean loving others less. That is not love, that is a lack of love. Love isn’t exclusive, it’s inclusive. Some people love their children more than other children. It’s pathological. The child that is in front of me is my child. This faithfulness to love is a form of clarity.
Needing love, needing to be loved. We need to set ourselves free from this fantasy from women’s magazines!
No one ever loved us, no one will ever love us and that is ok! No one can love. The ego can’t love. Someone doesn’t love you; rather, they project onto you the answer to an expectation. When you match this expectation, they love you. When you no longer do, they throw you away and take someone else to love in their own way. We don’t need this kind of love.
Needing to be loved is a disease; so is needing to love. The disease resolves itself in the awakening of somatic sensitivity. When it awakens, we become free of imaginary needs. Need is future. In sensitivity, in the moment, what could I need? The question doesn’t mean anything.
To be in love is pathological. Like any emotion, it has moments of total beauty. When you are dead drunk or high as a kite, when you overate or overexerted yourself, you can experience moments of sensory madness, which are moments of meditation as well. Being is love also includes these moments, which go beyond our usual functioning.
Being in love is the expression of a lack of love; it means that everything I am not in love with becomes second priority. I am in love and if someone needs me, I don’t have time for them because I am in love! That is not right. We are in love with what is here now, not with someone we need to go visit, while neglecting all the suffering of our immediate environment.
The only true faithfulness is to this obvious fact.
Unconditional love for someone is a teenage girl fantasy. It’s unconditional… until it’s conditional.
Most human beings need to be in a couple to live in a certain harmony. Many people like to talk and they need someone to listen. Of course they could talk to the wall, but most people have too many concepts to appreciate the depth of the wall. That is why they get married, but it’s only a question of time before they talk to the wall.
For most, marriage is a good deal. It’s pure animal behavior. “If you give me this, I’ll give you that. If you love me, I’ll love you.” That’s what most people call love. It’s surprisingly unpractical but it’s appropriate for many.
Most people need an image of security. They need to know, twenty years in advance, whether or not someone will call them “my love.”
Physical attraction is rarely also intellectual or emotional. In our artificial and rigid societies, we’ve wanted to create structures where you have to find it all in the same person.
In every being you meet there is depth. But ego, personality want security. Therefore, we’ve created institutions which sanctify ego’s fear. The ego is so scared that it started owning these sacraments religiously, and because of that people respect others’ “wife” or “husband.” Perversity pervaded our psyche to such an extent that we respect what doesn’t exist: fear, property.
Human beings aren’t anyone’s property. But the ego needs to pretend and for that, we create chains that people wear on their ring finger. They are proud to be chained, they love one person more than another.
That invention is respected by society. These sacraments are bestowed by beings dressed up as dark ghosts who often hide their repressed urges under a religiosity erected as morality…
At one point you no longer relate to these pathological caricatures. It is normal for some people to be delighted when the football team with the same accent as theirs scores a goal, but one day comes when you no longer feel aligned with this type of behavior. You realize how unhappy someone must be to feel complete when a piece of leather moves past a line, to imagine that they own a man or a woman and to believe in another bond than love.
This doesn’t prevent us, for functional or economic reasons, from taking part in these strange rites – which by the way aren’t rites but anti-rites – of our societies. Simply, at one point, it becomes impossible to find any emotion in them.
Eric’s website is http://www.bhairava.ws/