On Marriage
Khalil Gibran
Then Almitra spoke again and said, "And what of Marriage, Master?"
And he answered saying:
You were born together, and together you shall be for evermore.
You shall be together when the white wings of death scatter your days.
Ay, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God.
But let there be spaces in your togetherness.
And let the winds of the heavens dance between you.
Love one another, but make not a bond of love:
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.
Fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup.
Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf.
Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,
Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.
Give your hearts, but not into each other's keeping.
For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts.
And stand together yet not too near together:
For the pillars of the temple stand apart,
And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other's shadow.
It's beautiful.
Does he mean that love, but not towards your own self-destruction?
Or love, but not so much that you lose who you are? Your spouse is, after all, a human being. Only Life or God deserves such passion and unthwarted attachment. (Does that phrase even make sense?).
I mean, Laila and Majnu. She kills herself. Romeo and Juliet, they both kill themselves (were they historical figures?). The Little Mermaid goes through hell for her prince. End product for most of them: death. When they had a better purpose in life than to serve as fairy tales and entertaining films and books and poetry.
I don't know: I love the idea of a moving sea between the shores of your souls. It gives me an image of the fact that we can be together in that ocean and maintain our Oneness at the same time.
Giving into the ego of another person must have dire consequences. It can not be trusted, even though you might trust the person in entirety; it's the person's Soul, Ame and the Ruh, because it reflects what's in your own Ruh; they are, after all, made of the same Godly material.
And my reasoning is that you haven't known this person for the first 25 years of your life, which were the most formative, so there will always be surprises and deceptions and disappointments and to give another such power over you is defeating the purpose of this love and this marital bond. It is not to stagnate, it is not to say: I have given myself entirely unto you.
Why should one give up her entirety to him? Has he asked for it? Does he deserve it? And what purpose does it serve?
Okay, I have lost the train of thought and shall revise/delete appropriately :)
Khalil Gibran
Then Almitra spoke again and said, "And what of Marriage, Master?"
And he answered saying:
You were born together, and together you shall be for evermore.
You shall be together when the white wings of death scatter your days.
Ay, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God.
But let there be spaces in your togetherness.
And let the winds of the heavens dance between you.
Love one another, but make not a bond of love:
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.
Fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup.
Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf.
Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,
Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.
Give your hearts, but not into each other's keeping.
For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts.
And stand together yet not too near together:
For the pillars of the temple stand apart,
And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other's shadow.
It's beautiful.
Does he mean that love, but not towards your own self-destruction?
Or love, but not so much that you lose who you are? Your spouse is, after all, a human being. Only Life or God deserves such passion and unthwarted attachment. (Does that phrase even make sense?).
I mean, Laila and Majnu. She kills herself. Romeo and Juliet, they both kill themselves (were they historical figures?). The Little Mermaid goes through hell for her prince. End product for most of them: death. When they had a better purpose in life than to serve as fairy tales and entertaining films and books and poetry.
I don't know: I love the idea of a moving sea between the shores of your souls. It gives me an image of the fact that we can be together in that ocean and maintain our Oneness at the same time.
Giving into the ego of another person must have dire consequences. It can not be trusted, even though you might trust the person in entirety; it's the person's Soul, Ame and the Ruh, because it reflects what's in your own Ruh; they are, after all, made of the same Godly material.
And my reasoning is that you haven't known this person for the first 25 years of your life, which were the most formative, so there will always be surprises and deceptions and disappointments and to give another such power over you is defeating the purpose of this love and this marital bond. It is not to stagnate, it is not to say: I have given myself entirely unto you.
Why should one give up her entirety to him? Has he asked for it? Does he deserve it? And what purpose does it serve?
Okay, I have lost the train of thought and shall revise/delete appropriately :)
Comments