A man falls in love with a woman or a woman falls in love with a man, but it is nothing special to man, it is not part of the dignity of man. It is a fall and it will bring misery to you. And remember, it will be possessive. Also, if you carefully watch, you will see it will not only be possessive; deep down there will be a desire to be possessed too. You are already possessed by nature, now it will have other implications. The man will be possessed by the woman; the woman will be possessed by the man…and the whole conflict of the so-called love….
Whenever you are possessed by somebody there is a dichotomy in you: you want to be possessed and yet you want to be free. There is a conflict within you: you want to be possessed because that makes you feel valuable, possessable. Somebody is paying respect to you, somebody is thinking of you as a treasure, so you feel good that you are possessed. But on the other hand, simultaneously you feel that you are being reduced into a commodity. It may be a treasure, but a treasure has no consciousness. You are becoming a thing, you are being reduced into the world of objects, you are becoming an object of possession. You are losing your subjectivity and the freedom of your subjectivity, hence the conflict.
And you will be in misery because whatsoever you do will only fulfill half the desire and the other half will remain frustrated. If you allow yourself to be possessed, your desire to be free remains unfulfilled, it fights. If you don’t allow yourself to be possessed you are free, but something in you goes on insisting that nobody possesses you. Does it mean nobody values you? Does it mean nobody is bothered by you; nobody takes any note, that you are worthless?
At this level of love, misery is a natural consequence. Watch it, because through watchfulness you can rise above it. You can start rising in love rather than falling in love. Watchfulness becomes like a ladder from the lowest to the highest.
The second dimension is closer to what Kahlil Gibran says in his second statement: “Love possesses not nor would it be possessed, for love is sufficient unto love.”
But again he gives a wrong reasoning why love is not going to possess and is not going to be possessed. He says: because love is sufficient unto itself – that’s not so. Love is not sufficient unto itself, love needs to be shared. There is an immense, overflowing energy which needs to be shared. The flower is not sufficient unto itself; it needs the winds and the sun so that it can release its hidden splendor, its fragrance, its perfume. If it is not allowed to release its perfume it will be in deep suffering.
Love suffers most when there is nobody to share it. The greatest suffering comes when you have to give and there is nobody to receive it. “Love possesses not” – that is true – “nor would it be possessed” – that is true. But the reason given for it by Kahlil Gibran is not right. It is poetic, but it has no insight into the reality of love.