Yoga and Sex vs Celibacy


#101

[QUOTE=The Scales;62864]How did it start?
hmmm. well. impulse propelled me to study and practice the yogas on my own. Once I was mature enough he just made his presence known. [/QUOTE]

Forgive me if I make too many questions…

For how long did you engage your sadhanas before he manifested?
How old are you?


#102

[QUOTE=yogi rigo;62897]Celibacy ??? I don’t think so, besides there is a whole sect (if you may) that romances the kundalini through sexual practice. Please refer to the Vaigyan Bhagav Tantra. Namaste.[/QUOTE]

In a yogic context celibacy is rather a psychological issue than a physical one.

For example: someone being raped is not practicing sex, although the act consists in introducing a penis in a vagina or an anus.


#103

Amir:

Are you enlightened?


#104

[QUOTE=panoramix;62900]Forgive me if I make too many questions…

For how long did you engage your sadhanas before he manifested?
How old are you?[/QUOTE]

I’m an old hand at this yoga stuff. I can’t remember all the why fors and how to’s of this yoga stuff because the memories have causalized - and at present I don’t know how to access them - nor have I given the task of accessing them any effort.

Looking back the sadhana I engaged in was to provide me with a knowledge base of technique and understanding - jnana - a categorical framework.

The assistance is really tied to my incarnating karma. Once the knowledge base was established and I was mature enough he began to make his presence known to help me do what I’m here to do.

Basically.


#105

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62878]“Patanjali’s yoga sutra no.7 says that direct perception, inference and competent evidence can be considered as proofs. The knowledge “borrowed” from classical Yoga texts is considered as “aptavakya” i.e. direct evidence of the yogis.”

Anand,

Again, you are quoting Patanjali and other sources. I was not commenting about the content of your message, in fact I agree with much of what Patanjali and others have said in other scriptures. But we are not discussing whether what they have said or not said is true or false. We are discussing whether one is speaking out of ones own direct experience, or whether one is just repeating whatever knowledge has entered into ones mind - whether one has just information, or whether one has come to a transformation. Fundamentally - it comes down to your state of being.

“Logical proof of existence of atman is available from the proper understanding of the Doctrine of Karma.”

If your true nature is beyond logic, then how can you supply logical proof for it ? If Truth could be proved, then you can write a thesis about it or conduct an experiment in a laboratory for it. But it does not work like that.

Yes, there are some people who have claimed to have found logical proof which is irrefutable for Atman. There are people who also claim to have found irrefutable logical proof for God, as well as people who claim irrefutable proof for the existence of no-God. And there are Buddhists, who like those dogmatic Hindus, have stated that they have irrefutable evidence for Anatman (no-self), and the only way to come to this is through study of the Buddhist dharma.

Of course, any tradition will claim that their philosophy is right - because otherwise their very existence comes under threat. Traditions need followers, otherwise they will simply disappear. The same has happened with all of the world religions.[/QUOTE]

Dear Friend:

Even great masters quote their masters and the scriptures. I am just a small person.

regards, anand


#106

[QUOTE=yogi rigo;62897]Celibacy ??? I don’t think so, besides there is a whole sect (if you may) that romances the kundalini through sexual practice. Please refer to the Vaigyan Bhagav Tantra. Namaste.[/QUOTE]

You are conflating 2 entirely different paths and practices.


#107

Anand,

“Even great masters quote their masters and the scriptures.”

If such things have been done, it is simply to give their own statements credibility, it is just a method to put some bait so that you may get caught in it’s hook. Because others are identified with a certain tradition - you will have to speak in the same language and terminology of that tradition if you are going to transmit a message. Even Gautama Buddha - when he was speaking to Hindus, used to use the word “Atman” (the self), even though a central part of his whole teaching was Anatman (no-self). And like this - it has happened that many masters would quote others, simply to give their own message a certain seal of authority. That is in fact the reason why so many scriptures have declared themselves as revelations from God - Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism alike. The Bible has declared itself the Word of God, Islam has declared itself the final word of God, and in Hinduism - you can find countless dfferent belief systems, all declaring that their scriptures are from God. The Sikhs have done the same, they have declared their scriptures to be revelations from a Supreme Being. They are all doing the same thing - they are trying to give their teachings a certain seal of authority, and there can be no greater seal of authority than a cosmic seal of authority by God himself. Other times, certain scriptures were written by an anonymous author but under the name of a well known master. In the Nath tradition, there are many scriptures which are said to have been written by Gorakshanath himself. In the Western esoteric traditions, there is a whole category of scriptures - the Hermetic scriptures, which are said to have been written by Hermes Trismegistus himself, though it has been proved that such a character was just an invention - it is a combination of the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian God of Wisdom, Thoth, though some have believed that Hermes Trismegistus was a historical person.

Yes, masters may quote other masters, real or dead, fictitious or real, but it is just for the sake of emphasizing their own message. Otherwise, a master speaks out of his own direct experience, no borrowed knowledge is needed as a substitute.


#108

Gori,

“conflating 2 entirely different paths and practices.”

I cannot agree. You are still thinking of “yoga” as a fixed, static thing. Yoga, as a method, does not mean being celibate, or standing on your head. It simply refers to any method for awakening to one’s own true nature. You can use meditation (Raja Yoga) as a means, you can use emotion (Bhakti yoga) as the means, you can use action (Karma yoga) as the means, you can use transformation of the subtle energies of the body (Kriya Yoga) as the means, you can use awakening of the Kundalini energy at the base of the spine (Kundalini Yoga) as the means, you can use concentration upon sound as the means (Mantra Yoga), you can even use hate as a means (dvesha yoga) - just about any method for awakening to one’s true nature can be called a method towards yoga. There is one sect of Shiva worshippers, the Aghora sect, which use methods which are otherwise absolutely forbidden, and those methods work just as well as any other. Rather than repressing the senses in order to move beyond, you can also indulge the senses as a means to move beyond - it all comes down to one essential thing : awareness. If, for example, you have a fear of death - rather than trying to escape from it, you can go live in a graveyard, surround yourself with as many scenes of death as possible. One very well known sadhana, sava sadhana, involves just sitting on a corpse for meditation. That is a much more direct method - other yogis will simply, to transcend the fear of death, imagine a corpse rotting. Aghora yogis will have sex, not for the sake of pleasure, but simply for moving beyond sex. Because the more you repress anything in the mind, is the more importance you give to it. And it does not just disappear, it shifts down into the unconscious and gathers force there. So the Aghora Yogis have a far more direct approach - rather than repressing sex, you can indulge into sex, enjoy it, but all the while remaining absolutely mindful and alert. That is a very different approach than other yogis - who insist that you must remain celibate.

When we are speaking of “yoga” - we are not speaking of any absolute method. There are as many different methods and strategies towards liberation as you can imagine. Using sexual intercourse is not a different path from “yoga” - there is no path which is not towards yoga. That approach which uses sex as a means to awaken Kundalini is part of Tantra Yoga.


#109

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62924]Anand,

“Even great masters quote their masters and the scriptures.”

If such things have been done, it is simply to give their own statements credibility, it is just a method to put some bait so that you may get caught in it’s hook. Because others are identified with a certain tradition - you will have to speak in the same language and terminology of that tradition if you are going to transmit a message. Even Gautama Buddha - when he was speaking to Hindus, used to use the word “Atman” (the self), even though a central part of his whole teaching was Anatman (no-self). And like this - it has happened that many masters would quote others, simply to give their own message a certain seal of authority. That is in fact the reason why so many scriptures have declared themselves as revelations from God - Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism alike. The Bible has declared itself the Word of God, Islam has declared itself the final word of God, and in Hinduism - you can find countless dfferent belief systems, all declaring that their scriptures are from God. The Sikhs have done the same, they have declared their scriptures to be revelations from a Supreme Being. They are all doing the same thing - they are trying to give their teachings a certain seal of authority, and there can be no greater seal of authority than a cosmic seal of authority by God himself. Other times, certain scriptures were written by an anonymous author but under the name of a well known master. In the Nath tradition, there are many scriptures which are said to have been written by Gorakshanath himself. In the Western esoteric traditions, there is a whole category of scriptures - the Hermetic scriptures, which are said to have been written by Hermes Trismegistus himself, though it has been proved that such a character was just an invention - it is a combination of the Greek god Hermes and the Egyptian God of Wisdom, Thoth, though some have believed that Hermes Trismegistus was a historical person.

Yes, masters may quote other masters, real or dead, fictitious or real, but it is just for the sake of emphasizing their own message. Otherwise, a master speaks out of his own direct experience, no borrowed knowledge is needed as a substitute.[/QUOTE]

Dear Friend:

I am not claiming to be a master. Again I say, I am just a small person. I still need a lot of “borrowed knowledge”.

regards, anand


#110

[QUOTE=The Scales;62912]The assistance is really tied to my incarnating karma. Once the knowledge base was established and I was mature enough he began to make his presence known to help me do what I’m here to do. [/QUOTE]

Your story is encouraging! :smiley:

What Yogas have you practiced?


#111

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62924]Yes, masters may quote other masters, real or dead, fictitious or real, but it is just for the sake of emphasizing their own message. Otherwise, a master speaks out of his own direct experience, no borrowed knowledge is needed as a substitute.[/QUOTE]

[B]Amir:[/B]

Are you enlightened?


#112

Anand,

“Again I say, I am just a small person”

Drop this attachment to being a personality, whether small or otherwise. To think of yourself as a “small” person is just as egoistic as it’s opposite - in both cases one has remained clinging to a self-image.

"I still need a lot of “borrowed knowledge”.

To use such borrowed knowledge as an instrument is one thing, but the moment you become entangled in it - it becomes something dogmatic, you cannot see anything beyond it. And there may be many things in your borrowed knowledge which have no roots in reality, but you have already accepted them without question. Something like an Atman (self) - how do you know that there is such a thing to be found anywhere in your being ? You have accepted it simply because you have heard others talking about it, and it gives you comfort and security to believe that there is such an Atman in your being. Like this - one has accepted far too many things blindly. When this is done, we usually call that person a believer. Or - if you happen to think of something intensely and jump to conclusions - then we call this person a thinker. But neither thinking or believing is an attitude of one who is sincerely interested in the search for Truth. Because to be a seeker means just that - that you have come to recognize your ignorance and you are inquiring into things as an empty slate, trying to see things as they are out of your own intelligence.


#113

panoramix, : )

Enlightenment and non-enlightenment,
This shore and the other shore,
All shattered to dust,
Deluded are the fragmentations are the intellect,
The more one entertains oneself with them, the farther astray from the Way,
Seeing, the eyes see,
Hearing, the ears hear -
This is a teaching beyond all teachings.


#114

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62951]panoramix, : )

Enlightenment and non-enlightenment,
This shore and the other shore,
All shattered to dust,
Deluded are the fragmentations are the intellect,
The more one entertains oneself with them, the farther astray from the Way,
Seeing, the eyes see,
Hearing, the ears hear -
This is a teaching beyond all teachings.[/QUOTE]

You speak as if you were enlightened, and you aren’t (are you?).
So you partially resort to borrowed knowledge too (don’t you?).

Silence…
cicada’s sound,
penetrates the rock.

:cool:


#115

parnoramix,

Everything I have been saying arises out of my own direct experience. If I happen to use other knowledge in conversation, then it is just as a means to point towards something else entirely. Even while writing this message - I have to use the knowledge of the English language in order to communicate.

If you mean by enlightenment the transformation that arises out of a direct perception into your own true nature, then it had taken me six years of tremendous effort and discipline in the yogic sciences to come to my awakening. Since then I have remained in a state of bliss for almost twenty four hours. But I do not see how any of this is relevant, as far as your own being is concerned, whether another is awake or not, does not bring you even an inch closer to Truth. I could simply be inventing all of this, hoping that you are gullible. You do not know. Or, I could simply be delusional. So the matter of my own awakening is more or less meaningless.


#116

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62953]
If you mean by enlightenment the transformation that arises out of a direct perception into your own true nature, then it had taken me six years of tremendous effort and discipline in the yogic sciences to come to my awakening. Since then I have remained in a state of bliss for almost twenty four hours. [/QUOTE]

Amir,

Do no “fall asleep” in your bliss.
Practice another six years more.

I intuit you still got path to follow on.


#117

[QUOTE=panoramix;62944]Your story is encouraging! :smiley:

What Yogas have you practiced?[/QUOTE]

My education is well rounded.

Currently the primary focus is concentration.


#118

Yoga’s purpose is to bring unity and enlightenment and when sacred sex is brought in, it can be the ultimate experience for two souls to become one. But unfortunately, sex is sometimes misused, causing pain and heartache. Abstinence is a choice that can be freely made, and for some it is the best choice. The key here is to remember that there should be no judgment. There is neither good nor bad, it just IS, and the purpose of our very existence is to grow higher and higher towards enlightenment, regardless of whether or not sex is chosen as the vehicle to bliss, or whether abstinence will be of greater benefit.


#119

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62950]Anand,

“Again I say, I am just a small person”

Drop this attachment to being a personality, whether small or otherwise. To think of yourself as a “small” person is just as egoistic as it’s opposite - in both cases one has remained clinging to a self-image.

"I still need a lot of “borrowed knowledge”.

To use such borrowed knowledge as an instrument is one thing, but the moment you become entangled in it - it becomes something dogmatic, you cannot see anything beyond it. And there may be many things in your borrowed knowledge which have no roots in reality, but you have already accepted them without question. Something like an Atman (self) - how do you know that there is such a thing to be found anywhere in your being ? You have accepted it simply because you have heard others talking about it, and it gives you comfort and security to believe that there is such an Atman in your being. Like this - one has accepted far too many things blindly. When this is done, we usually call that person a believer. Or - if you happen to think of something intensely and jump to conclusions - then we call this person a thinker. But neither thinking or believing is an attitude of one who is sincerely interested in the search for Truth. Because to be a seeker means just that - that you have come to recognize your ignorance and you are inquiring into things as an empty slate, trying to see things as they are out of your own intelligence.[/QUOTE]

Dear Friend:

I had to come to a personality standpoint as you insisted on asking me (over consecutive posts) if all the words I used were from my own experience.

By Guru’s grace, I have been initiated into[I] Mahayoga[/I] by [I]Shaktipaat[/I]. There have been some experiences along the way. I prefer not to talk about these.

However, I do confess that the path is difficult. I keep falling, but then Guru Shakti pulls me up every time.

Regarding atman, I found the treatise “The Doctrine of Karma” by Swami Abhedanand very useful. Maybe you would like to read it too. A fax copy is uploaded by a helpful soul on www.scribd.com

As regards its experience, yoga will show the way. The Guru and the texts serve as guide for that.

regards, anand


#120

Eternity Yoga

“Yoga’s purpose is to bring unity”

Unity with what or whom?