|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
paw
52 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 28 2006 : 10:03:24 PM
|
I gather from reading "Secrets of Wilder" and "AYP", as well as this forum, that masturbating and tantric partner sex are ok, and sex outside of matrimony is ok too. That is, in AYP there doesn't seem to be any condemnation for those yogis who have sex, or who have sex in "nontraditional" partnerships or methods. I'm trying to understand this, but it's confusing cuz of my lifelong reading of yoga texts that recommend brahmacharya and sannyas (like SRF etc.), or which recommend the householder path of monogamous marriage with sexuality de-emphasized (like Hamsa Yoga Sangh). I gather that Indian society, for example, is sexually conservative, with many no-nos.
Of course, in Xtian USA sex is repressive, with much sexuality equated with "sin".
But then I have read books by Muktananda and Brother Charles that seem to endorse hetero- and homosexual acts outside marriage. Also, Osho is unconcerned with marital status, etc.
Thus my confusion. So I am wondering, is viewing pornographic images also acceptable for yogis? How would viewing porn relate to samyamas and "virtues"? |
|
|
Maximus
India
187 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 02:21:17 AM
|
| My few cents - I despise porn not from any Yogic point of view but because in my perception it is for desperate guys without girlfriends. A confident person will not have that desperation to resort to quick & easy ways like porn, in general. |
 |
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 07:17:22 AM
|
| Why do you dispise desparate people? They can't help where they are, and are probably trying their best to not be there, but can't seem to pull themselves out of it. |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 10:49:03 AM
|
>> that masturbating and tantric partner sex are ok, and sex outside of matrimony is ok too.
I would say that they can be OK and good. But there are plenty of instances the above that can be severely not-ok (even masturbation, if done in a public place).
Sexual mores are very place-and-time dependent. Since I don't believe that any particular place and time 'got' what was pregiven and the others didn't, I tend to believe that sexual morality is not pre-given.
This doesn't mean I don't believe in morals. But rather, that we live under taboos, which are called morals but are not morals per se. If you want to live under morals ( and I believe a Yogi should) you may find that some of the prohibitions do not make any sense. That is, in the big picture, they really don't help. Morals should help, and as I see it, that is the big distinction between morals and mere taboos.
As far as I can see, the prohibition against extra-maritial sex doesn't help here and now in this society from which I am writing. It certainly was helpful and important once, before the availability of contraception.
Regarding 'pornography', my thinking is similar. BTW Maximus, many guys with girlfriends watch pornography, and many women with boyfriends do too.
|
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5241 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 12:23:45 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by paw
I gather from reading "Secrets of Wilder" and "AYP", as well as this forum, that masturbating and tantric partner sex are ok, and sex outside of matrimony is ok too. That is, in AYP there doesn't seem to be any condemnation for those yogis who have sex, or who have sex in "nontraditional" partnerships or methods. I'm trying to understand this, but it's confusing cuz of my lifelong reading of yoga texts that recommend brahmacharya and sannyas (like SRF etc.), or which recommend the householder path of monogamous marriage with sexuality de-emphasized (like Hamsa Yoga Sangh). I gather that Indian society, for example, is sexually conservative, with many no-nos.
Of course, in Xtian USA sex is repressive, with much sexuality equated with "sin".
But then I have read books by Muktananda and Brother Charles that seem to endorse hetero- and homosexual acts outside marriage. Also, Osho is unconcerned with marital status, etc.
Thus my confusion. So I am wondering, is viewing pornographic images also acceptable for yogis? How would viewing porn relate to samyamas and "virtues"?
Hi Paw:
AYP is flexible on lifestyle, sexual or otherwise (nudged persistently higher by yogic and tantric methods), but points to our responsibility regarding conduct that may injure others. That includes lovers, spouses, children (especially), or anyone we happen to be affecting by our actions. Also, the laws of the society we live in should be honored...
Until we have natural ahimsa (non-harming) born of inner silence that comes from deep meditation and other spiritual practices, we should at least be aware of the profound value of non-harming. There is great truth in the Biblical injunctions, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..." and "Love thy neighbor as thy self."
On "sin," check this AYP lesson for some additional thoughts: http://www.aypsite.org/132.html
Also, here is a lesson on pornography and compulsive behaviors: http://www.aypsite.org/T38.html
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
nearoanoke
USA
525 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 2:23:33 PM
|
Hi Paw,
I dont see a link where AYP writings or forums say its OK to have extra-marital sex. Can you please point me to a link? The closest I read on AYP is saying that imagining some other person during tantric sex wont cause any harm to that person. AYP "agrees" that married men (as well as women) can have sexual fantasies with other partners. That is definitely NOT AYP recommending such a thing, rather it is AYP accepting how the world is currently now. Definitely the moral behaviors that arise out of the inner silence will lead us to what is right and AYP says that.
AYP recommends tantric sex or masturbation for those people who already have those sexual tendencies and want to direct them spiritually. It clearly states that people who are already well set in brahmacharya are fine as they are.
Sexual fantasies or pornography can make the tantric masturbation exciting for some people and as long as our goal is directed spiritually (pre-orgasmic cultivation rather than orgasm), I feel the means we use doesnt really matter.
Just my 2 cents
-Near |
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5241 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 3:09:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by nearoanoke
Hi Paw, I dont see a link where AYP writings or forums say its OK to have extra-marital sex.
Hi Near and Paw:
I don't know where AYP says that either. 
Pre-marital maybe in the Secrets of Wilder novel, but that depends on your definition of marriage. While the novel is very sexy (and eventually quite graphic), it is also very moral. In the process of being morally sexy, it reveals the essential principles of tantric relationship -- the most important being the emergence of bhakti-inspired divine love.
Near, thanks for reminding me about this lesson covering the relationship of sexual fantasies, tantra and extra-marital affairs: http://www.aypsite.org/T37.html
This link can also be found in the pornography/compulsive behavior lesson referenced above.
The point is, whatever we are doing, whatever our current habit is, it can be turned higher with bhakti and yogic/tantric methods. And no matter what we are doing, we are always responsible for the effects of our actions. What we do to others, we are doing to ourselves. And what we do to ourselves, we are doing to others. We are One.
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Sep 29 2006 : 7:47:13 PM
|
I believe morals are very important. I have become quite sensitive over the years as to whether I uphold my own morals.
Whether other people do or not doesn't mean as much to me unless someone is getting hurt.
So if I make a promise to someone, i make sure that promise is kept or tell them otherwise.
sometimes I tell someone something wrong by accident, and it bothers me until I straighten it out. I think this is how marriage should be also.
I have a friend who has a code with her husband that certain extra-marital affairs are OK (she likes women too) and that's fine. And there are cases where marriage is just kept for some reason like business or politics, but both partners agree not to be monogamous, and that's fine.
But in general, i feel to be dishonest with the person you are pretending to be closest with is destructive to both people, usually much more one than the other, and will come back to haunt you eventually. |
|
|
|
Alvin Chan
Hong Kong
407 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 02:18:18 AM
|
Yogani wrote
quote:
points to our responsibility regarding conduct that may injure others. That includes lovers, spouses, children (especially), or anyone we happen to be affecting by our actions. Also, the laws of the society we live in should be honored...
Until we have natural ahimsa (non-harming) born of inner silence that comes from deep meditation and other spiritual practices, we should at least be aware of the profound value of non-harming.
This (non-harming) seems to be the main point of morals. And masturbation, even when done in the public, can be OK in some societies, as long as the conduct doesn't harm the others (not even on a pyschological level). In some societies, this could be true!
Of course, besides the more passive role of non-harming, morals sometimes have a more active role of promoting love |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 07:48:44 AM
|
| I agree. But while I actively do whatever promotes love between people, I know that my motivation is selfish. I have found what works best for me, and that is my motivation. I find people who publically talk about "promoting love" to be uninteresting and sometimes distasteful! |
|
|
|
Chiron
Russia
397 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 5:37:15 PM
|
I think porn arouses the desire for worldy sex and orgasm. While yogic or tantric sex is done to bring us closer to our highest ideal, or God. So I view porn as one of those bad habits like smoking and drinking that do not bring me closer to God, and thus are not needed in terms of Yoga or union with God.
As for extra-marital sexual relations, it has been pretty much said by everyone above. What's the point of having a marriage then? I think for a Yogi, Honour is an important virtue that should be cultivated, not discarded. And we should look at ourselves and our actions through the eyes of God. Then all the morals and all the rules will come naturally from the heart. |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 6:41:35 PM
|
I think porn arouses the desire for worldy sex and orgasm.
Can it only arouse the desire for 'worldly' sex and orgasm? What about it arousing the desire for 'spiritual' sex?
|
|
|
|
Chiron
Russia
397 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 8:14:35 PM
|
| I suppose it can. But you are stimulating it yourself and not just dancing with the energy naturally (when it wants to dance) so it doesn't seem very spiritual to me. I guess it is just the association that I have of porn -- perversion and obsession with wordly sex and orgasm. I suppose the desire can be transformed for a higher purpose. But I'd rather let it come naturally, or at least honourably through yoga. Can't imagine porn being part of my spiritual practice. |
Edited by - Chiron on Sep 30 2006 8:21:54 PM |
|
|
|
Scott
USA
969 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 9:40:08 PM
|
There's a complete lack of intimacy and affection when you look at porn, which in my opinion, are necessary ingredients for having a healthy and balanced mental state as a result of sexuality. Without those ingredients....alright think of this. It's like you're trying to bake bread, and you don't put in the flour. Whoops. Your bread is going to be disgusting, and probably won't resemble bread at all. So it's good to have sex the way it was meant to be, in my personal opinion. Otherwise, especially with revealing ourselves to ourselves as we do in yoga, we will wind up wired incorrectly.
I have to admit though, I do look at porn because I don't have a girlfriend, and I get tense when I don't have a release. Maybe I should cut myself off from the porn, because I do know it's not good for me. Sometimes it's difficult to come out of self destructive behavior. When beauty is so readily available, albeit in a cheap form, it's hard to say no.
I will try! |
|
|
|
paw
52 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2006 : 10:51:54 PM
|
Thanks to the board for all the great replies!
OK, please be patient with me, as I am studying, but I have not read the entire AYP manual, and there is much I don't know or understand.
And maybe I am reading too much into T15, "Lustful Pleasures", page 435. If so I apologize. The meaning I got was perhaps between the lines, and not a direct statement that extramarital sex is approved, but that is how I (mis?) interpreted it. Here is the passage:
In T15, a chela states she has had problems with lustful relationships. In the third paragraph of yogani's response, discussing the application of tantric practice to her situation, yogani said: "In cases where working with a partner is difficult due to strong lustful habits, it might be beneficial to work alone for a while" To me, this sounds like working with a partner in tantric sex practices, but there is no mention of marriage.
In the last paragraph of his response, yogani refers to "viewing men (plural) differently", and speaks of "engaging with a partner (one of the "men") without mention of marriage, and concludes that "you will attract men of higher spiritual quality too." To me this sounds like an endorsement of multiple partner practices, without regard to a marriage. Am I incorrect in my understanding? Again, if so I apologize.
I also thought that the characters in "Secrets of Wilder", John and Devi, were uninhibited sexually with each other, except in the matter of John's brahmacharya. They of course were monogamous, but when I read T15, I just assumed multiple partners was OK too. Maybe I am oversensitive to these matters, prolly due to my misspent youth in Xtian fundamentalism. Maybe I am trying to understand the right and wrong of such things, OUTSIDE the context of "sin and guilt". I certainly don't mean to criticize, just understand.
Personally, I am a married guy since 1965 (met in HS), and have only ever had sex with my wife. Since I met her, I have rarely masturbated, literally a "handful" of times (yeah I know dumb joke I couldn't resist :0). We have an active sex life, slowing down some as my dear one ages and her interest wanes (mine hasn't). So I have not made a decision for brahmacharya in my life, and prolly will always include orgasmic sex in my life to some degree. And often in mantra meditation, I have closed eye movies of erotic scenes, which I don't feel attached to, and which don't seem to interrupt the mantra. I also see erotic couplings in the clouds at sunset, as well as lingam/yoni, merkaba etc.
A few years ago, I abandoned a long-held belief in Christianity, a process that had been building for years prior, and am exploring life without Christian sin and guilt, which is not easy. So I am pondering what the role of erotic art (once a big no-no for me) might be, in sex and in yoga. I have always loved the sculpture art of Khajuraho and other shrines in India-not a good quality I suppose for a Fundie type! hah).
paw |
|
|
|
Balance
USA
967 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 02:06:33 AM
|
Hi paw
In my opinion your attraction to "porn" in the clouds and temples etc. is a healthy eroticism. You appear to have attraction to the natural erotic coupling in images that may reflect your inner spiritual longing for communion of the masculine/feminine within. It's all around in outer nature and inner nature. I would say keep it up!
Have fun, Alan
BTW is it paw and maw? |
|
|
|
nearoanoke
USA
525 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 02:07:41 AM
|
Hi Chiron,
I think the view on porn is a good example of the difference between older traditional systems and newer ones. In older traditional systems emphasis was on brahmacharya, i.e., on staying away from what is considered as bad or worldly. In the newer systems the emphasis is on "redirecting" our worldly tendencies towards god/spirituality i.e., staying in world and dealing with it.
If watching porn excites me, i dont see a point in trying hard to stay away from it. I would rather meditate and let my inner self tell me to drop it. If masturbating on porn is a habit for me, i would redirect it to use in tantric way.
Coming to moral aspects of it, in my opinion as long as we dont harm anyone, theres nothing immoral about anything we do. If our partner is worried about it, then it is a different case.
Scott,
whats wrong if theres no affection or intimacy in watching porn or masturbating on porn? Why cant it just be a satisfaction of desire? I feel hungry, I eat food. |
Edited by - nearoanoke on Oct 01 2006 02:09:41 AM |
|
|
|
Chiron
Russia
397 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 02:25:31 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by paw
So I have not made a decision for brahmacharya in my life, and prolly will always include orgasmic sex in my life to some degree.
This is the way I also thought at first. And I'm a young guy compared to you so my sex drive is alot stronger. Once you learn to send the energy up the spine, brahmacharya and tantra become the natural choices. I used to think it would be impossible to not have orgasm after sex.. but you just gotta ride it out and the alternative isn't worse at all. It becomes an inner, ongoing orgasm, just without the ejaculation.
And I think that's where the AYP practices are leading us -- to go inward with the senses and experiences instead of dwelling on the outside world. All the joy and all the excitement can be found inside your own body without any outside stimulation -- but if that stimulation is there already then fine, that is also naturally and easily transformed into inner ecstacy using AYP practices overtime. That's how I interpret the AYP teachings anyway.
All the Christian sin and guilt concepts are based on the basic universal law of cause and effect. This law is mentioned by almost every religion and philosophy I have come across. And I have verified it in my own short life. Yogani already said it "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..." -- nothing wrong with that is there?
My advice to you about sex with multiple partners and extra-marital sex would be very harsh. But I know from my own experience that no outside rules can truly influence a person's actions unless they themselves have a coiciding conviction in their heart. I think you should thoroughly study tantra, because IMO that is the best solution for you right now. And your wife's interest might also light up with your increased performance :D :D |
Edited by - Chiron on Oct 01 2006 03:35:43 AM |
|
|
|
Chiron
Russia
397 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 03:51:05 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by nearoanoke
Hi Chiron,
I think the view on porn is a good example of the difference between older traditional systems and newer ones. In older traditional systems emphasis was on brahmacharya, i.e., on staying away from what is considered as bad or worldly. In the newer systems the emphasis is on "redirecting" our worldly tendencies towards god/spirituality i.e., staying in world and dealing with it.
If watching porn excites me, i dont see a point in trying hard to stay away from it. I would rather meditate and let my inner self tell me to drop it. If masturbating on porn is a habit for me, i would redirect it to use in tantric way.
I agree 100%. I just can't imagine Jesus or Buddha sitting cross-legged in a cave somewhere with a picture of Pamela Anderson..
:P |
Edited by - Chiron on Oct 01 2006 05:19:19 AM |
|
|
|
Scott
USA
969 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 08:31:32 AM
|
Near,
quote:
whats wrong if theres no affection or intimacy in watching porn or masturbating on porn? Why cant it just be a satisfaction of desire? I feel hungry, I eat food.
I guess it still gets you by, but it's like eating McDonalds and spoiling your appetite rather than waiting for the good tasting healthy food at home. Just my opinion...and I definitely don't think of someone as bad if they look at porn. We are humans with desires, and there's nothing wrong with that. I just believe that McDonalds does bad things to you "under the hood" whereas healthy foods do good things to you. |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 10:23:29 AM
|
Chiron wrote:
"I agree 100%. I just can't imagine Jesus or Buddha sitting cross-legged in a cave somewhere with a picture of Pamela Anderson.."
Of course not. Silicone and pictures weren't discovered yet.
But maybe some people feel the need to hide it more than others. I can't imagine a catholic priest having sexual desires either, but I've seen monkeys masturbating at the zoo. . . .
Oh yeah, we're better than that. We're not savages anymore. We have guns and nuclear bombs and text messaging. |
Edited by - Etherfish on Oct 01 2006 10:37:21 AM |
|
|
|
Wolfgang
Germany
470 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 10:54:49 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Etherfish
I can't imagine a catholic priest having sexual desires either, but I've seen monkeys masturbating at the zoo.
I am really puzzled now, Ether.
I myself can very well imagine catholic priests having sexual desires.
In fact, I am absolutely convinced that there are many of them
having sexual desires and struggling to handle these desires.
Many greetings
Wolfgang |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 11:24:23 AM
|
Paw,
erotic puritanism (sorry, I don't have a better term), is I believe a very definite psychosexual syndrome that can affect a single person, or even a whole culture or population. It's a disease. Or, another way of putting it, a disturbance of development.
The syndrome is present or absent to varying degrees among different people in different cultures, and it affects some people more strongly than others, even if they are brought up in the same way. In historical christian cultures it has been so pervasive that the religion has often basically spoken from the disease itself. When that happens, it can be ten times as hard to get out of it.
I believe that the gist of it is developmentally the arising of sexual desires that cannot 'integrate' on a bed of appropriate emotional and spiritual development. Main contributors to the disease include the puritanism and sexual repression in which one is brought up, with the inevitable shame-based hiding of the naked body and so on.
Cultures that do not have it celebrate erotic spiritual art, and that helps keep the syndrome at bay. If one is brought up in a household in which an honored symbol is shakti and shiva copulating, it is much harder for the disease to take root.
Maybe the majority of us have the disease in varying degrees. It may be that your body-mind is on the verge of shaking it off. One of the things that yoga brings is that the body's own intelligence says 'to hell with this crap, I've had enough'. It can know something is crap and be set on getting rid of it even if the conscious mind and surrounding culture are not yet so convinced.
|
Edited by - david_obsidian on Oct 01 2006 11:34:35 AM |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 3:03:25 PM
|
wolfgang wrote:
"I am really puzzled now, Ether."
I was just joking Wolfgang. The point I was trying to make is we can't imagine our spiritual leaders having sexual feelings because of taboos; see david's post above.
Christ was a man. He supposedly had no sexual desire, etc.
It's the whole thing of the concept of sexual energy being raised into spiritual energy, and people misunderstanding it.
|
|
|
|
paw
52 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 6:43:02 PM
|
Hi Alan, yeah it's pa and ma, but since I started toe-strike "catwalking", I am paw :0)
I agree, the erotic seems to be everywhere, as Shiva and Shakti unite in cosmic dance... |
|
|
|
Kyman
530 Posts |
Posted - Oct 01 2006 : 8:18:11 PM
|
"Pull themselves out of it."
Well said, and I agree.
Sex is very complicated, yet so simple. It truly is to each their own. Who is to say what is attractive to another person? I think the way of yoga would bring about an entirely different pattern of sexual activity than the person who is generally living life through their sensuality.
Does spanking break the code of non-harming?
What is moral seems to me a game of context. A good example by alvin was masterbating in public. no doubt at one time this was probably natural, completely commonplace. People create immorality based on their average behaviors, and those outside the majority create the context. Spanking is probably as common as french kissing, so its position in the spectrum of what is percieved as moral is more in the middle.
It is common for religious ideoligies to dictate this moral context, creating an unnatural shade for human behavior. Which is better for this planet as a whole, people masterbating in public, without much insecurity and embarrisment, vs barely being able to have good sex behind closed doors with someone you've known for years 'with the lights on'. It's got me thinking. In a general sense, of course. I am not planning on resurrecting our old 'completely open and natural' customs.
Go back to when people masterbated in the open public and 'spanking' is probably considered the yogic way. Spanking would be for the spirtually elite, those who have transcended the more primal practices.
I would say that health is probably the best determining factor as to what should be labeled moral. This relates to non-harming.
Then it all comes down to how a person defines themselves, because the ego's idea of health and the balanced core of reality often conflict. For those who engage in rough or passionate sex, this understaking pushes the body and helps it with its cycles, probably helps with the relationship cycles too. For this type of couple, the practices of the person who doesn't define themselves and asks to be shown the way through surrender, would probably impede their natural equilibrium.
What a can of metaphysical warms.
|
Edited by - Kyman on Oct 01 2006 8:28:39 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
porn ?
