OK, given my rep around here, I think sex is an appropriate topic for my 50th post of the week. :-)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@...> wrote: > > Around 1977-78 a lot of TM teachers in my area started reading > Muktananda's books because "he answers questions Maharishi > won't". Some of that was on sex. Interestingly, I missed all of that because I had already bailed at that point. Never caught the Muktananda vibe then, still haven't. > Sex is a natural part of human existence. Celibacy is bullshit > because the male excretes unused sperm in the urine. In > ayurveda, excessively sex will make you more vata. It's a > strong drive. If you're hungry thinking about sex can even > trump hunger pangs. If you can find a source for this last sentence, please post it. I can turn it into a fun article for my moonlighting gig. > To enlightened people though it will just seem very > animalistic or "those damn hormones going off again." :-D Is that sex's problem, or their problem? :-) > Religion is nothing more than primitive mind control. Cheaper > than the Pharaoh maintaining a lot of cops to keep the masses > from revolting. "Do as the Pharaoh says or you'll go to hell." > They also learned that in times of famine it was wise to keep > population numbers low. Thus the "sin" of sex was introduced. That's an interesting concept, that associating sex with overpopulation (and thus starvation) was a genesis for the concept of it being a sin. But I'm remembering the Cathars, and their story. They were weirdass dudes and dudesses, no question about it, but they had some cool things going for them as well. One of the (IMO) less cool things was to look down on sex and consider it a Bad Idea. The Cathar clergy -- men and women -- were celibate. The Cathar lay followers were encouraged to be. But fascinatingly enough, their reason for not having sex was philosophically compassionate. They believed (as many gnostic sects believed) in complete duality. God never entered the relative world. He was completely distant from it, never interacted with it, and was not accessible from within it. The most you could hope for was "gnosis," a form of emotional, empathic "closeness" to "Godness." There was just no way you could address Him directly, *while being in a human body*. ( Hey, I warned you that they were kinda weird. :-) OK, so they also believed in reincarnation. Big-time. Same reincarnation that you believe in, if you believe in it. You live, you die, but not quite...there is a flag on the play and everything gets reset and you get reborn in another human body. Combine these two beliefs and what resulted was that the Cathars convinced themselves that sex was bad because it could result in children. And those children would be born into this dualist world in which they would be forever separated from God, because he wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. It was that crass. Suffice it to say I do not groove behind these Cathar beliefs, even though I suspect I paid some dues in past incarnations as one of them. I honestly think that a cartload of condoms and a little sex education would have done the whole lot of them some good. :-) But that's an instance in which espousing celibacy was not a response to overpopulation. In the 13th century, you wanted as many kids as you could get, because most of them were going to die before they got old enough to take care of you in your dotage. These guys and gals swore off of sex not because of overpopulation but because they didn't want to subject future generations to the bummer they perceived life on Earth to be. Weird. Way weird. Why I find the whole Cathar thang fascinating, even though their core beliefs are the opposite of mine, is that I have had a few flashbacks that suggest to me that I may have spent some time among them. The flash- backs suggest to me that as a Cathar priest (and thus believing in complete duality) I may have started having Unity experiences. Cognitive dissonance, big-time. The whole Cathar dogma is that infinity or eternity or the Absolute or God *cannot* exist in the relative world. And then one day you start perceiving it there. What do you do? :-) > On 12/14/2012 05:02 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: > > Sex can be an immensely powerful object of egoic attachment, so it has come > > to be regarded as inherently a bad thing, with abstinence being regarded as > > a spiritually ideal good thing. My take on it is that the spiritual > > problems with sex lie in a person's relationship with sex and are not > > inherent qualities of sex. With a healthy relationship with sex, i.e, no > > attachment and no expectation of fulfillment, sex (or any other pleasurable > > duality) can be enjoyed in the present moment for what it is, with no unmet > > expectations and no craving for more. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@> wrote: > >> Haha, not referring to you, just wondered if you had thoughts to as why so > >> many people follow someone as a Saint or Master if they are believed to be > >> celibate. > >> To this way of thinking, why does belief in celibacy in full adult age > >> bring more wisdom? > >> Maybe a misinterpretation to ancient scriptures? > >> > >> > >> I like your post and it made me think. > >> > >> Some people think we should shy away from questioning such "nonsense." > >> I do not, because there are so many people getting harmed by believing the > >> ultimate path is celibacy and/or their marriages are pretend monogamy and > >> when power is placed in these hands, innocent people are taken advantage > >> of and then blamed for being bad themselves, the one's who may speak up > >> and out. > >> > >> The money machine drives a hard bargain when combined with spiritual > >> creating attributes. It can deceive. It, being the money machine and > >> greed. The greed, to get something for waving a magic wand in the face of > >> another. > >> > >> When one contemplates what has happened, there is a fear of disgrace and > >> that disgrace is held in place by wand wavers, inc., that protection for > >> the purpose to continue the same shit over and over. > >> > >> Point being, there is no magic in knowledge. No mystery to be found by > >> worshiping one's who share knowledge. It is very disgusting to use > >> information (knowledge) for deception, to lure a temporary victim for > >> one's loins. This makes a prostitute much more truthful about their > >> actions. Yet, a prostitute is frowned upon, there is no deception in what > >> and why sex is offered. > >> I say people in spiritual positions who abuse this to their sexual > >> advantage, are actually much worse than what the perception of a > >> prostitute is. It is clever, but nonetheless the lowest of perversions. > >> > >> > >> Sexual attraction is easy to attach with knowledge in young women's eyes. > >> People feel that attraction is love and love to share with someone because > >> they have magic secrets is just plain wrong. > >> > >> Maybe there is knowledge of ancient sorts scattered about a person from > >> traditional lineage practices, but in no way is that worth sharing of the > >> body in exchange for. > >> > >> Sex and religion do not mix. No matter what label religion is given. > >> > >> Young women, heed this warning. You are beautiful, you want a mate or > >> two or three, haha, and that mate who shines the light in your eyes in the > >> name of ancient wisdom, may just be holding a flashlight. > >> > >> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Michael Jackson <mjackson74@> wrote: > >>> I'm not intrigued by it - I just expected him to do it if he said he was > >>> doing it. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> From: obbajeeba <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > >>> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > >>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:53 AM > >>> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: MAHARISHIââ¬â¢S TEACHINGS ON SEX > >>> > >>> > >>>  > >>> Why are many in cultures so intrigued by people being celibate to be a > >>> spiritual master, when they lack experience in feeling the birth of a > >>> child, the love of being a parent and its unconditional desire to > >>> continue to wish to help that child? > >>> > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mjackson74" <mjackson74@> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> For years I believed that Maharishi was a lifelong celibate because that > >>>> is what I was taught. I was surprised, really amazed when I first heard > >>>> a TM teacher say she had heard he was sexually active. I knew her pretty > >>>> well and she insisted it was true. When I asked her how she knew she > >>>> told me her sister and brother in law, both TM teachers and Governors > >>>> had assured her it was true. They had worked on national staff for some > >>>> years and yet it was not first hand information. They had gotten it from > >>>> a reliable source who had gotten it from the person who had it through > >>>> direct experience. > >>>> > >>>> Third hand info was not too impressive at the time. I did run the > >>>> information by another TM teacher who knew both myself and the person > >>>> who told me and they didnââ¬â¢t believe it, nor could they believe > >>>> that Susie had come to believe it. > >>>> > >>>> So the issue was a non-issue for me until I turned up here on FFL. A > >>>> brief exchange with Rick made me feel there really might be something to > >>>> the allegations so I looked further, reading everything I could from and > >>>> about the women involved which made me about fifty percent convinced it > >>>> was true. Even though I had come to believe Maharishi was not > >>>> enlightened, and that he was extremely fond of making promises in > >>>> exchange for cash, I still could not quite come to believe that he had > >>>> lied about that very fundamental aspect of his lifestyle. > >>>> > >>>> What did convince me were the similar stories from the former skin boys > >>>> like Mark Landau and Billy Clayton that I came across on the internet, > >>>> especially the recent BATGAP video interview with Mark Landau. > >>>> > >>>> Now that got me to thinking why would M preach celibacy to everyone else > >>>> if he was not practicing it himself. And I came up with a couple > >>>> conclusions. > >>>> > >>>> First, it was not cool in those days to be a guru and be sexually > >>>> active, or perhaps more to the point it wasnââ¬â¢t cool to be a guru, > >>>> be sexually active and have people in general know that was the case. M > >>>> had to maintain the facade that he was celibate to keep people coming to > >>>> him believing he was a spiritual master. > >>>> > >>>> Being a spiritual master and fucking just didnââ¬â¢t go together in > >>>> those days. This became particularly important when he announced he > >>>> wanted TM teachers to dress and behave conservatively so TM would appeal > >>>> to the ââ¬Å"responsible members of societyââ¬ï¿½ meaning older, > >>>> financially established people who could and would support M > >>>> financially. If they had known he was dipping the wick they would never > >>>> have supported him. > >>>> > >>>> In addition I believe he wanted to cut down on the competition. From the > >>>> stories his personal secretaries have told, he would often select women > >>>> from amongst those on teacher training courses or his staff ââ¬" if > >>>> they were being sexually active, they would be leery of cheating on > >>>> their spouses or boyfriends and celibacy certainly would lead the ladies > >>>> to be already horny, thus making it easier for him to get in their pants. > >>>> > > > > >
