Wednesday, December 26, 2007

"Preaching Illicit Sex, 24/7"

I feel somewhat guilty that I did not mention my pleasant visit to Advaitaji in Radha Kund while he has spoken rather kindly of me over on Madan Gopal. Since there seems to be a kind of link between the two blogs, I really should have shared my perception of that meeting.

The only disagreement he mentioned was related to the subject of projecting sexual desires on the lila. This was in fact a response to his misunderstanding that people like myself are projecting our own sexual desires on the lila; I was saying that Western psychology would argue that the lila is seen as the projection of repressed or unfulfilled (or unfulfillable) sexual desires. Which, if true, would mean that saying it is not is nothing more than denial, a refusal to accept the obvious.

But of course, the relationship between material sexual desire and the lila of Radha and Krishna is more complex and sophisticated than projected repressed desires, and certainly seeing it as nothing more than titillation is equally wrong. But I will leave that for another time.

I also remember saying in my meeting with Advaita that we must have another alternative to the two poles of "recreational" and "procreational" sex, as he puts it. Since not even Advaita seems able to do entirely without it, in my opinion, sex must potentially have a spiritual function.

Not so long ago I admonished Gaurasundar for suggesting that I was only talking of sex, but now Advaita himself has gone back to saying that I am "preaching illicit sex 24/7" and promoting "debauch theories." Now, I have looked again at my blog and see that even after mentioning Gaurasundar’s name, I have pretty much not touched the subject of sex for over a month, what to speak of promoting illicit sex or debauchery.

Gaurasundar himself helps shed light on the psychology here when he writes:
If there is a concern that reading Jagat's "sahajiya" works may instantly or cumulatively lay us open to sahajiya influences, I would say that merely a consciousness of Jagat as a sahajiya can significantly affect one's own perception of the work, whether or not there is any sahajiyaism in Jagat's work. In effect, one is "sahajiyaising" oneself.

This is indeed astute, and reminds me of a rather well known parable:
One day, two sannyasis were on their way down the mountain to beg for alms in the market when they came to a wooden bridge they had to traverse. In front of the bridge was a beautiful young lady trying to cross. Crossing that unstable bridge was easy for the two monks, but for the lady was an almost impossible task. Seeing that the sky was turning dark and that it was very dangerous for the lady to be left alone in the wilds, the older monk went forward to the lady and said: "Let me carry you across." The lady smiled and nodded her head.

The old monk thus piggy-backed the lady across the wobbly bridge. The young monk took what he just saw to heart but kept quiet and followed behind.

After crossing the bridge, the old monk put the lady down and without even turning behind, carried on his journey. The young monk took another glance at the lady and followed close behind the old monk. For the rest of the journey, both monks remained silent. When they reached the town, the young monk finally could not stand it anymore and questioned the old monk: "How could you carry the lady on your back? We as monks are supposed to keep away from women!"

The old monk did not bother to explain much. Instead, he asked the young monk one question: "I've put the lady down the moment I crossed the bridge, why is it that you are still carrying her, even now?" The young monk immediately understood the old monk's words and was ashamed of himself. (Copied from this blog, though obviously it is an old and popular parable and any number of retellings can be found on the internet.)

So I reiterate: nothing is further from my mind than preaching debauchery. Indeed, I believe I am offering a solution to a conundrum that affects many devotees. So when Malati says that I “enjoin [people] to bonk each other to get a glimpse of the divine,” this is a kind of rhetorical perversion of what I am really saying. Indeed, her language reveals rather more about her than genuinely reflecting what I am talking about.

Sexuality plays an important part in human personality, but there is a distinction, subtle but most important, between lust and love. This is why, pace Gaurasundar, I place such emphasis on distinguishing between tamasic, rajasic and sattvika sexuality. Tamasic sexuality is about hatred, power and domination and has little if anything to do with love. If you cannot see the difference then you are purposely blind. It is love between devotees that is at the center of this sadhana.

The point about Manjari seva is a little more complex, but nevertheless it is at the core of what I am preaching. I do not say to identify with the Divine Couple in the sense of ahangrahopasana, but to identify in the very way that is meant by the ideas presented in Rupa Goswami’s rasa-siddhanta and in the concept of advaya-jnana, as stated in Bhagavatam 1.2.11. I will not go into further detail here (I have in the past and obviously will have to return to these issues again, as nobody seems to understand them, meaning that I have not explained well and clearly), but the essence is that no one can serve without identifying with the object of service. How can I serve you if I do not know your mind? How can I even talk to you if I don’t make an effort to understand your mind? So where is the question of love?

I realize that for many devotees, it is difficult to understand how advaya-jnana applies to bhakti, since clearly there is a duality of server and served, but there is a unity of server and served also. Anyway, that is where I am going to leave this for today. I have a ton of unfinished blogs that I am trying to post and I would rather not get distracted for the moment, important as this issue is.

Alam ativistarena.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

Its been interesting reading the two blogs lately. Advaita locks on the real 'problem': whether or not he (Jagat) will edit the sacred words of Jiva Goswamipada. Well, never was there an esier solution: Satyanarayan is a sadhu removed from the murk of this material world. Had he read Jagat's blog he would have known of Jagat's conniving methods. So, someone should go and inform Satyararayn of the mistake he is making and so he fires Jagat immediately! Simple.

Harisaran said...

Aloha Jagat! I hope you are having happy holidays in India.

Over here, the old western traditions is going; a lot of snow in the mainland, but not in Hawaii...

Question for you: Does Indian Calendar indicates anything about the Winter solstices?

Jagat said...

One thing about Satya Narayan. I am fairly sure he does not read my blog, as he makes little use of the computer and has others do his typing and responding to email, etc.

However, Gopinathji, whose idea it was to engage me and who promoted the idea to SN, is an occasional reader of this blog and though I doubt that he is a 100% supporter (he is an intelligent and learned man with his own ideas and opinions), he nevertheless has not formed any prejudices against me. He recognizes that I am capable of doing the work, asked me to show what I could do on a number of texts, and both he and SN came to the conclusion that I could do the work efficiently and accurately.

As to Makara Sankranti (the Indian version of the winter solstice), it is calculated differently than in the West and this year falls on Jan. 14, 2008.

Anonymous said...

Excuse the directness, but I want to address Advaitada's amazing ability of derailing a discussion by pseudo-representing shastra. No, really.

A real calling upon shastra must be corroborated by guru and sadhu. Advaitadas does not support his calling on shastra by adhering to any current guru, nor by being guru himself. His diksa guru, being deceased, cannot be requested to give a decision on current issues. And Advaita doesn't submit his understanding to current sadhus either, unless a sadhu's opinion may coincide with his.

If literal translation of Sanskrit is all it takes to strictly understand shastra, why then aren't people giving Advaita the job of translating and editing "our" books instead of to Jagadananda? Surely it is not the academic credential that matters.

I think Advaita, like Don Quixote, fights an imaginary enemy. He has said in his blog, About non-Vaishnavas: Krishnadas and me took Jagat in a pincer-movement last september, on his blog, challenging him on scriptural evidence on his debauch theories and he wasn't able to provide any. Is such a person, at least in his public speech and the consequent influence he has on an innocent and already misled public, to be considered a Vaishnava, at least in words?

Jagat does follow his guru line in that he abides by Bhaktivinod Thakur's recomendation that one expands on the previous line's achievements. In the beginning of his "The Bhagava, Its Philosophy, Ethics and Theology", addressing all seekers of the truth, Bhaktivinod Thakur says: " You must yourself knock at the door of the inexhaustible store of truth from which the former ages drew their wealth. Go, go up to the Fountain-head of truth where no pilgrim meets with disappointment of any kind. Vyasa did it and obtained what he wanted. We have been advised to do so. Liberty then is the principle, which we must consider as the most valuable gift of God. We must not allow ourselves to be led by those who lived and thought before us. We must think for ourselves and try to get further truths which are still undiscovered. In the Bhagavat we have been advised to take the spirit of the shastras and not the words. The Bhagavat is, therefore, a religion of liberty, unmixed truth, and absolute love."

Advaita speaks also of an "innocent and already misled public. Assuming that he is talking about Iskcon/GM cultures, a propos, it is a fact that the neo-traditionals such as Advaita and Malati dasi do not think much different than Iskcon and GM, and at those groups darkest period at that.

But we still hope that the real Tradition doesn't concern itself merely with the upkeeping of, well, tradition, just for the sake of keeping face. Truth isn't a stone block with which to smash an enemy, but a fluid current to be fed with newer and newer streams.

advaitadas said...

"And Advaita doesn't submit his understanding to current sadhus either, unless a sadhu's opinion may coincide with his.

No acarya - current or ancient - Haridas Shastri, Satyanarayan, Lalitprasad, Prabhupad, Rupa Goswami - practised or preached sannyasis having illicit sex. Nobody. I need not ask.

If literal translation of Sanskrit is all it takes to strictly understand shastra, why then aren't people giving Advaita the job of translating and editing "our" books instead of to Jagadananda? Surely it is not the academic credential that matters.

That's exacty my point. Nobody questions Jagat's skill in Sanskrit, but that does not make a morally sound person out of him.

Jagat does follow his guru line in that he abides by Bhaktivinod Thakur's recomendation that one expands on the previous line's achievements.

A sannyasi/babaji preaching illicit sex is an expansion of Bhaktivinod's teachings????

In the beginning of his "The Bhagava, Its Philosophy, Ethics and Theology", addressing all seekers of the truth, Bhaktivinod Thakur says: " You must yourself knock at the door of the inexhaustible store of truth from which the former ages drew their wealth. Go, go up to the Fountain-head of truth where no pilgrim meets with disappointment of any kind. Vyasa did it and obtained what he wanted. We have been advised to do so. Liberty then is the principle, which we must consider as the most valuable gift of God. We must not allow ourselves to be led by those who lived and thought before us. We must think for ourselves and try to get further truths which are still undiscovered. In the Bhagavat we have been advised to take the spirit of the shastras and not the words. The Bhagavat is, therefore, a religion of liberty, unmixed truth, and absolute love."

I must say that I have great problems with such talks of BVT, in the light of B.Gita 16.23, but that asides, BVT would never condone Jagat's perversions. I think you greatly insult BVT by insinuating that.

Advaita speaks also of an "innocent and already misled public. Assuming that he is talking about Iskcon/GM cultures, a propos, it is a fact that the neo-traditionals such as Advaita and Malati dasi do not think much different than Iskcon and GM, and at those groups darkest period at that.

We're not speaking Iskcon, but just plain decency. Whoever speaks decency has my support, including the IGM.

Anonymous said...

I must say that I have great problems with such talks of BVT, in the light of B.Gita 16.23, but that asides, BVT would never condone Jagat's perversions. I think you greatly insult BVT by insinuating that.

Well perhaps you should get some help understanding the spirit of B. Gita 16.23 instead of merely repeating the words. But you "have problems with such talks", and fights so everyone else will have your problem.

For once I would like to see you cool-headedly addressing your own "indecency": you preach one thing but act another: according to your philosophy's standards, you too incur in "illicit sex", attempting as you are a third marriage.

It would be plain decency if you followed what you preach. As it is, its cheating. Which is indecent.

Anonymous said...

No acarya - current or ancient - Haridas Shastri, Satyanarayan, Lalitprasad, Prabhupad, Rupa Goswami - practised or preached sannyasis having illicit sex. Nobody. I need not ask.

That is correct. And although you have never been a sannyasi yourself, according the above mentioned acaryas, your divorces and current plan for a non-reproductive marriage, at 51, also falls in the category of "illicit sex".

To reiterate, lets take a sample from your above list: Prabhupad (A.C. Bhaktivedanta), on performing Satsvarupa's and Jadurani's marriage, instructed: "And there is no separation. It is... There is no question of divorce or separation. In any condition of life, happiness or distress, you shall continue as husband and wife, because our main business is Krishna consciousness. This marriage is not material marriage for sense gratification. But because there are girls and boys and we require also Krishna conscious population, therefore we encourage this marriage. It is not for sense gratification. So in this way there is no question of separation or divorce. You admit this? Yes. You also admit this? Then you change your garland..

Jagat said...

Dear Advaitaji,

Once again, I have to object to your rhetorical overkill. Words like "debauch," "illicit," "perversions," "immoral," should be more carefully used.

When we met in Radha Kund, you indicated to me that you had been "dating" a woman and I understood that you are actively seeking a female companion to join you in your pursuit of Radha seva. This means that you do not consider the companionship of women to be so inimical to bhakti that it would destroy all the hard work you have done over the years. I am glad that you believe in the resilience of bhakti.

I imagine that you also intend to engage in sexual relations with the fortunate woman who becomes your companion. I doubt you are interested in procreational sex, so you must be talking about the only alternative you have mentioned, i.e., recreational sex. Since in your view such activity not only has no possible connection to devotional service, and indeed is the very symbol of our conditioned state, it must be rather disheartening for you that after more than 30 years of bhajan you are still so mired in the bodily concept of life that you pine to hold another body in your arms, not just for the relief of your aching penis, but for the human loving contact she would bring.

Nevertheless, since you seem to associate sexuality with debauchery and the such, I shiver for the fate of your future companion. If you marry only to avoid burning, then she will always be the symbol of your failures. You will always be ambivalent toward her and unable to feel the very love and physical pleasure you are still seeking. Moreover, I strongly suspect that most intelligent women will intuit this ambivalent attitude and refuse to go very far with such a proposition that would lead to certain relational disaster. I strongly believe that a rigid attitude towards celibacy goes hand in hand with misogyny.

But should you be fortunate enough to find a woman ready to meet the cold proposition you offer, what do you intend to do if by looking at her breasts you suddenly think of a verse from Govinda Lilamrita that describes Radha's? Or if you should be so fortunate as to receive a glance filled with love, will you be able to avoid remembering Radha's kataksha pat? And when she becomes angry, will you erase all thought of Radha's mana from your memory because it comes from an "unauthorized source," or because it is contaminated due to coming from a flesh and blood woman? Heaven forbid your poor woman friend will be told to stop looking at you with love because it reminds you of Radha!!

Advaitaji, you are a devotee of Srimati Radharani. Surely you will welcome any thoughts that somehow touch on Srimati Radharani. And if, as I fervently pray, your companion is also a devotee of our Swamini, that you will be able to share your love for Radha in the very intimacy of your love for her.

And if I may venture a final thought: If after 35 years of bhajan you still are ready to undertake this painful experiment, surely the impetus that is coming from deep within you is Radharani's own mercy. Have you considered this possibility? Surely after all these years Radha does not want you to engage in debauchery (after all, this is your third or fourth attempt, is it not?). Perhaps she really wants you to find the way to her through a loving devotee companion who will share Radha-Krishna smaran with you in the tight embrace of love, with whom you can chant Radha's name together while basking in the delights of deepest intimacy.

Leave aside the dry renunciation my friend. Look for the third way beyond bhoga and beyond tyaga.

Jai Sri Radhe!

Anonymous said...

"Moreover, I strongly suspect that most intelligent women will intuit this ambivalent attitude and refuse to go very far with such a proposition that would lead to certain relational disaster. I strongly believe that a rigid attitude towards celibacy goes hand in hand with misogyny.

Just a comment on this intelligent woman stereotype, there are intelligent women as there are intelligent men, and there are slow women as there are thick men. The notion that a woman who does not challenge established institutions is automatically stupid, this notion is just as sexist as any. Intelligent women sometimes tolerate opressing situations for their own reasons. And simple minded women may intuit ambivalence and mysogyny in her companion's behavior regardless of her limited intellectual capacity. Indeed, intuition is a function of the heart rather. This is why in fact, in general, women have a higher capacity of tolerance and are therefore more accomodating in delicate emotional situations.

The point is that men and women, both genders must have equal opportunity in their pursuit of bhakti. And among us practioners, equal opportunity seems to point to and urgent need for adjustment in the traditional roles. If tradition works against cooperation, then tradition must be upgraded.

So its not about just women being intelligent as men anymore, but about men being sensible as women as well. This for the greater good which is optimazation of the self.

Jagat said...

Perhaps I should just have said "perceptive."

advaitadas said...

Jagat, I must protest here against you allowing an anonymous person launching a personal attack against me, based on sheer ignorance and prejudice. For all I know this anonymous may be a person who had an illicit relationship with you or who knows what. It is outright cowardly. He/she nor you know nothing at all about the circumstances of my divorces, but insinuate, for the sake of winning the moral argument, that I am some type of adulterer. On the contrary, I was myself the victim of adultery, so it is grievously hurting that I am being accused of a thing that caused me personally such a trauma.
Secondly, dating a woman does not mean having illicit sex, not in my dictionary.
Thirdly, and I have said this before, I am neither a sannyasi, nor can I have an arranged marriage, nor am I voluntarily unmarried. How shall I find myself a spouse unless I go and find one myself?
Fourthly, I never said anything against sex itself. I know this is a big problem, for me too.
I just cant find any sadhu, shastra or Guru proposing what Jagat did. I hope that the anonymous will have the honesty to reveal his/her ID, I am also not cloaked here, and apologise for this ignorant and cowardly attack.

advaitadas said...

it must be rather disheartening for you that after more than 30 years of bhajan you are still so mired in the bodily concept of life that you pine to hold another body in your arms, not just for the relief of your aching penis, but for the human loving contact she would bring.

Jagat, tell me honestly, would you write such explicit things about someone's anatomy on a Bengali site, or a Hindustani, or Muslim site? Don't you think this shameless use of language is totally mleccha rather than rupanuga, brahminical or whatever? Have I ever used such language about you? Do you really want to compete with me in decency? I have a pretty good idea of your long track record of sexual misbehaviour (breaking sannyasa and marriage vows), you'd lose the competition with me by a million miles. So let's not take this path, OK? Don't wake up sleeping dogs, so to say.
And for the first challenge in this quote, why don't you read Visvanath's tika on SB 1.9.26 and my blog on it of 18 february 2006? And that's an advice to anonymous as well.

Jagat said...

Shocking, isn't it? We have penises and vaginas. I have one, too. Perhaps my explicitness arises out of the Abbott readings. She sometimes uses quite salty language. I plead being influenced.

A lot of protesting going around here. Look, Advaitaji, I wrote my letter in the best spirit of loving friendship. Please do not take offense, but think about your fourth point and appeal to the Lord in your heart.

Radhe Shyam!

Harisaran said...

>>>As to Makara Sankranti (the Indian version of the winter solstice), it is calculated differently than in the West and this year falls on Jan. 14, 2008.<<<

Thanks Jagat!

advaitadas said...

J: "Since in your view such activity not only has no possible connection to devotional service, and indeed is the very symbol of our conditioned state,"

A: That is not my view, but that of all the shastras and all the acaryas, minus you.

J: "it must be rather disheartening for you that after more than 30 years of bhajan you are still so mired in the bodily concept of life that you pine to hold another body in your arms, not just for the relief of your aching penis, but for the human loving contact she would bring."

A: utpanna rataya samyan nairvighnyam anupagatah - Even in fully blooming bhava there are anarthas, what to speak of my state?

J: "Nevertheless, since you seem to associate sexuality with debauchery and the such, I shiver for the fate of your future companion."

A: I never said that. I said you are a debauch, not that married sex by a non-sannyasi is debauchery!

J: "If you marry only to avoid burning, then she will always be the symbol of your failures. You will always be ambivalent toward her and unable to feel the very love and physical pleasure you are still seeking."

I am aware of that, I am not a baby.

J: "Moreover, I strongly suspect that most intelligent women will intuit this ambivalent attitude and refuse to go very far with such a proposition that would lead to certain relational disaster. I strongly believe that a rigid attitude towards celibacy goes hand in hand with misogyny."

That s nonsense. Sadhu Baba was a perfect brahmacary and he loved women and gave them all the top posts in his ashram. You are ISKCONditioned to the max.

J: "But should you be fortunate enough to find a woman ready to meet the cold proposition you offer,"

You jump to conclusions, that I am only interested in sex. I never said that. You're so full of prejudice and generalisation. Loneliness is a great factor,too.

J:" what do you intend to do if by looking at her breasts you suddenly think of a verse from Govinda Lilamrita that describes Radha's? Or if you should be so fortunate as to receive a glance filled with love, will you be able to avoid remembering Radha's kataksha pat? And when she becomes angry, will you erase all thought of Radha's mana from your memory because it comes from an "unauthorized source," or because it is contaminated due to coming from a flesh and blood woman?"

Radha is maha-bhava svarupini and wives/girlfriends are of flesh and blood. You project your ahangropasana upon others. We are not all like you. Jiva Goswami said "paurush vikaravad indriyaih....nopasya" 'With an aching penis (haha) you should not meditate on this.' And that brings me to the anonymous coward and her challenges on current acaryas - all contemporary saints - Sadhu Baba, Madrasi Baba, Madanmohan Baba, Rohini Babu - all told me independently not to meditate on rahasya lila while being sexually active. And, anon, that was not what I wanted to hear.

J: "Heaven forbid your poor woman friend will be told to stop looking at you with love because it reminds you of Radha!!And if I may venture a final thought: If after 35 years of bhajan you still are ready to undertake this painful experiment, surely the impetus that is coming from deep within you is Radharani's own mercy. Have you considered this possibility? Surely after all these years Radha does not want you to engage in debauchery (after all, this is your third or fourth attempt, is it not?)."

No, the 5.761st attempt. You excel in exaggerations. I am not a lampat but an abandoned man. And I have also not done 35 but 29 years of sadhana, 19 of them celibate btw.

J: "Perhaps she really wants you to find the way to her through a loving devotee companion who will share Radha-Krishna smaran with you in the tight embrace of love, with whom you can chant Radha's name together while basking in the delights of deepest intimacy."

Mind if I ask permission from Jiva Goswami and Guru first? It is ironic to get marital advice from a serial adulterer who is himself ditched by two wives and is currently all alone.

J: "Leave aside the dry renunciation my friend. Look for the third way beyond bhoga and beyond tyaga."

Again, just like in he bad old das at GD you blindly lump me in with Iskcon. Your protest is not against me but against the acaryas and shastras. I am just following them. You havent learned anything since 2004, rather you became even more deluded.

Finally: I again protest against your vulgar approach of myself; tell ms. Abbott that it is shame that distinguishes a human being from an animal. And it is not a friendly gesture to collude with a cowardly anon in making unproven insinuations about my private life.

Jagat said...

Look Advaita, I am your well wisher. I have only the deepest desire for you to find every happiness. I am not projecting any crimes or misdemeanors on you, nor am I interested in gossip about you and your private life.

I certainly do believe, as I wrote, that your primary concern is loneliness, but frankly I don't really make that big a distinction between loneliness and sex. Call me a Freudian.

But if you think about it, you are the one who is constantly calling me names, and that is the only real reason I said anything at all. Anon was only, legitimately I think, responding to that. Now I find that you believe I am a "serial adulterer." I don't know what gossip you are listening to, but I assure you that this is a complete misrepresentation.

Indeed, to commit even one adultery has been a huge moral struggle for me, and I am furthermore well aware of the moral netherworld that my propositions potentially open up. I think that you have a distorted view of me personally and of my beliefs. Where this animus comes from I really don't know.

I am in favor of devotional sexual relations within the context of a committed loving relationship between two devotees and sadhakas. I have tried to be as clear about this as possible. This is about bhava-sadhana, the cultivation of loving feeling, which can be enhanced through physical intimacy. This loving feeling is recognized as coming from the Divine Couple and is then channeled back toward the Divine Couple.

This practice requires a certain physical culture (deha-sadhana). Yogic practice is ultimately meant to enhance mental concentration on the ishta-devata and to purify the body to make it a suitable temple for the Lord's service. Misunderstood, it can lead to abuses or to useless distractions. Properly used, it can enhance all aspects of devotional life, not even necessarily including the application that I am suggesting.

With regards to Bhaktivinoda Thakur, it is true that neither he nor any of the acharyas openly spoke of such practices; many objected to them--primarily because of the abuses, real and imagined, of which Sahajiyas have been accused. I do not defend any abuses, as I have already stated above. I opposed Premananda's approach from the very beginning because I felt that it was wrong-headed and destined for probably disaster. Nevertheless, I feel that Bhaktivinoda gives me, his grand-disciple, the right to listen to my heart and my personal experience and to learn from it. I think that you will agree I have a little knowledge of this tradition as well as commitment to it, indeed love for it. I am committed to its essential goal, expressed as prema prayojan.

In the book I am just reading by Swami Veda Bharati, he writes: "There are people who claim to be followers of kundalini yoga and say 'Love everyone' and 'have sex with everybody.' The two statements are contradictory. To love everyone means opening of the heart center--an upward inward flow. Having sex with everybody is blocking the lower center, the sexual center of consciousness, so that the kundalini energy flows downward and outward and is dissipated. When it flows inward and upward, the heart center receives that energy and opens up its love to everyone." (page 81)

I agree in totality with Swami Veda here. He is not a Tantric, by the way. Nevertheless, I see this practice as being enhanced by loving partners, who share both the yogic discipline and the symbolic universe of the Nitya Vihara and Radha-Krishna's primal and universal love.

Swami Veda also says (again, he is NOT a Tantric): "One of the best times to meditate is when there is strong sexual desire. Then that crypto-sexual energy goes upward and you have the deepest possible meditation."

To reiterate what I have already said: Bhava and prema are the essence of Radha and Krishna's world. We actually enter that world through bhava and prema, not through vidhi. Most people cultivate vidhi bhakti, even when they think themselves to be raganuga bhaktas. The forced adoption of a nitya-siddha identity is not, on its own, a sign of raganuga bhakti. In fact, since it is so often an artificial imposition on the consciousness, it is usually a struggle and turns into a kind of vidhi practice. What I am talking about is approaching raganuga sadhana through the bhava, i.e., through identifying the infinitesimal bhava with the transcendental bhava (not the infinitesimal jiva with the transcendental Divine Couple or one or the other part of that Couple) and basking in that bhava in the way that the sakhis and manjaris bask in the reflection of Radha and Krishna's love while serving it, is the essence of the natural (sahaja) raganuga sadhana.

Anonymous said...

"tell ms. Abbott that it is shame that distinguishes a human being from an animal.

No Advaita, it is not shame but freedom of making decisions that makes us humans.

advaitadas said...

Jagat; I dont share your beliefs, but you can do as you please. I know I have often used rough language about you, and you can return such insults if you want, but to jump to conclusions on mky private life and make graphic remarks on my anatomy is a new low for you. I am sure this is because of your regular pilgrimages to crow-tirthas, beware. I would appreciate it if you would delete this discussion or at least the most offensive parts of it. I feel like being stripped and raped in public.

Anon - dogs make their own decisions but they wear no clothes. Only humans wear clothes.

Jagat said...

My dear Advaita,

For someone who dishes it out rough, you sure have a thin skin.

Nothing I wrote assumed anything about your personal life except what you admit, that you are looking for a wife.

Nor do I think that any straight-thinking person will find my remarks were written in a spirit of animosity, because, to tell you the honest truth, I have NO animosity toward you.

You are a devotee of Srimati Radharani whose love for her abode is beyond question. I offer you my most sincere obeisances and wish you the best in your bhajan and your worldly happiness. May Radha bless us all with the dust of her lotus feet.

Happy New Year and Jai Radhe!!

Your servant, Jagat

Anonymous said...

I am sorry but no, dogs don't make decisions - it's all been decided for them. But If they were free to make decisions, one decision they might make would be of donning clothing of various sorts. And sometimes no clothing. Such is the nature of freedom. Such is human nature.

Anonymous said...

"dogs make their own decisions but they wear no clothes. Only humans wear clothes.

It can be argued that humans wear clothes out of even more shamelesness than animals. Devoid of natural attractives, human wear clothing of intricate sorts to lure the oposite sex into shameful contact.

Jagat said...

Maybe we can call it a day on this one. My apologies to Advaita for any offenses. Please forgive us.

Radhe Radhe!

jijaji said...

I see Advaitaji had a new post today:
The Bhagavata on misogyny, wherein he states, "The line patim tvapatitam bhajet (7.11.28) contains it all - it shows both the woman's and the man's duty. The woman must (bhajet is imperative) serve the husband (pati means 'master'), and the man must not be fallen (tvapatitam), which certainly includes abusing his wife (misogyny)"
but it it not misogyny to consider the women as servant to men..?
jeej

Apurvada EcoVillage said...

Greetings Jagat,
Here is a very interesting site about "sacred sex".

http://www.reuniting.info/karezza_method_lloyd

Saragrahi

Apurvada EcoVillage said...

Part One
This is my personal understanding regarding the "Great Sex Conundrum". Instead of presenting scriptural references as the only valid response, I shall try to present my personal realizations from a logical point of view. In addition, I no longer accept every statement of shastra as absolute truth because, I am convinced, by analysis, direct experience and comparison, that many shastric injunctions are the personal opinion of the author, and in some cases, are blatantly untrue.

The first point here requires reference to the various stages of spiritual maturation. I reference three stages from these sources:

[1] Chaitanya Vaishnavism: Kanishta, Madhyama and Uttama
[2] Paul Ricoeur: First Naivete [Faithful], Critical Distance [Rational] and Second Naivete [Mystical]
[3] James Fowler: His six stages contain the three mentioned above.
[4] M. Scott Peck and numerous other researchers have made presentations on this topic and, a cursory review of their work concurs with the idea of at least three basic stages. I am certain, among Indian traditions other than Chaitanya Vaishnavism, there must be similar categories because, ultimately, they are all manifestations Radha-Krishna and will be found everywhere humans exist.
[5] First stage - mode of ignorance. Second Stage - mode of passion. Third stage - mode of goodness

Reference to these stages is required because, in each stage, there is a distinctly different psychology, mode of perception and degree of realization of absolute and relative truths. Those in the first stage will argue in favor of their stage being absolute and, if provoked, as history shows, will kill the opposition. Those in stage two will have issues with those in stage one and will often try to go back to the stage from whence they came to "save" those in stage one. Those in stage three will have the capacity to understand and accommodate the limited perceptions of the others, and so on. One sees these various stage in play here, and everywhere Chaitanya Vaishnavas meet to discuss their various points of view.

The second point.

There is only one person in existence, Radha-Krishna or whatever name one selects to describe the Supreme Being. Individual souls are not separated parts, nor are they exclusively energy-atoms devoid of an energetic component. They are inseparable and fully integrated personality facets of Radha-Krishna. In essence, they are Radha-Krishna in the form of a limited and local manifestation within a particular pastime venue. Here in the Material Dimension, the individual souls, under the influence of false ego [separation], think they are absolutely separated from Radha-Krishna and, to attain salvation, must some how reconnect through the application of religious principles. The sense of separation causes all forms of bewilderment that underlie humanities eternal quest to discover the truth about the Supreme Ontological Mystery surrounding existence in the Material Dimension. This is the foundation fallacy of all material existence because, the souls are not separated and do not need to reconnect. What they need to realize is that they are engaged in a co-creative pastime.

Apurvada EcoVillage said...

Part Two
The third point.
In this sense, all sexual activity is the sexual activity of Radha-Krishna expressed in different pastime venues. Here in the Material Dimension, the sexual activity of the personality facets is over coated with ignorance of their true identity and the influence of the modes of nature. Even when a man rapes a helpless girl under the influence of ignorance and the mode of ignorance or passion, that sex is still the sexual activity of Radha-Krishna enacted through the agency of Maha Lakshmi-Vishnu. This portion of the personality of Radha-Krishna, the Demiurge, is where all opposite, reflected and distorted archetypes originate to be enacted in the Material Dimension. If something exists, it must be real and have a relationship to the whole to which it belongs. If the complete whole did not contain so-called material sex, it would not be manifest here in the Material Dimension. The false sense of absolute separation, when expressed from the first stage of spiritual evolution, induces the souls therein to view sex in black and white categories. Sex according to religious dogma is sanctified while all other sex is sinful. This bifurcation of sex into profane and sacred categories creates the play field in which the fundamentalists end up killing others who exhibit sexual practices contrary to religious dogma. Those in the critical distance are in the process of decoding and understanding the means by which pure archetypes become mixed with their opposite, refleced and distorted archetypes to create the unique pastime venue known as the Material Dimension. Those in the mystical phase see everything as a direct expression of the limitless pastimes of Radha-Krishna and, as such, are not offended by anything. From the point of view of Radha-Krishna/Lakshmi-Vishnu there is no such thing as sacred, profane, right or wrong. For Radha-Krishna, virtually everything is a pastime, either in Vaikuntha, Goloka or Bahiranga [Material Dimension].

The fourth point.

Those in the Mystical phase see all sexual activity as the sex of Radha-Krishna displayed in various pastime venues. They are free to engage in sexual activity in full awareness of who they are and that everything they do is also the doing of Radha-Krishna. Those in the Critical Distance are gradually moving away from the first stage toward the third stage and, in doing so, engage in research and experimentation to test the fallacies of the first stage to derive their own personal point of view, devoid of the descending authoritarian dogmatics of the first stage. Being free of religious dogma, they are not afraid to question authority, reject it or experiment with what, in the first stage, would be considered heresy and profane. Those in the first stage are convinced of the absolute perfection of their religious dogma and exist in a state of constant indignation at the fallen status of humanity. A primary feature of the first stage is engagement in religious activities under the force of fear and reward. Under this influence, the first stage individual is afraid to engage in any form of sex that is not made sacred by edict of religious dogma. On the other hand, they engage in religious activity to obtain a reward. The ultimate reward of those in the first stage is to be reconnected to Radha-Krishna, but, that can only be done if one obeys the authority of dogma.

Apurvada EcoVillage said...

Part Three
Last point.
One cannot compare apples to oranges. Those in the first stage cannot understand the second and third stages. Those in the second stage cannot expect those in the first stage to understand and accept their view of sex, when those in the first stage have a one dimensional and severely limited point of view on the various expressions of Radha-Krishna sexual activity in different venues.

My personal experience.

While in ISKCON for 12 years, I obeyed the dogmatics and had sex once a month as a householder. Due to the sex edict, I was often afraid of falling down and losing the reward. When I "fell down" and had recreational sex, I felt terrible. I would attend Bhagavatam class marinated in shame as the local Sexless-Sannyas berated householders as wanton sex mongers with no hope of ever getting the grace of God, However, looking back on my sex life during those years, I notice that sexual experience really had nothing to do with spiritual consciousness. When I was able to set aside the dogma induced guilt and shame, I see that my root consciousness remained unaffected by anything that was happening to me. Nowadays, my sex life does not cause shame and guilt because I am no longer under the thralls of religious dogma. I am not afraid and, the reward is omni-present, without submission to the authority structure. I am having the best sex ever! Sex life is sacred, period! Absolutely and undeniably the personal presence of the most intimate aspect of Radha-Krishna! Sex life as profane is a delusion induced by faulty religious dogma for the control and exploitation of the innocent. Sex life does not impede spiritual development. Sex life is an essential feature of a healthy spiritual odyssey. Sex life cannot be renounced, period. Sex life cannot be renounced because it is an integral and non separate feature of Radha-Krishna and the jiva personality facet. As such, sex life, to be properly understood and experienced as a natural function of the soul [sahajiya = natural] needs to be harmoniously integrated in such a manner that it does not induce the fallacy of separation and profanity. When this is done, all sexual activity is a sacred and shared communion involving the jiva with Radha-Krishna. This is love of God in practice, and, who would not want to be directly involved with and participating in the love life of Radha-Krishna?