Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. > > Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). > > Love > Bobby G. "Control" of the senses perpetuates the idea that there is someone who controls. You can have it. It forms the boundary of your identification as an entity. love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote: > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. > > > > Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > > helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). > > > > Love > > Bobby G. > > "Control" of the senses perpetuates the idea that there is > someone who controls. You can have it. It forms the boundary > of your identification as an entity. > > love--jody. That was another one of my knee jerks. Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous practice is entirely relative to the person and their cultural context. Some of what passes as virtuous practices in yoga are stifling and repressive. For instance, the control of one's sexual desire. If one is not hurting themselves or anyone else, their sex life is entirely irrelevant. What I'm trying to say here is don't let the lilly-white hagiographies of the saints of India be your guide to sexual morality. Besides being white-washes most of the time, they come from an entirely separate cultural context with an entirely mythic (and often hypocritical) conception of sex and it's relationship to spiritual practice. I'd contend most of it was just Aryan psych ops aimed at keeping the indigenous birth rate low by implying that sex impedes spiritual progress, thereby encouraging the locals to abstain from making babies. love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 > Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. > > Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). > > Love > Bobby G. "Control" of the senses perpetuates the idea that there is someone who controls. You can have it. It forms the boundary of your identification as an entity. love--jody. Dear Jody: Good advice for people who are ready to see that wanting to control the senses perpetuates a boundary of identity. For people lost in a sea of sensory turmoil, wanting some control is a pretty good idea. That was another one of my knee jerks. Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous practice is entirely relative to the person and their cultural context. Some of what passes as virtuous practices in yoga are stifling and repressive. For instance, the control of one's sexual desire. If one is not hurting themselves or anyone else, their sex life is entirely irrelevant. What I'm trying to say here is don't let the lilly-white hagiographies of the saints of India be your guide to sexual morality. Besides being white-washes most of the time, they come from an entirely separate cultural context with an entirely mythic (and often hypocritical) conception of sex and it's relationship to spiritual practice. I'd contend most of it was just Aryan psych ops aimed at keeping the indigenous birth rate low by implying that sex impedes spiritual progress, thereby encouraging the locals to abstain from making babies. love--jody. I have to go with my gut on this sex thing. I don't believe sensory control has anything to do with sexual morals. The senses are tied to the breath and the heart and require an immediate or existential control. Morals are conceptual. If the mind is a sense then any thought is controlled in the same way as a sense. Certainly not having control is not better. Control is an indication of no boundaries. For myself I believe that sex requires hormonal keys be put in play in the bloodstream and they make their way to the brain where they influence thoughts, actions, and support the development of vasanas. Until control is established I will go along with the old view on this and say give up sex. After knowledge is established then it won't interfere so much as just slow down progress. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 Hi Jody, You wrote: >>> Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous practice is entirely relative to the person and their cultural context. Some of what passes as virtuous practices in yoga are stifling and repressive. For instance, the control of one's sexual desire. If one is not hurting themselves or anyone else, their sex life is entirely irrelevant. What I'm trying to say here is don't let the lilly-white hagiographies of the saints of India be your guide to sexual morality. Besides being white-washes most of the time, they come from an entirely separate cultural context with an entirely mythic (and often hypocritical) conception of sex and it's relationship to spiritual practice. <<< Well put. Wim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 7/10/2002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 , Wim Borsboom <wim@a...> wrote: > Hi Jody, > > You wrote: > >>> Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous > practice is entirely relative ... [snip] > Well put. > Wim Thanks Wim. Being a devotee of Ramakrishna made these issues very difficult for me. He is portrayed as absolutely beyond any sexual desire, but when one investigates a little further one can see that this wasn't necessarily the case in his life. In my own life I had to go with my intuition even though it seemed to conflict with the tradition and the practices of those around me. This generated a lot of guilt and shame, but if it doesn't kill you it makes you stronger, and so it afforded me the opportunity to inquire even more. --jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 Good for you Jody! >>> ...but if it doesn't kill you it makes you stronger, and so it afforded me the opportunity to inquire even more. <<< Wim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 7/10/2002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 How is your leg healing? You must be rattling around the house ready to go for long hikes right about now. , "ecirada" <janb@a...> wrote: > > On 8/9/02 at 1:55 PM texasbg2000 wrote: > > ºOnly one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. > > Without tendencies to breathe, drink, eat and excrete, there wouldn't be a sage ;-) Very cute! I was not aware that eating and drinking for sustenance were vasanas. I will wait till I get some corroboration on that before adopting any death programs of abstinence. > º > ºControl of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > ºhelpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). > > Control has its limitations, the breathing issue demonstrates this... > As nirvana/moksha pertains to mind-bodies, life-energy and its > distribution determines success or failure - a science not openly > discussed in cyber space. Regarding Self-realization, there are > two requirements: to be conditioned and alive ;-) Control is pleasure intensive. Once someone, a baby or monkey, for instance has control of something they get mad if it is taken away. They will exert control just for the sake of it. Resistance to lack of control creates dictators and alpha males. :-O If controlling the senses is a bad habit and has to be broken I guess I should not exert control over that either.:-} Love Bobby G. > > Peace, > Jan > º Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 Hi Jody, Having been exposed early on to Ramakrishna, I learned a different viewpoint. For context, if one reviews the lives of the "saints" and "sages" of virtually all the religions and traditions one finds that they had problems with their "drives" or observing the drives of people in the society in which they found themselves. They saw that the exercise of such drives led to problems and ultimately suffering. As I dug deeper into the teachings relative to the suppression of "drives" I discovered that the actual teaching was: Suppress the drive until it doesn't control you any more. When you are in control, are managing your drives, then you can express them creatively, not self-destructively. For some teachers and mostly their followers, the "hit" from being in such control was so strong the second generation taught the complete suppression of the "drives". Operating Question: Who or what is in control? Operating Answer: If the drive is in control, there will be problems, individually and societally, and choice is lacking; if the consciousness is in control, then there will be choice. The result will generally be beneficial if the consciousness has integrity (but that is another discussion). Operating Conclusion: The problem is not the practice it is the attachment. Many of the problems associated with any tradition is the limited interpretation by followers of the master's teaching. The master's teaching always has a context and an audience to which the master is responding. The problem arises with that context is not taken into account and the master's statements are taken as universally true, when actually they are provisional. One must be wary in dealing with those who skip from mountaintop to mountaintop. It is easy for those at the bottom of the mountain to misunderstand. (Image: The Fool, the 0 card of the Tarot deck. The fool falls off the cliff, the master (appearing to be a fool) simply jumps to the next mountaintop. BTW how did the fool become a master? Ans. By falling off the mountain!) John L. , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote: > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote: > > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > > Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. > > > > > > Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > > > helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). > > > > > > Love > > > Bobby G. > > Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous > practice is entirely relative to the person and their cultural > context. > > Some of what passes as virtuous practices in yoga are stifling > and repressive. For instance, the control of one's sexual desire. > If one is not hurting themselves or anyone else, their sex life > is entirely irrelevant. > > What I'm trying to say here is don't let the lilly-white > hagiographies of the saints of India be your guide to sexual > morality. Besides being white-washes most of the time, they > come from an entirely separate cultural context with an entirely > mythic (and often hypocritical) conception of sex and it's > relationship to spiritual practice. > > I'd contend most of it was just Aryan psych ops aimed at > keeping the indigenous birth rate low by implying that > sex impedes spiritual progress, thereby encouraging the > locals to abstain from making babies. > > love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 Dear Jody: > The senses are tied to the breath and > the heart and require an immediate or existential control. Why is it required? Who is requiring it? In order to control the senses one must be in the heart which places the breath under control and being in the here and now is required for this. I'm not saying don't practice self control. Whatever floats your boat. But to say that control is required just isn't true. It can certainly help, but is certainly not necessary in every case. > Morals are > conceptual. If the mind is a sense then any thought is controlled in the > same way as a sense. The one seeking control is *itself* a concept. Yes, seeking control is conceptual as is the 'one' seeking. > Certainly not having control is not better. Not *needing* control is best. For some the path of control drops them off here. For others never wanting control leads them right to the same spot. Right. Action or surrender. > Control is an indication of no > boundaries. Come again? An example. Breath control begins as an exercise where one may count and space the breath. Push out and pull in. Take and give back. When control is achieved the breath is followed effortlessly. At any moment control could be exerted but is not because that is the meaning of effortless control. This state indicates a lack of boundaries. It is the person who cannot control it who is a concept. > For myself I believe that sex requires hormonal keys be put in play in the > bloodstream and they make their way to the brain where they influence > thoughts, actions, and support the development of vasanas. Thoughts always happen. We'll never escape them. It's their various significances we have to watch out for. Your belief that sex control we get you beyond them is just that, and that's why it can work. However, if it does, it will have nothing to do with the control and everything to do with the belief in it. I can live with that. > Until control is > established I will go along with the old view on this and say give up sex. If that's the truest feeling in your heart then that's exactly what you should do. > After knowledge is established then it won't interfere so much as just slow > down progress. > > Love > Bobby G. The ladder you're climbing is entirely of your own making. May the top lead you to the understanding sitting right there in your lap. This sounds like an indictment of technique in general. do you believe that greater understanding comes to those who do not make an effort to clear their minds? If not why criticise the ladder I built? Your thoughts on the subject are clear. I just wonder if you did not do some vasana clearing up at some point to get you here? Some efforts which now you say are not necessary. love--jody. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 The secret of surrender is understanding-seeing that all control is an illusion and ultimately comes from a center which does not exist, an effort that is futile since it's ground is false. love let love Shawn Dear Shawn: Control is surrender. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2002 Report Share Posted August 9, 2002 On 8/9/02 at 1:55 PM texasbg2000 wrote: ºOnly one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. Without tendencies to breathe, drink, eat and excrete, there wouldn't be a sage ;-) º ºControl of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very ºhelpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). Control has its limitations, the breathing issue demonstrates this... As nirvana/moksha pertains to mind-bodies, life-energy and its distribution determines success or failure - a science not openly discussed in cyber space. Regarding Self-realization, there are two requirements: to be conditioned and alive ;-) Peace, Jan º ºLove ºBobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 The secret of surrender is understanding-seeing that all control is an illusion and ultimately comes from a center which does not exist, an effort that is futile since it's ground is false. love let love Shawn on 8/9/02 3:07 PM, Bigbobgraham at Bigbobgraham wrote: >> Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. >> >> Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very >> helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). >> >> Love >> Bobby G. > > "Control" of the senses perpetuates the idea that there is > someone who controls. You can have it. It forms the boundary > of your identification as an entity. > > love--jody. > > Dear Jody: > > Good advice for people who are ready to see that wanting to control the > senses perpetuates a boundary of identity. For people lost in a sea of > sensory turmoil, wanting some control is a pretty good idea. > > > That was another one of my knee jerks. > > Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous > practice is entirely relative to the person and their cultural > context. > > Some of what passes as virtuous practices in yoga are stifling > and repressive. For instance, the control of one's sexual desire. > If one is not hurting themselves or anyone else, their sex life > is entirely irrelevant. > > What I'm trying to say here is don't let the lilly-white > hagiographies of the saints of India be your guide to sexual > morality. Besides being white-washes most of the time, they > come from an entirely separate cultural context with an entirely > mythic (and often hypocritical) conception of sex and it's > relationship to spiritual practice. > > I'd contend most of it was just Aryan psych ops aimed at > keeping the indigenous birth rate low by implying that > sex impedes spiritual progress, thereby encouraging the > locals to abstain from making babies. > > love--jody. > > I have to go with my gut on this sex thing. I don't believe sensory control > has anything to do with sexual morals. The senses are tied to the breath and > the heart and require an immediate or existential control. Morals are > conceptual. If the mind is a sense then any thought is controlled in the > same way as a sense. > > Certainly not having control is not better. Control is an indication of no > boundaries. > > For myself I believe that sex requires hormonal keys be put in play in the > bloodstream and they make their way to the brain where they influence > thoughts, actions, and support the development of vasanas. Until control is > established I will go along with the old view on this and say give up sex. > After knowledge is established then it won't interfere so much as just slow > down progress. > > Love > Bobby G. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 , Bigbobgraham@a... wrote: [snip] > Dear Jody: > > Good advice for people who are ready to see that wanting to control the > senses perpetuates a boundary of identity. For people lost in a sea of > sensory turmoil, wanting some control is a pretty good idea. It is the nature of being alive to seek comfort and avoid pain, so if control brings comfort then it will be sought. [snip] > I have to go with my gut on this sex thing. I don't believe sensory control > has anything to do with sexual morals. But they are often taken as the same nonetheless. > The senses are tied to the breath and > the heart and require an immediate or existential control. Why is it required? Who is requiring it? I'm not saying don't practice self control. Whatever floats your boat. But to say that control is required just isn't true. It can certainly help, but is certainly not necessary in every case. > Morals are > conceptual. If the mind is a sense then any thought is controlled in the > same way as a sense. The one seeking control is *itself* a concept. > Certainly not having control is not better. Not *needing* control is best. For some the path of control drops them off here. For others never wanting control leads them right to the same spot. > Control is an indication of no > boundaries. Come again? > For myself I believe that sex requires hormonal keys be put in play in the > bloodstream and they make their way to the brain where they influence > thoughts, actions, and support the development of vasanas. Thoughts always happen. We'll never escape them. It's their various significances we have to watch out for. Your belief that sex control we get you beyond them is just that, and that's why it can work. However, if it does, it will have nothing to do with the control and everything to do with the belief in it. > Until control is > established I will go along with the old view on this and say give up sex. If that's the truest feeling in your heart then that's exactly what you should do. > After knowledge is established then it won't interfere so much as just slow > down progress. > > Love > Bobby G. The ladder you're climbing is entirely of your own making. May the top lead you to the understanding sitting right there in your lap. love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 on 8/9/02 7:34 PM, Bigbobgraham at Bigbobgraham wrote: > The secret of surrender is understanding-seeing that all control is an > illusion and ultimately comes from a center which does not exist, an effort > that is futile since it's ground is false. > > love let love Shawn > > > Dear Shawn: > > Control is surrender. > > Love > Bobby G. dear Bobby, Only when cooking a stew... what's that smell....mmmmm, oh no!~ ...someone's burning the concepts again! ....what is the opposite of control? Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 , Bigbobgraham@a... wrote: [snip] > Dear Shawn: > > Control is surrender. > > Love > Bobby G. Control is a full participation in the illusion that you are an individual. Surrender is an acknowledgement that this "illusion" is subject to the whims of the universe. love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 , Bigbobgraham@a... wrote: [snip] >> The ladder you're climbing is entirely of your own making. >> May the top lead you to the understanding sitting right >> there in your lap. > > This sounds like an indictment of technique in general. Not technique, but the idea that there's somewhere to go. If we spent more time looking for that which is already here, rather than imagining it's at the end of a rainbow, we just might get to see it quicker. > do you believe that > greater understanding comes to those who do not make an effort to clear their > minds? If not why criticise the ladder I built? Meditation practice and greater understanding seem to be in love with one another. I believe it's always a good idea to meditate, whether you are spiritual or not. Clearing the mind by not having sex may help when you don't want sex. But repressed desire can create just as much havoc as expressed desire. And repressed desire will always find a way to express itself anyway, usually in a way that is not controlled. > Your thoughts on the subject are clear. I just wonder if you did not do some > vasana clearing up at some point to get you here? Some efforts which now you > say are not necessary. > > love--jody. > > Love > Bobby G. I'm not saying meditation is unnecessary. The stats tell a different story. What I'm saying is that safe sex behavior will not necessarily interfere with a normal spiritual practice. That is, you don't necessarily need to control what would be considered reasonable and safe sex behavior. I can accept that some people are better off by not having sex, but I'm also certain that having it is much more like eating or sleeping rather than stealing twenties out of your mother's purse. love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 , "johnrloganis" <johnrloganis> wrote: > Hi Jody, > Having been exposed early on to Ramakrishna, I learned a different > viewpoint. For context, if one reviews the lives of the "saints" > and "sages" of virtually all the religions and traditions one finds > that they had problems with their "drives" or observing the drives of > people in the society in which they found themselves. They saw that > the exercise of such drives led to problems and ultimately suffering. That was definitely true in Ramakrishna's case as his problems stemmed from the fact that his sexual preferences were taboo. He had to overcome his drive in order to survive as much as teach anyone a lesson. His frequent admonishment against consorting with sexually active women was directed at the apprentices he was grooming to be the sanyassis of his order, not at those who read his words in a book he had no idea would exist in a land he knew almost nothing about. If he did, he may have said something else, as he did to his householder disciples. Most of these teachings were not recorded, and the few that were have been edited for content by the swamis. --jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 On 8/10/02 at 12:37 AM Bigbobgraham (AT) aol (DOT) com wrote: Dear Jan: How is your leg healing? You must be rattling around the house ready to go for long hikes right about now. Dear Bobby, One month ago the ankle was healed well enough to speed walk. Hiking is ok now but running and jumping still are difficult and cause some pain. The "explanation" i use for the somewhat speedy recovery is Reiki :-) , "ecirada" <janb@a...> wrote:> > On 8/9/02 at 1:55 PM texasbg2000 wrote:> > ºOnly one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage..> > Without tendencies to breathe, drink, eat and excrete, there wouldn't be a sage ;-)Very cute! I was not aware that eating and drinking for sustenance were vasanas. I will wait till I get some corroboration on that before adopting any death programs of abstinence. In my case, when the K. was rising, pranayama happened spontaneous and breathing often happens with the awareness of it, according to the dictum "old habits last long". Yogis have been buried while in samadhi, for weeks, showing there's more to the breathing issue than air. > º> ºControl of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > ºhelpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance).> > Control has its limitations, the breathing issue demonstrates this...> As nirvana/moksha pertains to mind-bodies, life-energy and its > distribution determines success or failure - a science not openly > discussed in cyber space. Regarding Self-realization, there are > two requirements: to be conditioned and alive ;-)Control is pleasure intensive. Once someone, a baby or monkey, for instance has control of something they get mad if it is taken away. They will exert control just for the sake of it. Resistance to lack of control creates dictators and alpha males. :-O In my case, control hasn't been the issue, (re)directing the life-force was. If pleasure would have been the issue, jokingly called "acceptance", i would still be a Self-realized moksha seeker, or would have accepted a belief like "apperception = nirvana" :-) If controlling the senses is a bad habit and has to be broken I guess I should not exert control over that either.:-} What is control from one perspective, indeed is a habit from another. I could claim to control appetite by exercise but instead confess a habit of enjoying outdoor life here :-) One poem covertly dealing with the topic of 'control' is by the mystic Lalla. In it, she calls the senses "thieves" bestowed upon her by God. She is most grateful to her guru who taught the art of liberating her from those thieves, hence is "greater" than God :-) On a more serious note, the only non-human guru who can convey the same lesson is Yama, who could be called Ramana's guru as well... Peace, Jan LoveBobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Hi Shawn and Bobby When I have more time I'll get into the original meaning of the word "control"... There something to say for control being surrender... something to make sure that surrender is / was genuine... Of course control is an accounting term... Wim Bigbobgraham [bigbobgraham] Friday, August 09, 2002 10:35 PM re: Control The secret of surrender is understanding-seeing that all control is an illusion and ultimately comes from a center which does not exist, an effort that is futile since it's ground is false. love let love Shawn Dear Shawn: Control is surrender. Love Bobby G. /join All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. Your use of is subject to --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 7/10/2002 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 7/10/2002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Dear Shawn, Jody, and Wim: If one stops to look at what control of the senses would mean it should be clear that it is not so mundane as wanting to be president. A liberated sage does not have run away senses. They are said to be controlled. Example: George W. and Ramana are in a conference. Who has more power? Who uses the power they have? I don't remember the exact quote but I heard an old Ram Das (Richard Alpert) tape where he said, 'you have to give it all up to get it all.' The ultimate act of control is the giving it up. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Jody, Bob & Friends, Bob says: Good advice for people who are ready to see that wanting to control the > senses perpetuates a boundary of identity. For people lost in a sea of > sensory turmoil, wanting some control is a pretty good idea. There you go. Well put, Bob. yours in the bonds, eric , Bigbobgraham@a... wrote: > <A HREF="/post? protectID=103166091112042031200098031219147090006058044067209130152">H arshaSatsangh</A>, "texasbg2000" <<A HREF="/post? protectID=023176178254193202048061175004147223136144139046209">Bigbobg raham@a...</A>> wrote: > > Only one who is free from all latent tendencies (vasanas) is a sage. > > > > Control of the senses along with other virtuous practices is very > > helpful for the attainment of knowledge (vidya-absence of ignorance). > > > > Love > > Bobby G. > > "Control" of the senses perpetuates the idea that there is > someone who controls. You can have it. It forms the boundary > of your identification as an entity. > > love--jody. > > Dear Jody: > > Good advice for people who are ready to see that wanting to control the > senses perpetuates a boundary of identity. For people lost in a sea of > sensory turmoil, wanting some control is a pretty good idea. > > > That was another one of my knee jerks. > > Self-effort is important, but what is considered a virtuous > practice is entirely relative to the person and their cultural > context. > > Some of what passes as virtuous practices in yoga are stifling > and repressive. For instance, the control of one's sexual desire. > If one is not hurting themselves or anyone else, their sex life > is entirely irrelevant. > > What I'm trying to say here is don't let the lilly-white > hagiographies of the saints of India be your guide to sexual > morality. Besides being white-washes most of the time, they > come from an entirely separate cultural context with an entirely > mythic (and often hypocritical) conception of sex and it's > relationship to spiritual practice. > > I'd contend most of it was just Aryan psych ops aimed at > keeping the indigenous birth rate low by implying that > sex impedes spiritual progress, thereby encouraging the > locals to abstain from making babies. > > love--jody. > > I have to go with my gut on this sex thing. I don't believe sensory control > has anything to do with sexual morals. The senses are tied to the breath and > the heart and require an immediate or existential control. Morals are > conceptual. If the mind is a sense then any thought is controlled in the > same way as a sense. > > Certainly not having control is not better. Control is an indication of no > boundaries. > > For myself I believe that sex requires hormonal keys be put in play in the > bloodstream and they make their way to the brain where they influence > thoughts, actions, and support the development of vasanas. Until control is > established I will go along with the old view on this and say give up sex. > After knowledge is established then it won't interfere so much as just slow > down progress. > > Love > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Jody, BigBob & Friends, Jody says: I can accept that some people are better off by not having sex, but I'm also certain that having it is much more like eating or sleeping rather than stealing twenties out of your mother's purse. eric says: great Realizers are also famous for learning to control their sleep habits as well as their food intake. Sleep deprivation and fasting are ancient tools of Realization practice in all the cultures where the goal of Enlightenment is respected. Hmmmmm. yours in the bonds, eric , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote: > , Bigbobgraham@a... wrote: > > [snip] > > >> The ladder you're climbing is entirely of your own making. > >> May the top lead you to the understanding sitting right > >> there in your lap. > > > > This sounds like an indictment of technique in general. > > Not technique, but the idea that there's somewhere to go. > If we spent more time looking for that which is already > here, rather than imagining it's at the end of a rainbow, > we just might get to see it quicker. > > > do you believe that > > greater understanding comes to those who do not make an effort to > clear their > > minds? If not why criticise the ladder I built? > > Meditation practice and greater understanding seem to be > in love with one another. I believe it's always a good > idea to meditate, whether you are spiritual or not. > > Clearing the mind by not having sex may help when you don't > want sex. But repressed desire can create just as much > havoc as expressed desire. And repressed desire will always > find a way to express itself anyway, usually in a way that > is not controlled. > > > Your thoughts on the subject are clear. I just wonder if you did > not do some > > vasana clearing up at some point to get you here? Some efforts > which now you > > say are not necessary. > > > > love--jody. > > > > Love > > Bobby G. > > I'm not saying meditation is unnecessary. The stats tell > a different story. What I'm saying is that safe sex > behavior will not necessarily interfere with a normal > spiritual practice. > > That is, you don't necessarily need to control what would > be considered reasonable and safe sex behavior. > > I can accept that some people are better off by > not having sex, but I'm also certain that having it > is much more like eating or sleeping rather than > stealing twenties out of your mother's purse. > > love--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Actually Eric, great realizers CANNOT BE > famous for learning to control their sleep > habits as well as their food intake. etc. It works the other way around, being realized, none of those things matter, they may be there, they may not be there... whatever comes up arises in the permeating bliss of being, all of what is, is unconditionally appreciated. Wim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 7/10/2002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2002 Report Share Posted August 10, 2002 Hi Bobby, > A liberated sage does not have run away senses. > They are said to be controlled. That's right, they just cannot be uncontrolled, appropriateness is always clear. This is actually what the Heart Sutra conveys... Oh, if we ever had a good translation... Wim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release 7/10/2002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.