Guest guest Posted January 5, 2004 Report Share Posted January 5, 2004 dear sadhaks/sadhikaas, can anyone tell me for what purpose/siddhi gauri form of the divine mother is worshipped in tantra. jai gurudev soham /*\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2004 Report Share Posted January 8, 2004 , Antinous <materdeorum@s...> wrote: > Satish: > When you listen to Mary Ann, do you not hear the voice of Mother >seeking to break free from ages of male dominance. Listen from the >heart and notice that Kali Ma dances upon the corpse of Lord Shiva. >Ma must break free during Kali Yuga for the journey to continue. >(Only my humble opinion) > > Warren There is none or nothing in this world that can bind or imprison Mother in anyway. The fact that Kali dances on top of Shiva can be observed from pictures and reading books. I need not listen to "voice of Mother from Mary Ann" to understand that. Also note that the name Shiva includes Shakti. Shiva is no different from Kali. So there is nothing for Ma to break free from, and she isnt journeying anywhere. The Kali on Shiva picture does not represent female dominance or any of that non-sense. Regards Satish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2004 Report Share Posted January 11, 2004 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Namaste: > > I think it is worthwhile to question and repair the effects of living > in "this generally patriarchal, global authoritarian culture" you > mention, but I don't associate that with "tinkering" with one's > sexuality for experimentation purposes. I'm not sure what you > mean by that...? I just think that being loving with, in, and about, > sexuality and sexual energy is most important. If that could be > the rule and practice, there would be so much less pain in the > world. > > -- Mary Ann Well, notions such as 'rule and practice' in terms of individuals sexual preferences I find a bit strange, anyway. People can do whatever they want, so long as they are not harming anyone, and hopefully not themselves, either: as far as I am concerned... m6 > > , "m6" > <megalith6@h...> wrote: > > Namaste, > > > > Why is sex taboo? Because it cannot be controlled and is > subversive, > > in terms of this generally patriarchal, global authoritarian > culture > > that we are now increasingly living in. > > > > Shri Ardhanarishvara reminds us that Divinity is androgynous, > how > > could it be otherwise? > > > > The sexual act between a woman and a man could be seen as > symbolising > > this sacred, androgynous state - a 'Tantric consubstantiation', if > > you will. > > > > But physical coitus isn't necessary for this - look at Kundalini > > Yoga: you can spiritually > > unite the male and female aspects within a human being by > practising > > this discipline. > > > > Otherwise, I shouldn't advise anyone to attempt tinkering with > their > > sexuality for the sake of experimentation: the result is likely to > be > > one extremely confused and unhappy individual. > > > > Jai Om - > > > > m6 > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > Hello Satish: > > > > > > Thank you for your inquiry, and your honest expression of not > > > understanding me. From my perspective, I see Devi as > > > particularly strong in children, women, and gay people, and I > see > > > harsh treatment of each, that is, attempts to control or > suppress > > > what is natural by calling it unnatural, as acts against Devi. > > Thus, > > > I see the need to make men be "manly" (and deny Devi > within) > > > as resulting in the prejudice against more free expression of > > > sexual energy. I think this restraint on sexuality prevents our > > > growth spiritually and otherwise because it keeps us > entrenched > > > in assumptions that do not allow for the free and loving flow > of > > > life energy in all. I hope this explains it better for you. > > > > > > BTW I don't think that everyone would be lesbian or gay if the > > > various churches and other authorities quit proclaiming that > sex > > > (and marriage) should only be between man and woman. > But I > > > do think that those who are afraid of sexuality in its myriad > forms > > > are fearful of that. Why else make it such a taboo thing? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Mary Ann > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Satish Arigela" > > > <satisharigela> wrote: > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > I think there is such a taboo on sexuality other than that > > > between > > > > > male and female because the female aspect has been > so > > > > > degraded in our world. It is seen as degrading or false for > > > men > > > > > to "take the role of the female" with another man in sexual > > > > > embrace. It is seen as false or undesireable for a woman > to > > > > > "take the role of a man." This shows too much emphasis > on > > > > > roles based on gender, which limits what individuals are > > > > > capable of, and limits the evolution of our world, > spiritually > > > and > > > > > otherwise. My two cents, anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that supposed to mean that we evolve better > "spiritually > > or > > > > otherwise" if everyone in this world becomes a Lesbian or > > > Gay? > > > > > > > > Can u plz explain the phrase "limits what individuals are > > > > capable of"? > > > > > > > > I barely understand ur obsession with homosexuality and > the > > > reason > > > > why u have to bring that up time and again in a Shaktism > list? > > > > > > > > Satish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2004 Report Share Posted January 11, 2004 Hi m6: That's nice to hear. But there's no denying that the effects of the "rule and practice" that says marriage should only be between a man and a woman harms people. The so-called "gay community" -- comprised of people who unite with others outside of the "rule and practice" regarding marriage -- deals with hate crimes against and beating deaths of its members, as well as suicide, either by deliberately contracting AIDS, or taking one's life by other means, including taking prescription drugs due to being diagnosed as mentally ill and "living" a deadened existence. That's a huge weight of prejudice going against people when it comes to the most beautiful feelings Devi has gifted to us all. M , "m6" <megalith6@h...> wrote: > , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> > wrote: > > Namaste: > > > > I think it is worthwhile to question and repair the effects of > living > > in "this generally patriarchal, global authoritarian culture" you > > mention, but I don't associate that with "tinkering" with one's > > sexuality for experimentation purposes. I'm not sure what you > > mean by that...? I just think that being loving with, in, and > about, > > sexuality and sexual energy is most important. If that could be > > the rule and practice, there would be so much less pain in the > > world. > > > > -- Mary Ann > > Well, notions such as 'rule and practice' in terms of individuals > sexual preferences I find a bit strange, anyway. People can do > whatever they want, so long as they are not harming anyone, and > hopefully not themselves, either: as far as I am concerned... > > m6 > > > > > , "m6" > > <megalith6@h...> wrote: > > > Namaste, > > > > > > Why is sex taboo? Because it cannot be controlled and is > > subversive, > > > in terms of this generally patriarchal, global authoritarian > > culture > > > that we are now increasingly living in. > > > > > > Shri Ardhanarishvara reminds us that Divinity is androgynous, > > how > > > could it be otherwise? > > > > > > The sexual act between a woman and a man could be seen as > > symbolising > > > this sacred, androgynous state - a 'Tantric consubstantiation', > if > > > you will. > > > > > > But physical coitus isn't necessary for this - look at Kundalini > > > Yoga: you can spiritually > > > unite the male and female aspects within a human being by > > practising > > > this discipline. > > > > > > Otherwise, I shouldn't advise anyone to attempt tinkering with > > their > > > sexuality for the sake of experimentation: the result is likely > to > > be > > > one extremely confused and unhappy individual. > > > > > > Jai Om - > > > > > > m6 > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > <maryann@m...> > > > wrote: > > > > Hello Satish: > > > > > > > > Thank you for your inquiry, and your honest expression of not > > > > understanding me. From my perspective, I see Devi as > > > > particularly strong in children, women, and gay people, and I > > see > > > > harsh treatment of each, that is, attempts to control or > > suppress > > > > what is natural by calling it unnatural, as acts against Devi. > > > Thus, > > > > I see the need to make men be "manly" (and deny Devi > > within) > > > > as resulting in the prejudice against more free expression of > > > > sexual energy. I think this restraint on sexuality prevents our > > > > growth spiritually and otherwise because it keeps us > > entrenched > > > > in assumptions that do not allow for the free and loving flow > > of > > > > life energy in all. I hope this explains it better for you. > > > > > > > > BTW I don't think that everyone would be lesbian or gay if the > > > > various churches and other authorities quit proclaiming that > > sex > > > > (and marriage) should only be between man and woman. > > But I > > > > do think that those who are afraid of sexuality in its myriad > > forms > > > > are fearful of that. Why else make it such a taboo thing? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Mary Ann > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Satish Arigela" > > > > <satisharigela> wrote: > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I think there is such a taboo on sexuality other than that > > > > between > > > > > > male and female because the female aspect has been > > so > > > > > > degraded in our world. It is seen as degrading or false for > > > > men > > > > > > to "take the role of the female" with another man in sexual > > > > > > embrace. It is seen as false or undesireable for a woman > > to > > > > > > "take the role of a man." This shows too much emphasis > > on > > > > > > roles based on gender, which limits what individuals are > > > > > > capable of, and limits the evolution of our world, > > spiritually > > > > and > > > > > > otherwise. My two cents, anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that supposed to mean that we evolve better > > "spiritually > > > or > > > > > otherwise" if everyone in this world becomes a Lesbian or > > > > Gay? > > > > > > > > > > Can u plz explain the phrase "limits what individuals are > > > > > capable of"? > > > > > > > > > > I barely understand ur obsession with homosexuality and > > the > > > > reason > > > > > why u have to bring that up time and again in a Shaktism > > list? > > > > > > > > > > Satish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2004 Report Share Posted January 29, 2004 , "Mary Ann" <maryann@m...> wrote: > Hi m6: > > That's nice to hear. But there's no denying that the effects of the > "rule and practice" that says marriage should only be between a > man and a woman harms people. I'm not quite sure whose 'rule and practice' you are referring to; the consensus of majorities cuts no ice with me, never has done . . . > The so-called "gay > community" -- comprised of people who unite with others > outside of the "rule and practice" regarding marriage -- deals > with hate crimes against and beating deaths of its members, as > well as suicide, either by deliberately contracting AIDS, or taking > one's life by other means, including taking prescription drugs > due to being diagnosed as mentally ill and "living" a deadened > existence. That's a huge weight of prejudice going against > people when it comes to the most beautiful feelings Devi has > gifted to us all. > > M > > , "m6" > <megalith6@h...> wrote: > > , "Mary Ann" > <maryann@m...> > > wrote: > > > Namaste: > > > > > > I think it is worthwhile to question and repair the effects of > > living > > > in "this generally patriarchal, global authoritarian culture" you > > > mention, but I don't associate that with "tinkering" with one's > > > sexuality for experimentation purposes. I'm not sure what you > > > mean by that...? I just think that being loving with, in, and > > about, > > > sexuality and sexual energy is most important. If that could > be > > > the rule and practice, there would be so much less pain in > the > > > world. > > > > > > -- Mary Ann > > > > Well, notions such as 'rule and practice' in terms of individuals > > sexual preferences I find a bit strange, anyway. People can do > > whatever they want, so long as they are not harming anyone, > and > > hopefully not themselves, either: as far as I am concerned... > > > > m6 > > > > > > > > , "m6" > > > <megalith6@h...> wrote: > > > > Namaste, > > > > > > > > Why is sex taboo? Because it cannot be controlled and is > > > subversive, > > > > in terms of this generally patriarchal, global authoritarian > > > culture > > > > that we are now increasingly living in. > > > > > > > > Shri Ardhanarishvara reminds us that Divinity is > androgynous, > > > how > > > > could it be otherwise? > > > > > > > > The sexual act between a woman and a man could be > seen as > > > symbolising > > > > this sacred, androgynous state - a 'Tantric > consubstantiation', > > if > > > > you will. > > > > > > > > But physical coitus isn't necessary for this - look at > Kundalini > > > > Yoga: you can spiritually > > > > unite the male and female aspects within a human being > by > > > practising > > > > this discipline. > > > > > > > > Otherwise, I shouldn't advise anyone to attempt tinkering > with > > > their > > > > sexuality for the sake of experimentation: the result is likely > > to > > > be > > > > one extremely confused and unhappy individual. > > > > > > > > Jai Om - > > > > > > > > m6 > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Satish: > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for your inquiry, and your honest expression of > not > > > > > understanding me. From my perspective, I see Devi as > > > > > particularly strong in children, women, and gay people, > and I > > > see > > > > > harsh treatment of each, that is, attempts to control or > > > suppress > > > > > what is natural by calling it unnatural, as acts against > Devi. > > > > Thus, > > > > > I see the need to make men be "manly" (and deny Devi > > > within) > > > > > as resulting in the prejudice against more free > expression of > > > > > sexual energy. I think this restraint on sexuality prevents > our > > > > > growth spiritually and otherwise because it keeps us > > > entrenched > > > > > in assumptions that do not allow for the free and loving > flow > > > of > > > > > life energy in all. I hope this explains it better for you. > > > > > > > > > > BTW I don't think that everyone would be lesbian or gay if > the > > > > > various churches and other authorities quit proclaiming > that > > > sex > > > > > (and marriage) should only be between man and > woman. > > > But I > > > > > do think that those who are afraid of sexuality in its myriad > > > forms > > > > > are fearful of that. Why else make it such a taboo thing? > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Mary Ann > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Satish > Arigela" > > > > > <satisharigela> wrote: > > > > > > , "Mary Ann" > > > > > <maryann@m...> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I think there is such a taboo on sexuality other than > that > > > > > between > > > > > > > male and female because the female aspect has > been > > > so > > > > > > > degraded in our world. It is seen as degrading or > false for > > > > > men > > > > > > > to "take the role of the female" with another man in > sexual > > > > > > > embrace. It is seen as false or undesireable for a > woman > > > to > > > > > > > "take the role of a man." This shows too much > emphasis > > > on > > > > > > > roles based on gender, which limits what individuals > are > > > > > > > capable of, and limits the evolution of our world, > > > spiritually > > > > > and > > > > > > > otherwise. My two cents, anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that supposed to mean that we evolve better > > > "spiritually > > > > or > > > > > > otherwise" if everyone in this world becomes a Lesbian > or > > > > > Gay? > > > > > > > > > > > > Can u plz explain the phrase "limits what individuals > are > > > > > > capable of"? > > > > > > > > > > > > I barely understand ur obsession with homosexuality > and > > > the > > > > > reason > > > > > > why u have to bring that up time and again in a > Shaktism > > > list? > > > > > > > > > > > > Satish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2004 Report Share Posted February 8, 2004 'Marriage' appears to be, at root, a patriarchal institution, whereby a husband 'owns' a wife. No-one owns anyone. Talk about Maya! , MaryJWoodworth@a... wrote: > I think marriage is a cruel and unusual punishment ...but if people want to > do it I guess they should. Of course I am in favor of abolishing the whole > institution except for the raising of children...and it would be null and void as soon as those children came of age. that means we would revert to the > midlevel costume of proving pregnancy before the vows could be taken. except in the case of adoption you could be married if you adopted a child but that too would only last until the child came of age. And of course people too old to reproduce would not be able to marry. Pretty radical huh? Of course we could just bud out of peoples personal lives and let them do what the heck they wanted to do with their lives...but that would be even more radical. > > Hugs > > > In a message dated 1/29/2004 8:55:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, > megalith6@h... writes: > > > > > Hi m6: > > > > > > That's nice to hear. But there's no denying that the effects of > > the > > > "rule and practice" that says marriage should only be between a > > > man and a woman harms people. > > > > I'm not quite sure whose 'rule and practice' you are referring to; > > the consensus of majorities cuts no ice with me, never has done . . 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.