Cultural Context of 5M's (was 10K Messages)

[Guest guest]

Namaste DB,

 

You raise a very good question in regards to cultural context and

spiritual practice. Eating meat & drinking alcohol would not be

particularly transgressive for the average Westerner. I have often

wondered do these practices have relevance for a Westerner practicing

Tantra?

 

 

~sunelectric

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "Devi Bhakta"

<devi_bhakta> wrote:

> Dear Satish:

>

> Thanks for your additional thoughts on this.

>

> You note, "Since you grew up in a different culture where people

seem

> to see nothing wrong about it [i.e., moderate social drinking of

> alcohol], it is definitely understandable."

>

> Yes, I believe that a certain cultural relativism must be applied in

> order to properly understand a lot of these things.

>

> For example, in France and some Mediterranian cultures, the

> consumption of light alcohols such as wine and champagne is not only

> socially acceptable. It is perceived as integral to the prevailing

> culture, and even young children will have a glass of wine at social

> gatherings. No big deal. Just as in some cultures, the consumption

of

> meat and poultry is the historical norm and vegetarianism is a

> relatively new idea as a social trend.

>

> In many parts of India, of course, vegetarianism is the social norm.

> In the U.K., Canada, Australia and the U.S., for example,

> vegetarianism is socially acceptable as an individual choice --

> whether for health, ethical or religious purposes (Benjamin Franklin

> was practicing vegetarianism in Boston in the early 1700's) -- but

it

> is *not* the societal norm.

>

> In India, as you note -- as in orthodox Judaic culture or among

> relatively isolated groups such as the French Canadians or the

> Pennsyvania Dutch, for example -- marriages between close cousins

and

> so on are the social norm, though many European and European-derived

> cultures would consider such practices to be unacceptable.

>

> I wonder how much the 5M's of Tantra are a product of the societies

in

> which they arose? It seems to me that the underlying philosophy of

the

> 5-M's -- as of certain Aghora practices -- is to dramatically and

> experientially demonstrate the underlying unity of all things, by

> treating as holy what would usually be considered impure or even

> profane. But Tantra developed in India, not in France or some other

> Western culture. And therefore, the transgression from societal

norms

> required by some of the 5-M's loses much of its psychological and

> physical impact.

>

> Obviously, I am not qualified to address such questions with any

> authority; I am just wondering aloud. To what extent is "sinful

> behavior" societal, and to what extent is it absolute? Is it that

act

> itself that constitutes the sin, or the individual sense of

> transgression? Part of the process of becoming Kaula involves a

shift

> away from being governed by societal norms, and toward being

governed

> by intuited norms instilled by diksha and sadhana. But this shift

does

> not constitute a license to commit any act without conscience or

> consequence; rather, it is experienced as an enormous weight of

> personal responsibility for all of one's actions, and an enormous

> personal obligation to society and to DEVI's service. Is objectively

> defined "sin", then, even an operative concept for the Kaula?

>

> *** However, IMHO, if one embraces a certain religion, I think it

is a

> good idea to (to try) abide by what is considered appropriate (in

that

> religion) if one expects benefits from following (say like reciting

> LS or Khadgamala) that whatever religion. ***

>

> All of the above aside, this seems extremely reasonable to me. Would

> any other members care to contribute their thoughts and opinions on

this?

>

> Aum Maatangyai Namahe

[Guest guest]

Satish wrote : However, IMHO, if one embraces a certain religion, I

think it is a good idea to (to try) abide by what is considered

appropriate (in that religion) if one expects benefits from following

(say like reciting LS or Khadgamala) that whatever religion.

 

DB wrote : All of the above aside, this seems extremely reasonable to

me. Would any other members care to contribute their thoughts and

opinions on this?

 

sunelectric101 wrote: You raise a very good question in regards to

cultural context and spiritual practice. Eating meat & drinking

alcohol would not be particularly transgressive for the average

Westerner. I have often wondered do these practices have relevance

for a Westerner practicing Tantra?

 

In my opinion, I would go back to my source of guidance, that is my

own guru. What is his opinion on his and what would he recommended.

If he says its okay and there is no restrictions, why should I listen

to others.

[Guest guest]

, "N. Madasamy"

<ashwini_puralasamy> wrote:

> Satish wrote : However, IMHO, if one embraces a certain religion,

I

> think it is a good idea to (to try) abide by what is considered

> appropriate (in that religion) if one expects benefits from

following

> (say like reciting LS or Khadgamala) that whatever religion.

>

> DB wrote : All of the above aside, this seems extremely reasonable

to

> me. Would any other members care to contribute their thoughts and

> opinions on this?

>

> sunelectric101 wrote: You raise a very good question in regards to

> cultural context and spiritual practice. Eating meat & drinking

> alcohol would not be particularly transgressive for the average

> Westerner. I have often wondered do these practices have relevance

> for a Westerner practicing Tantra?

>

Nora:

> In my opinion, I would go back to my source of guidance, that is

my

> own guru. What is his opinion on his and what would he

recommended.

> If he says its okay and there is no restrictions, why should I

listen

> to others.

 

IMO, this is the best advice. One's teacher will be able to better

decide when this is sadhana appropriate and in what way.