(Mystery of the 5M)

[Guest guest]

HI To All

>From reading the mails on this topic, i observe We have forgotten the goal of

using tantric

 

means to propiate the Divinity

 

It is to overcome our basic instinct to feel attracted towards the opposite sex

( and not the

 

same sex) and regard the opposite sex as the divinity personified

 

As one great mystic, Swami satyananda saraswathi of bihar school of yoga has

said that

 

the shortest way to reach the enlighted stage is thru 5Ms but it is so difficult

once a devotee

 

falls,he can never get back to the path and very few are eligible

 

again there is a solution, swami premananda ( purity personified ) of sri

ramakrishna ashram

 

has said if we cant overcome the basic instinct, let us consider the opposite

sex as the

 

companions of the divine lord, here he was saying to men specifically, since in

the tantras

 

the women are considered to be the forms of the divine mother

 

Yes the Divine mother would forgive the greatest of the sinners, so a gay is not

such a big

 

sin then, since the basic desire exist even in straight people too

 

why should we try to change the rules set down by Great lords like sri

ramakrishna

 

to suit our selfish desires isnt?

 

regards

vikram

colin777au <colinr wrote:

Namaste,

 

If I remember correctly, male-male embracing is mentioned in the

Kularnava Tantra as one of the things that can happen in a

particular sort of worship circle. I will try to find the exact

verse as soon as I can.

 

Om Shantih

Colin

 

 

, "devi_bhakta"

<devi_bhakta> wrote:

> As far as I know, Hindu scripture doesn't address the issue. As in

> the West, homosexuality -- while not necessarily condemned -- was

not

> until recently considered an actual "lifestyle choice." It was

> certainly out there; people were aware of it; but in the main it

was

> something that took place behind closed doors -- it was nobody's

> business but those involved. Marriages, then as largely now, were

not

> intended as romantic matches, but as interfamilial and social

> contracts. If she happened to prefer ladies, or he happened to

prefer

> gentlemen ... well, that was something they could discretely

arrange

> on the side as they wished -- so long as they also fulfilled the

> dharma of upholding the contract. But no one was writing

instruction

> books on the Tantric ritual implications of such arrangements.

>

> The thing is, it doesn't even matter. Hindu scriptures have never

> been seen as carved-in-granite laws for the ages. Each generation

> elucidates them anew, building on past elucidations and adapted

for

> the times. Historical longevity -- i.e., whatever was said first

in

> time is more correct -- does not really apply here. Whether an

> interpretation was made a millennium ago, five centuries ago, 50

> years ago, or last night doesn't really matter; only the authority

> that you place in the sage matters.

>

> So the Tantras did not arise in a world where homosexuality was

> considered a legitimate "lifestyle choice" -- but Amritananda's

> elucidations were made in a world where such arrangements are

> increasingly commonplace. So, accordingly, he addressed it. If you

> accept his teachings, that is all that matters. If you do not, you

> can surely find other modern sages who will insist (as do the

various

> traditionalists of other religions) that it's an abomination

against

> nature. Whatever floats your boat. But that's the way it works.

>

> Aim MAtangyai NamaH

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

/