Guest guest Posted February 18, 2007 Report Share Posted February 18, 2007 Dear Jagbir, The reason that I find what 'nnn123' has written insulting and objectionable is that in his words there is the theme of blaming women for men's lust. This is the same theme that has resulted in the cruelty and oppression of women, and this is the theme that has resulted in women being treated as inferior to men. This is the theme that religions have based their treatment of women on...Eve tempting Adam into sin in Judaism and Christianity, for example, and the Muslim custom of covering their women so that men may not be tempted. This implies that the lustful thoughts of men is the fault of women, and is the same logic that blames victims of rape. Possibly you did not realise the implications of the quote. It is against marriage and having children, and it goes on further to imply that as men never felt lust for the Virgin Mary due to her own purity and power, they do feel lust for other women because they are impure. In other words, the quote is saying that lustful thoughts of men are dependant on the condition of the woman, and this is something that is blatantly untrue. I am not objecting to people trying to attain purity, or whatever they think purity is by their own standards. I am objecting to women being seen as dirty and impure and a temptation for men simply because they are women. There is a contradiction here; the Virgin Mary was married, and a mother. She did not reject her own humanity; rather she embraced it fully. She was not an unmarried nun, and I don't think that she ever advocated that anyone else should be, either. Purity does not mean that people despise themselves and the human condition; this is a conditioning that has been imposed by religious institutions. Love, Semira , " jagbir singh " <adishakti_org wrote: > > i am just quoting one nnn123 Semira. However, i cannot verify the > accuracy of nnn123's quote. > > The reason - maybe we should try to attain that level of purity, > among other things. The bar is really very high, to say the least > ........... but no harm trying. > > regards, > > jagbir > > , " caraleen98 " > <caraleen98@> wrote: > > > > Dear Jagbir, > > Please explain what exactly is meant by the following excerpt that > > you have posted, and your reasons for posting this. > > > > ''Sri Ramakrishna said that he had never had a single thought of > lust in his entire life. Not once. > > > > It is said that the Virgin Mary's power and purity was such that in > > her presence, during her life, no one was ever able to even think a > > thought of lust around her - the force of her being chased it all > > away.'' > > Love, Semira > > > > > > , " jagbir singh " > > <adishakti_org@> wrote: > > > > > > , " jagbir singh " > > > <adishakti_org@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yesterday i was discussing religion and spirituality with my > > > > brother-in-law who had come down. i told him that in all my > years > > > > prior to self-realization i grasped 1% of the Truth. Then from > > 1993- > > > > 2007 i realized another 1%, and that i am confident of > realizing > > at > > > > maximum about 4-5% of the Truth in my remaining years. i am just > > > > like an ant trying to understand the universe. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2007 Report Share Posted February 18, 2007 Dear Semira, i am flabbergasted by your interpretation of nnn123's quote: > > ''Sri Ramakrishna said that he had never had a single thought of > lust in his entire life. Not once. > > It is said that the Virgin Mary's power and purity was such that > in her presence, during her life, no one was ever able to even > think a thought of lust around her - the force of her being chased > it all away.'' > to mean all that you have said about nnn123. Yours is a disturbing statement that betrays deep-rooted problems and an unbalanced outlook. This narrow-minded and apparently painful view is definitely not healthy. Please rid yourself of self-distortion and excessive pity for the daily misery of untold millions because you do not have the power to help/change their present conditions. Do not continue to make yourself miserable with such self-torture. You should also realize that, except for religious fanatics, most humans do not view " women being seen as dirty and impure and a temptation for men " . The worst of the religious fanatics are those who slice off their clitorises so that not only will these women in future not tempt them, but also not tempt husbands in coitus with moans of their own pleasure. These religious men want to feel all the power and pleasure of penetrating dominated women at will, and thus take inhuman steps to deny them the same. After all, their women were originally created from a man's rib. How much respect do you think those indoctrinated with this belief have for women? But why discuss such a topic here? We all revere the Divine Feminine and regard a wife, daughter, mother or sister as sacred too. The patriarchal religious fanatics will too if they realize the Divine Feminine (Shekinah/Holy Spirit/Ruh/) within .......... or want to take part in the Last Judgment and Al-Qiyamah. So do you see Her triumphing and leaving them no choice? Why do you think some Muslim nations have begun blocking the http://al-qiyamah.org/ site? Maybe you do not have the power to force change but She definitely has. So give up all that torments you and learn to bear witness in Silence. Jai Shri Mataji, jagbir , " caraleen98 " <caraleen98 wrote: > > Dear Jagbir, > The reason that I find what 'nnn123' has written insulting and > objectionable is that in his words there is the theme of blaming > women for men's lust. This is the same theme that has resulted in > the cruelty and oppression of women, and this is the theme that has > resulted in women being treated as inferior to men. This is the > theme that religions have based their treatment of women on...Eve > tempting Adam into sin in Judaism and Christianity, for example, > and the Muslim custom of covering their women so that men may not > be tempted. This implies that the lustful thoughts of men is the > fault of women, and is the same logic that blames victims of rape. > Possibly you did not realise the implications of the quote. It is > against marriage and having children, and it goes on further to > imply that as men never felt lust for the Virgin Mary due to her > own purity and power, they do feel lust for other women because > they are impure. In other words, the quote is saying that lustful > thoughts of men are dependant on the condition of the woman, and > this is something that is blatantly untrue. I am not objecting to > people trying to attain purity, or whatever they think purity is by > their own standards. I am objecting to women being seen as dirty > and impure and a temptation for men simply because they are women. > There is a contradiction here; the Virgin Mary was married, and a > mother. She did not reject her own humanity; rather she embraced it > fully. She was not an unmarried nun, and I don't think that she > ever advocated that anyone else should be, either. Purity does not > mean that people despise themselves and the human condition; this > is a conditioning that has been imposed by religious institutions. > Love, Semira > > > > > , " jagbir singh " > <adishakti_org@> wrote: > > > > i am just quoting one nnn123 Semira. However, i cannot verify the > > accuracy of nnn123's quote. > > > > The reason - maybe we should try to attain that level of purity, > > among other things. The bar is really very high, to say the least > > ........... but no harm trying. > > > > regards, > > > > jagbir > > > > , " caraleen98 " > > <caraleen98@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Jagbir, > > > > > > Please explain what exactly is meant by the following excerpt > > > that you have posted, and your reasons for posting this. > > > > > > ''Sri Ramakrishna said that he had never had a single thought of > > > lust in his entire life. Not once. > > > > > > It is said that the Virgin Mary's power and purity was such > > > that in her presence, during her life, no one was ever able to > > > even think a thought of lust around her - the force of her > > > being chased it all away.'' > > > > > > Love, Semira > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2007 Report Share Posted February 18, 2007 Dear Jagbir, Thanks for your comments on this issue, and I'll consider carefully what you have said. Love, Semira , " jagbir singh " <adishakti_org wrote: > > Dear Semira, > > i am flabbergasted by your interpretation of nnn123's quote: > > > > > ''Sri Ramakrishna said that he had never had a single thought of > > lust in his entire life. Not once. > > > > It is said that the Virgin Mary's power and purity was such that > > in her presence, during her life, no one was ever able to even > > think a thought of lust around her - the force of her being chased > > it all away.'' > > > > to mean all that you have said about nnn123. Yours is a disturbing > statement that betrays deep-rooted problems and an unbalanced > outlook. This narrow-minded and apparently painful view is definitely > not healthy. Please rid yourself of self-distortion and excessive > pity for the daily misery of untold millions because you do not have > the power to help/change their present conditions. Do not continue to > make yourself miserable with such self-torture. > > You should also realize that, except for religious fanatics, most > humans do not view " women being seen as dirty and impure and a > temptation for men " . The worst of the religious fanatics are those > who slice off their clitorises so that not only will these women in > future not tempt them, but also not tempt husbands in coitus with > moans of their own pleasure. These religious men want to feel all the > power and pleasure of penetrating dominated women at will, and thus > take inhuman steps to deny them the same. After all, their women were > originally created from a man's rib. How much respect do you think > those indoctrinated with this belief have for women? > > But why discuss such a topic here? We all revere the Divine Feminine > and regard a wife, daughter, mother or sister as sacred too. The > patriarchal religious fanatics will too if they realize the Divine > Feminine (Shekinah/Holy Spirit/Ruh/) within .......... or want to > take part in the Last Judgment and Al-Qiyamah. So do you see Her > triumphing and leaving them no choice? Why do you think some Muslim > nations have begun blocking the http://al-qiyamah.org/ site? Maybe > you do not have the power to force change but She definitely has. So > give up all that torments you and learn to bear witness in Silence. > > Jai Shri Mataji, > > > jagbir > > > , " caraleen98 " > <caraleen98@> wrote: > > > > Dear Jagbir, > > The reason that I find what 'nnn123' has written insulting and > > objectionable is that in his words there is the theme of blaming > > women for men's lust. This is the same theme that has resulted in > > the cruelty and oppression of women, and this is the theme that has > > resulted in women being treated as inferior to men. This is the > > theme that religions have based their treatment of women on...Eve > > tempting Adam into sin in Judaism and Christianity, for example, > > and the Muslim custom of covering their women so that men may not > > be tempted. This implies that the lustful thoughts of men is the > > fault of women, and is the same logic that blames victims of rape. > > Possibly you did not realise the implications of the quote. It is > > against marriage and having children, and it goes on further to > > imply that as men never felt lust for the Virgin Mary due to her > > own purity and power, they do feel lust for other women because > > they are impure. In other words, the quote is saying that lustful > > thoughts of men are dependant on the condition of the woman, and > > this is something that is blatantly untrue. I am not objecting to > > people trying to attain purity, or whatever they think purity is by > > their own standards. I am objecting to women being seen as dirty > > and impure and a temptation for men simply because they are women. > > There is a contradiction here; the Virgin Mary was married, and a > > mother. She did not reject her own humanity; rather she embraced it > > fully. She was not an unmarried nun, and I don't think that she > > ever advocated that anyone else should be, either. Purity does not > > mean that people despise themselves and the human condition; this > > is a conditioning that has been imposed by religious institutions. > > Love, Semira > > > > > > > > > > , " jagbir singh " > > <adishakti_org@> wrote: > > > > > > i am just quoting one nnn123 Semira. However, i cannot verify the > > > accuracy of nnn123's quote. > > > > > > The reason - maybe we should try to attain that level of purity, > > > among other things. The bar is really very high, to say the least > > > ........... but no harm trying. > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > jagbir > > > > > > , " caraleen98 " > > > <caraleen98@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Jagbir, > > > > > > > > Please explain what exactly is meant by the following excerpt > > > > that you have posted, and your reasons for posting this. > > > > > > > > ''Sri Ramakrishna said that he had never had a single thought of > > > > lust in his entire life. Not once. > > > > > > > > It is said that the Virgin Mary's power and purity was such > > > > that in her presence, during her life, no one was ever able to > > > > even think a thought of lust around her - the force of her > > > > being chased it all away.'' > > > > > > > > Love, Semira > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2007 Report Share Posted February 18, 2007 , " caraleen98 " <caraleen98 wrote: > > Dear Jagbir, > Thanks for your comments on this issue, and I'll consider carefully > what you have said. > Love, Semira > > Dear Semira, i hope my strong response will help you introspect and heal yourself faster and more effectively. Compassion does not mean hurting yourself because millions are hurting. If that was the case then all your tears cannot ease the pain of even a single victim. There is nothing we can do except help bring about a change in human consciousness. Your own enlightened consciousness has the potential of doing just that. So strive to heal humanity by first changing your own consciousness. There are 1001 ways to abuse and self-abuse with drugs, alcohol, sex, violence and what not. By being so hurt you also become a victim, maybe even more. Many victims, conditioned by culture and soceity, may even be blissfully ignorant that they are abused. If you are going to feel all this hurt you will easily become depressed and unhappy. It is not healthy for both mind and body Semira. regards, jagbir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Dear Jagbir and Friends, I was thinking especially about the words Jagbir has written below; ''Dear Semira, Maybe > you do not have the power to force change but She definitely has. So > give up all that torments you and learn to bear witness in Silence.'' ....and so I was thinking about the power that brings about change and that can break through the centuries of conditionings...and I thought about the vivid dream that I had a couple of days before these issues about the cruel things done in the name of religions came up. I'm posting it here, as I think it may have meaning for other people as well as for me personally. Your words made me realise that the force that can bring about change is within each person; it is the Spirit of Love and Forgiveness that is awakened in us that actively works through us and is more powerful than any other force, and it is this force which can remove all obstacles that stand in it's way, and that are keeping us from realising God. ''In a dream there was the giant form of a man, who appeared very dark, much darker than the surrounding shadows. In his hands he was cradling a small ball of white light, holding it close to his stomach,and he saw me looking at this. He held it out towards me, and released it, and it grew larger and brighter as it floated slowly towards me. After this, I saw a white stone wall in front of me, on my left side. Cracks appeared in it, and it was like a tremendous force was pushing forwards through the wall. The bottom of the wall was pushed forward, with broken pieces of white stone being scattered as this happened. It was a wall of very thick stone. The strange and frightening thing was that in the section of stone that was forced forwards, each block of stone formed into the shape of a face, so I could see rows of faces crowded on top of each other all with frozen expressions of pain. This was happening all over the wall; I could see detailed faces appearing in the stones before the stones crumbled apart. I couldn't see the shape of the force destroying the wall; from between the cracks all I could see was a blinding white light.'' Love, Semira , " jagbir singh " <adishakti_org wrote:> > Dear Semira, Maybe > you do not have the power to force change but She definitely has. So > give up all that torments you and learn to bear witness in Silence. > > Jai Shri Mataji, > > > jagbir > > 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.