Continence shouldn't be part of regulative principles

[Guest guest]

Sex, like hunger, is a physiological impulse. We don't condemn hunger but we do sex. There is a difference between necessity and desire. Sexual urge isn't a desire (you don't desire it way you'd desire a million bucks), it is a human need. It is a necessity. Why condemn it?

 

Even if we aren't free from sexual urges, it shouldn't matter to spirituality; after all, we aren't trying to free ourselves from hunger to become spiritual. Why the double standards? The various ashramas (brahmacharya, grihasta etc.) in sanatana dharma would have no meaning if people from all ashramas follow a sanyasi lifestyle.

 

Thus it is concluded that sex isn't a bar to spiritual progress, and I do not know why it has been included in the 4 regs.

 

[Guest guest]

Sex isn't condemned, but illicit sex is. Just because it feels like a "natural urge" doesn't make it okay to indulge. If that were the case, pedophilia, necrophilia, and all types of perverse activities would have to be okay as well.

 

Although hunger isn't condemned, overreating is. Also, if there were no restrictions in hunger, then it would be okay for those who have the urge to engage in cannabilism and whatever else they have the urge for. (Go to your local kennel and adopt some cats and dogs, then eat eat them for dinner.)

 

When addressing the urges of hunger and sex, regulating and controlling the senses is advisable, not just for spiritual life, but for civilized life in general. IMHO.

[Guest guest]

Just because it feels like a "natural urge" doesn't make it okay to indulge***

 

Whether you indulge or not, the urge is real and cannot be wished away. The physiological urge called hunger is real and cannot be wished away, doing which you die. In case of sexual hunger, you may not die if you fail to recognize it but there are other effects like insanity etc. In fact, the perverted activities you mention like necrophilia etc. are the result of suppression.

 

If that were the case, pedophilia, necrophilia, and all types of perverse activities would have to be okay as well.***

 

You must be the all-or-nothing type. Either you do away with sex or wonder whether perverse actions are also allowed. The answer to this: Sexual urges cannot be controlled, they are as natural as hunger. So indulge in it sanely and rationally.

 

Also, if there were no restrictions in hunger, then it would be okay for those who have the urge to engage in cannabilism and whatever else they have the urge for****

 

It is not okay, because there are limits to waht you can do. I only said hunger and sex are natural urges. Did I ever say that one can do illegal or unethical acts to satisfy those urges? IF you desire a car, it is perfectly okay. But you don't steal your neighbor's car, do you? Why dont you apply the same logic to this situation as well?

 

When addressing the urges of hunger and sex, regulating and controlling the senses is advisable, not just for spiritual life, but for civilized life in general.***

 

Yes. And the way is not suppression.

 

Yours in Dharma,

Bhimasena

[Guest guest]

Sorry, your arguments are inconsistent and I have no desire to dance in circles with you.

 

No one is suggesting suppression. Sense control yes. Developing a higher taste, yes. This is human life. Uncontrolled sense gratification is animal life.

[Guest guest]

Nice book on the subject is "Brain Gain"

Read it for greater insight on this subject of contenance.

[Guest guest]

 

Much like a snake gradually crawls out of its skin, we too eventually emerge from the mundane. Like a serpent who still has fangs but no poison, the natural attraction remains yet it does not pollute our existence, drawing us down into the mundane shackles of sensory attachment. Like the serpent who was allowed to keep his fangs so others would not laugh at him, also the bhakta remains every bit a man not a eunuch, a gentleman not a rogue.

 

It will evolve naturally. As the soul takes control, all pushings will become dovetailed in satisfying the transcendental pleasure of Sri Krsna - for as it was mentioned, these too are natural feelings. But we are not this body (Bhakti 101), and neither hunger, pain, nor material distress should draw our affection and attention from the lotus feet of Sri Krsna. Our love must be stronger, our attachment to Him greater, greater than such trifles.

 

Krsna will help get past the pushings. Just give Him a chance. Do what you can, and the rest will come with time. A sparrow tried to empty the ocean to recover her eggs - and indeed eventually recovered the eggs. It is all within our grasp, for Sri Krsna Himself is our best friend and guide.

 

[Guest guest]

Hare KRishna!

 

The original poster talks about sex and 4 regulative principles.

 

I think you mis-understood- Nothing wrong with SEX per se

 

but ILLICT SEX IS WRONG. So the difference is SEX and ILLICT SEX.

 

Draw the difference there and no need on urges.

 

If you have the capacity to have sex 100 times and get 100 children and delivery all 100 kids...then have proper sex and beget children. No problemo

 

But if any one of the 3 you think you will not do....then...problem

 

Haribol!

 

anand

[Guest guest]

The reason sex desire is to be controlled is that it concentrates the mind on intense sense enjoyment and that desire is so strong that it acts as an anchor holding the consciousness in identifying the material body tas the self in order to experience the sex organs.

 

No one is forced to abstain from sex or any of the regulative principles for that matter. But if ones wants to follow in the footsteps of Bhaktivedanta Swami then he must adhere to his discipline.

 

One can still chant from any position without prior purificatory processes or qualification. A murderer, a homosexual, a religious man, or whatever game we find ourselves playing we can start right away and chant and make spiritual progress.

 

But to be a disciple of Bhaktivedanta one must follow his discipline. Not that just because it is too hard we will change the rules to our liking. That would just be fooling ourselves and is somewhat less then useless.

[gHari]

Sometimes this song gives me inspiration and I don't feel so weird:

 

Woman Don't You Cry For Me

George Harrison

 

I'm gonna leave you here

I'm gonna leave you at the station

I've got a long way to go baby

Woman don't you cry for me

 

Now I can't take no more

Now I don't need no complication

I've got a long way to go baby

Woman don't you cry for me

 

There's no one place I want to be

Attachment only hurts you

Take care of yourself baby

C'mon won't you let me be

 

There's just one thing I got to see

That's the Lord got to keep him in sight

Take care of yourself baby

C'mon won't you let me be

 

There's no one place I want to be

Attachment only hurts you

Better take care of yourself baby

C'mon won't you try to see

 

There is just one thing I got to see

That's the Lord got to keep him in sight

Take care of yourself baby

C'mon won't you let me be

 

Now baby here's the door

I don't need no aggravation

I've got a long way to go baby

Woman don't you cry for me

 

I'm gonna leave you here

I'm gonna leave you at the station

I've got a long way to go baby

Woman don't you cry for me

 

I've got a long way to go baby

Woman don't you cry for me