PDA

View Full Version : Kali Shakti Question



sdevante
19 January 2012, 09:40 PM
Namaste,

I am familiar with the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads, but only recently began learning more about other branches of Sanatana Dharma, specifically Shaktism.

As I learned more, I am drawn to Kali and everything that she represents. One thing that I am unclear of though is that Devi (correct term?) is usually worshipped as a caring mother. Is it ever appropriate/permissible to view the Goddess as something more akin to a romantic love? Not sexual, but viewing the Goddess embodied more towards my own age, so to speak.

I hope this makes sense. I have found in my own life that despite my great love for my mother that my most selfless love is for my wife.

Thanks

Eastern Mind
20 January 2012, 10:01 AM
Namaste,

I am familiar with the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads, but only recently began learning more about other branches of Sanatana Dharma, specifically Shaktism.

As I learned more, I am drawn to Kali and everything that she represents. One thing that I am unclear of though is that Devi (correct term?) is usually worshipped as a caring mother. Is it ever appropriate/permissible to view the Goddess as something more akin to a romantic love? Not sexual, but viewing the Goddess embodied more towards my own age, so to speak.

I hope this makes sense. I have found in my own life that despite my great love for my mother that my most selfless love is for my wife.

Thanks

Vannakkam: As with many questions, you may well get more than one answer. From my very limited understanding, it is absolutely fine, but shouldn't be the whole thing. God/Goddess has many attributes, forms, ways of looking at, etc., and this could be one of them.

For example, in my sampradaya, God is energy flowing through all form, primal soul, and Cause, Absolute Reality. God has Form and is formless, both.

In the Hindu wedding ceremony, (at least ones I have witnessed) there is a point where the man worships his wife as Shakti, and the wife worships the husband as Siva. It impresses you about the sanctity of marriage, and adds to the idea that God is in and through all things. So there are a lot of deeper reasons for this.

Hope this is of some benefit.

Aum Namasivaya

Jainarayan
20 January 2012, 10:26 AM
Namaste sdevante.


Namaste,

Is it ever appropriate/permissible to view the Goddess as something more akin to a romantic love? Not sexual, but viewing the Goddess embodied more towards my own age, so to speak.

If you read about Sri Krishna and Srimati Radha, you will find that, while they are in reality Vishnu and Lakshmi, on Earth they were the exemplification of the most divine love, but I have never seen any references to anything sexual.

In fact, Sri Krishna later had three wives who were His queens, and by whom He fathered children, but Srimati Radha was not one of His wives or queens. The love between Srimati Radha and Sri Krishna was, afaik, the deepest kind of devotional love, more than any sexual union or kinship relationship.

Jainarayan
20 January 2012, 10:32 AM
Namaste EM.


In the Hindu wedding ceremony, (at least ones I have witnessed) there is a point where the man worships his wife as Shakti, and the wife worships the husband as Siva.

The show Charmed had an episode in which Piper was a manifestation of Shakti and Leo was a manifestation of Shiva. Artistic license run amuck? :rolleyes:

MahaHrada
20 January 2012, 11:09 AM
they were the exemplification of the most divine love, but I have never seen any references to anything sexual.


If you have not seen anything of Krishnas erotic plays that is because you have not looked close enough. I have been inCochin, Kerala visiting the Mattancherry Palace and in the bedchambers of the wifes of the king were erotic murals, one of them was depicting krishna in foreplay with 8 maidens, right beside him is a mural showing lord shiva in erotic embrace with shakti the paintings are done according to the dhyana slokas used in some tantras, the name is mentionened but i have forgotten it.

JaiMaaDurga
20 January 2012, 11:30 AM
Namaste sdevante,

As I can only guess based on the information provided, you do not have currently a guru (other than Devi Herself) to seek guidance on this from; therefore my first preferred advice cannot be given ("Ask your guru") ;)

With this in mind- just as in other paths, it may be best for one devotee to be as a child of Devi, another devotee to be as Her brother or sister, yet another to be as loving father or mother to Her, and still yet another to be as a husband to Her.. and of course, as has happened, at crucial points the devotee might find themselves having to change from one mode of relation to another, or to progress through all possible modes, depending on the devotee and what is best... all of this is no trivial matter, and great care needs to taken- I have often heard it said that the reason for emphasis on an initial approach in the form of Her child is the forgiveness of error, in the manner of a mother forgiving a child who almost burns down the house in an attempt to make her breakfast ;)

So, to make a long story short- if you have no earthly guru to advise you in this, pray to Her for guidance; though She may already know all that is within your mind, it may be that asking Her directly and sincerely is the key to seeing Her intended path for you.

Again, I may be Shakta, but certainly no acharya or pandit to claim any wisdom in this- I do applaud your asking questions, and of course am always happy to see another who hear's Devi's call :)

May Maa's blessing be with you as your journey continues!

JAI MATA DI

Jainarayan
20 January 2012, 12:12 PM
Namaste MahaHrada.


If you have not seen anything of Krishnas erotic plays that is because you have not looked close enough. I have been inCochin, Kerala visiting the Mattancherry Palace and in the bedchambers of the wifes of the king were erotic murals, one of them was depicting krishna in foreplay with 8 maidens, right beside him is a mural showing lord shiva in erotic embrace with shakti the paintings are done according to the dhyana slokas used in some tantras, the name is mentionened but i have forgotten it.

Now I am awared. Thank you. :) I knew He was a great tease of the gopis, but I did not know of anything more than that. However, I knew of a story that Lord Shiva was so "energized" that He took Maa Parvati right on the back of Nandi. I also knew that after He cut off Ganesha's head, Maa Parvati would would have nothing to do with Her husband, if you know what I mean. ;)

MahaHrada
20 January 2012, 12:41 PM
Namaste MahaHrada.



Jato hasta stato drusti, Whither the hand goes, the glance follows
Jato drusti stato mana: Whither the glances lead, the mind follows
Jato mana stato bhavo, Whither the mind goes, there the mood follows
Jato bhava stato rasa: Whither the mood goes, there is "rasa" born.
There are nine rasas or sentiments, they are as follows: Sringar (love), veera (heroism), bibhatsa (disgust), raudra (anger), hasya (mirth), bhayanaka (terror), karuna (pity), adbhuta (wonder), shanta (tranquillity).
The queen of rasas is undoubtedly shringara rasa.
Shringara rasa in today's undertones mean images of sexual love, or the pangs of separation, unfaithfulness of the beloved. Tiruvalluvar in the Kural has said: Love is sweeter than wine-its mere name intoxicates.
But the Natya Shastra says that the erotic flavour arises from what ever is, sacred, pure, placid and worth seeing.

http://www.narthaki.com/info/articles/art238.html

Namaste TBL
Google:

srngara rasa
or
shringara rasa

and you´ll find more about the usefulness of the romantic emotions. In the context of health and the spiritual path it has great value. A constant slight erotic emotion was often recommend as neccessary for the physical and emotional well being and health. It was customary in ancient times to keep at least one erotic picture in every room of the house to remain in a constant state of slight erotic arousal and bliss.

Jainarayan
20 January 2012, 01:02 PM
Fascinating! Thanks. :)

charitra
20 January 2012, 01:38 PM
Namaste MahaHrada.



Now I am awared. Thank you. :) I knew He was a great tease of the gopis, but I did not know of anything more than that. However, I knew of a story that Lord Shiva was so "energized" that He took Maa Parvati right on the back of Nandi. I also knew that after He cut off Ganesha's head, Maa Parvati would would have nothing to do with Her husband, if you know what I mean. ;)


Namaste TBTL, Unwittingly you have allowed yourself led into The Leela (illusion).

It is the classical murthis displayed in Mandirs that count, and they typically represent Hinduism. What one draws in ones own bedroom or or what one writes in poetry or drama or what a nut does in a cremation ground with white paint on his body is everything to do with his/her own personal deluded take on life and faith and it serves only one purpose for us - humor value, bereft of any spiritual substance. .:)

MahaHrada
20 January 2012, 02:03 PM
Namaste TBTL, Unwittingly you have allowed yourself led into The Leela (illusion).

It is the classical murthis displayed in Mandirs that count, and they typically represent Hinduism. What one draws in ones own bedroom or or what one writes in poetry or drama or what a nut does in a cremation ground with white paint on his body is everything to do with his/her own personal deluded take on life and faith and it serves only one purpose for us - humor value, bereft of any spiritual substance. .:)

Excellent, that is a brillant comment, You are so right. Kama is much more than merely an erotic urge. All Rasas proceed from the desire. Kama takes many forms, like dharma kama (passion for virtue) artha-kama (desire for wealth) and moksha-kama (desire for liberation).

Desire is the main driving force of the universe, and one has to take a yogic approach to all actions, and emotions, as an offering to the Divine.

And most certainly we should learn from what is depicted in the mandirs. For instance Tripura Sundari the same Shodasi or Lalita, is also Kamakshi "She whose eyes awaken desire," or "She who has beautiful eyes."

This attraction of divine beauty creates the most sublime desire of union with the Divine. The goddess Tripura Sundari in her aspect as Shodasi is represented as a sixteen-year-old girl, and embodies sixteen types of desire.

Good that we got such a great help, without you we would be lost, deluded by the lala and the tantra of the bedroom of the Raja. And of course we should not forget the danger of the rasa of the white painted bogey man in the ice-cremation parlour.

Jainarayan
20 January 2012, 02:50 PM
Namaste TBTL, Unwittingly you have allowed yourself led into The Leela (illusion).

It is the classical murthis displayed in Mandirs that count, and they typically represent Hinduism. What one draws in ones own bedroom or or what one writes in poetry or drama or what a nut does in a cremation ground with white paint on his body is everything to do with his/her own personal deluded take on life and faith and it serves only one purpose for us - humor value, bereft of any spiritual substance. .:)

I don't understand what you're saying. Are we to discount the stories and mythologies as having lessons in there somewhere, though we may not take them literally? Aren't we all part of lila? Isn't creation the recreation of God, as Shankara pointed out?

If "what a nut does in a cremation ground with white paint on his body" brings him closer to his God, who is to judge him wrong? Is Hinduism not varied enough to allow for many different beliefs, approaches and practices? I'm just not understanding your response. :confused:

yajvan
20 January 2012, 06:25 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


If you see the Divine in sexual congress and think that is what they are depicting, then you have mistaken a rock for a diamond.

What they offer us is that of the co-mingling of the pure absolute (śiva) with that permeating all of creation (śakti) ; the Supreme is co-mingled with all of creation, all of the energy (śakti) that makes up creation.

It is by this co-mingling, that all of creation manifests. In kaśmiri śaivism it is considered spanda, a throb, a vibration, a stir in the Absolute level of Being. My teacher called it Creative Intelligence ( śakti + śiva); its very nature is to create expand, diversify, unfold.

The wise are teaching us via symbols , inferences, ideas.

praṇām

sdevante
20 January 2012, 06:44 PM
Thank you all for the responses, they have been very illuminating. I am glad to see that my thoughts are not totally outside the norm, even as I try to pin down exactly what those thoughts are. :)

MahaHrada
20 January 2012, 07:07 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


[FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=3]If you see the Divine in sexual congressthen... you have mistaken a rock for a diamond


The other way around it makes more sense. If one is a spiritual evolved person one can see the divine everywhere, especially in sringara rasa since it is the highest most refinend of the rasas. A deluded person can see the divine nowhere, not even in the most refinend emotion.

If one cannot see the divine in sexual contact it is because one is a pashu a person deluded and bonded by desire.

A Kaula Yogi experiences the divine everywhere, for him there is no difference between the pure and the impure, unlike the worldly person who differentiates for these Yogis every experience is an expression of the divine, it is of the nature of pure conciousness, of Bhairava, that is the meaning of advaita in the context of Kaula Dharma.

Shri Abhinavagupta, the greatest master of Kashmir shaivaism explains the same in Tantraloka ch. 29: The person who wants to perform a religious rite should bring a sexual partner, but not so if he is deluded by desire.

Those not yet able to see the divine in the sexual act and discern it as Samghatta, can profit nonetheless and improve their health and well being by staying in the refined state of srngara rasa, by contemplating and cherishing art natural beauty and erotic depictions or cherishing the joy of good food. In the teachings of Kashmir shaivaism aka trika kaula, Parabhairava is joy pure and simple- ananda -and can be experienced by the qualified person easiest in all activities that are joyful.

Only with shaktipat resulting from the descent of anugraha shakti, the shakti of grace the meaning of the kaula shastras can be unsealed. Understanding solely by human effort and intellect wthout a satguru is a vain task.

This same basic principle of the Kaula Dharma, the sacrifical refinement of sense impressions as the path to realise the divine state, taught with simple words by the great Master of Kashmir shaivaism, swami lakshman joo in this video. Refined Enjoyment of the Sense Organs is the key concept. Rasa means translated "taste".

Enjoy- if you can

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srV1bdQ68RM

swami lakshman joo 3:44 "these delicious things are not meant for worldly people who will waste it"

Shri Abhinavagupta Tantraloka:
Therefore this phoneme ‘ emission’ Visarga’ h that is phoneme ha in the state of latency is termed Kamatattava in the kulagahavara tantra. The fullness of desire (Kama) is realized in compenetration samghatta.”
Swami Lakshman joos commentary:
The Kaula yogi also realizes this Shaktikundalini. He realizes it as Kamattava, ‘the Essence of Desire’ through the contemplation of the power of desire kamakala during the secret rite caryakrama at that moment of immersion (samvesa), which is the compenetration (samghatta) of siddha and yogini.

charitra
20 January 2012, 07:09 PM
I don't understand what you're saying. Are we to discount the stories and mythologies as having lessons in there somewhere, though we may not take them literally? Aren't we all part of lila? Isn't creation the recreation of God, as Shankara pointed out?

If "what a nut does in a cremation ground with white paint on his body" brings him closer to his God, who is to judge him wrong? Is Hinduism not varied enough to allow for many different beliefs, approaches and practices? I'm just not understanding your response. :confused:


Would like to see what vaishnavas have to say, they will be able to contribute here with their insights.

Anyway we both are on thesame side of aisle. If we agree that theyare stories which they really are, Iam fine with that. My response was with ref to the palace dweller and his bed room pictures as posted above. Romance and sexualforeplay, with Krishna as central figure as described by someone above,doesn’t apply to Krishna in Physical Sense, its more of imagination from both genuine devotees and not so genuine ones. Krishna’s life outside the realm of implementing dharma proper,especially about his physical needs, needs a proper look. His enlightening Arjuna about dangers of attachment,removing his darkness and finally encouraging him to act to fight adharma is where his role comes out in all its grace. But then he also clearly had spread love around, but his physical participation for his own needs is non existent.

I hope Iam makingsense here. Even in his human form, a perfect yogi like Krishna, will have no serious use of material means like sex for his Ananda. See now sex and romance for us humans is clearly dharmic within its well defined limitations, however characterizing Krishna working on his own gratification becomes OUR Leela. Some draw on Krishna for anything they liked, notwithstanding their adoration and Bhakti. The guy who lived in the above palace example was one such individual. Olden time Romeos went overboard about romantic side of Krisna, that’s fine, taking it a myth is logical ‘cause it all comes as part of larger leela. In peacetime, as was the most world, hindus had it good. The result- the arts, lit other humanities flourished. And ‘theme of romance’ justifiably claimed solid share of those creative works. Krishna’s personal life was overused.

What we see within the 4 walls of mandirs that were built in stipulation ( to Agamas) only matter, those agamas are the recognized Shastras. Kalidasas and Srinathas were great writers but then they are not vedic sages, they wandered boundlessly in their creative landscape. Iam not sure my POV is any clearer than before. You will have the last word on this.

yajvan
20 January 2012, 08:31 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté



The other way around it makes more sense. If one is a spiritual evolved person one can see the divine everywhere,
Yes, what you say makes sense... the point I wished to offer was the notion of only seeing the flesh and nothing else. Then one is subordinated to paśuka.

If one spends some time studying & looking to the 29th chapter of the trantrāloka ( that of kula) it points to the subtler and richer meaning of physical union; yet this ~union~ is not based upon the rank-and-file.


You mention svāmī lakṣman-jū . He teaches that all contacts with the senses are by nature ~sexual~, perhaps a better word is sensuous. There is a union of the physical with the non-physical and joy can come from this.


We can go deeper¹ into this if there is interest.

praṇām

1. Going deeper into this, we will need to move to the uttara folder as the concepts are much more robust, and
a bit more esoteric.

Jainarayan
20 January 2012, 08:52 PM
Namaste charitra.


Anyway we both are on thesame side of aisle. If we agree that theyare stories which they really are, Iam fine with that. ...

...

I hope Iam makingsense here. Even in his human form, a perfect yogi like Krishna, will have no serious use of material means like sex for his Ananda. See now sex and romance for us humans is clearly dharmic within its well defined limitations, however characterizing Krishna working on his own gratification becomes OUR Leela. Some draw on Krishna for anything they liked, notwithstanding their adoration and Bhakti. The guy who lived in the above palace example was one such individual. ...

Iam not sure my POV is any clearer than before. You will have the last word on this.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes, it is clearer and you make perfect sense; we are indeed on the same page. There are lessons to be learned from these stories, lessons which are not so obvious.

I was thinking you thought I thought (ooh, my head is spinning now :D) of Krishna's and Radha's love as Earthly and physical. I don't see it that way... I see it as transcending what is Earthly, as They transcend everything material and Earthly. That's why I said originally that I've never read of anything that suggested a sexual side to Their love. There's a perfect love there that I don't know that we can understand here on Earth, but we strive for. People do indeed ascribe their own views and beliefs, for example that king's palace's bedroom(s). We see what we want to see.

sm78
21 January 2012, 02:22 AM
The hypocrisy and pretensions to appear something one is not in some of the posts in this thread is rather in poor taste. The mere mention of the s-word gets one uncomfortable, and one looks for the nearest exit door. But instead of accepting one's pashu nature or take a doctrinal stance against sacred sexuality we want to appear take the pseudo-intellectual high ground.

If the real and practical appear so uncomfortable and inconceivable, then the words are just words. Armchair philosophy does not get one liberation, but coming face to face with oneself, one's own mind, prejudices can be a start.

MahaHrada
21 January 2012, 05:43 AM
[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]What we see within the 4 walls of mandirs that were built in stipulation ( to Agamas) only matter, those agamas are the recognized Shastras.

Thanks again for your support another excellent contribution. The shastras should be our guiding light not some arbitrary work of artists, and like i mentioned in my posting, the pictures have all been painted according to the Dhyana slokas of the Agamas and Tantras. This was mentioned in the description. The sorry thing here is that i forget the exact titles.

MahaHrada
21 January 2012, 06:16 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté



Yes, what you say makes sense... the point I wished to offer was the notion of only seeing the flesh and nothing else. Then one is subordinated to paśuka.

If one spends some time studying & looking to the 29th chapter of the trantrāloka ( that of kula) it points to the subtler and richer meaning of physical union; yet this ~union~ is not based upon the rank-and-file.


You mention svāmī lakṣman-jū . He teaches that all contacts with the senses are by nature ~sexual~, perhaps a better word is sensuous. There is a union of the physical with the non-physical and joy can come from this.


We can go deeper¹ into this if there is interest.

praṇām

1. Going deeper into this, we will need to move to the uttara folder as the concepts are much more robust, and
a bit more esoteric.

There are no teaching about a difference between the physical and non-physical in Kaula Dharma, there is only advaitam. All this universe is nothing but shiva. All means exactly that "all" . There is no Maya as understood in Advaita Vedanta which became somehow the cause for materiality and impurity. It is not possible to adhere to concepts of tantra and Advaita Vedanta at the same time. These are mutually exclusive philosophies and path. Either a woman is pregnant or she is not there is no woman that is half way pregnant. Either one can take the step and accept everything as divine including what appears as impure or one cannot do that.Kaulachara is the highest path, there are many that are lower and accept the idea that there is the fleshy or physical or impure and things that have to be avoided. One can follow any path as one wishes but one cannot accept two paths at the same time that are mutually exclusive and hope to progress.

It depends on what we are able to understand, that path is what we must choose, the impure does not exist outside of our limited self. If you see something fleshy or a rock instead of a diamond you are ultimately only unaware of the true nature of the universe.
Concepts of Impurity, the fleshy, the rock as opposed to the diamond are errors of perception that soley exists inside a limited worldly mind and if one sticks to these concepts it require a worldly path.
The worldly person looks around and only sees the duality he does not see the "diamond quality" of all that exists.
We experience the universe by means of our sense organs, which are divinities. This is simple and straightforward. Swami does not say there are physical organs and there are non physical organs.

MahaHrada
21 January 2012, 06:26 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté



Yes, what you say makes sense... the point I wished to offer was the notion of only seeing the flesh and nothing else. Then one is subordinated to paśuka.

If one spends some time studying & looking to the 29th chapter of the trantrāloka ( that of kula) it points to the subtler and richer meaning of physical union; yet this ~union~ is not based upon the rank-and-file.


You mention svāmī lakṣman-jū . He teaches that all contacts with the senses are by nature ~sexual~, perhaps a better word is sensuous. There is a union of the physical with the non-physical and joy can come from this.


We can go deeper¹ into this if there is interest.

praṇām

1. Going deeper into this, we will need to move to the uttara folder as the concepts are much more robust, and
a bit more esoteric.

There are no teaching about a difference between the physical and non-physical in Kaula Dharma, or kashmir shaivaism, there is only advaitam. All this universe is nothing but shiva. All means exactly that "all" . There is no Maya as understood in Advaita Vedanta which became somehow the cause for materiality and impurity. It is not possible to adhere to concepts of tantra and Advaita Vedanta at the same time. These are mutually exclusive philosophies and path. Either a woman is pregnant or she is not there is no woman that is half way pregnant. Either one can take the step and accept everything as divine including what appears as impure or one cannot do that.
Kaulachara is the highest path, there are many that are lower and accept the idea that there is the fleshy or physical or impure.
One can follow any path as one wishes but one cannot accept two paths at the same time that are mutually exclusive.

It depends on what we are able to understand, that path is what we must choose, the impure does not exist outside of our limited self. If you see something fleshy or a rock instead of a diamond you are ultimately only unaware of the true nature of the universe.
Concepts of Impurity, the fleshy, the rock as opposed to the diamond are errors of perception that soley exists inside a limited worldly mind and require a worldly path.
The worldly person looks around and only sees the duality, he does not see the "diamond quality" of all that exists.

We experience the universe by means of our sense organs, which are divinities. We have to give them tarpana that means satisfy them and they will grace us in return with joy. This is simple and straightforward. Swami does not say there are physical organs and there are non physical organs or physical joy or non physical. It is the central message of all tantric paths that there exists nothing whatsoever that is not divine, that message is not armchair philosophy as sm liked to call it but it needs to be practised for example by erasing dualistic concepts such as rock-diamond/ only physical-non physical sexual act/divine union from the mind. Only if this practical work is done under supervison and blessing of a Guru, then understanding of the other concepts may occur.

swami says:
"these delicious things are not meant for worldly people who will waste it"

How will they waste these delicous things? By being unaware that these "fleshy physical tastes" are Parabhairava, they will not see the reality.
But then they should at least thank god that they can taste these joys says swami, but these people don´t do that, instead they curse these "rasas" or tastes. And illogical as it may seem the highest of the "tastes" the most divine is the subject of the worst curses.

yajvan
21 January 2012, 11:38 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


There are no teaching about a difference between the physical and non-physical in Kaula Dharma, or kashmir shaivaism, there is only advaitam.

I respect what you offer, yet my point was not from parā but from the point of view of aparā. Here there is diversity for the viewer, for the pāsu. It is from here this string was initially oriented. Hense comparing and contrasting different notions.

You mention all is śiva - of this I have no doubt. If we look to abhinavagupta's work parā-trīśikā vivaraṇa, he offers the following: yatsattatparamārthohi paramārthastataḥ śivaḥ

That which is Existence (sattā) is the highest (param) Reality, the Universe is of the nature of that Reality, therefore everything is śivaḥ

I will let these ideas rest for another time. Thank you for your input.

praṇām

MahaHrada
21 January 2012, 01:12 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

I respect what you offer, yet my point was not from parā but from the point of view of āpara. Here there is diversity for the viewer, for the pāsu.
I will let these ideas rest for another time. Thank you for your input.

praṇām



Namaste Yajvan, thanks for this exchange
Yes exactly it is apara or nigraha shakt, the limiting influence, that makes us think in terms of these dualities like impure pure, dharma adharma etc., what is good to do and what has to be avoided, and anugraha or Para shakti the grace that relives us from this bondage.
Thats why i suggest to not re-enforce these limiting and binding concepts of the pashu bhava, but trust in the releasing grace of the Guru and the Anugraha shakti and dare the practical step towards this advaitam, not grasping and holding on to limiting (nigraha, apara) concepts but by accepting sense enjoyment as divine move above delusions.