Question about the 4th principle in ISCKON

[orlando]

Namaste.
Shri Arjuna,how is that they contradict Shruti?And how they are told in special context?

[orlando]

Please read the whole context at http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto11/chapter5.html

[Arjuna]

Namaste,

I have seen the text — the whole passage is aimed against those who do not care about God and not meant for all, especially not meant for true Vaishnavas!

This view does contradict Shruti, since Vedas, Upanishads and Gita acknowledge sex as a aspect of love and means to enjoyment, and do not restrict it to procreation.

[Jalasayanan]

Is there by any means we can stop discussing basic instincts and start discussing something usefull

1. We can form a comparitive chart which lists all common practises amongst different religions
2. We can discuss philosophies in depth without making way for debating
3. We can post some small books like Hasthamalakeeyam or Geethaartha Sangraha or chatusloki with meanings

Is that an impossibility?

[kimtadbrahma]

Just a couple of points to add here. I think the suggestion that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu or his direct associates indulged in tantric or other forms of sexuality is quite wrong. There is no reference to this in any of the biographies and according to Chaitanya Charitamrita he was very strict in observing samnyasa vows in relation to women. The tendency in the Chaitanya Sampradaya towards practice of this kind would seem to be a later deviance from the original ideals, which emphasised celibacy. It is also interesting to note Suka's reply to Parik**** in the Bhagavata when the latter raises the point about Krishna lila and human dharma. Basically he says: you are not God so don't think you can immitate the lila of God.

In relation to the Gita, someone above cited 6.17 as teaching moderation rather than restraint. That is a possible interpretation but one must also note 6.14, which refers to brahmachari vrate sthitah for one practising the Yoga system advocated in that chapter. I am not myself advocating that strict line on sexuality, but I think it is unfair to try to accuse ISKCON or Swami Prabhupada of being deviant in the position they take on this issue.

[Arjuna]

Is there by any means we can stop discussing basic instincts and start discussing something usefull

Please see the name of the thread

If U aren't interested in the topic, who forces U to read or post? U are free to start any topic or take part in those which are of interest to U.

I do not think this is "useless", since due to abovementioned "4th principle" a considerable number of people are forced either to hypocricy or to suppression, both of which are harmful and wrong.

[orlando]

Namaste.
Shri Arjuna please read the following.By http://www.yoga-age.com/modern/brahp...#_Toc441557067
Voluntary Self-restraint Is No Suppression
There is a Western idea that sex is a natural urge and so free expression should be given to it. And if free expression is not given to it, the sex urge will become suppressed, will become repressed. And if it is thus suppressed and repressed, it will create all sorts of abnormalities within you and you will develop neurosis and various types of complex and you will become an abnormal person. There is partial truth in it. There is truth in it to the extent that if this suppression and repression is forced upon you by circumstances beyond your control, by social environment, by other taboos and deep-seated inhibitions within you, due to your father’s advice or mother’s dominance or family and all, then it can give rise to some undesirable inner abnormality. But this situation never applies if realizing the greatness of a higher goal and realizing the necessity of this important Sadhana of self-control in order to attain that goal, you make up your mind fully, willingly and voluntarily. Then there is no question of suppression. If with a full willing heart you enter into this course of self-discipline and self-restraint, then there is no question of suppression. No one is asking you to do it. You want to do it. You are yourself desirous of it. So, done with full willingness, done with great enthusiasm, it becomes a voluntary thing. Then, psychological situations will not arise. On the contrary, every time you succeed in controlling the sense-urge, you get a sense of elation, you get a sense of achievement you get a sense of inner satisfaction that you have succeeded. So, it is something that goes on giving you endless satisfaction and a sense of triumph, a sense of overcoming. Therefore it is entirely a positive process, a very creative and positive process, not a negative and suppressive process. So, regarding Brahmacharya, if you take the right approach and attitude towards it, then it is simple. It is a question of conserving energy, of preserving energy, so that it may be utilized for higher things which you wish to attain.

Regards,
Orlando.

[Arjuna]

Namaste.
Shri Arjuna please read the following.By http://www.yoga-age.com/modern/brahp...#_Toc441557067
Voluntary Self-restraint Is No Suppression
There is a Western idea that sex is a natural urge and so free expression should be given to it. And if free expression is not given to it, the sex urge will become suppressed, will become repressed. And if it is thus suppressed and repressed, it will create all sorts of abnormalities within you and you will develop neurosis and various types of complex and you will become an abnormal person. There is partial truth in it. There is truth in it to the extent that if this suppression and repression is forced upon you by circumstances beyond your control, by social environment, by other taboos and deep-seated inhibitions within you, due to your father’s advice or mother’s dominance or family and all, then it can give rise to some undesirable inner abnormality. But this situation never applies if realizing the greatness of a higher goal and realizing the necessity of this important Sadhana of self-control in order to attain that goal, you make up your mind fully, willingly and voluntarily. Then there is no question of suppression. If with a full willing heart you enter into this course of self-discipline and self-restraint, then there is no question of suppression. No one is asking you to do it. You want to do it. You are yourself desirous of it. So, done with full willingness, done with great enthusiasm, it becomes a voluntary thing. Then, psychological situations will not arise. On the contrary, every time you succeed in controlling the sense-urge, you get a sense of elation, you get a sense of achievement you get a sense of inner satisfaction that you have succeeded. So, it is something that goes on giving you endless satisfaction and a sense of triumph, a sense of overcoming. Therefore it is entirely a positive process, a very creative and positive process, not a negative and suppressive process. So, regarding Brahmacharya, if you take the right approach and attitude towards it, then it is simple. It is a question of conserving energy, of preserving energy, so that it may be utilized for higher things which you wish to attain.

Regards,
Orlando.

Namaste,

Since i am not a physician, let me not enter into any arguement on this. I can admit that in a case of serious practice of hatha-yoga (or any similar system, like chinese chi-kung) no physical damage from celibacy occurs.
We were not discussing a case of brahmacharis however, but only of grihasthis. And in this case the problem is very different and isn't limited to physical suppression or self-restraint.

Moreover, the idea that through sex one inevitably loses energy is essentially wrong. If sex is in love, it brings more energy. In a case it is a mere copulation for bodily pleasure, then yes, it results in the energy loss.

A yogi who is married is supposed to make sex divine, and who is single (and wishes to be) is supposed to keep brahmacharya as self-willed celibacy.

[Jalasayanan]

Please see the name of the thread

If U aren't interested in the topic, who forces U to read or post? U are free to start any topic or take part in those which are of interest to U.

I do not think this is "useless", since due to abovementioned "4th principle" a considerable number of people are forced either to hypocricy or to suppression, both of which are harmful and wrong.

I have no problems in ignoring but all your topics are dealing with basic instincts only - in a way or another.

Hope Mr Satay or Mr B Yoga Seeker did not made this forum only for basic instincts. Or atleast instead of using the three letter word often you can find some better variance, which could save some face

[Ram]

Namaste,

Since i am not a physician, let me not enter into any arguement on this. I can admit that in a case of serious practice of hatha-yoga (or any similar system, like chinese chi-kung) no physical damage from celibacy occurs.
We were not discussing a case of brahmacharis however, but only of grihasthis. And in this case the problem is very different and isn't limited to physical suppression or self-restraint.

Moreover, the idea that through sex one inevitably loses energy is essentially wrong. If sex is in love, it brings more energy. In a case it is a mere copulation for bodily pleasure, then yes, it results in the energy loss.

A yogi who is married is supposed to make sex divine, and who is single (and wishes to be) is supposed to keep brahmacharya as self-willed celibacy.

You can either be a Yogi or a Bogi. If you attempt both you will be a Rogi. What is the need for grihastas to involve in Yoga at all?

Your whole idea violates Yama and Niyama, the cornerstones of any Yogic practice. This so called charge against the 4th principle in ISKCON is equally applicable to Srivaishnavas as well, where it is an unwritten rule. Every Hindu school preaches the notion of having reduced material desires and dedicating your life for God and Godly activities -- naturally implying these rules.