Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: Jnana Yoga

  1. #21
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    37
    Posts
    743
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    My query was specific. How does Sex leads to eternal bliss?
    Well, i never said that "sex leads to eternal bliss", these are Ur words.
    I said it is a means to realise Divine Bliss, which is different. Also, it includes certain essential prescriptions, without which sex turns to mere body function.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    You had quoted Shyama Rahasya text which has some relevance, where in the word Samyoge (samyoga) as understood stands for conjunction, meeting point for two different objects. "Sharir indriye satva atma samyoge dhari jivitam iti ayu" as given in Charaka Samhita or "deha prana samyoge ayuhu" all refers the word Samyoga to conjunction. I want you to be specific where does the clear reference is given.
    It is clear and exact in the context.
    Of course, i am aware of given meaning of "samyoga", but in this case it refers primarily to sexual union. You may compare this with Shrividya's Jnanarnava-tantra, it is available online in sanskrit.
    I cannot type the whole Tantras here just for the sake of arguement. As a representative of the Tradition, i can speak on its behalf.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Pertaining to Shri Abhinavagupta's work, than a mere reference it will be better if you can produce the script or translation so that we can discuss on that. There is no point where you give references and I search it down all by myself. If you give the reference better you quote.
    I can provide sanskrit text if U'd like. But i cannot go on translating each and every passage here, sorry.
    BTW 29th Ahnika of Tantraloka is published in english by J. Dupuche as "Abhinavagupta. The Kula Ritual" or something like that - check with google.com if interested.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Assuming the translation is exact, the point in discussion is 1. Sex might lead to eternal bliss and now this also adds 2. Sex is enjoyment of mind. If this is carries blanket acceptance, a child molester mind might seek enjoyment verily in his activity, so does a drug addict and so does a murderer. Now, how do you relate Vijnana Bhairava text with the question in context, "Sex leading to eternal bliss". The text actually reads - "Wherever you find satisfaction, the very essence of bliss will be revealed to you if you remain in this place without mental wavering". This is well known. When your mind is tranquil, essence of bliss will be revealed. Now again it is for you to show, how does sex leads to this tranquil mind
    Since sex in love and inside marriage is in total accordance with all Hindu scriptures, there is no reason not to apply given method of VBh. Do not confuse the issue with acts of violence or ignorance, please, which clearly go against Dharma.
    Then, there is another passage in VBh which speaks specifically about sexual act. I can find it if i dig the book out, i have it in photocopy somewhere.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    The only bliss Vijnana Bhairava talks about during sex ritual is bliss of love and how do you relate this to eternal bliss?
    I doubt that VBh uses expression "bliss of love". This is needed to be checked.
    Brahmananda is not eternal in a conventional sense, since it is out of time. One moment of direct anubhava of That is an experince of Eternity, it is not placed in time.

    Scriptures say Shiva is Love. Thus, bliss of love verily is Eternal Bliss, Brahmananda.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    This is what I was saying earlier, being in threads pertaining to Sankara bhagavatpada's system or other system, let us abstain from making statements pertaining to our sampradaya. Further, If you are making statements pertaining to your Kaula sect, also request you to acknowledge what is said first and then point what your sect says, otherwise it is evident that you are trying to make your views as the only correct versions. This is a suggestion.
    I have clearly written that Kaula-naya is to be followed by Kaulas only. And each one has to follow his sampradaya.
    But, some points U say are againts general Vedic or Hindu view - these only i argue with. Like that, grihasthi intending for Moksha do not have to abstain from sex for two reasons: it is simply not required by Shastras and moreover goes against his ashrama-dharma.
    If some gurus taught this view (i haven't seen till now ANY proof of this from Ur side or from Kannan), it is mere personal opinion which in fact contradicts Vedic teaching.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Many times I had told my views pertaining to Sex and Grihasta - I say it again, I do not deny the fact that Grihasta can have sex, but mumukshu cannot have sex. If you still do not know this it means you have not exposed yourself to other philosophies other than Kaula
    Yes, i know it is Ur view.
    But verily this is not Hindu Dharma or Vedic teaching.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    37
    Posts
    743
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    1. Pure love is not ALWAYS sex as you presume.
    I did not say this. Please, see again.
    What i said is sex is natural manifestation of love between man and woman (shringara-rasika love). Of course it is not a necessary part in each case! We were discussing specially relationships of husband and wife - and in this particular case sex makes their feelings perfectly manifested. Since we live in "material world", expression of bhAva into physical actuality is natural. And since sexual love is natural and pure (note, LOVE and not "sex only"), it is no obstacle to upasana and Jnana, but quite the opposite - it helps to reach God.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    2. Not only Bengalis all call this Shringaara
    I did not say this, again
    Simply i know Bengali tradition of Vaishnavism somewhat better, thus i speak what i know. I wasn't sure Shrivaishnavas use the same term.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    5. Union as suggested by you in Radha Krishna bhakthi bhava is absolutely wrong as that pertains children of 7 years old. There is no reference of Radha being crossed the level of puberty. Your accusations leads to calling Hindu Gods for pedophilia. Better know the consequences of your statement and abstain from making such statements
    U have to tell this to Sri Jayadeva and other Vaishnavas who thought so! This is not imagined by me or Tantric gurus.
    As i know, no Scripture makes any notes on Radha's age. Moreover, she was married, as most gopis - they were parakiya-shaktis to Krishna! This implies they were mature enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    I agree with this. Even my sect views similarly. We assign all beautiful things and women to Goddess Lakshmi
    Then what is the reason to abstain from sexual relationships with one's wife in case of mumukshu?

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    You never considered puranas are authoritative. Better be consistent with your ideas. There is no point in making a statement and retracting it without due notice
    I never considered Puranas as equal authority to Vedas and Agamas. But when Puranic view doesn't go against Shruti (Agamas included), it is authorative as well.
    What i quoted is Tantric teaching - Kalika-purana is verily Tantric scripture written in Assam.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    1. Out of five - is not it nine?
    Bengali Vaishnavas have a system of 5 rasas, unlike more early system of 9 or 12 (i may be wrong in numbers, but i think 12 was also there).

  3. #23
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Age
    41
    Posts
    371
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna
    Well, i never said that "sex leads to eternal bliss", these are Ur words. I said it is a means to realise Divine Bliss, which is different.
    "Of course it is not only bodily pleasure, but it is a sparkle of the Bliss of Brahman." Whose words are this?

    2. Sex is a natural way to manifest Ananda, bliss of Brahman as it is present in the world and body. Thus it is a part of Kaulika brahmacharya. Your statement in Vamachara thread page 3

    1. Maithuna is a direct means of realising blissful pulsation of Consciousness Your statement in Vamachara page 6 where in you say maithuna realises pulsation of consciousness and not eternal bliss - Pulsations of consciousness is a result of self inquiry and eternal bliss is a result of inquiry on God(Brahmajinjaasa, as put in by Maharishi Ved Vyasa)

    Thus the very enjoyment is upasana — when the attitude is such. For this reason Yoni-tantra says: “Happiness is achieved through enjoyment and Liberation is achieved through enjoyment Your statement in What is tantrik monism referring to sexual rituals page 7

    Vijnana-bhairava Agama says: "Wherever one's mind has enjoyment, there one should hold it. In that very place he experinces the bliss of Brahman". is again your statement referring to sex as suggested by Vijnana Bhairava

    It will be better if you are consistent with your statements in this forum

    Of course, i am aware of given meaning of "samyoga", but in this case it refers primarily to sexual union. You may compare this with Shrividya's Jnanarnava-tantra, it is available online in sanskrit.
    That is your assumption. If you want to mean Samyoga for Sexual union you are free to do it. As it is not so in general practise (non kaula sects) it will be better if you abstain from making such statements in general threads like this

    Furthermore, there must be a reason if samyoga means sexual rituals here. Request you to provide us that reason

    (A sample of such reason I had given while discussing the nature of the word narayana being proper noun and interpretation for the elephant word meaning ordinary elephant and lord - there are similar other examples also which I can provide with)

    I can provide sanskrit text if U'd like. But i cannot go on translating each and every passage here, sorry.
    I welcome any original quote

    BTW 29th Ahnika of Tantraloka is published in english by J. Dupuche as "Abhinavagupta. The Kula Ritual" or something like that - check with google.com if interested.
    I am not interested in part translations. if the text is available in full, let me know it. If the need arises, I have good access to religious texts, I know how to take it, thanks for your suggestion, Do inform me incase the entire translations are available online

    Since sex in love and inside marriage is in total accordance with all Hindu scriptures, there is no reason not to apply given method of VBh. Do not confuse the issue with acts of violence or ignorance, please, which clearly go against Dharma. Then, there is another passage in VBh which speaks specifically about sexual act. I can find it if i dig the book out, i have it in photocopy somewhere.
    It is not me who is confusing indeed it is you. You perpetually shift you base from normal Grihasti to Mumukshu. My quotations was indeed talks about mumukshu. Again you are missing a query posted - How does Sex leads to tranquility of mind?

    My comparisons was specific. I am talking about enjoyment concept as you suggested, suddenly you bring in adharma ignoring the very word you had used to refer sex - "Enjoyment".

    You can dig out a copy, I had given you verse numbers where all sex is dealt in Vijnana Bhairava, from verse no 69 to 72, but it has only referece to sexual ritual and no where it says you can feel or realise supreme bliss. Check and get back to me on this

    On the contrary, the very Vijnana Bhairava talks about
    49. O beauty! Senses disseminated in your heart space, perceive the essence of the Shakti as indescribably fine gold powder which glitters in your heart and from there pours into space. Then you will know supreme bliss. (meditation)

    53. See the entire world as a blazing inferno. Then, when all has turned into ashes, enter bliss.

    64. In any activity, concentrate on the gap between inbreath and outbreath. Thus attain bliss
    This is the what Vijnana Bhairava suggest about how to know supreme bliss

    Whereas it is not clear about how bliss will come in while referring in other places, but just suggests reader to taste bliss by tasting food and drink (I should check my current translations with some two or three other translations, my present translations sounds as if bliss of intoxication, which I doubt 72. At the time of euphoria and expansion caused by delicate foods and drinks, be total in this delight and, through it, taste supreme bliss.)

    I doubt that VBh uses expression "bliss of love". This is needed to be checked.
    You can check again.

    My version says this 68. When you practice a sex ritual, let thought reside in the quivering of your senses like wind in the leaves, and reach the celestial bliss of ecstatic love

    It further till 71 quotes about bliss of love and not about eternal bliss.

    Correct me if I am wrong for this shows verily I should buy another book on Vijnana Bhairava, if your version is true and my version is wrong

    Brahmananda is not eternal in a conventional sense, since it is out of time. One moment of direct anubhava of That is an experince of Eternity, it is not placed in time.
    You should describe your second statement well. First you say it is not eternal and in the very next you say it is eternal. May I understand Brahmanada is not eternal conventionally but eternal in modern sense? I am unable to make this up

    Scriptures say Shiva is Love. Thus, bliss of love verily is Eternal Bliss, Brahmananda.
    Shiva is love - correct; but this love is not sex. it is verily Samanya prema Bhava like love for cow, birds and other living organism - Sneha should be the right word considering the phrase as rendered in Dravidian Languages. English vocabulary is not strong for expressing "Love", like Sanskrit, Telugu, Tamil, Kanada and Malaylam (I stop here for this is what I know, I can also generalise all Indian Languages, but I wont be able to corroborate)- Prema, abhilasha, Sneha, Raaga:, Vaatsalya, Anuraaga:, pranaya:, shrungara, kaama, anangaraaga, daya, krupa, abhinivesha, madanavashya, - trust you and sarabhangaji can list more

    How this love corroborates your view is unknown still, where as snehabhaava to other living creatures with the view that god lives in all and all living creatures are viewed as god, can lead to eternal bliss - falling into bhakthiyoga

    I have clearly written that Kaula-naya is to be followed by Kaulas only. And each one has to follow his sampradaya.
    I doubt as this is verily mere words of yours. You say sankara is really Kaula, Ramanuja has hidden Kuala tattvas from Vaishnav sects, trust both of us are new to this forum less than a year, (this forum is also very young, I trust), lest I will able to give more such instances.

    You indeed want to say, Kaula is original Hindu sect and all sects support Kaula view inspite of the fact you verily acknowledge Kaula is non vedic religion whereas all other sects are vedic

    [quoteBut, some points U say are againts general Vedic or Hindu view - these only i argue with. [/quote]
    This corroborates my earlier statement. You indeed want to say Kaula philosophy is indeed only Hindu/Vedic sect. Let me not take reference of all - Sankara Bhavathpada did advice mumukshu to abstain from sex, indeed he adviced to abstain from women in toto. Is this not a part of general vedic / hindu view?

    Like that, grihasthi intending for Moksha do not have to abstain from sex for two reasons: it is simply not required by Shastras and moreover goes against his ashrama-dharma.
    Not required only for Kaula Shastras (You forget to add), and in fact your ideas goes against Ashrama Dharma. As I had submitted, only Kama is not Grihasta dharma, even Artha is. As long as he upholds this purusharatha he remains as Grihasta. Kama as a purusharaatha is given permission to be practised by Grihasta but Grihasta is not defined on this enjoyment. As I had pointed out earlier, people of higher gnana in mythology entirely had very less children. For that fact, stories pertaining to Narada maharishi being trilokasanchaari will verify to my opinions.

    If some gurus taught this view (i haven't seen till now ANY proof of this from Ur side or from Kannan), it is mere personal opinion which in fact contradicts Vedic teaching.
    Point is your carefully and purposefully miss those texts, there was a similar text submitted to you for which you had replied that the submitted text belongs to Harsha. Your dismissed it saying it is independant view of Harsha. In the same way, if I reject your Kaula view that it is independant view Shri Abhinavaguptaji, I think you will be sorry for me for holding such view, in the same way I feel sorry for you for holding such views with submitted texts which you rejected as personal opinions of Shri Harsha

    Yes, i know it is Ur view.
    But verily this is not Hindu Dharma or Vedic teaching.
    Indeed, it is your view that Kaula is only Hindu sect and all sects corroborate only Kaula

  4. #24
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Age
    41
    Posts
    371
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna
    Namaste,

    I am not a Vaishnava in my practice or beliefs, and not a pandita in Vaishnava-shastras. But i will try to find exact references to Bhagavata and other main Vaishnava texts.

    However, Gita-govinda is not mere poetry, it is authorative text for Orissan and Bengali Vaishavism. If it included any "heretical" ideas, it wouldn't be treated with such respect. Jayadeva was traditional Vaishnava and not a Tantric or Shakta-upasaka. Thus i see no reason to suspect him of deliberate imagining of facts of Krishna's life and sports.
    I do not suggest you to be a vaishnavite or even do not advice you to change your sect.

    It is more better if I stay in my sect and you in yours, for verily both sects are Hindu sects.

    All I object is your interference in each and every thread spreading Kaula views irrespective of the nature of the thread clearly mentioning Kaula is the only Hindu Sect. You posting always had this attitude, lest you would not had said Sanakara is verily Kaula and Ramanuja hid Kaula traces in Vaishanvism

    As far as Gita Govinda is concerned it is not authoritative text but a mere poetry. As this leads to clear discussions on basis on Vaishnavism, I suggest there must be another thread in Vaishnav part of this forum, and not here on this general thread. But I can give an analogy - for Vaishnavites, dasaavataraa does not include Buddha, as Shri Jayadeva addressed all dasa Avataaras of Shri Vishnu in order, there is no point in taking Buddha's name to complete the tenth avataraa. One view suggested to me in my private discussion group is that Buddha avataraa as it is completed avataraa and Kalki is yet to come, Shri Jayadeva could had opted for it, I submission to this is - if this has to be accepted, Shri jayadeva texts being popular in Bengal and Orissa, should had chosen Kapila Maharishi, or Dattavataraa instead of Buddha. For that fact he could had chosen any of the other 27 listed in Bhagavatha, but for the purpose of poetry, he stuck to dasavataraa sequence and when Krishnaavataraa is finished continued with Buddha as final avataraa, for poetry demands some order in the way things are depicted which in sharp contrast with sruthis and smritis which says what deems fit and correct

    Reverence could not be equated with religious treatises. For that fact many of us know Harivamsa, Raghuvamsa, Meerabhai Bajans better than Rig Veda shakas (atharvana Veda sakhas could be very apt example) and former is equally popular. The fact is former cannot be religious treatises and later is not just a mere work of poetry

  5. #25
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Age
    41
    Posts
    371
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna
    I did not say this. Please, see again.
    What i said is sex is natural manifestation of love between man and woman (shringara-rasika love). Of course it is not a necessary part in each case! We were discussing specially relationships of husband and wife - and in this particular case sex makes their feelings perfectly manifested. Since we live in "material world", expression of bhAva into physical actuality is natural. And since sexual love is natural and pure (note, LOVE and not "sex only"), it is no obstacle to upasana and Jnana, but quite the opposite - it helps to reach God.
    This is another example, but I cannot be quoting you again and again. This part you have successfully abstained from clarifying - Sex help to reach god. I am discussing this with you for more than week now in three different threads, never you had clarified how sex helps to reach god - All you say in Kaula it is Upasana, when questioned you say even Vaishnavite has this upasana

    Just tell me - are you going to clarify this or not. If yes, pls post it

    I did not say this, again
    Simply i know Bengali tradition of Vaishnavism somewhat better, thus i speak what i know. I wasn't sure Shrivaishnavas use the same term.
    This you did not said, I agree. As your phrase went Bengali vaishnavs call this Shrungara, I responded all call this as shrungara

    U have to tell this to Sri Jayadeva and other Vaishnavas who thought so! This is not imagined by me or Tantric gurus.
    As i know, no Scripture makes any notes on Radha's age. Moreover, she was married, as most gopis - they were parakiya-shaktis to Krishna! This implies they were mature enough.
    This is indeed spread by Tantrics and more prominent sect of Vaishnav in Bengal - Gaudias did not subscribe to this view. They insist Shri krishna is "Param Brahmachary". If you can tell me which Vaishnavs feel so, I am duty bound to take this message to them as Gaudias are doing now.

    Again you make clear that you do not read Hindu Scriptures but stick to what you Kaula guru says - No objection to that, but you should not say Shri Radha was married when she met Krishna, if so, I demand proof, if you do not submitt proof, I am going to raise a blasphemy complaint against you to moderator

    Quote Originally Posted by Arjun
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramkish42
    Even my sect views similarly. We assign all beautiful things and women to Goddess Lakshmi
    Then what is the reason to abstain from sexual relationships with one's wife in case of mumukshu?
    What do you suggest - to have sex with some one whom you see as your mother and mother goddess? This is ridiculous Arjun.

    One of the Kaula sect member in my private discussion post suggested this and to this one smarta replied, "we verily say child is god, and if you suggest to have sex with some one whom you treat as your god, why you do not have sex with a child". All I did at that time is to shout at that smaarta for making such comment. I never thought I will be posting it in some forum like this to reply to a similar Kaula view.

    RIDICULOUS CLAIM, THE MOST RIDICULOUS YOU COULD EVER POST

    I never considered Puranas as equal authority to Vedas and Agamas. But when Puranic view doesn't go against Shruti (Agamas included), it is authorative as well.
    What i quoted is Tantric teaching - Kalika-purana is verily Tantric scripture written in Assam.
    Puraanas are as old as veda or dated very immediately to veda (this is my view) or very late dated (as per your view). If so, later works which are assigned to Maharishi Ved Vyasa (Let us not go to other rishis who compiled similar puranas for easy understanding) namely puranas and Ithihaasas should corroborate with views of agamas and Veda. I deny to accept how a person of level Maharishi Ved Vyasa could make this mistake of contradicting Agamas and Vedas. If there are any scribes in Puraanas and ithihaasas, then it should verily mean it was the intention of Maharishi Ved Vyasa, hence your idea of agama and Veda should be wrong. You do not see how to link two contradicting verses as seen by maharishi ved vyasa could be possibility.

    Second possibility I had given earlier. Great gurus had a practise of denying authority of agamas but they objected to the authority of a mahapurana, indeed for any works to which Maharishi Ved Vyasa name is ascribed to. Shri Adi Sankara Bhavatpada rejected the authority of Paancharaatra for the fact, Paancharaatra suggested saranagati marga as method of eternity which is unknown for advaita. He did this falling in line with his perceptors. Whereas Shrimad Ramanuja falling in line with maharishi Bodhayana (Rishi Bodhayana is a sutrakara and smritikara, even today by his name we have Bodhayana amavasya for people who follow bodhayana sutras), accepted the authority of Paancharaatra, but denied authority to kaamika, yogaja kind of agamas. No where I read, these great gurus rejected authority of any mahapurana and itihaasas.

    It is very evident that only Kaula practise varies, (non vedic philosophies varies at this), hence I deny to accept your view as general Hindu View. Yours idea is an exceptional case and not general view.

    Bengali Vaishnavas have a system of 5 rasas, unlike more early system of 9 or 12 (i may be wrong in numbers, but i think 12 was also there).
    I have nothing against this. I know Bangla practise varies in majority of views, with my law background, I can say, rest of India falling in Mitakshara sect of Hinduism whereas Bengal falls in Dayabhaga sect of Hinduism, hence other courts are suggested not to take precedents of Calcutta highcourt views on Hindu laws(Of course, to many instances related to marriage, succession, guardingship etc, we have generalised for we have specifically enacted laws and made our legal system almost universal, but when it comes to customary practises and issues not covered by enacted laws by Indian parliament, this blanket ban applies)

  6. #26
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Age
    41
    Posts
    371
    Rep Power
    0
    Leaving behind all this controversies, I see, you are reaching 200 postings. By the time you read this thread, I reasonably trust you should have crossed 200 postings.

    Congragulations

  7. #27
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    37
    Posts
    743
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    "Of course it is not only bodily pleasure, but it is a sparkle of the Bliss of Brahman." Whose words are this?
    2. Sex is a natural way to manifest Ananda, bliss of Brahman as it is present in the world and body. Thus it is a part of Kaulika brahmacharya. Your statement in Vamachara thread page 3
    All these statement of mine are exact. And yet i didn't use the wording U ascribed to me. I cannot say that "sex leads to eternal bliss", since this would imply that if one has sex it makes him permanently blissful, which may not be the case.
    There are certain strict conditions, and i have underlined those several times quite clearly.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    1. Maithuna is a direct means of realising blissful pulsation of Consciousness Your statement in Vamachara page 6 where in you say maithuna realises pulsation of consciousness and not eternal bliss - Pulsations of consciousness is a result of self inquiry and eternal bliss is a result of inquiry on God(Brahmajinjaasa, as put in by Maharishi Ved Vyasa)
    I do not see any 6th page in that thread. The link U provided leads to 5th page, and nothing is there what U mention. I don't know what U are reading. I never used the word "Brahma-jijnasa" in this forum and never called Vyasa by hindi title "Ved". U mix something...

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    It will be better if you are consistent with your statements in this forum
    This is not a first case when U try to imagine inconsistency in my posts. The problem is with how U read, however...

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    That is your assumption. If you want to mean Samyoga for Sexual union you are free to do it. As it is not so in general practise (non kaula sects) it will be better if you abstain from making such statements in general threads like this
    The quotation was from Kaula scripture! And i have a full right to make such statements - because truth is that. When U are not initiated into Kula-naya and haven't read discussed texts, how can U deny provided interpretation on the only basis that "U do not like it"? Isn't this really inconsistent?

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Furthermore, there must be a reason if samyoga means sexual rituals here. Request you to provide us that reason
    saMyoga m. conjunction , combination , connection (%{-ge} or %{-geSu} ifc. `" in connection with , with regard to , concerning "') , union or absorption with or in (gen. , or instr. with and without %{saha} , or loc. , or ifc.) A1past. MBh. &c. ; contact (esp. in phil. `" direct material contact "' , as of sesamum seed with rice-grains [in contradistinction to contact by the fusion of particles , as of water with milk] , enumerated among the 24 Gun2as of the Nya1ya cf. under %{sam-bandha}) Yogas. Kan2. Bha1sha1p. ; carnal contact , sexual union MBh. &c. ; matrimonial connection or relationship by marriage with or between (gen. , %{saha} with instr. , or comp.) Gaut. Mn. MBh. &c. ; a kind of alliance or peace made between two kings with a common object Ka1m. Hit. ; agreement of opinion , consensus (opposed to %{bheda}) R. ; applying one's self closely to , being engaged in , undertaking (%{-gaM} %{kR} , `" to undertake , set about , begin "' ; %{agnihotra-saMyogam} %{kR} , `" to undertake the maintenance of a sacred fire "') A1past. Mn. R. ; (in gram.) a conjunct consonant , combination of two or more consonants Pra1t. Pa1n2. &c. ; dependence of one case upon another , syntax Vop. ; (in astron.) conjunction of two or more heavenly bodies MW. ; total amount , sum VarBr2S. ; N. of S3iva MBh. ; %{-pRthak-tva} n. (in phil.) separateness with conjunction (a term applied to express the separateness of what is optional from what is a necessary constituent of anything) MW. [1112,3] ; %{-mantra} m. a nuptial text or formula Gaut. ; %{-viruddha} n. food which causes disease through being mixed MW.

    Seeing the textual context of that statement and context of Kaula Doctrine, proper meaning in this case is "sexual union".

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    I welcome any original quote
    Full text of Tantraloka is available in Muktabodha Online Library as PDF (with Viveka of Jayaratha) and as txt file. What i referred to is 29th Ahnika, near to beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    It is not me who is confusing indeed it is you. You perpetually shift you base from normal Grihasti to Mumukshu. My quotations was indeed talks about mumukshu. Again you are missing a query posted - How does Sex leads to tranquility of mind?
    Who said grihasthi cannot be mumukshu, which Shastra?
    And if he becomes mumukshu, dharma of grihasthashrama is still there. Moreover, do U mean to say that a grihasthi who wants to achieve Mukti has to stop loving his wife and deny her? This is a practical conclusion of Ur flowery words...

    Sex MAY help to achieve tranquility of mind - when a person is meditating in sexual act or feeling. Otherwise, if he is submerged in intense love.
    In orgasm mind is tranquil - the problem is that common people are unaware of themselves and never notice this. When attitude and intention is proper, sexual enjoyment is a direct means to higher consciousness.

    This is the aim - AWARENESS, and not making mind inactive (which is not possible and not needed). In most intense feelings Kaula is perfectly self-aware and free.

    Regarding VBhT, i will see in sanskrit text. Gimme some three days, i am out of my place today and tomorrow.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    37
    Posts
    743
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    It further till 71 quotes about bliss of love and not about eternal bliss.
    Personally i would really prefer bliss of love, if these two are different!
    It is necessary to see exact sanskrit words used.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Correct me if I am wrong for this shows verily I should buy another book on Vijnana Bhairava, if your version is true and my version is wrong
    I did not say that. The only "right" VBhT is sanskrit one, every translation is an interpretation. I have got a translation of Jaidev Singh, which i do not concider good in certain instances. But we can always compare with original and see, what is the proper meaning.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    You should describe your second statement well. First you say it is not eternal and in the very next you say it is eternal. May I understand Brahmanada is not eternal conventionally but eternal in modern sense? I am unable to make this up
    Well, the problem is in english word "eternal". As i understand it, it implies something unlimitedly extended in time (i may mistake, english is a foreign tongue for me). To show that i spoke about That, which is beyond time, is put it in capital letter, "Eternity".
    This problem is linguistic and not essential.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Shiva is love - correct; but this love is not sex.
    Shiva is verily called as "Kameshvara", Lord of Passion. And sex is a natural and sacred aspect of the most intimate kind of love.
    If Shiva is love, He is also sexual love (not exclusively of course).

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    I doubt as this is verily mere words of yours. You say sankara is really Kaula, Ramanuja has hidden Kuala tattvas from Vaishnav sects, trust both of us are new to this forum less than a year, (this forum is also very young, I trust), lest I will able to give more such instances.
    U again try to misinterpret my words.
    About Shankara i told that such is the view of Kaula tradition, and historically this may not be true. About Ramanuja i said that he perhaps had known about existence of sexual ritual in Pancharatra tradition (as it is shown in LT). Since Lakshmi-tantra was written about 9-12 century, and its teaching verily existed at least some time before the text was written down, there is nothing impossible in my assumption.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    You indeed want to say, Kaula is original Hindu sect and all sects support Kaula view inspite of the fact you verily acknowledge Kaula is non vedic religion whereas all other sects are vedic
    Please do not use a ad-trick with "and all other toothpastes"
    Which "all other"? Kaulism is based upon Shruti, but Agamic part of it. It is in accordance with Vedas, but its origin is not Vedic, but Agamic.
    Same is the case with Pancharatra, Pashupata, Natha and many other traditions, which are based on Agamas.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    This corroborates my earlier statement. You indeed want to say Kaula philosophy is indeed only Hindu/Vedic sect. Let me not take reference of all - Sankara Bhavathpada did advice mumukshu to abstain from sex, indeed he adviced to abstain from women in toto. Is this not a part of general vedic / hindu view?
    He did not advice to grihasthis to abstain from their wives.
    Generally, Gurus for sannyasis should be sannyasis, while Gurus for grihasthis - grihasthis. Shankara's system is essentially monastic one and not meant for grihasthis.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Not required only for Kaula Shastras (You forget to add), and in fact your ideas goes against Ashrama Dharma.
    What exactly, please?
    There are things in Tantra which go against Smriti, but i never promoted them for non-Kaulas.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    As I had pointed out earlier, people of higher gnana in mythology entirely had very less children. For that fact, stories pertaining to Narada maharishi being trilokasanchaari will verify to my opinions.
    Mythology proves nothing unless one understands its symbolism.
    Moreover, in mythology Indra, Shiva and Krishna are very sex-minded! Of course, number of offsprings has no relation to the case, since one can enjoy sex and have no children at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    Point is your carefully and purposefully miss those texts, there was a similar text submitted to you for which you had replied that the submitted text belongs to Harsha. Your dismissed it saying it is independant view of Harsha. In the same way, if I reject your Kaula view that it is independant view Shri Abhinavaguptaji, I think you will be sorry for me for holding such view, in the same way I feel sorry for you for holding such views with submitted texts which you rejected as personal opinions of Shri Harsha
    Views of Sri Abhinavagupta are based upon Agamas and transmission of Jnana. This is clear from comparance his teachings with teachings of other Kaula-siddhas.
    Those views which are against Agamas are not Kaulika and are to be rejected as personal opinions of biased personalities.
    Abhinavagupta is such authority for Kaulism as Ramanuja for Shrivaishnavism or Shankara for Advaita-vedanta. U are supposed to have some respect to these Acharyas and their view - in frame of their traditions. I do not say Abhinavagupta should be an authority for Vaishnavas or Pashupatas, but for Kaulas he verily is.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    37
    Posts
    743
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    This is another example, but I cannot be quoting you again and again. This part you have successfully abstained from clarifying - Sex help to reach god. I am discussing this with you for more than week now in three different threads, never you had clarified how sex helps to reach god - All you say in Kaula it is Upasana, when questioned you say even Vaishnavite has this upasana
    Just tell me - are you going to clarify this or not. If yes, pls post it
    From the point of view of Bhakti, sexual love relationships are means to get one with Devi, as She reveals herself in a woman. For that reason woman is also called dUtI.
    From the point of view of Jnana, it is a means to manifest Ananda and experience samavesha, which leads to Self-realisation.
    I have written this several times, but U either do not notice (or read my posts) or simply want to go on argueing. Thank U, but for me enough. I have said too much already . Really it won't be good to bury the truth of Love under hipes of words.

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    This is indeed spread by Tantrics and more prominent sect of Vaishnav in Bengal - Gaudias did not subscribe to this view. They insist Shri krishna is "Param Brahmachary". If you can tell me which Vaishnavs feel so, I am duty bound to take this message to them as Gaudias are doing now.

    Again you make clear that you do not read Hindu Scriptures but stick to what you Kaula guru says - No objection to that, but you should not say Shri Radha was married when she met Krishna, if so, I demand proof, if you do not submitt proof, I am going to raise a blasphemy complaint against you to moderator
    Radha was married and that is an orthodox view of Gaudiya-vaishnavism. What Sahajiyas did, they understood sexual relations of Radha and Krishna as a mode of sadhana, which is rejected by orthodox Gaudiya-vaishnavas. But both accept Radha was parakiya.
    In fact some followers of Chaitanya did hold to svakiya view, but they were defeated in dispute and accepted parakiya doctrine.

    I am not afraid of Ur complaints to the moderator, since there is no blasphemy in my words. Come on

    Quote Originally Posted by ramkish42
    What do you suggest - to have sex with some one whom you see as your mother and mother goddess? This is ridiculous Arjun.
    What in fact is ridiculous - to see one's wife as a mother. Why then not vice versa? A queer logic if any.
    Goddess is not only Mother, but Beloved. And in wife she is primarily Kameshvari (for a husband).

  10. #30
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Age
    41
    Posts
    371
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna
    All these statement of mine are exact. And yet i didn't use the wording U ascribed to me. I cannot say that "sex leads to eternal bliss", since this would imply that if one has sex it makes him permanently blissful, which may not be the case.
    There are certain strict conditions, and i have underlined those several times quite clearly.
    Your statement is clear, you are talking about manifesting Ananda, bliss of Brahman in the natural way - Sex. No point in saying one thing and reverting back when questioned

    I do not see any 6th page in that thread. The link U provided leads to 5th page, and nothing is there what U mention. I don't know what U are reading. I never used the word "Brahma-jijnasa" in this forum and never called Vyasa by hindi title "Ved". U mix something...
    The link provided takes me to 6th page, the thread has 8 pages in my system, better you check the whole thread for it is your words.

    I was not saying Brahma Jijnasa is your word, It is the words of Maharish Ved Vyasa. I was clarifying what does pulsations of consiousness

    This is not a first case when U try to imagine inconsistency in my posts. The problem is with how U read, however...
    You do not see how your posting varies in meanings every time, I am sorry for that, If you see, my reading is different you have to clarify

    The quotation was from Kaula scripture! And i have a full right to make such statements - because truth is that. When U are not initiated into Kula-naya and haven't read discussed texts, how can U deny provided interpretation on the only basis that "U do not like it"? Isn't this really inconsistent?
    I understand you have every right to interpret the text, however, there is no point in saying as you authorised to intrepret you will interpret.

    Further there is no point in assuming I havenot read any text

    Seeing the textual context of that statement and context of Kaula Doctrine, proper meaning in this case is "sexual union".
    This is what I am asking for, if your case is verily context of the statement, describe it, how Samyoga fits into your context

    Who said grihasthi cannot be mumukshu, which Shastra?
    And if he becomes mumukshu, dharma of grihasthashrama is still there. Moreover, do U mean to say that a grihasthi who wants to achieve Mukti has to stop loving his wife and deny her? This is a practical conclusion of Ur flowery words...
    My words saying Grihasti cannot be mumukshu is a qualified word in terms of Sex. When Grihasti want to be practising sexual union with his partner he cannot be Mumukshu. You can understand this, as I verily pointe it out in many instances, that Sex alone is not Grihasti, even Artha part of chatur purushaartha is. I also pointed out only shri vaishnava sect allows grihasta to be mumukshu even if he after Artha, which is limited only for bhavath preeti.

    Mumukshu does not stop loving his wife, but starts loving all living organisms as such, there is no separate treatment for his wife vis-a-vis others. i do not know what you mean by Dening her

    Sex MAY help to achieve tranquility of mind - when a person is meditating in sexual act or feeling. Otherwise, if he is submerged in intense love. In orgasm mind is tranquil - the problem is that common people are unaware of themselves and never notice this. When attitude and intention is proper, sexual enjoyment is a direct means to higher consciousness.
    What is that attitude and what is the intention?

    This is the aim - AWARENESS, and not making mind inactive (which is not possible and not needed). In most intense feelings Kaula is perfectly self-aware and free.

    Regarding VBhT, i will see in sanskrit text. Gimme some three days, i am out of my place today and tomorrow.
    You have to explain this.

    You are welcome to quote the original text after referring to it pls

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Lists of Yogas
    By skhandelwal in forum Yoga
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 22 September 2016, 07:20 PM
  2. Hatha Yoga came from Lord Shiva and On to Human Rishis
    By ShivaFan in forum Hatha & Kriya
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03 May 2012, 04:39 PM
  3. The Hindu Culture
    By cmorel02 in forum I am a Hindu
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09 January 2012, 10:49 PM
  4. Yogas Formed At Birth...
    By yajvan in forum Jyotish
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27 January 2008, 04:26 PM
  5. The significance of Itihasas and Puranas
    By TruthSeeker in forum Scriptures
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12 January 2007, 12:43 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •