To: K-list
Recieved: 1999/09/06 10:26
Subject: [K-list] Sex and K (and rock'n'roll?)
From: Ville Vainio
On 1999/09/06 10:26, Ville Vainio posted thus to the K-list:
On Sat, 4 Sep 1999 DruoutATnospamaol.com wrote:
> You write on your site: Q: Does kundalini have anything to do with sex?
> A: No, it doesn't. Obviously people that forcefully supress their libido can
> ****************************
> Hillary here. You might want to reconsider your response. LOL. I don't
> know how you could have missed the sexual aspect of Gopi Krishna's
> experience. (Of course he did downplay it, and was reluctant to go into
> details).
Yes, I didn't see the possible sexual aspect of Gopi Krishnas experience.
Perhaps I haven't read something you have... And I'm yet to see the sexual
aspect of my *own* experience.
> A poll was taken on this list some time ago (and I grant you these
> polls are unscientific), asking, in part, whether people on the list
> felt the energy as sexual. Of 22 replies to this question, 13 replied
> yes, 6 sometimes, and 3 no . Eight of those who answered modified
> their yes question with adjectives such as extremely very high,
> sexually ballistic etc.
I would be one of those replying no, definitely not. And I am also rather
surprised about the amount of yes-replies. What was the ratio of
man-to-woman in the yes-replies? Perhaps this is really a personal thing,
and me being rather young (23 by the end of the year) I don't feel the
impact on sexuality in the same way as some slightly older people would,
the hormones having different concentrations in individuals of different
age/heritage.
> This is *very* important, IMO, because many people who become suddenly k
> active (esp. Christians) feel some guilt toward the sexual aspect of K.
> They don't want to equate spirituality and sex. But Kundalini isn't called
> sexual energy for nothing. :))
I think K is called sexual energy because celibacy increases the intensity
of K, and people with K sometimes choose to "preserve the energy" through
not ejaculating.
> And to say that Kundalini "has definitely nothing to do with pleasure felt
> during orgasm." Is simply just plain wrong. I guess you have not (yet?)
> experienced the blissful orgasms of the whole body and brain. Instead of
> sexual repression, you might think in terms of sexual expansion.
I have to disagree. For me, orgasm is a rush of feeling great for one
second, accompanied by strong sensation of relief and relaxation (after
all, Mother Nature/DNA has to somehow reward us males for squirting our
fluid). My spiritual rushes are quite different. The highest sensations I
have got from sex (not orgasm) have been deep love for my girlfriend,
sensation of "one flesh", and other "minor" experiences. It's all fun and
stuff, but not spiritual, in the light of my own experience. And no, I'm
not celibate, I have to think of my girlfriend also.
I think "sexual ecstasy" is so often spoken about because of democracy. It
would be unfair if ecstasy was limited to boring old solitary men on
Himalayas, while Mr. and Mrs. John Doe wouldn't get any of it. So someone
comes around telling that sex, when done correctly, is just as fun. And
the universe is happy again.
YMMV.
Ville Vainio - vvainioATnospamtp.spt.fi http://www.tp.spt.fi/~vvainio
* "Vi doede ikke
* Vi ha aldri levd" - Burzum
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.