Damn, it always gets back to "for the enlightened one......". I'll have to make more of an effort to become "enlightened" in my next life.
________________________________ From: Ravi Yogi <raviy...@att.net> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 11:11 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: [Fairfield Life] Can an enlightened person have lust? Denise, Yes - What Sri Bhagwan says is exactly what Osho would have said. I have said before, but I would say that for an enlightened there is lust but there is no pain and suffering. Animal-like, animals have sex but it's not mental, it's not in the mind (which Sri Bhagwan referred to as psychological), they don't suffer from guilt, shame. In the absence of beliefs such as sex is sin - sex is seen for what it is just a biological need. No shame, no guilt, no archetypal guilt of abuser or being abused, hence no pain or suffering. ________________________________ From: Denise Evans <dmevans...@yahoo.com> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Fri, November 11, 2011 11:02:09 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: [Fairfield Life] Can an enlightened person have lust? This conversation has been kicked around plenty and is now passe. However, I'm sending this anyway. I simply could not understand Sri Bhagavan on the video John sent so I decided to transcribe him and then I had to comment below because it was so non-sensical. I did understand OSHO - his word choices came across more clearly and he was far funnier, I must say. Sri Bhagavan and OSHO are trying to say the same thing...are they not? If one pulls way up and doesn't getting confused by the minutia or their personal beliefs [such as OSHO stating that God raped the Virgin Mary and marriage inhibits freedom (paraphrased)]? Sri Bhagavan speaks more indirectly. I think he may be trying to cater to the American puritan roots and his ability with the English language may be inhibiting clear thought presentation as well. OSHO always has a crazy look in his eye and had me ROTFLMAO, if for no other reason than the pure irreverence of his statements. "Word Up"... Who has time for all that "psychological romance stuff." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZjAantupsA SRI BHAGAVAN - transcribed Question: Does lust exist for an enlightened person? Answer: Enlightened people can also have children, like unenlightened people. (Meaning that enlightened people can procreate...obviously - it's a biological function.) If an enlightened person has got lust, we can talk about lust, biologicallust. In normal people, it is psychological lust. (Biological/psychological...it's all interrelated and it's all biological because that's the way the hormones work in the body. He's parsing to make a point, which is that enlightened people can have lust too, so yes, John, please feel free to sleep with your wife this week too :). He's just trying to create an artificial boundary in order to keep the enlightened man in a separate category.) For the enlightened person, it is more animal like, it is just part of the body, that's all (I think that perhaps what he is really trying to say is that the enlightened man realizes that consciousness encompasses (wrong word choice?) the body and that the body comes with animal instincts....yes, my kids started learning how their body works in elementary school..no big aha moment here.) Now, the unenlightened person can sit alone and be thinking about lust (Yes, she can). The enlightened man cannot do that because the mind doesn't come up with supporting pictures. (Yeah, right - FFL is a good example of the truth of this statement.) So, there is no mental lust or psychological lust. (Again, it's all the same thing so yes, there is. He's also speaking to our American puritan-based roots which create self-talk that says..."we know it's wrong but we can't help ourselves." ). But, let us say there is a woman - understanding there can be physical lust. And of course he (the enlightened man) is not going to violate any law and may have a relationship with his wife and produce children. But, this biological lust is really really little (Yeah, right) - and can be a good solution to population problems (Please, stop). But, then let us say there is a person - an enlightened person - and there is a woman going there and there is physical lust. After she moves away from the range of vision - it's gone - he cannot think about her (I think he's trying to say that an enlightened man stays in the moment). Lust came, lust went - that's all. It will not cause a problem (It might for the woman...stereotypical male statement). But, the other (unenlightened man) will be thinking of....will go off and chase.....that does not happen for the enlightened person (Yeah, like celebrities. Women come to them.) After this week of reading all your posts, I might beg to differ on that point, but never mind me, I'm an unenlightened, depressed, stressed, fear-based, shame-based, slightly overweight, immuno-compromised, middle-aged, woman. Whew - now there's a good visual. Luckily, my personal version of the hopey-changey thing is beginning to work for me. I don't always know what FFL is saying, but what I'm hearing is: "It's o.k., you can be here, we have a lot of experience with realities here, we are experts in management here. Oh, by the way, have you heard the one about the Raja's and the Domers?" OSHO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ocbZhRQS9I No transcribing needed. Freedom-hoppin' starts in pretty good here after the song gets rolling - tee hee: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rd8VzNGjL0&feature=related
