[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
but the work is challenging, to say the least, to mainstream physiologists, It's not challenging at all, it's a completely trivial exercise to find spurious connections between things. The only challenging thing is for people who think it's significant to escape from an intellectual hall of mirrors with only superstition and wishful thinking to act as a guide. It's so trivially easy to show that it's garbage and contains many internal inconsistencies that no proper physiologist would ever waste time arguing against it. As an example of internal inconsistency, human physiology is supposed to have correlates with things in jyotish. There are some ancient structures in the spinal cord which correspond to the 27 nakshatras. The number of nakshatras is determined by the number of days it takes for the moon to move around the earth. But the orbital period of the moon and the length of day on earth have changed over time. So that at the time these ancient structures where first evolved there weren't 27 nakshatras. Another example; the structure of DNA is supposed to correspond to the layout of the cosmos as understood in jyotish, but that leaves out Uranus because it's not easily visible to the human eye. But Uranus is readily visible to animals like cats who have good night time vision. Is their DNA different? Why should the structure of DNA correspond with what can be seen by an ape with poor night time vision? The whole thing is riddled with inconsistencies like this. Like anyone else, Maharishi brought out some good ideas and some bad ideas. The good stuff is mostly the early stuff, the recent stuff is mostly rubbish. Any doctor or educated person in the TMO who has had anything to do with developing Tony Nader's stuff should hang their heads in shame at having dragged the good things that Maharishi brought out into a cess pit of pseudo-science.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
Guyfawkes with the big hammer of intellectual discrimination! Your post is so true! The whole thing is a silly exercise in meaningless superficial similarities. Reminds me of the pseudo adage: Dog is God spelled backwards. Makes you think, doesn't it. --- On Sat, 5/16/09, guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@yahoo.com wrote: From: guyfawkes91 guyfawke...@yahoo.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, May 16, 2009, 3:22 AM but the work is challenging, to say the least, to mainstream physiologists, It's not challenging at all, it's a completely trivial exercise to find spurious connections between things. The only challenging thing is for people who think it's significant to escape from an intellectual hall of mirrors with only superstition and wishful thinking to act as a guide. It's so trivially easy to show that it's garbage and contains many internal inconsistencies that no proper physiologist would ever waste time arguing against it. As an example of internal inconsistency, human physiology is supposed to have correlates with things in jyotish. There are some ancient structures in the spinal cord which correspond to the 27 nakshatras. The number of nakshatras is determined by the number of days it takes for the moon to move around the earth. But the orbital period of the moon and the length of day on earth have changed over time. So that at the time these ancient structures where first evolved there weren't 27 nakshatras. Another example; the structure of DNA is supposed to correspond to the layout of the cosmos as understood in jyotish, but that leaves out Uranus because it's not easily visible to the human eye. But Uranus is readily visible to animals like cats who have good night time vision. Is their DNA different? Why should the structure of DNA correspond with what can be seen by an ape with poor night time vision? The whole thing is riddled with inconsistencies like this. Like anyone else, Maharishi brought out some good ideas and some bad ideas. The good stuff is mostly the early stuff, the recent stuff is mostly rubbish. Any doctor or educated person in the TMO who has had anything to do with developing Tony Nader's stuff should hang their heads in shame at having dragged the good things that Maharishi brought out into a cess pit of pseudo-science. To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia and falsifiability
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stanley@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brahman@ wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. *** Last Sunday I watched as the brain was described as being a Shivalinga on the Global Family Chat presentation of Tony's book. Makes sense, at least when it comes to the males of our species. * If it's really true that the repro system is not covered in Tony's book, then what he has to say must simply be so startling that he decided it was better not to say anything -- obviously, there is not a puritanical element at work here, with all the mentions of Shivalinga etc, but the work is challenging, to say the least, to mainstream physiologists, and some discretion may have been invoked on the repro system in the book until some future edition when there is the likelihood of more favorable reception on this ignorantly populated blue marble. Bobananda, it really is true. And, everyone has been correct that the book is packed with correlations just something Vedic and something bodily have the same number of parts. Moreover, the enumeration of parts in the body and in the Veda are open to interpretation and opinion. More moreover, TN's book lacks falsifiability. How can any claim in it be proven wrong? Maharishi said that people would be using this as a textbook and discussing it for hundreds of years. Right. I'm curious about his new book on the Ramayana, which no one has seen AFAIK. My guess is that no one ever will see it, either. FWIW, the Vedic Gods book that people have mentioned is very easy to obtain. Just Google it. It's sold from lots of different sources. I just ordered a copy. This is really monster news, if verified, that Tony didn't write the book. It could blow the lid off the Movement, given the size of the potential lie. This is bigger than Deepak's stories about Maharishi's illness and year of convalescence that the Movement has taken such great care to cover up.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia and falsifiability
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman Bobananda, it really is true. And, everyone has been correct that the book is packed with correlations just something Vedic and something bodily have the same number of parts. I meant to say, ...correlations *that* something Vedic and something bodily have the same number of parts
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: snip Last Sunday I watched as the brain was described as being a Shivalinga on the Global Family Chat presentation of Tony's book. Makes sense, at least when it comes to the males of our species. Ah, so that's where we get the term dickhead.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia and falsifiability
TN's book lacks falsifiability. How can any claim in it be proven wrong? FWIW, not that anyone should even bother to give it a moments thought, there are statements that are open to falsification. In fact they're pretty easy to falsify. Take the example that the structure of DNA, a molecule which has had the same layout since bacteria evolved about 3.5 billion years ago, should be correlated with the planets as counted in jyotish, which in turn depends on the night time visual acuity of human beings. It's not entirely clear why the structure of DNA, billions of years old, should be correlated with the number of planets visible to a recently evolved ape with bad night time vision. But sometime in this century we might find living bacteria on Mars. Mars has a very different arrangement of visible planets and a very different number of nakshatras because it's got two tiny moons that orbit very fast. If TN's (or whoever on purusha thought it up) ideas are correct then the number of planets visible at night by a human being on the surface of Mars, plus things like ascending and descending nodes, should be correlated with the structure of whatever Martian bacteria use for their genetic information. If the ideas aren't correct then there will be no correlation. Even writing down the steps in the argument makes it seem pretty unlikely that it's true. But at least it is a falsifiable statement. If you work through this stuff meticulously then it's pretty easy to find things that don't make sense or don't correlate with reality as we know it and in many cases aren't even logically consistent with other statements in the book. So in that sense it does contain falsifiable statements. In addition a theory should have explanatory power, that is it should solve problems which are otherwise insolvable simply and elegantly. It doesn't do this even remotely, there's no explanation at all, it's just a collection of random correlations glued together with poetic license. The problem is the True Believer Syndrome, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome) people who continue to believe wrong ideas even after they've been explained how and why they're wrong. E.g. creationists and so on and so on and so on. Even if you could prove without a shadow of doubt that TN's (or whoever on purusha thought them up) ideas are garbage, people would still believe them. It's a kind of mental illness and explaining to people how these ideas are wrong isn't going to help them. It might help other people who aren't TBs to steer clear of it, but it doesn't help the people who are lost in the intellectual hall of mirrors to find a way out. But AFAIK there are many, even a majority, of the intelligent people remaining in the TMO who feel distinctly uncomfortable about these ideas; they just keep their doubts to themselves because they worry about their position in the movement. Finding out that TN isn't the originator of the ideas, and having it explained how the ideas are worthless anyway can help those people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brah...@... wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. I'm not quite sure whether to say Congratulations, or I'm sorry. :-) No mention of gonads in either. Why am I not surprised. What IS it with TM types that they like to pretend that sex either does not exist or, if it does, it's dirty and beneath them. I mean, don't these people ever read stuff by enlightened folks outside of India and its stick-up-its-butt prudish ways? Like this masterpiece by Zen Master Ikkyu: A Woman's Sex: It has the original mouth but remains wordless; It is surrounded by a magnificent mound of hair. Sentient beings can get completely lost in it But it is also the birthplace of all the Buddhas of the ten thousand worlds. or A Man's Root: Eight inches strong, it is my favourite thing; If I'm alone at night, I embrace it fully - A beautiful woman hasn't touched it for ages. Within my fundoshi there is an entire universe! (A fundoshi is a type of loose-fitting underwear once worn by Japanese men.) And this wonderful quote, from Red Thread Zen: The Tao of Love, Passion, and Sex by Subhana Barzaghi: One of the characters I want to introduce you to is a wonderful character in the Zen tradition, called Ikkyu, who is one of my longstanding and favourite Zen masters and who appeals, I guess, to the wild woman in me. He was born in 1394 and was an illegitimate son of the emperor Go-komatsu. He was known by some as the emperor of renegades, a wild wandering monk and teacher, sometimes called Crazy Cloud. He was a lover, a poet, and he could write very tenderly about the beauty of women. He relent- lessly attacked the hypocrisy of the then corrupt Zen establishment, and even had women as his students. I think he was one of the first Zen masters to have women as students; that was considered quite radical. It was in the brothels and geisha houses that he developed the Red Thread Zen, a notion he borrowed from the old Chinese master Kido and extended to deep and subtle levels of realization. Call me low-vibe (Jim? Edg?), but personally I think that anyone who thinks their subtle body stops being a body at waist level and that anything below that belongs in the realm of the lower chakras and isn't important just hasn't tried going without taking a pee or a dump lately. And it's ferdamnsure that they haven't gotten laid lately. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- On Thu, 5/14/09, bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: snip King Tony deserves any food, even if it's laden with gold (which sort of food I have actually eaten at Hare Krishna temples). His work on Veda and human physiology is just brilliant. Since I'm too cheap to spring for the $450 for the book, I'm watching the Global Family Chat at 6pm Pacific every Sunday on mou.org for the reading of the book, which currently is halfway through showing how the ten avatars of Vishnu are expressed in the human physiology, just an amazing piece of creative knowledge that only a physiology phd and md could do. Bob, admittedly, I have not listened to or read too much of King Tony's book, but from what I did hear, I thought, big deal. I honestly could not understand what all the fuss was about. Do they ever mention the genitals/reproductive system?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brah...@... wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. I believe the gentiles are ruled by the root chakra (or muladhar), the abode of Shakti Kundalini. When the life force (kama) is going outwards towards the senses the procreation is children, when going inwards or up the spine the procreation is Self realization. If one is sexually attached (or a hedonist) the shakti cannot reverse direction due to being tied down by the memories (Samskaras). Part of TM is to release these 'stresses' (as MMY calls them) allowing for clearer transcending. Part of being 'still' (Be still and know that I am God) and (ChittiVrittiNirodha-quieting the whirlpools in the chitta-consciousness) is stilling these subconscious memories and desires boiling like a cauldron in the subte recesses of the subconscious.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of BillyG. Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 3:52 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brah...@... wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. I believe the gentiles are ruled by the root chakra (or muladhar), the abode of Shakti Kundalini. Then who rules the Jews?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
On May 15, 2009, at 4:52 PM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brah...@... wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. I believe the gentiles are ruled by the root chakra (or muladhar), the abode of Shakti Kundalini. When the life force (kama) is going outwards towards the senses the procreation is children, when going inwards or up the spine the procreation is Self realization. If one is sexually attached (or a hedonist) the shakti cannot reverse direction due to being tied down by the memories (Samskaras). Part of TM is to release these 'stresses' (as MMY calls them) allowing for clearer transcending. Part of being 'still' (Be still and know that I am God) and (ChittiVrittiNirodha-quieting the whirlpools in the chitta- consciousness) is stilling these subconscious memories and desires boiling like a cauldron in the subte recesses of the subconscious. It sounds like you're not aware of Vedic Technology of the Yonified Field. Let me quote the Vedic texts [Vaj commentary interspersed]: A person should not worship the yoni if he does not have the Shakti mantra. This initiation and mantra is the deliverer from hell. I am Mrtyunjaya, beloved of your yoni. Surasundari, I always worship Durga in my heart lotus. This liberates the mind from distinctions such as Divya and vira. O Lady Goddess! worshipping in this manner, liberation is placed within a person’s reach. [trans: I love you baby, I really love you in my heart chakra] A yoni worshipper should prepare the Shakti mantra. He gains wealth, poesy, wisdom and omniscience. He becomes the four-faced Brahma for one hundred million aeons. [trans.: hehe. I'll soon be the Big Man on Campus] What is the use of talking! To speak of this avails naught. If a person worships with menstrual flowers, he also has power over fate. Doing much puja in this way, he may become liberated. [trans.: Oh gawd, the obligatory foreplay!] The devotee should place a Shakti in a circle. She should be wanton, beautiful, devoid of shame and disgust, charming by nature, supremely alluring and beautiful. After giving her vijaya, the devotee should worship her with utmost devotion. [trans: get her into your pad and turn her on to your best weed. Tell her it is vijaya. She'll be impressed that you knew a Sanskrit word. You're almost there.] He should place her on his left, and should worship her hair-adorned yoni. At the edges of the yoni, the devotee should place sandal and beautiful blossoms. There, indrawing the goddess, he should do jiva nyasa using mantra, having given her wine and drawing a half-moon using vermilion. After smearing sandal on her forehead, the devotee should caress her breasts. [trans.: Gawd! More foreplay.] After reciting the mantra for 108 times, while in her arms, the devotee should caress the breasts, having previously kissed her on the cheek. The mantra should be recited 108 or 1008 times in the yoni circle. [trans.: skip the mantra, it's time to make out] The best of sadhakas should mix the effusion from yoni and linga in water, sipping this amrita, he should nourish himself with it. [trans.: hey, it's the quick way to enlightenment.]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brah...@... wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. *** Last Sunday I watched as the brain was described as being a Shivalinga on the Global Family Chat presentation of Tony's book . I have not seen the book, but I would really be surprised if the repro system was not discussed, as references to Shiva in his phallic form are abundant. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- On Thu, 5/14/09, bob_brigante no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: snip King Tony deserves any food, even if it's laden with gold (which sort of food I have actually eaten at Hare Krishna temples). His work on Veda and human physiology is just brilliant. Since I'm too cheap to spring for the $450 for the book, I'm watching the Global Family Chat at 6pm Pacific every Sunday on mou.org for the reading of the book, which currently is halfway through showing how the ten avatars of Vishnu are expressed in the human physiology, just an amazing piece of creative knowledge that only a physiology phd and md could do. Bob, admittedly, I have not listened to or read too much of King Tony's book, but from what I did hear, I thought, big deal. I honestly could not understand what all the fuss was about. Do they ever mention the genitals/reproductive system?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On May 15, 2009, at 4:52 PM, BillyG. wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brahman@ wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. I believe the gentiles are ruled by the root chakra (or muladhar), the abode of Shakti Kundalini. When the life force (kama) is going outwards towards the senses the procreation is children, when going inwards or up the spine the procreation is Self realization. If one is sexually attached (or a hedonist) the shakti cannot reverse direction due to being tied down by the memories (Samskaras). Part of TM is to release these 'stresses' (as MMY calls them) allowing for clearer transcending. Part of being 'still' (Be still and know that I am God) and (ChittiVrittiNirodha-quieting the whirlpools in the chitta- consciousness) is stilling these subconscious memories and desires boiling like a cauldron in the subte recesses of the subconscious. It sounds like you're not aware of Vedic Technology of the Yonified Field. Let me quote the Vedic texts [Vaj commentary interspersed]: A person should not worship the yoni if he does not have the Shakti mantra. This initiation and mantra is the deliverer from hell. I am Mrtyunjaya, beloved of your yoni. Surasundari, I always worship Durga in my heart lotus. This liberates the mind from distinctions such as Divya and vira. O Lady Goddess! worshipping in this manner, liberation is placed within a person's reach. [trans: I love you baby, I really love you in my heart chakra] A yoni worshipper should prepare the Shakti mantra. He gains wealth, poesy, wisdom and omniscience. He becomes the four-faced Brahma for one hundred million aeons. [trans.: hehe. I'll soon be the Big Man on Campus] What is the use of talking! To speak of this avails naught. If a person worships with menstrual flowers, he also has power over fate. Doing much puja in this way, he may become liberated. [trans.: Oh gawd, the obligatory foreplay!] The devotee should place a Shakti in a circle. She should be wanton, beautiful, devoid of shame and disgust, charming by nature, supremely alluring and beautiful. After giving her vijaya, the devotee should worship her with utmost devotion. [trans: get her into your pad and turn her on to your best weed. Tell her it is vijaya. She'll be impressed that you knew a Sanskrit word. You're almost there.] He should place her on his left, and should worship her hair-adorned yoni. At the edges of the yoni, the devotee should place sandal and beautiful blossoms. There, indrawing the goddess, he should do jiva nyasa using mantra, having given her wine and drawing a half-moon using vermilion. After smearing sandal on her forehead, the devotee should caress her breasts. [trans.: Gawd! More foreplay.] After reciting the mantra for 108 times, while in her arms, the devotee should caress the breasts, having previously kissed her on the cheek. The mantra should be recited 108 or 1008 times in the yoni circle. [trans.: skip the mantra, it's time to make out] The best of sadhakas should mix the effusion from yoni and linga in water, sipping this amrita, he should nourish himself with it. [trans.: hey, it's the quick way to enlightenment.] Hey Vaj, your blowing BillyG's chastity crusade! :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_re...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brahman@ wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. *** Last Sunday I watched as the brain was described as being a Shivalinga on the Global Family Chat presentation of Tony's book. Makes sense, at least when it comes to the males of our species.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley j_alexander_stan...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brahman@ wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. *** Last Sunday I watched as the brain was described as being a Shivalinga on the Global Family Chat presentation of Tony's book. Makes sense, at least when it comes to the males of our species. * If it's really true that the repro system is not covered in Tony's book, then what he has to say must simply be so startling that he decided it was better not to say anything -- obviously, there is not a puritanical element at work here, with all the mentions of Shivalinga etc, but the work is challenging, to say the least, to mainstream physiologists, and some discretion may have been invoked on the repro system in the book until some future edition when there is the likelihood of more favorable reception on this ignorantly populated blue marble.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of BillyG. Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 3:52 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brahman@ wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. I believe the gentiles are ruled by the root chakra (or muladhar), the abode of Shakti Kundalini. Then who rules the Jews? Jerry Jarvis you fool!
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wg...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, at_man_and_brahman at_man_and_brahman@ wrote: I hold the unusual distinction of owning both editions of the book. No mention of gonads in either. I believe the gentiles are ruled by the root chakra (or muladhar), the abode of Shakti Kundalini. When the life force (kama) is going outwards towards the senses the procreation is children, when going inwards or up the spine the procreation is Self realization. If one is sexually attached (or a hedonist) the shakti cannot reverse direction due to being tied down by the memories (Samskaras). Part of TM is to release these 'stresses' (as MMY calls them) allowing for clearer transcending. Part of being 'still' (Be still and know that I am God) and (ChittiVrittiNirodha-quieting the whirlpools in the chitta-consciousness) is stilling these subconscious memories and desires boiling like a cauldron in the sublte recesses of the subconscious. Looks like it is actually the Svadhisthana Chakra: http://www.tantra-kundalini.com/svadhisthana.htm
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
On May 15, 2009, at 5:42 PM, do.rflex wrote: It sounds like you're not aware of Vedic Technology of the Yonified Field. Let me quote the Vedic texts [Vaj commentary interspersed]: A person should not worship the yoni if he does not have the Shakti mantra. This initiation and mantra is the deliverer from hell. I am Mrtyunjaya, beloved of your yoni. Surasundari, I always worship Durga in my heart lotus. This liberates the mind from distinctions such as Divya and vira. O Lady Goddess! worshipping in this manner, liberation is placed within a person's reach. [trans: I love you baby, I really love you in my heart chakra] A yoni worshipper should prepare the Shakti mantra. He gains wealth, poesy, wisdom and omniscience. He becomes the four-faced Brahma for one hundred million aeons. [trans.: hehe. I'll soon be the Big Man on Campus] What is the use of talking! To speak of this avails naught. If a person worships with menstrual flowers, he also has power over fate. Doing much puja in this way, he may become liberated. [trans.: Oh gawd, the obligatory foreplay!] The devotee should place a Shakti in a circle. She should be wanton, beautiful, devoid of shame and disgust, charming by nature, supremely alluring and beautiful. After giving her vijaya, the devotee should worship her with utmost devotion. [trans: get her into your pad and turn her on to your best weed. Tell her it is vijaya. She'll be impressed that you knew a Sanskrit word. You're almost there.] He should place her on his left, and should worship her hair-adorned yoni. At the edges of the yoni, the devotee should place sandal and beautiful blossoms. There, indrawing the goddess, he should do jiva nyasa using mantra, having given her wine and drawing a half-moon using vermilion. After smearing sandal on her forehead, the devotee should caress her breasts. [trans.: Gawd! More foreplay.] After reciting the mantra for 108 times, while in her arms, the devotee should caress the breasts, having previously kissed her on the cheek. The mantra should be recited 108 or 1008 times in the yoni circle. [trans.: skip the mantra, it's time to make out] The best of sadhakas should mix the effusion from yoni and linga in water, sipping this amrita, he should nourish himself with it. [trans.: hey, it's the quick way to enlightenment.] Hey Vaj, your blowing BillyG's chastity crusade! :-) BTW, the actual text is from the yoni-tantra. It is a text of Svecchachara, the path of following ones own higher Will. Since we are all Shiva or Shakti incarnated, there can be no morality, but only freedom beyond the pashu or herd-mentality--beyond the conventional mind, to a person beyond distinctions--and beyond caste. Actually these tantras evolved as a way to blow the minds of Brahmins and other up-tight caste followers, and to take them beyond duality (while still being able to enjoy it All). The same style of practice was exterminated in most Western sects like the Cathars (although their practices still survive in the Gnostic Catholic Church, esp. in France and the Caribbean). Heck my wife and I used to hang at a jazz club in Montreal where the old rites were still performed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Vedic genitalia
I always knew we would eventually get something worthwhile from Vaj. So now she can be revealed: The Vajra Yoni Sutras. Vaj discovered her in a cave (guha) back East. She called herself AdhiStrih nee Kunti. No wonder he rants like a man who makes it all up. This whole universe is made up. From golden embryo to solos nocturnus it is just a dream.
