Sex in pureland?

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21908
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Grigoris »

Adamantine wrote:Hey greg, admiring a girl and wanting to spend time with her = objectifying male gaze? I don't think you'll find many girls who would agree with this PC nonsense.
What is it about the girl in the picture that you admire? Her charming wit? Her personality? Her intelligence and logic? Her emotional capacity? Her loving kindness?

Let me guess... Her ass! Got it!

If you believe that women dig your neanderthal, overstestosteroned garbage, if you believe that women do not want to be respected as holistic entities but just for the firmness of their posterior, or the size of their breasts, well my friend then take up your club and happy hunting.
I mean, unless you have totally transcended subject-object duality -----> anything you perceive as an object = objectifying gaze... so women then are equally guilty of objectifying men the moment they set their eyes on them. . Are we all supposed to keep our eyes closed?
What's this? Buddhist logic to justify your uncontrolled sensual desire? :zzz: C'mon Adamantine you can do better then that!
:namaste:
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
User avatar
Adamantine
Former staff member
Posts: 4027
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am
Location: Space is the Place

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Adamantine »

gregkavarnos wrote:
Adamantine wrote:Hey greg, admiring a girl and wanting to spend time with her = objectifying male gaze? I don't think you'll find many girls who would agree with this PC nonsense.
What is it about the girl in the picture that you admire? Her charming wit? Her personality? Her intelligence and logic? Her emotional capacity? Her loving kindness?

Let me guess... Her ass! Got it!
Actually, I only posted a pic for fun, in good humor as an offering to the OP who seemed to be longing for some dakinis to hang with, here or in purelands to come.

From the image, she has a nice smile, a beautiful face, and a fit figure. I could admire her form if I was a man or a woman, and either way there'd be nothing wrong, or un-Buddhist, about it. But more importantly, she had the good humor to pose as if her hands are beaming rainbow-light. It's a nice image illustrative of how one may imagine pureland dakinis, from our world''s imprints...

In the photo, if you'd looked (clearly you didn't, since you close your eyes before any attractive ladies manifest apparently-- lest you objectify them with your gaze) you can't see the girls bottom (I won't lower myself to your objectifying crass and offensive male language).
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
User avatar
Adamantine
Former staff member
Posts: 4027
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am
Location: Space is the Place

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Adamantine »

gregkavarnos wrote: If you believe that women dig your neanderthal, overstestosteroned garbage, if you believe that women do not want to be respected as holistic entities but just for the firmness of their posterior, or the size of their breasts, well my friend then take up your club and happy hunting.
There's not one woman I know who doesn't want their beauty to be admired. As for the other gibberish about firmness, size, or whatever, I never spoke a word about any of that so stop projecting. I am guessing you must be a very frustrated man!
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
AlexanderS
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:58 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by AlexanderS »

Yeah Gregg, I'm the transform desire into wisdom kinda of person. Unless you've taken celibacy wows there's nothing un-buddhist about having sex. Anyway this thread was meant to be in good humour. The core question was geniune though.
User avatar
Dechen Norbu
Posts: 3056
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:50 pm

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Dechen Norbu »

gregkavarnos wrote:
AlexanderS wrote:Anyway, I was just curious, it was meant as a tounge in cheek question. Although I really am curious. I suppose it wouldn't matter at that point, but a few fit birds wouldn't hurt.
You make all that effort to get to Dewachen and the only thing that concerns you is the possibility that, maybe, when you get there you won't be able to get laid???
Image
Image
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21908
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Grigoris »

Adamantine wrote:I am guessing you must be a very frustrated man!
Now who's projecting? Image
AlexanderS wrote:Unless you've taken celibacy wows there's nothing un-buddhist about having sex.
I never said there was anything wrong with having sex, check out my earlier post.

Now for some questions:
Which of the following are NOT dakini?
1.jpg
1.jpg (7.03 KiB) Viewed 8648 times
2.jpg
2.jpg (4.13 KiB) Viewed 8782 times
3.jpg
3.jpg (6.35 KiB) Viewed 8822 times
Last edited by Grigoris on Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21908
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Grigoris »

6.jpg
6.jpg (10.14 KiB) Viewed 8664 times
5.jpg
5.jpg (8.47 KiB) Viewed 8541 times
4.jpg
4.jpg (8.47 KiB) Viewed 8521 times
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
plwk
Posts: 2932
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:41 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by plwk »

Image
AlexanderS
Posts: 416
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:58 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by AlexanderS »

gregkavarnos wrote:
Adamantine wrote:I am guessing you must be a very frustrated man!
Now who's projecting? Image
AlexanderS wrote:Unless you've taken celibacy wows there's nothing un-buddhist about having sex.
I never said there was anything wrong with having sex, check out my earlier post.

Now for some questions:
Which of the following are NOT dakini?
1.jpg
2.jpg
3.jpg
It's a trap, I won't bite :)
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21908
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Grigoris »

Funnily enough you laid the trap via your narrow definition of what the positive characteristics and attributes of a woman are. The feminine wisdom element of the dakini is to be found in ALL female forms.
Then the Lord paid homage with the five mandalas to the Lady (Vajrayogini) and said:
How, my dear, must your form be known by the yogi?
Then the Lady said:
Wherever in the Three Worlds a womanly form is seen, that is said to be my form, whether she belong to a low family or not low...
Mother, sister, wife, maternal aunt, niece, paternal aunt, mother in law, and all other caste relations...
Each in her own form is resolute in benefitting all living beings. Whomever among them are encountered, they are honoured by the yogis, kissing, embracing and joining the Vajra and Lotus.
When those women are honoured they give Success instantly to those who desire the welfare of all beings. Therefore one should honour women.
Women are heaven; women are Dharma; and women are the highest penance. Women are Buddha; women are the Sangha; and women are the Perfection of Wisdom...
By this man I am worshipped and satisfied, and to him I will give Success. I am none other than the bodies of all women.
Candamaharosana Tantra http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9844773/The%20C ... Tantra.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:namaste:
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Malcolm »

gregkavarnos wrote: but just for the firmness of their posterior, or the size of their breasts,
They're out there.
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21908
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Grigoris »

Image
Tell me something I don't know!
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Malcolm »

gregkavarnos wrote:Funnily enough you laid the trap via your narrow definition of what the positive characteristics and attributes of a woman are. The feminine wisdom element of the dakini is to be found in ALL female forms.

Nevertheless, the definition of the ideal woman partner, laid out in countless tantras, is the padmini i.e. prominent, large breasts, narrow waist, etc., i.e., completely sexist.

N
User avatar
justsit
Posts: 1461
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:24 pm
Location: Delaware

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by justsit »

:zzz:
User avatar
Adamantine
Former staff member
Posts: 4027
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am
Location: Space is the Place

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Adamantine »

Namdrol wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Funnily enough you laid the trap via your narrow definition of what the positive characteristics and attributes of a woman are. The feminine wisdom element of the dakini is to be found in ALL female forms.

Nevertheless, the definition of the ideal woman partner, laid out in countless tantras, is the padmini i.e. prominent, large breasts, narrow waist, etc., i.e., completely sexist.

N

So a waif like Kate Moss is totally off-base from the Tantric ideal then, huh?
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
User avatar
Konchog1
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Konchog1 »

gregkavarnos wrote:
Then the Lord paid homage with the five mandalas to the Lady (Vajrayogini) and said:
How, my dear, must your form be known by the yogi?
Then the Lady said:
Wherever in the Three Worlds a womanly form is seen, that is said to be my form, whether she belong to a low family or not low...
Mother, sister, wife, maternal aunt, niece, paternal aunt, mother in law, and all other caste relations...
Each in her own form is resolute in benefitting all living beings. Whomever among them are encountered, they are honoured by the yogis, kissing, embracing and joining the Vajra and Lotus.
When those women are honoured they give Success instantly to those who desire the welfare of all beings. Therefore one should honour women.
Women are heaven; women are Dharma; and women are the highest penance. Women are Buddha; women are the Sangha; and women are the Perfection of Wisdom...
By this man I am worshipped and satisfied, and to him I will give Success. I am none other than the bodies of all women.
Candamaharosana Tantra http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9844773/The%20C ... Tantra.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:namaste:
Equanimity is the ground. Love is the moisture. Compassion is the seed. Bodhicitta is the result.

-Paraphrase of Khensur Rinpoche Lobsang Tsephel citing the Guhyasamaja Tantra

"All memories and thoughts are the union of emptiness and knowing, the Mind.
Without attachment, self-liberating, like a snake in a knot.
Through the qualities of meditating in that way,
Mental obscurations are purified and the dharmakaya is attained."

-Ra Lotsawa, All-pervading Melodious Drumbeats
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6965
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by kirtu »

gregkavarnos wrote:I never said there was anything wrong with having sex, check out my earlier post.

Now for some questions:
Which of the following are NOT dakini?
Heterosexual yogis have it so easy ....

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche

"Most all-knowing Mañjuśrī, ...
Please illuminate the radiant wisdom spirit
Of my precious Buddha nature."
HH Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
simhanada
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by simhanada »

Namdrol wrote: Nevertheless, the definition of the ideal woman partner, laid out in countless tantras, is the padmini i.e. prominent, large breasts, narrow waist, etc., i.e., completely sexist.

N
i.e. Dolly Parton.....
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Malcolm »

simhanada wrote:
Namdrol wrote: Nevertheless, the definition of the ideal woman partner, laid out in countless tantras, is the padmini i.e. prominent, large breasts, narrow waist, etc., i.e., completely sexist.

N
i.e. Dolly Parton.....

I think this is more what they had in mine:

Image
User avatar
Adamantine
Former staff member
Posts: 4027
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am
Location: Space is the Place

Re: Sex in pureland?

Post by Adamantine »

Namdrol wrote:
simhanada wrote:
Namdrol wrote: Nevertheless, the definition of the ideal woman partner, laid out in countless tantras, is the padmini i.e. prominent, large breasts, narrow waist, etc., i.e., completely sexist.

N
i.e. Dolly Parton.....

I think this is more what they had in mine:

Image
Seems like the Indian ideal hasn't changed much over the centuries, judging from contemporary Bollywood stars:

Image
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
Post Reply

Return to “Pure Land”