You have formed an opinion, which has been reinforced by your reading of scripture and your religious tradition (and so has hardened into a conclusion), that the senses are bad, wrong, deceptive, seducing.
But are they? Surely the sense of smell, the sense of sight, the sense of touch and taste and hearing, are purely factual, perceptual instruments. There is nothing inherently bad or wrong about sensing or perceiving the world: this is what your body is designed to do.
The word “seduction” comes from an etymology meaning “to lead away” - as in, to lead away from the path of righteousness.
So, the implication is that you feel that you are on a righteous path, and yet you are tempted away by an irresistible urge or desire.
This urge or desire you are claiming is the result of the senses. But this is where I think you are mistaken.
When one sees something beautiful, one’s senses receive the impression, the contact, of that sensual object (a woman or man, a garden or house, etc), and there is a sensation. The sensation can give rise to a feeling in the body: joy, pleasure, a sense of beauty or appreciation. If we could leave it there, and not carry it over into memory and thought, then there wouldn’t be any problem with the sensual perception of beautiful things.
The problem is that we carry over the joyful or pleasurable sensation into the next moment, through memory and thought: this (as K endlessly pointed out) is the birth of desire and craving.
So it is thought that is responsible for the experience of seduction you speak about, not the senses.
Before asking this question, find out if what K said is true: namely, that seduction is rooted in thought and desire, not in the senses.
I took some time to write what I said above, and I do not want to repeat it because you haven’t taken the time to reflect on the position you have taken (with regards to the senses); so find out - for yourself - whether it is true or false.
If you have seen that thought is responsible for desire - and not the senses - then, and only then, can we discuss further.
Viswa - I won’t discuss with you until you have read my original post properly, taken some time to reflect on what it says, and find out for yourself - by thinking it through - whether the chief responsibility for “seduction”, for desire, for craving, lies in thought, thinking, or the senses.
Thanks James for coming to my level. I’m sorry - but those are only statements and I heard it from K so many times. I thought it many times. And so I immediately replied. Sorry james.
These are my doubts,
Had you lived for more than a year without any attachments/desires James?.
Before a year, I had so many attachment and totally got ride of those - like Job,people,friends,car,bike,entertainments,reading books,etc… But after that, I can clearly see there is no attachments other than those. I was only looking about myself and what happens in the world - in that very seeing suffering ended and it lead me here now. After that, neither anger nor desires. But only Lust.
Now, my question is - had you lived like this without any attachments James?. When there is only no attachments - you can really perceive what these senses really are - at that time no K words can help us. Even when I see Rolls Royce,Royal Enfields which I desired before, no thoughts aroused - but only beauty and sensations. No kind of attachments at all. After beauty leaves - just an awareness that - “Those are only atoms in different permutations and combinations and only brings sufferings later on. Cheap pleasures”. Thats it.
But when I perceive some implicit parts - this ‘seduction’ had no impact on thoughts. It drives me crazy James - as there is no desire/attachment inside me. Even it beats the awareness, as no sufferings comes after the action, but only body energy decreases and I’m not attached to body and aware that it is limited and going to die one day.
I can easily compare the “thoughtful situation” and “seduction” situation. It is entirely different James. I heard those K’s words. I even had a dialogue in this forum before. Here it is.
While doing those, I was fully aware as I was attached with my body. But when my attachment with my body decreases (even though I see it is responsibility to take care) - this senses drived me again crazy. And so, I started to doubt K “He might be attached with his body and so he was not ‘enlightened’”. Only then it lead to scriptures.
I don’t know how I was driven back to scriptures - but after reading those - there is total awareness which is extremely more than - when I aware but attached to body.
Even when I perceive the implicit parts then, seduced and thought arises. But thought immediately ends with words “What a creation power he has”. I don’t know from where this words come - but it’s sure that I don’t control (or) suppress (or) diverted. After that, I continue to feel the beauty. That’s all. No thoughts at all. Extreme beauty. No image of Krishna too. Nothing. And I continue to work.
Ultimately, my doubt is,
You may say from experience now that - “Only thought creates seduction”. But is this words come from James who is choicelessly aware?. Had he really experienced himself that - “Only thought creates seduction & desires” as he is fully sensitive (or) he is parroting words of K?. Had he out of every desires - and only from comparing those he strongly says “Only thoughts responsible for seduction”. If not experienced, just open an implicit part in website - and see what happens within you - and compare it with thoughts - and please reply. I beg to do this.
Please, I am not insulting (or) trolling (or) degrading. You may be right. But this words come from choiceless awareness without any desires and really experienced while seeing those parts, and only by comparing this ‘seduction’ with ‘thoughts & desires’ he says?
Again, If I said something wrong, forgive me. But this is so important as this is the real/actual craving from stone age till now.
Seduction is different from lust as per K James. Lust is thinking about sex. But here it is not that. Immediate response of perception is Seduction here. No thought comes in seduction. But after seduced, thought comes and desires come for more. Just smelling (or) hearing (or) touching (or) seeing - immediate arousal happens in the sexual parts. This is Nature James. This is in all living beings which sexually reproduce. You may have felt it too. This is called seduction. There is no thought in those. Only after seduction - thought comes in and then craving comes in.
So, when this arousal in implicit parts happens - while perceiving opposite genders implicit parts, how to continue in that seduction without thoughts intervention - and look at it and end it, without controlling/suppresing/diverting?
Viswa - in a dialogue one has to keep things simple. You bring in so many topics and words: krishna, enlightenment, the scriptures, choiceless awareness, seduction, creation, etc. It is confusing.
When you see a woman or a man, a garden or a house, etc, your senses receive the impression, the contact, of that sensual object, and there is a sensation. That sensation gives rise to a feeling in the body: joy, pleasure, a sense of beauty or appreciation, or whatever. Sex and arousal are part of this sensation in the body.
But if you are healthy, balanced, alert, the sensation is awoken, it is felt in the body, and very soon it dies away.
There is nothing wrong about this. The word “seduction” is inapplicable here - you are using a word to judge what is taking place, and it is thought which responsible for this word. - It is what happens when thought intrudes which creates the problem of pleasure, desire, etc.
Though it is less than 5 minutes, I took time and read those James.
Now, this is the point.
Is this arousal wrong? - If it not wrong - then why we have to be alert?
What is this Healthy and Balanced? - Is it a kind of eating habits?. Does eating habits affect arousal on perception?. If it suppress the arousal - could you suggest me the food to eat - so I may be balanced too.
(or) Is it a Yoga practice (or) Kundalini like such?
Does it dies away (or) diverted by another attachment (or) controlled because of something wrong (or) suppressed by above practices?
If it is confusing, please leave those and you may reply for the above.
If not wrong - then why alert? Why not let flow? What are the consequences of those arousal?
There is nothing wrong with sensation Viswa. You are making a problem out of it. Without sensation you would be dead.
You don’t have to be alert. But alertness is part of what it means to be alive, healthy, active. If you are inattentive then you inevitably miss things: you are unaware of your thoughts, your feelings, your surroundings. You become insensitive.
And when you are unaware, insensitive, inattentive, confusion occurs.
Why we have to be alive James? What are the consequences of not being alertive?. Just some time and waste of semens. What are we gonna achieve in this alertness/healthy/active? Why not let flow the arousal?
But when this arousal happens - why there is need to be alertness to be alive?. What we achieve by preserving the body?
Why there is attachment to this body to be alive? I’m not taking about suicide. But why?
I read that “Confusion happens”. But it isn’t. When there is arousal - we come outside be alone (or) approach her. No confusion at all. No sufferings at all.
By missing this what are the further consequences James?.
Just go on thinking.
Are we conditioned that - if we miss things we will lose something in this world?
Are we conditioned about fear of death?
Confusion means what kind of confusion? - Could you give an example James - because of arousal?
Say, I am aroused. I come out from the place - sit alone. Waste time and energy. Thats all. Then I again involve with people. What is confusion in this James?
If I am in a workplace - of course work is important - as someone is dependent on me to complete the work. But when I’m not busy - what kind of confusion it brings James? Why I have to be alert at that time too? Why I have to be healthy and what I will achieve in this world because of being healthy by the death of arousal? I will lose energy - but by eating food we can gain back. But why to be alive?
Very simply, Viswa - if you are not attentive in our dialogue, then there is nothing meaningful being said. It is just words.
So by talking and sharing on this forum, you are tacitly admitting the value of being alert, attentive. - It’s silly to debate this.
We are not talking about the fear of death, losing something, your work, attachment to the body, etc etc (you keep straying off the subject endlessly!).
We are talking about the place of sensation in our lives.
Sensation is simply a fact of what a body is. Without the sense-organs functioning you would not be writing here. - What we are questioning is the relationship between sensation and thought, thinking. - It is thinking that creates all these problems you continue to throw up: attachment, fear, seduction, etc.
Yes James. I totally accept that without Sensation nothing is alive.
We shared sex & arousal are not wrong. But you also said “If we are not alert to be alive,healthy,active - confusion arises in this seduction”.
And so I asked what kind of confusion? Why we have to be alive by preserving body/energy? What we will miss/lose in this world because of seduction? If we miss - what kind of consequence it will bring in our death? Why we have to be healthy by stopping arousal? We know men in centuries before lived for 100 years even letting flow of semens and arousal.
So, by being alert to this arousal what kind of confusion is saved?
No - It’s a most important topic James. I didn’t asked “what sensation brings in alert”. But I asked “by being alert from arousal - what more alert it brings?”
Why we have to curb that arousal?
I think that’s the topic - we speak from start - about stopping arousal,seduction and thoughts - and not sensation.