Theos-Talk Archives (August 1998 Message tt00220)

>Dallas offers:
>
>On the subject of sex.  What is the main REASON for intercourse ?
>
>Is it to have children and take on the responsibilities of family life and
>raising decent children or is it not ?
>

Not. Actually, it is psychologically necessary for what is called
intimacy, and intimacy is a necessary human developmental task.


>If it is pursued purely because of some pleasure -- then does that justify
>promiscuity?  And from that prostitution ?
>

There are lots of forms of prostitution. Doing anything for money
that you really wouldn't otherwise do is prostitution. A lot of folks
do this when they go off to work each morning. There is not much
difference in having sex for pleasure as in eating for pleasure or
scratching an itch for pleasure or going swimming for pleasure,
etc. Seeking after pleasure is what most folks do in one way or
another. I like to read Theosphy for pleasure.


>What is our attitude towards motherhood, sisterhood, one's wife or daughter
>(or reversibly, one's father, brother, son, other men ?).
>

I agree that seeing others as sex objects or "meat" is wrong.


>Only the most vile of humans who have descended to the level of the
>sub-bestial, have ever made of sex a matter of usage and display -- and
yet,
>here we now live in an age of permissiveness, and one's "rights" are thrown
>against the old customs and views of the past ?  Are we any the better or
>safer or happier for this condition ?
>

Actually, animals never use sex for casual display. Yet it is interesting
that
so far as we know, all animals soever masturbate.


>One of the signs of the sad condition of our times is the fact that
>so-called psychologists have made it their work to find excuses and
>persuasive reasons why sex-life (and its many kinds of perversions) ought
to
>be advertised.  If the continuing individuality and karma are not to be
>considered, are we to do worse than the animals do, who have their natural
>seasons for conception and exercise usually the greatest protective care
>over their little ones ?
>

One of the primary differences between humans and animals is that
animals have seasons while humans are horney all the time. Please
think about this seriously the next time you point out how far above
the animals we humans are.


> The Soul is neither male nor female.  Only the body of the
>present incarnation is provided under karma in one sex or the other for the
>purpose of meeting and adjusting our past karma -- says Theosophy.
>

I disagree with this, and so would science because it has been
clearly established that the male and female brains have differences.
What is the brain if not a physical expression of the soul? I would
say that the spirit has no such sexual differences, but the soul
certainly does.


>As students of Theosophy have we considered Karmatically what promiscuity
>implies -- in terms of liaisons that may last for many lives -- in terms of
>children who are not PROTECTED by their fathers or mothers and are the real
>orphans, the changelings, of the world ?  This may appear a strange
>question.  But Theosophy presents us with a view of karmic operations not
>provided in or by any other source.  It is one of real importance for us at
>this stage of our joint evolution.
>

Actually I agree with you here. They don't call fooling around karmamudra
without reason--you mix yourself up in the karma of another when you take
on a physical partner. I have done so with my wife of 35 years and would
do so again.


>Now comes a clincher for me:  Would it me possible for one to be both an
>occultist and a family person simultaneously ?
>

Yes, but I admit that it is difficult.

Jerry S.