# Sexual Intercourse, Need Or A Want?



## justosh

I wanted to ask this question because the thought arrived to me when i was at my college computer doing course work, and I BECAME hungry, with-out thinking about it.

So then i thought, one does not become aroused, just like i became hungry. With influences of Kaam (lust) around people and because of those influences images form in the mind which lead to one having desires (I have observed people in my class that respond like that, and its around 95% that do).


Point being i spontaneously became hungry, but one dose not spontaneously become aroused....... 

So is it a need or a want?

i understand its a need to start a family, thats fair enough.... but what about these people who say it is a psychological need?

I welcome all faith and beliefs to comment, can be either religious, philosophical or psychological  or all of them.

please, if you are going to state facts, can you please put a reference so we all can study it

Thanks


----------



## Harry Haller

I suppose sex could be debated long and hard and very little could be possibly achieved.

Food on a regular basis is essential to survival, sex is not.Once you have enough children, there is no point in having sex other than for procreation. Having said that the closest I feel to my wife is during sex, and that feels more spiritual than fun. The trouble is there are so many different types of sex, just as there different types of food. And do we actually get 'hungry' or do we yearn for a particular type of food, to taste, to devour, if it were hunger alone, surely rice and daal would do fine. 

Sex as an expression of love between two people is a wonderful experience. Sex, having paid money for, and taking place in an alleyway stinking of urine is not so. 

In my view, sex remains the closest you can get to another human being, it does not require money, status, finery, just an abundance of love, but like everything we experience,  
the majesty has been stripped out of it, and it now represents pleasure, rather than union. 

I think if sex is driven by love, union, intimacy, then it is a need, outside of these, it is a want.


----------



## justosh

But what about people who feel union with God or a being- that can be possible without sexual intercourse. further more do we need sex to express love and unity? 

If i put it this way, when i went India for a month, there was little references to sexual activities hence i found myself thinking about it less- much to the point where i forgot about the influences in the UK, so when i came back to the UK the influences hit me hard, again found myself think about it alot. 

so can one say it has been glorified by society so much that it has become a need?


----------



## Harry Haller

As I said before, sex outside of a loving relationship bears little resemblance to sex within. I find that the sex that one yearns for, lusts after, is predominantly the physical act, rather than the spiritual union, ie, the same way you may be hungry, but want a Big Mac rather than just the sensation of not feeling hungry. 

There is a line of thought that union with God is akin to the best orgasm you have ever had, one could even ponder as to whether the spiritual pleasures of loving sex are there to give us an insight into the power of love, the feeling of oneness with another being. 

Do we need sex to express love and unity? no, it is the other way round, sex is a medium to express love and unity, just as our hair expresses our love and unity with Creation. Should I grow my hair? Should I have sex? no, first find the love. 

The more you write, the more I think you are talking about sex in its most basest act, rather than as a by product of a loving union. 

There is a general line of thinking that the way to better sex is variety, to make sex sexier, clothing, fetishes, swinging, orgies, drugs, and those that are not having such sex, are not really living, but such sex leaves you feeling incredibly dirty, it demoralises you, it makes you a slave, and far from enhancing sex, it turns it from something beautiful and pure, into something disgusting and base, it numbs you, so that the rituals that surround the sexual act have to be more and more pronounced in order to get the same effect, it is a one way ticket to the very pit of your brain.But in the materialistic society we live in, the quick fix society, loving sex is seen as quaint and old fashioned. 

I am as guilty as you, even though married, I still have the most sordid thoughts about my wife, I find it disrupts my connection with Creator, I cannot find myself in a state of Naam when I feel like this, it is base and for the self only, however, when I think of us as pure loving souls sharing that love, I find that compatible with a state of Naam, the gold thread of Hukam seems to flow through that action, if anything, to love someone that much, that you can experience such happiness is a blessing from Creator, anything else is just scratching an itch.

I note you are of a young age, some words of experience, for every sexual experience you have between now, and when you fall deeply in love, you will have more to undo in order to enjoy that love as Creator intended, I am 43 now, and still have not completely made up what I have lost through lust.


----------



## Archived_member15

*"...The inner purpose of human sexuality is to regain wholeness and manifest the oneness of God..."* 

_- Daniel Chanan Matt (Jewish Zohar translator)_


"...The sexual relationship is in reality a thing of great exaltation when it is appropriate and harmonius...Keep this great secret and do not reveal it to anyone unworthy, for here is where you glimpse the secret of the loftiness of an appropriate sexual relationship..._*When the sexual relation points to the Name*_, there is nothing more righteous or more holy than it..." 


_- Moses ben Nahman (1194-1270 AD), Jewish Kabbalist master_


Now this part should be be arresting: "*When the sexual relation points to the Name, there is nothing more righteous or more holy than it"*

*Yes NOTHING is holier! *

When sex is mutual and self-giving, when the two lovers care not about their own pleasure - solely at least - but about pleasuring the other, then sex can ascend to divine heights. It becomes an act of _seva - mutual, self-sacrificing, self-giving love _and in the sexual act what you have is not only the unity and harmony of the sexes, but an icon of that Higher unity between God and the soul. 

However many sexual relationships nowadays are based not on self-giving love but rather on lust and the desire, merely, for the sensual pleasure itself rather than sex as an expression of a deep, loving, committed relationship between two people.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel

gurmqI siB rs Bogdw vfw AwKwVw ] 
*Through the Guru`s Teachings, I enjoy all the pleasures in the great world-arena. *

siB ieMdRIAw vis kir idqIE sqvMqw swVw ] *.**The True Lord has brought all my senses and organs under my control. *


----------



## Harry Haller

Just to throw an interesting dimension into the arena, where does that leave masturbation........?


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel

> where does that leave masturbation........?


 
Veer Ji I'm not sure thats what Vouthon meant by describing a 





> _self-giving love _


----------



## Randip Singh

Look Sikhism talks about Kaam, which is an un-natural obsession with sex. It's about self gratification.

Sex per se is not unnatural and Sikhism does not condemn it as per my understanding.


----------



## Kamala

Kaam has nothing to do with having sex with your consort, it is not bad at all for wanting to have it with your consort, the main reason why Kaam is bad is because some people cheat on their wives or husbands. The bad Kaam that the Guru ji talks about is that if you cheat on your consort or have crushes on random people because they are "hot"  

So mainly Kaam is only bad if you use it on someone other than your consort. You can think someone is sexy but you shouldn't want to have sex with them.


----------



## Kamala

harry haller said:


> Just to throw an interesting dimension into the arena, where does that leave masturbation........?



Abrahamic religons would say it is bad, but honestly I don't think it is condemned, we shouldn't just talk about these stuff in the religious site... also if you do it, whatever, not our problem, but please have some shame (not at you harry) and do not freely mention it.


----------



## Harry Haller

> Kaam has nothing to do with having sex with your consort, it is not bad at all for wanting to have it with your consort, the main reason why Kaam is bad is because some people cheat on their wives or husbands. The bad Kaam that the Guru ji talks about is that if you cheat on your consort or have crushes on random people because they are "hot"
> 
> 
> 
> So mainly Kaam is only bad if you use it on someone other than your consort. You can think someone is sexy but you shouldn't want to have sex with them.



Sorry Bhenji, but I think you are wrong. To say there is nothing at all wrong with kaam for your consort is misguided in my opinion. I am one of those extremely lucky men who actually finds it difficult to find other women attractive. My absolute ideal partner purely from a physical angle is my wife, this is great as it means she never has to worry about me straying, but, do I feel I am acting within Sikhi, when her back hurts, and she needs me to be gentle, kind, loving, and all I can think about is Kaam?

Or, lets say my wife is feeling a bit unloved, the dog has died, she has had a bad day at work, what she needs more than anything is love, lots of love, unconditional love, not Kaam, what she does not need is Kaam...

Even now I find it incredibly difficult to just 'have a kiss, or have a cuddle', as a man, I am focusing on where this will all lead to, not just concentrating on the moment, and how beautiful the moment is, but the good bit, the kaam bit. 

I know that when I stroke my wifes hair, cuddle her and then turn over to go sleep, she feels a lot more appreciated and loved than if let kaam take over whenever I feel like it. 

for the record, I define kaam as lust with no love present, the sort of thing animals do. ....


----------



## Harry Haller

> Abrahamic religons would say it is bad, but honestly I don't think it is condemned, we shouldn't just talk about these stuff in the religious site... also if you do it, whatever, not our problem, but please have some shame (not at you harry) and do not freely mention it.



Kamalaji

I respect your sentiments, however I would not class this site as a religious site, anymore than I would class myself as a religious person. Actually I despise the word, it conjures up images of people more concerned with rituals and appearances than substance. I am not religious, I merely crave the truth.

This site to me, is a site devoted to the furthering of philosophy that is in line with Bani. The next step, having made oneself aware of this philosophy is to live it. 

If one is going to live than it is important that one imports and accepts this philosophy 100% completely into every part of ones life. 

If we ignore this avenue, than we also ignore a huge amount of people for whom Kaam is a massive problem, despite having no partner.


----------



## Kamala

harry haller said:


> Sorry Bhenji, but I think you are wrong. To say there is nothing at all wrong with kaam for your consort is misguided in my opinion. I am one of those extremely lucky men who actually finds it difficult to find other women attractive. My absolute ideal partner purely from a physical angle is my wife, this is great as it means she never has to worry about me straying, but, do I feel I am acting within Sikhi, when her back hurts, and she needs me to be gentle, kind, loving, and all I can think about is Kaam?
> 
> Or, lets say my wife is feeling a bit unloved, the dog has died, she has had a bad day at work, what she needs more than anything is love, lots of love, unconditional love, not Kaam, what she does not need is Kaam...
> 
> Even now I find it incredibly difficult to just 'have a kiss, or have a cuddle', as a man, I am focusing on where this will all lead to, not just concentrating on the moment, and how beautiful the moment is, but the good bit, the kaam bit.
> 
> I know that when I stroke my wifes hair, cuddle her and then turn over to go sleep, she feels a lot more appreciated and loved than if let kaam take over whenever I feel like it.
> 
> for the record, I define kaam as lust with no love present, the sort of thing animals do. ....



Lust for your consort is OK. As long as it is not for anyone else.



harry haller said:


> Kamalaji
> 
> I respect your sentiments, however I would not class this site as a  religious site, anymore than I would class myself as a religious person.  Actually I despise the word, it conjures up images of people more  concerned with rituals and appearances than substance. I am not  religious, I merely crave the truth.
> 
> This site to me, is a site devoted to the furthering of philosophy that  is in line with Bani. The next step, having made oneself aware of this  philosophy is to live it.
> 
> If one is going to live than it is important that one imports and  accepts this philosophy 100% completely into every part of ones life.
> 
> If we ignore this avenue, than we also ignore a huge amount of people  for whom Kaam is a massive problem, despite having no partner.



I think this is a very religious site, I see Ik Onkaars everywhere and debates on religion. Is Bani not religious?  Also I already said what is to be said, that Kaam for your consort is OK but not for anyone else. If people think it is OK to have Kaam for anyone other than your consort, then that is their problem, lol.


----------



## Luckysingh

Well how about the couples that maintain their mutual love by encouraging each other to have sexual encounters with another person and sometimes prefer to watch ??
In UK this activity was known as 'swinging'


----------



## Randip Singh

harry haller said:


> Sorry Bhenji, but I think you are wrong. To say there is nothing at all wrong with kaam for your consort is misguided in my opinion. I am one of those extremely lucky men who actually finds it difficult to find other women attractive. My absolute ideal partner purely from a physical angle is my wife, this is great as it means she never has to worry about me straying, but, do I feel I am acting within Sikhi, when her back hurts, and she needs me to be gentle, kind, loving, and all I can think about is Kaam?
> 
> Or, lets say my wife is feeling a bit unloved, the dog has died, she has had a bad day at work, what she needs more than anything is love, lots of love, unconditional love, not Kaam, what she does not need is Kaam...
> 
> Even now I find it incredibly difficult to just 'have a kiss, or have a cuddle', as a man, I am focusing on where this will all lead to, not just concentrating on the moment, and how beautiful the moment is, but the good bit, the kaam bit.
> 
> I know that when I stroke my wifes hair, cuddle her and then turn over to go sleep, she feels a lot more appreciated and loved than if let kaam take over whenever I feel like it.
> 
> for the record, I define kaam as lust with no love present, the sort of thing animals do. ....


 
Even Kaam for your partner is bad, because Kaam is an un-natural obsession with sex. In this respect Kaam could take the form of forcing your partner to have sex when she/he does not wish to.....or wish to partake in certain practices.

There is a huge difference between Kaam and making love to your partner. 

For many years I could not get my head around this concept. I thought Kaam just was sex, and I thought how can sex be bad in a loving relationship? Then I realised, that Kaam is an "Obsession". It is about SELF gratification. Making love is about giving, mutuality, tenderness and above all LOVE. Kaam has nothing to do with love but has everything to do with selfwill, and satisfying self.


----------



## justosh

Sorry was very busy last night so couldn't reply, but now that im reading the replies i understands that its the intention behind the act that has become a "need" not the act itself. however i still hold to the point about the type of environment, just as Guru Arjan Ji said "the environment puts the dirt on ones mind".

Saying that, what the border of love and lust?


----------



## Harry Haller

> Saying that, what the border of love and lust?



the point where you are more interested in your pleasure than your partners pleasure


----------



## Randip Singh

harry haller said:


> the point where you are more interested in your pleasure than your partners pleasure


 

Exactly!!! 

We are then in effect Munmookh, selfwilled.


----------



## Kamala

Lol, I already made my point. Basically it is OK for your partner, not for anyone else though. Kaam is used by everyone to have children, even great avatars/gurus have children lol, that doesn't mean that they sinned in that area xD


----------



## justosh

harry haller ji, 
with all due respect, people learn at different paces and as you said its a concept, maybe it does not make sense to her. please explain it to her, just as Guru ji would..... because we are meant to be the roop of guru ji

please do not think i am disrespecting you 

thanks


----------



## Randip Singh

Kamala said:


> Lol, I already made my point. Basically it is OK for your partner, not for anyone else though. Kaam is used by everyone to have children, even great avatars/gurus have children lol, that doesn't mean that they sinned in that area xD


 
In the case of Avtars, how would one explain Krishna's behaviour?

How about Indira's affair and subsequent curse?

I don't think this is a good example winkingmunda


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel

> how would one explain Krishna's behaviour


 
Veer Ji It is said Arjuna saw the Universe in Lord Krishna's mouth, I guess we will have to explain that first and his behaviour second ,it is hard to explain because he's not the norm ,he is considered an Avtar so we can't make a proper comparison with the common man.


----------



## Kamala

Randip Singh said:


> In the case of Avtars, how would one explain Krishna's behaviour?
> 
> How about Indira's affair and subsequent curse?
> 
> I don't think this is a good example winkingmunda


What do you mean by Indira? Who is Indira? Indira Ghandi, Lord Inder?? 

Krishna was a prankster, and anyways Dwapar Yug was soo far back, and in that time nudity was not considered bad for normal citizens lol, it was only when the Gorays came they gave Indians gandi naazar lol. Even if you see the old murti of the Goddesses they are mostly all nude, now they wear clothes in mandirs because of gandi naazar, and when seen nude, people would see motherly love, not partner love


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel

> Sexual Intercourse, Need or a Want?


 
Veera it is not like food which without one dies,and if you neither want it or need it then you are close to death or close to God.


----------



## Inderjeet Kaur

I had a long, thoughtful answer written, but instead of writing it first in my notebook, I wrote it here and it disappeared into cyberspace.  You didn't really want the thoughts of a 60 year old woman on sex anyway, did you?


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

Kamala said:


> Lol, I already made my point. Basically it is OK for your partner, not for anyone else though. Kaam is used by everyone to have children, even great avatars/gurus have children lol, that doesn't mean that they sinned in that area xD



NO...NOT "Kaam"....just plain every day SEX. Kaam is NOT "sex"...Kaam is LUST....and I dont think the Gurus bhagats were LUSTY....and in Gurmat there is no concept of Sin/Paap/Punn etc.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

Kamala said:


> What do you mean by Indira? Who is Indira? Indira Ghandi, Lord Inder??
> 
> Krishna was a prankster, and anyways Dwapar Yug was soo far back, and in that time nudity was not considered bad for normal citizens lol, it was only when the Gorays came they gave Indians gandi naazar lol. Even if you see the old murti of the Goddesses they are mostly all nude, now they wear clothes in mandirs because of gandi naazar, and when seen nude, people would see motherly love, not partner love



not fair to blame the Gorays for all that...are the Goray stilla round..and is that the reason ONLY INDIA has this problem called EVE TEASING..and a LAW to combat that ??...

NO Jios..GURU NANAK Ji explained it all so nicely...DONT BLAME..*KALYUG*...( and by extension Gorays, Frenchies, chinks ruskies afghaans pakistanis...etc etc etc..)...in Satyug...Dwapur..Treta..kalyug..its the EXACT SAME SUN, MOON, STARS..EARTH..WATERS..rivers oceans, deserts, cities..*ITS THE PEOPLE who are to BLAME*...If a father rapes his 8 year old grandchild...is it due to "KALYUG" ?? NO.period. Its due to the depraved Grand daddy !! whats Kalyug got to do with it ??
So dont blame anyone any time..any yug etc etc..that is looking for loopholes excuses..bahanebaazee...Blame the PERSON.....
The GORAY have NUDE BEACHES..with the most beautiful girls prancing around..and the ONLY people GAWKING at these till their eyeballs hurt are INDIANS..Pakistanis..Iranians..etc etc..the Goray dont even LOOK second time...while the Indians SALIVATE like ******* in heat...why ??? Goray never TEASE Girls..Indians tease even female children in Kindergarten......cant get enough !!

In my opinion the Inder is Lord Inder..the Demi god. Those demi gods were LUSTY FELLOWS.....lusting after even their own DAUGHTERS...i am not saying it..the religious texts say:grinningkaur: that...


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

IS this the "prankster" ?? kamala ji talks about ? IF he is a "prankster" and its OK to be one..then why is India having an Anti EVE TEASING LAW ?? After all just blowing a whistle at a girl passing by is much much less than taking away all her clothes and having her beg for them ???...BUT Indian Police will ARREST such "modern pranksters" as BHOOND ASHIKS...and give them a beating in public...BUT how is it that an AVTAAR gets scott free ?? is it GORAY influence on the Police ??  I just cannot understand...ZINDA SHAHEED for one READY to Give up his LIFE for a Cause seems easier to understand than this prankster logic...


----------



## Kamala

Gyani Jarnail Singh said:


> not fair to blame the Gorays for all that...are the Goray stilla round..and is that the reason ONLY INDIA has this problem called EVE TEASING..and a LAW to combat that ??...
> 
> NO Jios..GURU NANAK Ji explained it all so nicely...DONT BLAME..*KALYUG*...( and by extension Gorays, Frenchies, chinks ruskies afghaans pakistanis...etc etc etc..)...in Satyug...Dwapur..Treta..kalyug..its the EXACT SAME SUN, MOON, STARS..EARTH..WATERS..rivers oceans, deserts, cities..*ITS THE PEOPLE who are to BLAME*...If a father rapes his 8 year old grandchild...is it due to "KALYUG" ?? NO.period. Its due to the depraved Grand daddy !! whats Kalyug got to do with it ??
> So dont blame anyone any time..any yug etc etc..that is looking for loopholes excuses..bahanebaazee...Blame the PERSON.....
> The GORAY have NUDE BEACHES..with the most beautiful girls prancing around..and the ONLY people GAWKING at these till their eyeballs hurt are INDIANS..Pakistanis..Iranians..etc etc..the Goray dont even LOOK second time...while the Indians SALIVATE like ******* in heat...why ??? Goray never TEASE Girls..Indians tease even female children in Kindergarten......cant get enough !!
> 
> In my opinion the Inder is Lord Inder..the Demi god. Those demi gods were LUSTY FELLOWS.....lusting after even their own DAUGHTERS...i am not saying it..the religious texts say:grinningkaur: that...


The gorays don't salivate since they see or watch pornography 24/7 (sarcasm) on the internet LOL! The sanskari Indians don't even go to nude beaches. Also, most Devis do NOT wear clothing, if you see my avatar on my profile you can see Sri Sarrvatomukhi not wearing any clothing, it is because of GANDI NAZAAR these days (that is why those nude girls are not a big deal, that so with the lord pranking them with the clothes on the tree, which I do not deny) with people and they jump to conclusions. I will give examples:

MODERN:






ANCIENT:





HOW MODERN SHOULD LOOK LIKE:


----------



## Kamala

Gyani Jarnail Singh said:


> NO...NOT "Kaam"....just plain every day SEX. Kaam is NOT "sex"...Kaam is LUST....and I dont think the Gurus bhagats were LUSTY....and in Gurmat there is no concept of Sin/Paap/Punn etc.


Veer ji I am 100% sure you do not know their personal life. Also law has nothing to do with religion. Anti eve teasing is mostly made up of scared people of different religions. The demi gods did not have sex with their daughters, if you have sufficient proof for a knowledgeable written source, I will believe you (I am sure if there was any you would proudly display it in your post ji). Also I can blame kalyug's citizens since this is the time where mostly everything goes wrong, the guru ji even said so as followed: 

ਸ੝ਤਾ ਪਿਤਾ ਤਨ ਰਮਤ ਨਿਸ਼ੰਕਾ ॥ ਭਗਨੀ ਭਰਤ ਭ੝ਰਾਤ ਕਹ ਅੰਕਾ ॥ ਭ੝ਰਾਤ ਬਹਿਨ ਤਨ ਕਰਤ ਬਿਹਾਰਾ ॥ ਇਸਤ੝ਰੀ ਤਜੀ ਸਕਲ ਸੰਸਾਰਾ ॥੩॥
सढ़ता पिता तन रमत निशंका ॥ भगनी भरत भढ़रात कह अंका ॥ भढ़रात बहिन तन करत बिहारा ॥ इसतढ़री तजी सकल संसारा ॥३॥>
The daughter unhesitatingly enjoys with her father and the sister embraces her brother; the brother enjoys the body of the sister and the whole world relinquishes the wife.3.
ਸ਼ੰਕਰ ਬਰਨ ਪ੝ਰਜਾ ਸਭ ਹੋਈ ॥ ਝਕ ਗਯਾਤ ਕੋ ਰਹਾ ਨ ਕੋਈ ॥ ਅਤਿ ਬਿਭਚਾਰ ਫਸੀ ਬਰ ਨਾਰੀ ॥ ਧਰਮ ਰੀਤ ਕੀ ਪ੝ਰੀਤ ਬਿਸਾਰੀ ॥੪॥
शंकर बरन पढ़रजा सभ होई ॥ झक गयात को रहा न कोई ॥ अति बिभचार फसी बर नारी ॥ धरम रीत की पढ़रीत बिसारी ॥४॥
All the subjects become hybrids and no one knows the other; beautiful women are engrossed in adultery and forget real love and the traditions of religion.4.

You guys also judge the book as it's cover, the gopis desired to have Krsna as their husband, and since it is only  before her husband that a woman can be naked, to fulfill their desire  Lord Krsna accepted their prayers by this pastime of stealing their  garments.


----------



## Randip Singh

Kamala said:


> What do you mean by Indira? Who is Indira? Indira Ghandi, Lord Inder??
> 
> Krishna was a prankster, and anyways Dwapar Yug was soo far back, and in that time nudity was not considered bad for normal citizens lol, it was only when the Gorays came they gave Indians gandi naazar lol. Even if you see the old murti of the Goddesses they are mostly all nude, now they wear clothes in mandirs because of gandi naazar, and when seen nude, people would see motherly love, not partner love


 
Come on you know exactly what I mean.

Lord Krishna waged countless wars to possess women.

..as for Lord Indira, he was cursed for having carnal knowledge with another mans woman.

Nudity has nothing to do with Kaam it. ...and what with all the laughing icons? Is something funny? Have I missed a joke somewhere. Kaam is about self sexual gratification.

I believe Krishna and Indira were men like our Guru's and over time have been elevated to the status of Gods.


----------



## Ishna

I know I'm like gori and Western and, like, responsible for all the problems in India, but while I was surfing the internet for porn (sarcasm) I found a picture of one of those fake Western goddesses (attached).

OMG she's like, naked or whatever.

Also better tell those pesky Wiccans to stop worshipping naked, they obviously didn't get the memo.

*rolling eyes*


----------



## Harry Haller

> The gorays don't salivate since they see or watch pornography 24/7 (sarcasm) on the internet



I think the credibility of your posts is questionable given statements like this, this is a world wide forum for Sikhs of all colour, not just brown ones.............



> Veer ji I am 100% sure you do not know their personal life.





> Also, most Devis do NOT wear clothing



Why is it Gyaniji could not know their personal life, but you have been gifted with the ability to know what they wore many thousands of years ago?


----------



## justosh

i can see this drastically moving away from the subject, please can we avoid this. 

i understand all of the points of views here.

If someone has another point around this subject or anything related please put your view forward and lets stop comparing religions, leaders e.t.c

thank you


----------



## Harry Haller

Justoshji, 

I have been actually thinking about this topic quite a lot recently, I have come to the conclusion that lust itself, regardless that some may find it acceptable in a marriage, is an extremely dangerous thing to play with. It is like a burning fire, and once it is alight, consumes all in its hunger for more. Marriages should be founded on love, not lust. The act of making love is possibly the closest to union that human beings can experience, the act of lustful sex is more about wanting than needing, one can need the closeness of another human being, in order to feel whole, or part of a union, but one can only ever want lust. 

I am at present intending to eradicate lust from my relationship with my wife for a month, just to see what differences it makes, it is already changing me as a person, I am more interested in her as a person, rather than her as a sex object, when I think about her during the day, my thoughts are innocent and constructive, rather than lustful and destructive, what can I do to make her happy, would she prefer to come home after a hard days nursing to a cooked meal and a tidy house, and a walked dog, or would she prefer me in a curry stained vest with a leer on my face. 

I think if more men attempted to eradicate lust in their marriage, there would be better communication, more closeness, more compatibility, more honesty. 

Of course I am a man, and human, and I am designed to respond to lust, so, on occasion, We can be lustful, provided it is a place where we both are, not just me, but it does not have to be a daily battle, the problem with lust is it is consuming, all consuming, in my view it must be understood and made peace with and even in a marriage, moderated.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

LUST is the disease...meant to be destroyed/curtailed as much as possible....Kaam is a biological necessity for reproduction. Just like too much food can lead to obesity..too much kaam can also be harmful..eat to Live..kaam to make babies...Live to eat obese..live to kaam makes one a lusty old man/woman very fast..leading to rapes, molestations, eve teasing etc which actually degrades the beautiful "kaam".  Guru Ji didnt quite make the distinctions becasue thats common sense...krodh is anger..out of jealousy, enmity etc..but good "krodh" is necessary in war/battle/self defense...ditto for the other so called thieves..they all have a good side and a bad side..we are to avoid the bad side.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

Kamala Ji..
What you quoted as GURU's words are NOT GURBANI. Such Trash is in the Bachitar natak also misnamed DG. Most Sikhs dont call it Gurbani for the obvious reason - your quote proves this point.

2. The proof of what i write is in the Hindu Religious texts...and I am "NOT PROUD" to quote such.

However I ma very very SURPRISED that you didnt bother to just GOOGLE....I ALWAYS GOOGLE...and one need not even have to be very "intelligent"...Just ask the simple way..like..:Google- Brahma and his Daughter...."..and LOL..out pops series of Pages with the correct INFORMATION...

Just this once I am giving it for your benefit ONLY ( i feel sick actually giving out such and NOT PROUD as you think..)

Google : Brahma and his daughter..
Links appear:
1. http://isearch.avg.com/pages/abt/bcnc/bcnc.aspx?q=brahma+goes+after+his+daughter&sap=nt&lang=en&mid=ae5d920a8a0e47d0bec6b1915f07c304-94abb4885c536c716c0c05f4d8d41be3851d0de4&cid={39f45454-24b3-46d8-ae24-bfc84a22335e}&v=11.1.0.7&ds=AVG&d=6%2F1%2F2012+6%3A44%3A14+AM&pr=fr&snd=hp&tc=test7

2. http://truereligiondebate.wordpress...od-and-runs-lusting-for-his-own-daughter-and/

3. http://www.messagefrommasters.com/S...hma_fell_in_love_with_his_daughter_Rohini.htm

4. http://www.sanatansociety.org/hindu_gods_and_goddesses/brahma.htm

5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakudmi
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri
7. http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/594-582.aspx#startofcomments

READ and open your eyes...Most of the Hindu religious texts can be found Originally at various sites....and after that you will see WHY Many SIKHS are AGAINST the DG...because the DG is a COPYCAT version of those Hindu Texts..and says the exact same things...  bringing the AUGUST GURU SAHIBS to that gutter level.

You may bring each of these articles in new THREADS in the religious discussion section of SPN for us to discuss as THIS THREAD is NOT the place for this. I ma sure many of US really want to hear your side...and your arguments with proofs from these texts... Thank you Ji.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

Btw i DONT agree with everything being said and written on these Forums..my only brief is with the *QUOTES FROM OFFICIAL HINDU TEXTS.* Those are Real and exactly as found.
The Shiva story of the vagina marks on his body are referenced in Gurbani in SGGS...and MOST Nirmalas, Udais Sants and Brahmgyanis who do katha of SGGS will ALWAYS relate THESE STORIES..simply because they come form THAT "ORANGE" background and thus they DESTROY the real and original gurmatt of Guru nanak ji shaib as does the texts in DG.


----------



## Kamala

Alright I will make a new thread.


----------



## sid

its need of any living species to survive and someone wants it because nature made us so,but nature also gave us quality of self control so that we do not addicted of it,and create happy society where sex is very small part of our life


----------



## Archived_member15

I think that "holy" or rather completely spiritual sexuality can be summed up with one small phrase: 


"...Love consists not in feeling great things but in having great detachment [from oneself] and in suffering for the Beloved...All for you and nothing for me..." 

_- Saint John of the Cross (1542 – 1591), Catholic mystic_ 


If a lover has the attitude, "_all for you and nothing for me_" then sex is a holy act capable of fostering not only spiritual growth but even detachment from self; in truth it also becomes _seva _and can bring a person into union with God. 

To achieve this selfless state of sacrificial love in one's sexual relationship, I would encourage some reading of one of my favourite books of the Bible - _The Song of Songs/Song of Solomon_. 

It is a story of the love affair between two unmarried youngsters, probably in their mid-teens, living circa 900 BC in Ancient Israel. Contrary to the marriage rites of their time, which were arranged according to class and which were only about property rights and succession, the love between these two youngsters ascends to the sacramental level - it is a mutual, self-giving, committed relationship founded upon love alone between a nobleman's daughter and a shepherd boy. In this respect we have a true marriage so to speak, a union of two souls, a sacrament not just a ritual and property rights. The poem is told largely from the woman's perspective ie during the oral sex scenes it is the woman's who speaks of tasting the man's fruit (semen) and the woman who speaks of the man blowing upon her garden (vagina). This was revolutionary for the time. In the narrative they have to make love and kiss in secret, and the young girls brothers and other antagonists often intervene to keep the two lovers apart but they stick together through thick and thin. Note how she affectionately calls him her "king", and later on in the text the boy chides/mocks the real King Solomon for all his concubines and wealth. The girl has her own king in the Shepherd boy and he has his own wealth in the girl, with no need for thousands of concubines, gardens and riches. His girl, according to the text, has it all! 

I love it. I suggest one to read it alone in translation rather than in the available Bible translations: 

Amazon.com: The Song of Songs: A New Translation (9780520213302): Ariel Bloch, Chana Bloch, Robert Alter: Books

(But if you own a Bible then do just skip right back in your Old Testament to this book. The translation will still be good, even though a singular translation like the above naturally gives it more focus in expression and artistic quality) 


*"....Kiss me, make me drunk with your kisses!*
_*Your sweet lovemaking*_
_*is better than wine*_

_*You are fragrant, *_
*you are myrrh and aloes. *
*All the young women want you. *

_*Take me by the hand, let us run together!*_

_*My lover, my king, has brought me into his chambers.*_
_*We will laugh, you and I, and count each kiss,*_
_*better than wine.*_

_*Every one of them wants you. *_

_*...*_

*My brothers were angry with me, *
*they made me guard the vineyards, *
_*I have not guarded my own *(She has been sexually active) _

*My king lay down beside me*
_*and my fragrance*_
_*wakened the night*_
_*All night My beloved is to me a cluster of myrrh *_
_*that lies between my breasts. *_
_*My beloved is to me a sheaf of*_
_*henna blossoms in the vineyards of Ein Gedi*_

_*...*_

_*And my beloved among the young men*_
_*is a branching apricot tree in the wood.*_
_*In that shade I have often lingered,*_
_*tasting the fruit *_
_*...*_

*Now he has brought me to the house of wine, *
_*and his flag over me is love. *_

_*Let me lie among vine blossoms,*_
_*in a bed of apricots! *_
_*I am in the fever of love. *_

_*His left hand beneath my head, *_
_*his right arm*_
_*holding me close. *_

_*Daughters of Jerusalem, swear to me*_
_*by the gazelles, by the deer in the field,*_
_*that you will never awaken love *_
_*until it is ripe. *_

*... *

*Awake, north wind; O south wind, come,*
_*breathe upon my garden, *_
_*let its spices stream out. *_
_*Let my lover come into his garden *_
_*and taste its delicious fruit. *_

_*I have come into my garden, *_
_*my sister, my bride, *_
_*I have gathered my myrrh and my spices, *_
_*I have eaten from the honeycomb, *_
_*I have drunk the milk and the wine. *_

_*Feast, friends, and drink *_
_*till you are drunk with love!*_

_*...*_

*How wonderful you are, O Love, *
*how much sweeter *
*than all other pleasures! *

_*That day you seemed to me a tall palm tree, *_
*and your breasts*
*the clusters of its fruit. *

_*I said in my heart, *_
*Let me climb into that palm tree *
*and take hold of its branches *

_*And oh, may your breasts be like clusters*_
_*of grapes on a vine, the scent*_
_*of your breath like apricots,*_
_*your mouth good wine-*_

_*That pleases my lover, rousing him*_
_*even from sleep.*_

*I am my lover's, *
*he longs for me, *
*only for me. *

*Come, my beloved, *
*let us go out into the fields *
*and lie all night among the flowering henna. *

*...*

*There I will give you my love..." *


_- The Song of Songs, Bible (Ariel Bloch translation) _


----------



## Luckysingh

I don't feel that it is either a Need or a Want. 
It's only if you THINK about it, that you start this need or want questioning.

I don't ever think about it either, ...I just do it!!!!!!
A little like food, when you need it there is no point questioning is it a want or a need, you just do it and eat!!!!!


----------



## Harry Haller

> I don't ever think about it either, ...I just do it!!!!!!



Luckyji, I admire your style, I have attempted to embrace this concept, and have so far collected 2 black eyes, bruised and swollen groin, a stinging cheek and a broken nose, could you kindly tell me where I am going wrong


----------



## Inderjeet Kaur

harry haller said:


> Luckyji, I admire your style, I have attempted to embrace this concept, and have so far collected 2 black eyes, bruised and swollen groin, a stinging cheek and a broken nose, could you kindly tell me where I am going wrong



Is that all?  Harry ji, If you're still intact (you know what I mean), :swordfight-kudiyan: 
I'd say you got off easy.  :angryyoungkaur:


----------



## Harry Haller

lets just say all religions are now open to me!


----------



## Taranjeet singh

Want and need are synonyms as per dictionary.com However, there may be  a hairline difference between want and need. Taking a cue from the earlier posts …

Sex is a ‘need’ when wanted and ‘want’ when needed and in both cases it is so strong that rigid classification may not be possible as this want, that we need so often that for the want of which we feel that it is a need though in reality it may only be an urge or a craving that may fall in between need and want or may not be directly related to these.
Satisfied with my need today, I want more of it tomorrow and satisfied with this want tomorrow, I need the same the next day. Each day it is different. 

Sex is gift of nature and I go by nature without thinking of want or need as Lucky ji stated above it just happens. Sikhi permits the fulfillment of this demand and as sex has no expiry date we all continue this activity till we live. However, Moderation is the key even though I would like to taste them all.

I have not reached the state where I find sex more than a physical pleasure. May be with time .... 
* 
Sex and Procreation *


ਇਸਤ੍ਰੀ ਪੁਰਖੈ ਜਾਂ ਨਿਸਿ ਮੇਲਾ ਓਥੈ ਮੰਧੁ ਕਮਾਹੀ 
 But when men and women meet in the night, they come together in the flesh.

ਮਾਸਹੁ ਨਿੰਮੇ ਮਾਸਹੁ ਜੰਮੇ ਹਮ ਮਾਸੈ ਕੇ ਭਾਂਡੇ 
In the flesh we are conceived, and in the flesh we are born; we are vessels of flesh


----------



## Luckysingh

A couple of guys have said-
'You can't always get what you *want*, but if you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you* need*.'


----------



## justosh

:interestedmunda:lol


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh

Need = Oxygen
Want = Air conditioning

Need = Water
Want = Nimbu Pani

That does make sense 

All in all we have Kaam in us all the time, which will confuse a need to be a want!


----------



## Inderjeet Kaur

In short:

Sexual intercourse is:

1.  necessary for the survival of the species.

2.  unnecessary (but highly desirable) for any given individual.


Of course, technology has made it possible to make babies in other ways.

busyknitting


----------



## Luckysingh

I'm going to drive south down to Beverly Hills this weekend and I will stop by the Playboy mansion for this weekends party. 
I will ask Mr Heffner this question of need or want, as I think he would be able to give me the best confirmed and true answer!!!!!!!!cheerleader


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh

Randip Singh said:


> Look Sikhism talks about Kaam, which is an un-natural obsession with sex. It's about self gratification.
> 
> Sex per se is not unnatural and Sikhism does not condemn it as per my understanding.



Bhagat Kabir Ji writes that BIND RAKHIYEAH..meaning ABSTINENCE/ABSENCE of sex/Virginity/Brahmchareeism/Virtual Marriage (like the Nuns do in Christianity)..ALL dont necessarily lead to HIM/Mukt /enlightened.......if this did that..then the Eunuchs, the sex-less men and women born without sex organs..etc etc would be automatically saved/mukt enlightened...Enlightenment muktee etc has to be EARNED via ACTIONS...

But just as in the Meat-Daal controversy people misinterpret this tuk. Its NOT a condemnation of sex neither is it a Carte Blanche free for all encouragemnet to sex for all...SGGS advocates MODERATION and MODERATION and MORE MODERATION.period.


----------



## Inderjeet Kaur

Gyani Jarnail Singh said:


> Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji advocates MODERATION and MODERATION and MORE MODERATION.period.



Moderation in all things, including moderation.  icecreamkudi


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh

You are not running away from things, you are neither running towards things. You are just standing, or better, sitting in meditation of Akaal Purakh!


----------

