I have so many teachings on brahmacharya that I can refer
to. I.e. Sivananda’s text and Alice Christensen’s Yoga of the Heart, etc. Do
you have a favorite text that helps explain this complicated yama to the
average student/householder? Thank you for your thoughts, A
While brahmacharya is variously translated from the extreme
of celibacy for unmarried yogis to the concept of continence (retaining
sexual appropriateness or withholding the sexual fluid) for householders it
is a concept that is difficult to grasp. The orthodox yogis take the
extreme point of view of celibacy being necessary for serious yogis to have
successful sadhana. However for householders they say it means to respect
your vow of marriage and be faithful to your partner. For myself I think of
this as meaning to respect the Divine Presence as always being with you.
This rendition is for both singles and couples and encourages us to
cultivate conduct that conceives of God as always watching you. This
entices us to wish to please God, with our righteousness and consideration
for others. So with regards to sexuality it implies that we act to hold
respect for the one we are with and consider them as Divine. On a more
Tantrik note, I focus on being passionate when I make love and yet back away
from the lust, as a result I do not regularly ejaculate. This is how I
personally practice brahmacharya.
I just found a quote from Ramana Maharshi in The Maharshi
newsletter (May/June 2004, pg. 4) sent free (contact Arunachala Ashrama or email to ashrama@aol.com)
“To live and move in Brahman (God) is the real brahmacharya. Continence is very helpful to
achieve that end. But so long as you identify yourself with the body you
can never escape sex-thought and distinction. It is only when you realize
that you are the formless, Pure Consciousness that sex-distinction
disappears for good and there is brahmacharya - effortless, spontaneous.”
Regarding the quote, this means (for me) that until the goal of Pure Consciousness is achieved, brahmacharya is forced. Good starting point for further discussion.
Mukunda’s example is very inspiring, I am still trying to balance things in my life. This indeed is a great challenge for every one of us, and we rarely are prepared for it. At least, I wasn’t.
I dare to share my limited experience.
We live in bodies of flesh, and bone. As we can’t control our heart to beat, our stomach to digest, our cells to do whatever they are doing, why do we think we can control, or eliminate perhapes the strongest physiolgic impulse, after self preservation ?
But as yoga teaches that fear of death is an obstacle, so we must accept the fact that sexual pleasure is an obstacle too.
So, should we not make love than ? Beside of preservation of the species, this experince is where most people can experience the emotion of love at it’s peak. Could we just throw this away so easily ?
These obstacles are not passed by ignoring them. That just makes them bigger. We must not take them for more than they are. These obstacles are not passed by rejecting them, but transcending them. This is brahmacharya.
As Mukunda says: "For myself I think of this as meaning to respect the Divine Presence as always being with you."
When you make love with this thought in your mind and heart, the sexual act of the body, with it’s pleasure, the intimacy with another being, are all lived to their highest limit, but are also transcended by the silent witness. This does not detract from the act’s value, but this is what makes one realize it’s real beauty, place in the world, and yes, it’s limitedness.
There are blessed people who are pure, and wise, and do not need to pass this. But for us who are not them, the path goes through transcendence, not rejection. The objects of desire must not be ripped from us, but let fall as leaves fall when autumn comes. Autumn will come inevitably, why hurry it ?
“However for householders they say it means to respect
your vow of marriage and be faithful to your partner.”
This can be be very hard at times. But as one who is passing through this trial, I say, it worths the effort. Again, not rejection. Ahimsa. See the passion, where it comes from. Do not kill it, do not spoil it. Let it be. Accept it. Than, eventually your eyes open, and you’ll suddenly find the beauty of the other in the one you already have. The freshness of feeling towards your old companion. It is not a matter of choice. It is a matter of union of passion with compassion. The real cause of passion is deep in you, and not in it’s targets.
It will be hard because you will have to let go the one you thought you’ll be forever with. Than you’ll let go the one you found. Than thorn and cut by the blade of passion, you will have to let go yourself, and surrender. Than the Witness remains. The pain of attachment will remain, the flame of passion will burn, compassion will retain it’s warmth, but you’ll not identify with either of these. You just stick to the Witness, as it is the only place you are safe.
So, it really worths your while.
I finally understand what Mukunda says by " For myself I think of
this as meaning to respect the Divine Presence as always being with you."
This is in fact a word to word translation, brahma = the self-existent spirit, carya, to follow. So simple.
It is not about not to do this or that, but simply: follow the divine spirit ! It is not negation, but a totally positive attitude.
Thanks Mukunda and Hubert
I was allways thinking about the same.
But the simple conclusion in your post Hubert is short exact and understandable.
Sunny greetings
Lars
Hi,
The word brahmacharya is made up of two words. Brahman, which means “pure consciousness” and charya, which means “one who moves”. Therefore for me it simply means to live in constant awareness of Brahman, in other words it is one whose consciousness is pure (or striving towards it), whose mind is above the duality (male/female) and only sees the One-ness in all.
As a married person Brahmacharya is also my conduct towards my partner in my marriage. In other words it is respect, love and kindness to each other. I always explain to my yogis that something like being faithful to your partner is one of the great pactices of Brahmacharya.
I have no experience of this, but I do think that the practice of Brahmacharya, i.e. to abstain (in the West I think it tend to take the form of suppressing) from sexual interaction, can actually lead to unnecessary frustrations in the yogi.
I did practice it, and I am sure if certain asanas are practiced, and the mind is checked by study and meditation, than no frustration or physiologocal problems will arise.
The problem is that without seclusion, all the above cannot be fully acomplished, and temptation is at every corner. As Sivananda says, the semen is extracted from the blood at every sexual thought, so the whole things starts and ends in the mind. Because of this seclusion is a must until thoughts and residuals are burnt. After that seclusion is not required, because the disciple will not think of it even at the sight of nakedness or sexual actions. (Hard to accept even the possibility, right ? 
)
I also accept what Jesus taught when they asked Him about divorce, and argued that Moses did allow this. He said: He allowed this because of your hearts’ cruelty, but this was not so from the beginning. He also says we were made man and woman from the beginning, and what God united, let no man divide. The disciples than said, in this case it is not good to marry. Good to know thet were no better than us !
And what was the answer ? There are people who were born castrated, there are people who were castrated during life, and there are people who castrate themself for the Kingdom of Heaven.
Of course this is a parable, as all He said, because I am sure he did not want followers to really lose their masculine jewels. I am positive that this is the same as Brahmacarya. But also the term he uses is right as it shows the determination required to accomplish such feat. There are no half measures here.
But He also says this is for who have the ears to hear.
So this is not for everybody and should not be teached to anybody as it can cause great quilt in the disciple. One should not try things he is not strong enough to do or failure will be sure, and there might be not enough strenght to cope with it.
I am not sure also if this is a question of choice but of Grace.
Forgive the bad grammar and typos. It was too early in the morning, and I was also a bit carried away. I hope the message still gets trough.