There are several organisations delivering art of living programmes on identical lines. Aasanas and mudras are the same every where slightly varying from platform to platform devolving different modus operandi from programme to programme with the sole purpose of eliciting peace, health and fitness which are quite in vogue in YOGA. There can’t be two opinions on the therapy utilisation on bumper scale people are able to secure. Some people ask as to how this applies in relation to sex. It does in the same measure as other areas forming any part of the body as no therapy functions with any kind of prejudice. If you feel mentally at ease, this feel operates in the whole body and not only brain.
This follows it’s very predecessor post nearly in the same name as an addendum being a comment as from R.S. Pandey, a versatile writer. It’s not confined to a mere comment but has fully assumed the characteristic of a full fledged write-up dealing with the relative theme philosophically like Annie Besant did while writing on Mira Bai. It is reproduced here:
Sir, the subject of the post – Love – has been fiercely discussed and debated from the times immemorial. The worldly as well as divine references to love have been made by the people, yet even to date, it remains one of the most confusing and misunderstood(?) term. The bonding between two creatures with contrasting characters as shown in the post which may be love, probably is the feeling of absence of fear and insecurity which might have got generated by their habitation in an atmosphere where they are cared as pets sans any violence. The feeling of mercy and compassion are there in even cruel and omnivorous beings, when it comes to taking care of their kids. The love which, in general parlance, is often equated with longing of varying nature, depending upon the context and relation, is considered of a mean nature when related to worldly relations but when related to a deity or God for that matter is considered a pious one. This piousness or otherwise of love, although being a relative phenomenon, is the real cause of confusion. When a term when associated with the so called divine is good, how it becomes bad when associated with worldly relations? After all, relations are but result of the creation of the He. The desire, both for worldly as well as divine attainments (even for sake of Moksha) are desires; how they can be classified along different parameters for which essentially the concerned person may or may not be responsible (often not)?
Sir, may be I have dared to tread in an area of which I have no insight and have no qualification or ability at all. But, as it seems to me, these are very perplexing ideas and notions which are not discussed and debated in public domain. The so called gurus try to have their own view point digested with no questions from other side. Raising questions is taken as being misbeliever or the one with no respect for gurus (the preachers who claim to be able and learned ones).
If this coincidence can give some solution to my problem, I shall be greatly obliged, although already and always so. However, seeking forgiveness for misadventure. Regards.