SENSUALITY AND SEXUALITY
(Discussing the duties of women according to Manu Samhita) Here it says, be chaste, self-controlled, means she behaves herself. But it doesn't say sense-controlled. It says self-controlled. Does that make sense? Means, women use their senses much more, for them sensuality is just part of the experience, part of the dealings. You know, the fine clothes, fine food, fine smells, fine these things, just the fineness of this is sensual. But it's all part of the scene, it's the environment.
But put the man in that environment, and then it becomes sensual that's outside of that, it brings him down. Does that make some sense? Because when you move in the intellect, then if you switch it to the senses, which are connected, but then the intelligence doesn't function so well. But for the women, the intelligence, the emotions, the senses can all function at the same time, so it's a different thing. That's why it says "self-controlled", not "sense-controlled". Means, the senses are engaged, that's not the problem. But it has to be self-controlled, that it's proper and the senses are engaged how they should be engaged. But the man should be sense-controlled in that he is trying to keep the senses in control and not get too involved in the sensuality of women. Because their field is sensual. He shouldn't get too involved. Only how much he needs to get involved, what is his duties to get involved, what are the proper relationships and that, get involved. Otherwise, more than that then it will bring him to another platform.
Mataji: Maharaja, I wanted to ask about the thing of sensuality of women, such as nice clothes, nice perfumes, and you were commenting how the man has to be sense controlled. So it seems contradictory...
HH BVPS Maharaja: Well, depends, if If he is sense controlled. That's why the woman connects herself to someone who is sense-controlled. Because otherwise, if you really think about it, when men start to get sensual, the women kind of find it strange. Means, there is something wrong about it, because there it comes into an element of control that is not wanted, or an element of enjoying that is not wanted. While for the woman, it's just her field. She just moves in these things naturally. So then a man who comes into that scene, he has to be sense-controlled to be able to function in that naturally and not be distracted by it. So that's why then the whole principle is that this training must be there for both. So that the woman is moving in the realm of sensuality that is proper, she herself has also be able to tell the difference between sensuality and sexuality.
Generally women, technically you can take it that it's all just sensuality, even sexuality. But there comes a point where it's obvious that there is, within sensuality, a distinction. The tendency is, men will take the whole scene of sensuality to be sexuality. So knowing this then the woman knows how much is within the realm of refined sensuality and how much actually goes into the realm of sexuality. And if she knows that, then things will work properly, so that requires training. She has to know what to do, what movements, what energies, all these things. She doesn't know that, then, one is, she doesn't know herself, and two, she will have trouble being with others, because she will constantly be getting all kinds of attention and this and that she doesn't want. Because she doesn't know that she is putting out the energies to attract it.
Means, this idea that women walk around half-dressed and that's their right, and what's the man's business, why they should get bent out of shape? But they don't understand how the modes of nature work. Does that make some sense? So that's the thing that it's there, it's available, so then man is a controller, so therefore he wants to control that and enjoy it. And so, since they are dealing with the rougher ends of, basically, sexuality, then the men also are not dealing in a refined way. It's also rough, and then the women think, hey, what's this? And those women who are careful about it and it's controlled, then the men that they move with are also controlled. So that's the point, it's rasa. As one person does, it attracts the other. So if one works on a refined level, it will attract refined people, if one works on a gross level, it will attract gross people.
So then one has to see that, one is, the person that you are dealing with, what is the level of their sense control and know what takes things too far, too less. Like you are saying, nicely perfumed. If that nicely perfumed is just the man either doesn't notice, and so you like the smell and your friends think it's great, then doesn't matter. If they have some tendency, that nature that they can appreciate fine smells, they will appreciate it. But if it creates sensuality in the man, then one has to try to find a balance. Or if you find, ok, it's fine for your man, but it also attracts a whole bunch of other men, then one might put on a little less, you don't have to be smelled from 20 feet.
So one has to find what works, you have to know what you are getting into. And you have to know what you want from it. So then deciding that then you decide how are you gonna dress, how are you gonna act, all these different things. You know what I am saying? If you are sitting and you are talking, because you are relaxed and you feel comfortable with them, and because of that you are not watching your cloth and because of that your chest is hanging out, and because of that you see he is getting agitated and you don't want that, then you cover your chest. Does that make some sense? So you see these kind of things. If it doesn't then don't worry about it. If they are so simple that they don't mind and others, it doesn't matter.
Like you go to the villages, like you see in Rajasthan, the villagers in Rajasthan, like that. The head has to be covered, but the choli can be completely hanging out, and those cholis they wear are like.. they have three forms. It's either cut down, so you see the top, means you will never see the nipples, that's always the rule, that is the point of freak-out. So it will be down to there or it will be cut out in the middle, means it will be a full top, full bottom, but cut in the middle, so that you will see the middle portion, or they will be cut from the bottom, where you see the bottom pad, like that, and that's what those gypsy women, all of them, wear. But their head is covered, and if they didn't have their head covered, they'd be called improperly dressed. So it's just the nature there, so they don't care. Or you have some of them where they are so simple, they just don't dress that nicely, and the men don't dress that nicely, so it doesn't matter, because neither one notices the other, they are too unrefined to notice it, so those kind-of things don't create any problem for them.
So you have to see what you are dealing with. You have to see what is the particular nature of the man you are involved with and see that it's being kept in line, because the actual thing is, it's controlled by the women. Does that make some sense? Means, there is no question of a man getting his hands on a woman, unless the woman allows. She doesn't allow, it's called rape. But if he does get and it's not called rape, that means she allowed. That's just the way it works. Because the words used by Manu, it's not in this section, it would be in the section on adultery, it just says, "Women will give themselves to the poor and the ugly." Because it doesn't matter, just the bottom line is, he is a man, he has got proper appendages, so therefore that's enough. That's the bottom line, if the woman is falling out of her level of training. But if she is sticking within it, then she will be considered following all the religious principles and this and that. But if she falls from that... So it doesn't matter. This idea it has to be... Manu says, she will leave a handsome husband who is taking care of her, plenty of wealth, all facilities for someone else who is not very good looking, just because he allows. Because one may not be very careful about that. So that's the whole point, women are trained, so then it comes to the conscious point that that won't happen. Then women are guarded. The women's determination that they are going to be protected is their protection. Means, the woman's determination that she will be protected is her main protection. That woman, a man can protect. But a woman who is not interested in being protected, no one can protect her. So that aspect is very, very important.
So it means, use your intelligence, just look at who you are dealing with, and then figure out what makes it work on a proper emotional, religious, spiritual progressive way. And those things that you see don't get the right things, adjust them. Does that make some sense? So that's what you look for. Because the point is is, the wife, it's mentioned in the Bhagavatam, is the fortress for the husband's senses. So she keeps his senses protected by herself dealing properly, so they don't get agitated and by these other forms.
Means, women aren't that happy with just sensual dealings, it has to be emotional dealings, it has to be something that stimulates their intelligence, it's a whole package that has to be there. So you have to see that that is being dealt with. It can't just function on the sensual platform. So many times in the modern women will use that as the bait, as the lure to pull in the man, but then they have only pulled in a man who can address her sensuality, not her emotional platform or her intellectual platform. So that's why in the Vedas they don't recommend this, because it never gives a good result. How can it? If you have somebody who is only addressing one third of your needs, what are you gonna do about the other two thirds? It just won't function. Does that make some sense?
So that's the principle, therefore then one has to be careful how they are mixed. Does that makes some sense? So use your brain, that's also part of the whole thing, using your intelligence seeing that the emotional interactions are going on nicely. And then it's there, so you have to watch that, just don't let just the modes to take care of it, you should be controlling it, that's their point on self-control.
(..)
Grihastha shouldn't sleep in the same bad with his wife, he shouldn't see her undressed, he shouldn't see her put on kajal, these things, he is living there and he might directly see them on a daily basis if he doesn't know about it. But for everybody else, then they know to avoid those things, because then the women put out extra energy at that time, and that's what attracts them.
Means, the woman herself, means, one cannot say that a bag of mucus, bile and air is attractive, even though it might have all the mucus, bile and air in all the right places. But it's still unattractive, it's the energy of the soul and that energy of the soul interacting with the surrounding that then makes it attractive. Does that make sense? Otherwise it's not, it's dead matter, so the point is is during certain times women emit more energy and that might create attraction. Like when they dress then they are very into how they look and that, so they'll be very projecting the energy into their clothes and in their eyes and everything like that, when they are putting things on like anjanas on the body they will do that, because it's projected into the skin, the experience. Does this make sense?
For women, experience is the thing, what it's like, what it smells, what it tastes like, the whole atmosphere, the mood, like that. Men is more like what's getting done, how is it getting done, what will be the result of doing it. But for women, those are secondary, for them it's the experience that's the main, while for men the experience is secondary. Means, they want a good experience, but if he can do a bad job and some experience or a good job and maybe less experience, they tend towards the good job, because of the feeling of accomplishment, well done, you applied your knowledge, you worked it out, you know how to run it, you know how to control it, so therefore it's more of control. While for women it's more of attachment. But every jiva is in the material world with the purusha-bhava of I am the controller and I am they enjoyer. Just it's more prominent control in the man is the sense of "I", and for women it's more "mine". Does that make some sense?
For the man it's like, "I am, this is my house, there is I and this is a manifestation of my I-ness." But the woman, it's mine and then from that it's my prestige, her sense of "I". Do you understand? The approach is different, in other words, the man goes from "I" to "mine", the woman goes from "mine" to "I". Does that make sense? So the field is the same, so that's why there is the compatibility even though men and women basically on every point are opposites. But because the field is the same, the desires are the same, but the approach to them on which is prominent, which is primary and secondary, that's different. Does that makes some sense? So that's why then it appears that there should be a nice cooperation but there is not, because they are different species. So unless one knows the science then one can't match them. Does that make sense? So that's why then all these rules are here.
Brahmachari also has to be careful not to bump into the women when they are dressing or doing all these things, or unclothed, but it's not like a daily occurrence for him. It may happen now and again and he just knows that this is something to avoid, but the grihastha, this could be a daily occurrence, if you live in the same room with a woman and it's a natural thing that you take a bath and you dress and undress and this, there is every chance you'll see. So therefore if it's known that this is not to be done, the woman will be more careful and the man will be more careful. The men will keep themselves busy, so they are not looking, and the women will keep themselves in some way, either somewhere else or if you only have one room, they will be more careful, they'll turn around, you know what I am saying? Does that make sense? So means, in other words, there is that carefulness.
(..)
(From Lectures on Manu Samhita, 15-23 January 2004, Bhaktivedanta Academy, Sri Mayapur Dhama)
(by courtesy of Madhavi Lata Devi Dasi)
