garbhadana samskara, who actually did it... Options

[0ann geee0]

i'm sure this is going to be another wildly unpopular post from me:

can i just say that i think the idea of doing lots of chanting and praying before trying to conceive sounds really beautiful to me? even the idea of people having nice bhajans in the process sounds really beautiful. i love the idea of having sex, and conceiving children, as a service to god. how sweeet it would be to do that as a complete offering to god, offering such an intimate part of your life and hoping to conceive positive, religious children.

i'll say a few things to qualify this opinion:

i've never actually tried it, and my children were not conceived this way at all...

i'm basically satisfied in my sex life, whereas many hare krishna devotees trying to follow difficult rules may be feeling much more repressed and hence want to use an attempt at conception for a much less godly, much more passionate style of lovemaking. i sympathize with this, of course, and get why this chanting and praying stuff might be repulsive to people in a certain context if they're already feeling really repressed.

the manual stuff that was mentioned sounds so completely out there and riddiculous, i'm surprised anyone even read it with a straight face. were they really based on prabhupada's instructions, or were they just some riddiculous idea made up by some insane american trying to be a devotee that has probably blooped like a million years ago and probably couldn't even follow it themselves?

i just think that sex for pleasure and sex for having children are kind of different, and i appreciate having sex for children with a religious frame of mind.

[0dayalu0]

i just think that sex for pleasure and sex for having children are kind of different, and i appreciate having sex for children with a religious frame of mind.

Certainly, Ann geee, by your own admission these practices are unknown to you taken out of their context. There is no manual, and guilt and complexes about sex exist I think in every human of every religion, race and culture. Let me first of all say that the ceremony or practice of chanting prayers or hymns to invite good children into the world is not restricted to the Hare Krishna movement and the Hare Krishna movement did not suddenly invent the practice but is found as recommendations of far more ancient books or scriptures in our line. It is a very good starting point, no doubt. This path, Krishna consciousness, as recommended by Krishna Himself, is to surrender to Him, become conscious of Him, it’s all about Krishna, the all-attractive natual center of attraction. But we fallen souls fall completely into the bodily concept of life by sex which is our selfish interest and so it has been advised in so many ways to have a regulated or restricted sex life and to try to render spiritual service alongside your partner. Have enough sex to be peaceful but do go on chanting and serving Godhead. Actually I chant and do bhajan and I do not think of sex then, but later perhaps sex may happen. We do not mix these things I’m a pro-sex person myself and have too much sex but it is not one of the spiritual qualities I know I should aspire after, it is the animal side of us, our lower self.
Love of God, Krishna-prema, is the only actual goal of life for all conscious entities. Always remember that. At least that is the opinion of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the originator of the Krishna consciousness movement. We rest in consciousness, not in shifting matter where physical sex draws us, I do believe and perceive this, truly.

[angrezi]

I heard if you do it doggie style you are more likely to have a male child

[Chanahari]

There is no manual

Yet there is, at least here. It was written by a Hungarian brahmana, based on Prabhupada quotes, some Sat-kriya-sara-dipika, some Hari-bhakti-vilasa, and some Puranic stuff added for good measure. Besides technical details on how to commit the actual sexual act - and wild threatening of fallen down grihastas who do it for other reasons than for begetting children -, there were descriptions about the actual garbadhana-samskara, other samskaras before and during the pregnancy and after the birth, the importance of seeking out the good time for procreation by an astrologer (the writer is an astrologer himself). So it is not a sex manual per se, but a significantly long part of it dealt with the Vedic techniques of sex. I assumed that there were similar opuses in other countries where devotees are present. I saw just one piece of this book - one of my friends borrowed it, and I saw it in his house.

As much as it was a frightening (even if somewhat amusing) experience to read that book - I tended towards deciding for all time that I will rather "preach in" a karmi girl than to marry an Iskconer girl who was indoctrinated by this... -, and as much as I find the idea that sexuality between married partners should be restricted to begetting children, and to a frequency of once a month (these two goals are counterproductive, by the way), I must say that I have nothing against the idea that those who actually try to beget a child try to bring themselves into a pure and good consciousness before doing so by chanting, rituals, bhajan and so. Even hearing bhajan during the act - especially if I ask some of my friends to help me maintaining my good consciousness while trying to beget my future child, and it is not a badly disguised attempt on part of some clerical authorities to control my sexuality. I wouldn't participate in such a bhajan where we bhajaners are called out by the commander to ensure they maintain their consciousness and "don't run out of time".

[Chanahari]

I heard if you do it doggie style you are more likely to have a male child

And if you do it by laying sideways, your child will be gay.

And if you sit too long before your computer, you are more likely to beget a female child, because spermatozoa with Y chromosomes are less endurant of electrosmog. It is said that programmers and similar geeks that somehow managed to get laid have more girlchildren than boys.

[0Open Mind0]

And if you do it by laying sideways, your child will be gay.

That's considered a highly pious sexual act because it is aimed to beget future members of this forum.

[0ann geee0]

besides the doggie style thing, does anyone have any real quotes explaining how to have a male child?

i read a long thing by prthu das once and thought it was insane. one the other had, the man had 3 boys, so maybe he figured something out...

[0Open Mind0]

besides the doggie style thing, does anyone have any real quotes explaining how to have a male child?

i read a long thing by prthu das once and thought it was insane.  one the other had, the man had 3 boys, so maybe he figured something out...

In Iskcon I heard that if the man enjoys the sexual act more, the kid will be male, and vice versa.

[0dayalu0]

besides the doggie style thing, does anyone have any real quotes explaining how to have a male child?

i read a long thing by prthu das once and thought it was insane.  one the other had, the man had 3 boys, so maybe he figured something out...

In Iskcon I heard that if the man enjoys the sexual act more, the kid will be male, and vice versa.

Yes, it is said in Bhagavatam that if the man's lust is more than the woman's then it will be a male child and vice versa. But by practical experience, since scriptures do not claim to be sex manuals, I am always more lusty than my wife and we had 2 boys, 2 girls. Go figure.

[Dhyana]

i'm sure this is going to be another wildly unpopular post from me:

I'm not...

i sympathize with this, of course, and get why this chanting and praying stuff might be repulsive to people in a certain context if they're already feeling really repressed.

I agree with you that having bhajan for a couple who is attempting to beget a child can be a nice thing -- and also that it will be resented if it is perceived as a part of a repression attempt, an attempt by the authorities to control the couple.

the manual stuff that was mentioned sounds so completely out there and riddiculous, i'm surprised anyone even read it with a straight face.  were they really based on prabhupada's instructions, or were they just some riddiculous idea made up by some insane american trying to be a devotee that has probably blooped like a million years ago and probably couldn't even follow it themselves?

Prithu and his wife Rambhoru once gave a seminar about begetting (sons). It was transcribed and circulated. That would be a manual of sorts. It became famous for the passage where Prithu dwells on how the man should make the foreplay as short as possible, in order to maximize the chance of begetting a son (since if his wife is not aroused, he will be the one whose body produces more secretion). A man in the audience then asked about the difficulty in penetration and pain to the wife, if she is not lubricated. Prithu's reply: "But use your common sense: use vaseline!"

Thus he became a vaselinacharya.

[0ann geee0]

A man in the audience then asked about the difficulty in penetration and pain to the wife, if she is not lubricated. Prithu's reply: "But use your common sense: use vaseline!"

Thus he became a vaselinacharya.

WOW

I wonder what Prabhupada would have thought about this kind of stuff! Prabhupada also had 3 boys, I believe... Did they have vaseline in Bengal back in the 1930s?

Maybe Prabhupada prefered mustard oil? Bengalis love mustard oil in their skin, and Prabhupada liked being massaged with it - but it gets hot when you rub it on your skin and I wouldn't dare put it anywhere sensative below the belt on a man or woman!

Seriously, whats with the vaseline? I feel sorry for the girls that were subjected to that type of insanity. I say thats a really fucked up speculation that has no basis in guru shastra and sadhu!

I'm imagining the psycho ex-brahmacharis thinking that that kind of bullshit was really their religious duty and thinking "f--k, the hare krishna's really are a freaky cult!"

And where is the verse that says the man should be more lusty? Was it really a verse, or just on of the wacky quotes from Prabhupada's purports?

And if the man needs to be more lusty, maybe he shouldn't chant all those rounds before trying to conceive! Maybe the woman should spend the day at the temple praying and the guy should spend the day watching porn or something.

[ePiTau]

Sushruta traces the existence of homosexual behavior and of certain genitalia-related disorders to the behavior and condition of the parents during the act of begetting. If you want to produce gay children, let the woman be on top!

Sushruta lists and defines five categories. Four of these were mentioned in the list of twenty that I posted elsewhere. My translation below:

1. āsekya (Sushr. 3.2.38)
"If the parents have exceedingly little generative fluids, their male child (purusa) would become an āsekya. He should undoubtedly get an erection after eating semen."
MMW's entry:
- impotent, a man of slight generative power Sushr.
Note:
=====
āsekya is probably the correct spelling for the category "āsevya" which I had in my list of twenty. My text seems to be corrupt. However, Sushruta's definition seems to be confirmed by Shukla's Semiotica Indica:
"āsekkya: mouth-congress. one who gets another man to emit semen in his mouth."
(H.L. Shukla, Ed., Semiotica Indica, Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Body Language in Indian Art & Culture, Delhi 1994)

2. saugandhika (Sushr. 3.2.39)
"One who happens to be born in a foul-smelling uterus becomes known as a saugandhika. He gains strength [only] after smelling the fragrance of vagina and penis."
MMW's entry:
-a sexually weak man (who is stimulated by the smell of the female organs).

Note that MMW does not mention that a saugandhika gets stimulated also by the smell of the male genital. Sushruta used the dual form "yoni-sephasor,"
which can mean "of the female AND male parts combined," or "of the female OR male part."

3. kumbhīka (Sushr. 3.2.40)
"He, being unchaste, in whose rectum takes place what men do in women, is known as a kumbhīka."
MMW's entry:
- a pathic [sic!], catamite Sushr.
Note that MMW uses the term "catamite." According to Websters a catamite is "a boy kept by a pederast."

4. īrṣ�yaka (Sushr. 3.2.41)
"One who, [only] after seeing the sexual intercourse of others, engages in sex, is known as īr�ṣyaka."
MMW's entry:
- a particular kind of semi-impotent man whose power is stimulated through jealous feelings caused by seeing others in the act of sexual union Sushr.

5. �ṣaṇḍ�ha (Sushr. 3.2.42-43)
"Now hear the fifth [category]: ṣ�aṇḍ�ha. If, due to illusion, he engages with his wife during her fertile period as if he were a woman, then a ṣ�aṇḍ�ha is born, one who looks and acts like a woman. (42) Conversely, if the woman, during her fertile period, engages [in sex] like a man, then, should a girl be born, that girl would behave like a man."
MMW's entry:
- hermaphrodite (14 or even 20 classes are enumerated by some writers) G��rS. Mn. MBh. &c.

6. general statement (Sushr. 3.2.44)
"It should be understood, however, that the āsekya, sugandhin, kumbhīka, and īrṣ�yaka have semen. One who has no semen is called �ṣaṇḍ�ha."

And now for kicks the original, ancient, Vedic Translation:

"A child born of scanty paternal sperm becomes an ASEKYA and feels no sexual desire (erection) without previously (sucking the genitals and) drinking the semen of another man. A child begotten in a sordid vagina is called a SOUGANDHIKA, whose organ does not respond to the sexual desire without smelling the genitals of others. The man who first becomes a passive member of an act of sodomy and then again commits sodomy with the woman (he visits) is called a KUMBHIKA (or Guda-yoni and is included within the category of Klida)." 36-40
"The man who cannot copulate with a woman without previously seeing the sexual intercourse of another couple is called IRSHAKA. A child born of an act of fecundation foolishly or ignorantly effected during the menses of its mother by its progenitor by holding her on his bosom during the act is called a SHANDA and invariably exhibits effeminate traits in his character. A daughter born of a woman riding on her husband during the act of sexual intercourse will develop masculine traits in her character." 41-43
"Semen is developed in the four types of Kliba known as Asekya, Sougandhika, Kumbhika and Irshaka, whereas a Shanda is devoid of that fluid (Sukra). The semen carrying ducts of an Asekya etc. are expanded by the drinking of semen as above described which helps the erection of his reproductive organ." 44-45.
(Translation found in the 1963 Chowkhamba edition)

[0dayalu0]

I question what is the ultimate value or any value in such texts written about a subject best enjoyed in the animal species. And with whom and for what purpose did the author dwell on these matters in such detail? Such texts have negative value in my opinion for many reasons.

[Emma]

Our 2 daughters were conceived when i was still under the impression that devotees especially women should not enjoy sex and our 2 sons (twins) were conceived when both of us were REALLY enjoying sex...sorry if this is too much info for some...but anyway this seems to go against what vedic knowledge tells us about how boys and girls are conceived...

[angrezi]

I question what is the ultimate value or any value in such texts written about a subject best enjoyed in the animal species. And with whom and for what purpose did the author dwell on these matters in such detail? Such texts have negative value in my opinion for many reasons.

why do you ridicule Vedic culture?

[rhapsodieff]

Sushruta traces the existence of homosexual behavior and of certain genitalia-related disorders to the behavior and condition of the parents during the act of begetting. If you want to produce gay children, let the woman be on top!

Sushruta lists and defines five categories. Four of these were mentioned in the list of twenty that I posted elsewhere. My translation below:

1. āsekya (Sushr. 3.2.38)
"If the parents have exceedingly little generative fluids, their male child (purusa) would become an āsekya. He should undoubtedly get an erection after eating semen."
MMW's entry:
- impotent, a man of slight generative power Sushr.
Note:
=====
āsekya is probably the correct spelling for the category "āsevya" which I had in my list of twenty. My text seems to be corrupt. However, Sushruta's definition seems to be confirmed by Shukla's Semiotica Indica:
"āsekkya: mouth-congress. one who gets another man to emit semen in his mouth."
(H.L. Shukla, Ed., Semiotica Indica, Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Body Language in Indian Art & Culture, Delhi 1994)

2. saugandhika (Sushr. 3.2.39)
"One who happens to be born in a foul-smelling uterus becomes known as a saugandhika. He gains strength [only] after smelling the fragrance of vagina and penis."
MMW's entry:
-a sexually weak man (who is stimulated by the smell of the female organs).

Note that MMW does not mention that a saugandhika gets stimulated also by the smell of the male genital. Sushruta used the dual form "yoni-sephasor,"
which can mean "of the female AND male parts combined," or "of the female OR male part."

3. kumbhīka (Sushr. 3.2.40)
"He, being unchaste, in whose rectum takes place what men do in women, is known as a kumbhīka."
MMW's entry:
- a pathic [sic!], catamite Sushr.
Note that MMW uses the term "catamite." According to Websters a catamite is "a boy kept by a pederast."

4. īrṣ�yaka (Sushr. 3.2.41)
"One who, [only] after seeing the sexual intercourse of others, engages in sex, is known as īr�ṣyaka."
MMW's entry:
- a particular kind of semi-impotent man whose power is stimulated through jealous feelings caused by seeing others in the act of sexual union Sushr.

5. �ṣaṇḍ�ha (Sushr. 3.2.42-43)
"Now hear the fifth [category]: ṣ�aṇḍ�ha. If, due to illusion, he engages with his wife during her fertile period as if he were a woman, then a ṣ�aṇḍ�ha is born, one who looks and acts like a woman. (42) Conversely, if the woman, during her fertile period, engages [in sex] like a man, then, should a girl be born, that girl would behave like a man."
MMW's entry:
- hermaphrodite (14 or even 20 classes are enumerated by some writers) G��rS. Mn. MBh. &c.

6. general statement (Sushr. 3.2.44)
"It should be understood, however, that the āsekya, sugandhin, kumbhīka, and īrṣ�yaka have semen. One who has no semen is called �ṣaṇḍ�ha."

And now for kicks the original, ancient, Vedic Translation:

"A child born of scanty paternal sperm becomes an ASEKYA and feels no sexual desire (erection) without previously (sucking the genitals and) drinking the semen of another man. A child begotten in a sordid vagina is called a SOUGANDHIKA, whose organ does not respond to the sexual desire without smelling the genitals of others. The man who first becomes a passive member of an act of sodomy and then again commits sodomy with the woman (he visits) is called a KUMBHIKA (or Guda-yoni and is included within the category of Klida)." 36-40
"The man who cannot copulate with a woman without previously seeing the sexual intercourse of another couple is called IRSHAKA. A child born of an act of fecundation foolishly or ignorantly effected during the menses of its mother by its progenitor by holding her on his bosom during the act is called a SHANDA and invariably exhibits effeminate traits in his character. A daughter born of a woman riding on her husband during the act of sexual intercourse will develop masculine traits in her character." 41-43
"Semen is developed in the four types of Kliba known as Asekya, Sougandhika, Kumbhika and Irshaka, whereas a Shanda is devoid of that fluid (Sukra). The semen carrying ducts of an Asekya etc. are expanded by the drinking of semen as above described which helps the erection of his reproductive organ." 44-45.
(Translation found in the 1963 Chowkhamba edition)

I assume this is from the Sushruta Samhita, written by Sushruta, the father of Indian Surgery, in about 6BC which is famous for having the erliest descriptions of plastic surgery and cataract removal?

[Dhyana]

WOW 

I wonder what Prabhupada would have thought about this kind of stuff!  Prabhupada also had 3 boys, I believe...  Did they have vaseline in Bengal back in the 1930s? 

They had Mr De's Liniment! Abhay Charan De advertised it as being all-purpose (I believe there was a reproduction of an old poster illustrating its different uses in the Lilamrita). Admittedly begetting sons was not mentioned... but what the heck, Bengalis are inventive people!

Seriously, whats with the vaseline?  I feel sorry for the girls that were subjected to that type of insanity.

I met Rambhoru in 1996 and she struck me as a stiff and sour kind of person. I gather she had far more serious reasons to be that way though, than the vaseline...

And if the man needs to be more lusty, maybe he shouldn't chant all those rounds before trying to conceive!  Maybe the woman should spend the day at the temple praying and the guy should spend the day watching porn or something.

Excellent questions, Ann Geee!

[0dayalu0]

why do you ridicule Vedic culture?

Because Krishna has told us all to distinguish between those qualities, even Vedic, that are predominated by passion and ignorance and to transcend those qualities, in order to associate with Him.

[ePiTau]

They had Mr De's Liniment! Abhay Charan De advertised it as being all-purpose (I believe there was a reproduction of an old poster illustrating its different uses in the Lilamrita). Admittedly begetting sons was not mentioned... but what the heck, Bengalis are inventive people!

[ePiTau]

I assume this is from the Sushruta Samhita, written by Sushruta, the father of Indian Surgery, in about 6BC which is famous for having the erliest descriptions of plastic surgery and cataract removal?

Yes, this was taken from the Sushruta-Samhita.

It is uncertain who exactly Sushruta was. He may have been a historical figure or just as well a mythical figure. Different writers give different dates. One thing is sure, he is ancient. Here are some examples just to give you an idea:

"Susruta, a descendant of Visvamitra, the Vedic sage, was the greatest Indian surgeon of all times. His treatise on surgery is known as 'Susruta Salya-tantra' and seems to have been composed about the sixth century B.C. The present Susruta Samhita is a revised version of the same by Nagarjuna, who is said to have flourished in the latter part of the fourth century B.C." (O.P. Jaggi, Scientists of Ancient India and Their Achievements, Delhi 1995.)

" su�zruta-saMhitA : A famous treatise on Ayurveda, traditionally attributed to Susruta. Acc. to some it is not the personal work of a certain Susruta, but the anonymously edited manual of a school which chose Susruta as patron. [...] Some eminent authorities think that the Samhita originated in the last centuries before the Christian era, and appeard during the first centuries A.D. in an already well-defined form. The Samhita in its present form, appears to have been fixed by the 7th cent. A.D."
(Sures Chandra Banerji, A Companion to Sanskrit Literature, Delhi 1989.)