C RAVI
0
Dear Ravi, all this talk of love and lust has made me lust after finding what lust actually means. Can there be lust outside sexual sphere, like lust for money or lust for power? Some say they have lust for life, whatever that means. Is lust just an intense desire for something, or is it an uncontrollable craving? Can lust be managed? If so, is it lust to start with?
From what little I have read, it seems to me, whatever it may be, it originates from the deep nooks of our DNA. Whether it is mother's love for a child, brother's love for sister, lover's love for a lover, or love for humanity, why even love for a pet dog or a cat, all of this can be traced to the selfish gene that is "driven" to replicate and survive. The genes that support strategies that succeed in this non-stop process of survival and reproduction, become more predominant. The gene that produces feeling of love, to the extent it has helped men and women succeed in this biological chess game, has become common. Love is not a man-made social construct, it is an innate gene based "strategy" for survival and reproduction, coded deep inside our genes.
So, in summary, love of a mother to child helps her offspring carrying her genes succeed and reproduce. Love of brother to sister helps the sister survive, find a mate, reproduce and pas on part of the gene she has in common with her brother to the next generation. Love for a lover has direct benefit, a whopping 50% of the genes of the product is yours, so very important, no less important than the love of a mother to her child half of the baby's gene is guaranteed to be hers, no such guarantee on the dad's side -- men's enslavement of women through such concepts as கற்பு, etc., are designed to extract this guarantee without working for it.
The genes that cause fond feelings for children, that help children survive, gets automatically activated when we see a cute dog or cat. In as much as this is uncontrollable, is this lust?
Whatever the gene imperative may be, the brain this gene has endowed us with, gives human beings the ability to circumvent that imperative in some ingenious ways -- between me and my genes, I choose me, ImeMine. Let us use it to fashion our lives that increases our happiness and the happiness of people around us.
Cheers!
Sri Nara ji,
I am not sure as to what extent I can answer your questions convincingly...I doubt it for sure...But since I could sense that I can share with you something, I am taking this initiative to express.
Off course, Lust can be outside sexual sphere. As you know, Lust is meant to define an overwhelming desire or craving; intense eagerness or enthusiasm. So lust can be for any thing and for any human in any kind of human relationships and relationship with animals. In the positive side of lust over our pets or any animal, its purely the same overwhelming desire, craving eagerness & enthusiasm that we carry towards fellow human beings in any relationships, that has nothing to do with sexual pleasures, beyond recognized & accepted criteria.
When we associate Lust with body pleasures in terms of Sex, its the same overwhelming desire or craving. This lust can take its toll in a natural form with opposite sex (can be with the liking and approval of the other person and can be by force too) and for some men, can take on animals too and that's called Abnormal Lust. Before I am been questioned by any one, as how I am claiming the existence of such few men who lust over animals in terms of sex, I can say that, I have heard such incidents where both boys and girls were found to be indulging in. To substantiate to yours and others satisfaction, I would suggest to go through Vatsyana's Kama Sutra, that elaborates the existence of such tendencies in men to indulge in abnormal sex with animals in the past.
As you have concluded & added up to my charm, we should use Lust to fashion our lives that increases our happiness and the happiness of people around us.
In line with yours, I would like to conclude that, the lust of sex becomes harmful only when it is truly found to be harmful.
Last edited: