The virtues: abstinence or renunciation

There are probably not many virtues that are more important than the abstinence.
the fire

The fire: It has always been a symbol of the divine and the divine was, inter alia, always thought of the union of all virtues in it's greatest perfection. (Picture: Steven Otto)

In general I speaking about the abstinence of everthing unreasonable and this is not a question of definition of unreason. Ask yourself honestly in all conscience and you get the right answer, f.e. are sweets reasonable? Certainly not. Most people know very much what's reanobale and what's not, so let's act accordingly - become or stay reasonable.

I for myself think, that even a little bit unreason is and will ever be nevertheless unreasonable, but before someone became a dissipater, of course it's at least better to remember the second inscription of the Tempel of Delphi which said: "Everything in moderation".

Sadly enough, nowadays the unreason became "usual" and therefore todays moderation is often far beyond any reasonable action, f.e. luxury was condemned formerly as a addiction of dissipation, justifiably of course, because waste of natural ressources (in other words: luxury) ends always up with disharmony in nature - and we are a part of nature.

Ethics are the soul of the Wisdom-Religion... Theosophy has to inculcate ethics... a true Theosophist must put in practice the loftiest moral ideal. (H.P. Blavatsky in "The Key to Theosophy")

But particular I now speaking of sexual abstinence or more precise of strong moderation. And please understand me correct, to proliferate is as important as love is.

But first, let's have a look what Theosophy says about this matter.  Every Theosoph remember the nemesis of the fourth race, of the mental and physical degeneration and their inglorious end and one important reason of that fate was the unnatural handling of sexuality. H.P. Blavatsky wrote in this context:

Nor was the curse of KARMA called down upon them for seeking natural union, as all the mindless animal-world does in its proper seasons; but, for abusing the creative power, for desecrating the divine gift, and wasting the life-essence for no purpose except bestial personal gratification. (SD:II:410)

Of course the natural union is only a union for the purpose of reproduction. This is what nature shows us, beside the few exceptions (in relation to the uncountable animal species doing so), that confirm this rule. And Helena Blavatsky continued:

Pointing to antiquity he [The true theosophist, the pursuer of divine wisdom and worshipper of ABSOLUTE perfection] will prove that there never was an original sin, but only an abuse of physical intelligence -- the psychic being guided by the animal, and both putting out the light of the spiritual. (SD:II:413)

All this is clear as it can be, written in times (19th century), where a allowed deeper look of a man into the eyes of a woman and a replied grasping hand was already considered as a solid promise of marriage and during this quite often both became highly embarrassed. Or consider the descriptions of Tacitus (in his book "Germania") or Gaius Iulius Caesar as they mention the exemplary abstinence of the Germans, in which "dealing with the woman" before the age of 20 years was considered as one of the greatest shames. They told that to their morally degenerated contemporaries in relation of the former admirable strength and healthiness of the Germans.

And Today? It's a disgusting unrestrained allover-sexualization and imbrutement, followed by it's karmic consequences, individual and social, and all of this is celebrated as liberation and blissful progress of the most civilized society of all time! "Sic transit gloria mundi" Mme. Blavatsky would most likely said.

Yes, progress and liberation, but from decency, virtues and reason and therefore the liberty from spirituality - materialism at it's best! "Wasting the life-essence for no purpose except bestial personal gratification" is sadly enough not only usual again today, but many people strive for it, as it is with a living in luxury. But both we learn, are physical and spiritual harmful and particulary the former can lead to "putting out the light of the spiritual" in ourself.

The secret of a happy life is in renunciation. (Mahatma Gandhi)

As I said, proliferate is important, a holy gift, an imperfect earthly imaging of a holy purely spiritual idealistic higher procreation, as Theosophy teaches and so one should perform it accordingly. In better (i.e. more spiritual or rational) days, the future parents practiced in preparation for the procreation of exceptional purity of thoughts, words, actions and the body, i.e. an extremely virtuous behavior and they also deal especially with the beautiful and good, f.e. the nature, spiritual philosophy and the fine or beautiful arts. The act of procreation itself should be steeped in a similar atmosphere as well of spirituality and the sacred act of communion with nieces by any lewd thoughts or behavior.

Any sexual act that does not serve the natural aim, befoul not only the sanctity of women - the "holy virgin mother" - but also the own soul, because it is un-natural (by the way, the worst possible state), means against nature or not a part of nature and the nature was named by ancient philosophers also as the "Soul of the World", of which in some sense of course also our soul is a part of. And it comes more clear in the controversial "esoteric papers" of H.P. Blavatsky:

But if the thoughts are about eating, drinking or the passions, than the consciousness is on the Kama lokic plane, which is the plane of animal instincts pure and simple. (The Inner Group Teachings, Meeting XX - April 22, 1891, last paragraph and therefore the last teachings - here even the latest scholarly sentence - received from HPB)

Yes indeed, we have to thought about and to deal with it, it's necessary for life, but we should do so not more as necessary. But unfortunately many people yet today do not rise above this animal level of consciousness (only about self-preservation), it's a shame, isn't it?

Love and affection, closeness and unity is important for human beings, but all of this has nothing to do with physical sexuality. To consider physical unity as love is an illusion of matter, because the origin of this unity is the spiritual unity with our higher principles after physical death, if we are spiritual enough for it. True Love is selfless devotional care and the highest form of this love on earth we can see in the love of parents to their children. Of course there are differences in the love of partnership because of the current state of humankind, but it shows us the right direction to a holistic, spiritual and clean love, clean of every lower or "animal" desires, but full of true love - strong and selfless devotional care.

It's not good to suppress these forces, I often hear. That's right, but also wrong and I reply: If you have an inner impuls to kill someone, should you suppress or live this impuls? And remember, what Adepts have to do in order to gain their freedom of spirituality. They must defeat their lower desires finaly. As above so below, so it taught Hermes and Theosophy and so we have to fight also against (at least to rule) our lower pure physical or kamalokic desires, if we want gain our freedom of spirituality.

We need to manage these lower "animal" forces in rational paths (no, Tantra in it's sexual aspect or "sexual magic" are the worst thing, pure "black magic", someone can do). We are self-confident and self-responsible. It is up to us. It's more about new hobbies or something similar. Learning a musical instrument, deal with the fine arts, with science or perform help with your own hands, for those who need it and so on. All of that can help in this case - not to suppres, but redirect.

This was when it [Saka-dwipa, or Atlantis (its earliest portions) in its beginnings] yet had its "seven holy rivers that washed away all sin," and its "seven districts, wherein there was no dereliction of virtue, no contention, no deviation from virtue," as it was then inhabited by the caste of the Magas -- that caste which even the Brahmins acknowledged as not inferior to their own -- and which was the nursery of the first Zaratushta. (SD:II:322-323)

That should be the case, not only for true Theosophists. There is plenty to do on our path of spiritual development and also plenty not to do. Poor in needs and rich in renunciation, that's the theosophical way, not vice versa. And to be a true Theosophist is not so much about a specific teaching, but mor important about how someone live and in this spirit one could say, every human live Theosophy, if he live a virtuous life.


International theosophy section

For more international theosophy related content on this site please visit the international theosophy section.

Um am Forum teilnehmen bzw. Inhalte kommentieren zu können musst Du Dich anmelden oder registrieren.

Bitte beachten

Diese Webpräsenz widmet sich dem Thema Theosophie (insbesondere im Rahmen der Geheimlehre von Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky) und ist zum Zweck der Bildung einer Theosophischen Gemeinschaft ins Leben gerufen worden. Hier finden sich zudem ein Theosophie-Forum und aktuelle Inhalte rund um das Thema Theosophie bzw. Tugenden und die Vernunftwerdung. Bei der Veröffentlichung von eigenen Inhalten beachte bitte einige Hinweise.

On this site you can also find an international theosophy section and the quarterly "International Theosophy World News"-Newsletter.