Me:
> >>To a mystic, wouldn't conception and childbirth be a >>failure? Conception would mean acknowledging the >>reality and possibly individuality of the child.
Chris Lemens:
>
> But there are all kinds of Mystics (or mystics, at
> least). In Revealed Mythologies we have the example
> (in which names escape me) of the two sages, one of
> whom had sex all the time and the other never had sex.
> The beautiful queen fell in love with the wrong one,
> of course.
Sivoli (ascetic) and Kamboli (hedonist), both students of Ven Forn the Immense Master.
> I don't think anyone's saying the one that
> never had sex is not a mystic.
He certainly is, but did he have children?
> Also, in the HW rules, I thought there was a type of
> Mystic that attempts to integrate himself into the
> world, the commonest result being a martial artist.
That's what Ven Forn instigated. One could argue that in order to integrate the whole world you have to embrace the birth of new life as well. It does fell a bit questionable though as the whole point is to get from individuality and fragmentation to wholeness and accepting creation of a new life means accepting fragmentation. I'm open to counter-arguments for sure.
> Finally, most folks in mystically oriented societies
> are going to be heavily influenced by mysticism, but
> they still have to get along from day to day. Perhaps
> there is a mystic strike that guarantees lust,
> conception, healthy pregnancy, etc.
I think procreation is a concern of "normal" religion in mystically influenced societies: those that don't exactly aid your progress toward liberation, buit don't stop it altogether either.
Lust is another thing. In Kamboli's method that is surely one of the six indulgences that you must master.
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail