Nursing

Nursing is more than providing milk for food. There is a give and take between mother and nursing infant, and that does not mean that mother is all give. (Just as in balling she is not all take.) In fact, what the infant gives is so far out that some women have baby after baby just to keep getting IT; and this could not occur if men and women learned the give and take of balling.

The breast is a medium for communication. To view nursing as merely a food distribution system or to use it for comfort is to initiate the dynamics that will eventuate a lifetime of dental, digestive, and elimination problems, and that will perpetuate the culture of the supermarket and the trash sold there to satisfy neurotic food trips.

The disinclination of nursing mothers for sexual intercourse has been the subject of a considerable amount of published material. "In any case, the nonmenstruating nursing mother does not usually desire sexual relations, and, in fact, usually does so only at the request of the husband. A highly charged activity such as sexual intercourse tends to upset her emotionally. The stress can be picked up by the infant, and may be an added factor in the incidence of colic in children, as well as causing a lessened milk supply in the mother."* Such a statement reflects the strong reaction of the sensually aroused, nursing mother to participate in erotic, image-manipulating sexuality.

Since there is no difference between the sensual, physiological communication of nursing and the sensual, physiological communication of tantric sex, this reaction does not manifest with partners who are tantric adepts. Moreover, this reaction is a sign to the mother that she must initiate tantric sadhana as described in Shivalila-tantra. Failure to do so creates a separation between the baby and the father, which is the main source of the love/hate, Oedipal dynamics that dominate relationships in Western culture.

Only a man possessed by erotic imagery, who has accumulated sexual repression, can desire sexual intercourse with a woman who does not have mutual desire. Manipulation of the repressed libido has been the principal source of power that Western women exercise over their men. This game becomes inescapably apparent with the arrival of a baby, and the backlash destroys all concerned Here is how it happens:

1. The man gets turned on either from watching the baby nurse or from his repressed libido.

2. The mother responds with negative feedback to the man's signals that he is turned on.

3. This causes additional repression and resentment towards the baby.

4. Meanwhile, the baby has been feeling this exchange between its mother and the man causing it anxiety. The baby seeks to resolve this stress by separating from or blocking any relationship with the man.

'Alice G. Bricklin, Mother Love: The Book of Natural Child Rearing (Philadelphia: Running Press, 1975), p. 87.

Moreover, and most significantly, the baby realizes that it is the source of a unique pleasure to the mother, and thereby manipulates her from that realization of power. This sets in motion the love/hate, manipulative dynamic that prevails between mother and child in Western culture and that later expands to include every relationship into which the child enters.

Both before and after birth a baby experiences its mother—her physiological rhythms, mental patterns, sound and flow of consciousness. Games of manipulation, image fixation, and attachment all create blocks in mental/physical energy patterns, which are experienced by the baby. It is in relationship to this experience that the baby's own mental/physical energy patterns develop. When a baby has the opportunity to consistently experience eight or ten people and to nurse from three or more women, whether or not they are lactating, the baby's mental/physical development will pattern after a DNA-based affinity for the most balanced physiological rhythms of the various people. The baby's mental/ physical development will be structured as it experiences the comfortable or pleasurable mental/physical patterns of the people and rejects the patterns that are blocked and uncomfortable or painful.

Weaning is intended to be the process whereby the psychic/ sensual relationship between mother and nursing infant is extended to the general environment. It is an extension/expansion that should begin at birth. This is impossible if the environment does not reflect psychic or sensual consciousness. Under these conditions, the child automatically develops attachment to the breast, and weaning is traumatic.

If a mother does not identify with the social dynamics of her environment, she cannot initiate her child as an integral being with those dynamics.

The child will senre the mother's feeling of alienation from the environment and will also feel her response, which will be either (1) withdrawal from the environment, necessitating an instrument of withdrawal, such as giving full attention only to the baby, often by nursing in order to create a separate environment of just mother and child. (Monasteries are instruments of withdrawal; so are rock and roll, mantras, art. The list is endless and the instruments subtle, but they all have in common the effect of transcending the environment rather than transforming it, and the effect of this is. through neglect, to render the environment even more inhospitable.) Or (2) the initiation of a change in the social dynamics so that the feeling of alienation dissolves as the scene evolves.

No child's evolutionary consciousness can respect a mother who does not, will not, cannot initiate. Can you?

Withdrawal is schizogenetic.

II is taboo, that is, contrary to convention, for a stranger to respond directly to an infant's or child's communication-say, for a glass of juice, a diaper change, or a walk, without first checking with the child's mother: "Is it OK to give her some juice?" "Shall I change her diaper?" "May we go out for a walk?" The impression (imprint) the child receives is that no one is in tune with its timing except mother—ONE SOURCE. Hence anxiety, competition, and insurance. This pattern is inevitable in the nuclear family. It is nonexistent in the extended, tribal, communal family.

Your child cannot be free unless its peers are free, for, if not, they will project the dynamics of their suffering on the free child.

This is a karmic balance designed to insure against familial partiality at the expense of community unity.

In other words, the nuclear family as a social organization is a bust.

Mother and Father, given the reality of reincarnation, it cannot help but be a transforming meditation for you to consider that your neighbor's daughter will be your mother and your son your father at your next birth, or vice versa.

To accomplish the meditation, address the child as "mother" or "father" for a time every day.

Please and thank you were the first expressions of the imprint that says you must pay (compete) for it.

At the psychic level, this imprint was initiated long before the child developed the vocal articulation required to express the imprint.

Please and thank you are lies, because they fix consciousness on humans as the source, rather than the earth.

On the one hand, this is an exercise in vanity, on the other, it is bad ecology.

Given the same environment, there is nothing fundamentally unique in the needs of any baby. It is ego that projects the notion of being special and unique. A mother possessed by egoism will project that ego reality onto her child. She will be certain that her baby is unique and needs her to fulfill its unique needs, since no one else is familiar or intimate enough to identify with that uniqueness.

This condition of partiality is endemic to the nuclear family, and, were it not so established as truth with a whole culture supporting it, it would be pitifully absurd. This condition cannot exist in the open, extended, or communal family.

This is not to say that children (not babies) do not have unique or individual abilities and talents. However, to the degree that egoism is stimulated, talent is sacrificed. For instance, a mother who says her child is psychically aware is destroying her child's psychic awareness. All children are born psychically aware.

Toys and books are for children whose environments are deprived of psychic and sensual reflections or stimuli. Shivalila children do not have items specifically created to be toys, so they play with each other, the grownups, and items from the environment—rocks, sticks, seeds, water, etc. There is always a body to play with, so toys are not needed. There are no books, because the grownups tell stories, not to, but with children. Books are a separate reality. Our stories are here-now reflections of group imagination. They would not make sense if written down and read to someone who was not present when the story happened.

A child's natural development is stimulated by an intensely creative imagination, which is capable of receiving a limitless variety of new stimuli. A mother who is alone cannot provide adequate stimuli, and so there are toys, books, and TV to fill in the space that she has either no time or inclination for.

To give a child a toy that lasts longer than a day is to limit creative imagination. A toy is fixed: it does not change; there is a limit to what the imagination can construct with any fixed object. The more toys, the more limited the imagination.

Toys are for children. They are objects with which the child's ego is intended to identify and which thereby create a separate reality from adults for whom toys are not. They legitimize the generation gap. Moreover, when a new child comes on the scene, the one who has (is?) a toy automatically goes on a "me, mine" trip, requiring the grownup to play cop. With "maturity," the me-mine games become more sophisticated; imagination becomes grossly overlaid by materialism; and the sensual and psychic channels of communication are blocked.

Dolls are a paramount example of environmental deprivation. The child who does not receive a reflection of its reality/imagination from the people with whom it lives creates that space with a doll. Later on it is called "religion."

Mother. The role and semantic load that accompanies the concept is a substitute for what was formerly experienced as an open, community psyche or group head. All children of the community had free, that is, impartial access to this group head. The feeling that accompanied the experience of that community has been translated into the myth of motherhood. After the "Fall," i.e., the emergence of the nuclear family, those channels to the community psych"? were closed, and the relationship with mother expanded to fill in the vacuum. That the world is dominated by competitive power trippers is evidence that this limited relationship has failed. This failure is an unconscious source of the guilt that mothers feel, which children manipulate. The only resolution will be when mothers reestablish a community psyche.

The most dynamic exercise for women's liberation is for three or more women to encounter each other over the subject of "Why I wouldn't want to be your baby."

Woman, unless you can become completely detached in your relationship with your mother, that core of attachment, or reaction, will be psychcdynamically and biodynamically transmitted to your own child, and you will end up with the same quality of relationship with your child that you have with your mother.

kt^i

Father,

The child to whom you have given your DNA is entitled, by genetic birthright, to experience consistently three reality-developing phenomena: your sound, your touch, and the sensation of sleeping with you.

Mother

It's never too late. If you oelieve it's too late, then you'll go to hell, and the hell will be the belief that it's too late.

All law has at its source the desire to create a protective structure for some attachment of the ego. Laws acquire tradition and are imbued with divinity to secure their authority.

Thus is the ego deified, thus the idols passed on from generation to generation.

Continue reading here: Vajrayana

Was this article helpful?

0 0