It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Androgyny and Gynandry in spirituality

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 02:53 AM
I almost hesitate to post this subject because to comprehend the point I'm trying to make takes a lot of background knowledge in a specific direction...but I think enough of you will be able to grasp this to make it worth throwing out there.

A number of spiritual/esoteric systems have as a pinnacle goal (which has historically been a deep secret) the creation of a "divine androgyne," usually through manipulation of psychospiritual energy channels. Two classic examples come to mind: High-level Tibetan Tanric energy work, and advanced Western alchemy. Briefly put, in both systems, the Kundalini energy is released and manipulated in a specific way. Through a process of "burning" it creates within the practitioner a kind of gender duality. This is a tricky thing to describe because it does NOT necessarily imply bisexuality or the kind of "androgyny" one associates with, say, crossdressing/transvestism. That's why I hesitated to post this because the concept is very subtle and easy to misunderstand. Those who don't already know about this will have to do a LOT of background reading.

Perhaps for those unfamiliar with the concept, its best to approach it as a kind of Jungian fusion of Anima and Anime (the psychological concept, not the comics genre). That is, there is a kind of fundamental wholeness that transcends gender.

Here is an example from alchemical symbolism. There are hundreds of seals like this. We can see the serpent energy (kundalini) and the fusion of the divine male and female:

What I find exquisitely interesting is that the high Tibetan tradition differentiates between the divine androgyne and the divine gynandrone. The first is seen as a male-female pair with male dominant and the second as a male-female pair with the female dominant. The former is identified in Tibetan Tantric tradition as "good" (because practitioners were, after all, generally male monks) and as being personified in the highest adepts. The latter was envisioned as a kind of terrifying hypothetical "ultimate evil," as if women gained control over this secret that should only, theoretically, be the province of male monks. One can find a rather involved (and somewhat biased) explication of this phenomenon at this link and elsewhere on the same site.

My question for those of you familiar with this type of arcana: Do you belive in a fundamental, highest-level difference between a male-dominant and female-dominant divine fusion (a la the Tibetan model) or do you think a perfect balance is the true goal of these kinds of exercises?

[edit on 6/15/09 by silent thunder]

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:14 AM
I didnt recognize two of the words in your title... so I'm automaticaly gonna take it as an insult..... im kidding. Now how to answer this, ... its all so.... technical.

Men once created systems as ways to remember " what is". And perhaps even to help others understand this. But so much is lost in translation, every man carry's his own doctrine. In acheiving enlightenment one hopes to burn away every aspect of his ego in order to reconnect to the source. So the term male or female, does not apply, as they are only temporary states created so they can experience their opposite.
I suppose their is always the struggle, between good, evil. ... positive and negative. finding the balance within. But towards the path of true enlightenment, .... the struggle ceases, both positive and negative are embraced, and the master is at one.

whats that ?? .. am I rambling again ?? ..... sorry.

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:18 AM
It's just terminology. Terms have a subjective meaning to each individual. How it really *is*, is subjective. You must not get too attached to metaphor or group ways of describing the larger reality (spiritual growth), but it is an individual effort that only you can experience for yourself.

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:21 AM
A bit of logic must be applied in this situation IMO. As is known generally throughout esoterica, a balance must be achieved, according to the Nature of the Universe. Therefore, a male or female dominated would neither be good nor evil. Just off balance.

Too much of either is not "healthy" if you get my drift, and it seems absurd to me that a female dominated aspect would be "evil". As you say, this comes most likely from the majority of monks being male, and applying their own perspective upon the matter.

To not be in accord with the Laws of the Universe, is to be flawed. Thus perfection is achieved through Balance and Harmony.

Love and Peace

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:23 AM
Thanks for your replies...I was afraid this would be too specific...look, I'm well aware there are paths to enlightenment that have nothing to do with any of this...this stuff only applies to certain systems, generally those involved with chakras, kundalini and "energy work." This is one way to go, but its not the only way. Zen, Merkaba, mystical Christanity...none of these even involve this kind of energy work so they sidestep the question all together.

Many paths, one mountain. This is a question directed at phenomena on one specific path, not about the mountain in general.

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:24 AM
Personally, I believe that spirituality is beyond sexuality.

Sex is required to procreate. The spiritual world is beyond this.

I think that humans complicate things unnecessarily, and visit things from their own perspective, instead of keeping an open mind.

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 03:29 AM
Sex is purely a physical thing. It has nothing to do with spiritual growth. Relationships and how to interact is what matters. Being love, giving love, and expecting nothing in return, is the core of spiritual growth. Chakras are just physical metaphors. They are tools.

I meditate often, and go OOBE randomly. It has nothing to do with chakras, or mantras. Those are just tools of focus. If they help you, fine. But they are not fundamental to actually doing these things.

The key is intent. Intent moves conscoiousness. Not physical metaophors regarding physical needs and drives.

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 04:29 AM
Very interesting post... thank you. It makes me want to read more about it... So I guess that's what I'll do.

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by spellbound

Actually sex is not really required anymore to procreate. Look at Octomom..

To the OP. I passed this post a few times but I only understood the first word in the title so I didnt think I would be interested...that is until I read it. I will be honest I am not up to par on any of these topics but I did find this a very interesting post. I will have to look these things up further before I can give you an answer but my short answer is I like things to be equal. A little of both I guess. Nice post!

posted on Jun, 15 2009 @ 11:44 AM
I believe the idea stems from the innate understanding of human psychology, that men and women react to the world differently and that those individual viewpoints can create discomfort through imbalance. So I believe this is not merely a path to enlightenment, but to peace.

The binding of emotional and rational reactions, behaviors and models. And please note that there is no implication of either of these traits being exclusive to either gender

I believe we are seeing this more and more naturally. The shame to me is how a rudimentary observation will show social attempts to subdue those we perceive as different. Men who are too soft. Women who are too hard.

Speaking from experience, I can say it's a difficult path at times, but one I wouldn't change.

top topics


log in