"Unlawful Sexual Practices"

Maya, Ashley Wells, Wisdom Quarterly; "Ask Maya" with commentator Jeffery Kaung

Sex is bad? Don't look at it. Don't think about it. And whatever you do, don't wish for it. That's what our parents teach us, but that's not what the Buddha taught lay Buddhists.

  

According to an abbot in Theravadan Burma, the words "unlawful sexual practice" would be more clear and effective than simply "sexual misconduct" for defining the Pali term kamesu micchacara.

In the Pali discourses expounded by the Buddha, he described altogether 20 types of females [not 10, Jeffery Kaung?] with whom males should avoid having penetrative sexual intercourse.

• See Buddhism's "Sexual Misconduct" Defined for the ten types of females who are off limits, at least from the perspective of ancient Indian society and possibly universally. We are awaiting Kaung's list of 20.
  

What did the Buddha teach any why? (HSUN)

Every male who is engaged in these forms of sexual relations with any of these females was said to be guilty of dire misconduct that results in the worst kinds of karmic consequences.

But for females, not every female from the given group of 20 is similarly guilty. In other words, only 12 women from the group are guilty for engaging in sex, and most of these females have already been married off or become "owned" by a particular male and his family. [It should not come as a surprise to Western readers that women were treated like chattel in European marriage contracts until very recently, and the practice is followed to this day in many places including Asia and India in particular.]

The rest of the females in the classification are not guilty since they are not married or have no contractual "owner" yet. Besides, in some of the Buddha's sutras, he encouraged most lay disciples to practice celibacy. 

Believe it or not, females have sexual agency

[We do not know of a single discourse that encourages lay celibacy except as an occasional practice for uposatha lunar observance days and periods of intensive Buddhist practice, such as meditation retreats, temporary ordination, or as the natural consequence of spiritual attainments such as the blissful absorptions and the permanent liberations beyond stream entry and once returning. Please specify, Kaung. We would be very happy to examine these sutra references.]

However, the Buddha said that if one fails to be completely celibate, because s/he is already married, then one should always refrain from "unlawful sexual practices" in his/her everyday life -- as a person with clean feet [avoids a puddle of urine on the road].

Besides, the Buddha also described four (4) features that lead a sexual relationship between a male and a female to be "unlawful conduct." In fact, the Buddha had already mentioned in his discourses how it was "noble" [enlightened] for one [with noble attainments] to stay celibate. However, he said that if one could not practice celibacy because he/she was already married...

[Kaung, if you cite these sutras, we can respond and clarify. Maybe the Buddha wants everyone to be happy, and maybe celibacy is the supreme (brahma-acharya) vehicle/teaching toward that, but it's not something he said lay Buddhists should do or had to do.  Living beings are reborn into this Kama Loka, Sensual Sphere, because of their sensual cravings. Denying them or forcing celibacy on people is not the way to transcend craving. To be reborn into the more blissful Fine Material Sphere, the Immaterial Sphere, or the supremely blissful attainment of ending rebirth (enlightenment and nirvana) requires seeing things as they really are, seeing sensuality as it really is, penetrating the disappointment (dukkha) articulated in the Four Ennobling Truths. We want living beings to be happy, the Buddha wanted people to be happy, and you probably want people to be happy. Truth is the way to that, not oppression and imposing rules on how people have to live. If we are wrong, please show us. We can show how open minded the Buddha was, how the Dharma is a path that avoid extremes, and leads beyond sensual craving to supersensual bliss and then insight and liberation from the bondage of craving, aversion, and delusion. We arrive there step by step, not by behaving like ascetic renunciants. There is a much easier way to let go than brute force and self-denial -- and it is "calm and insight," blissfully happy absorptions and systematically contemplating the 12 links of Dependent Origination. "There is no path to happiness; happiness is the path!"]

 

Males, Females, and Sex

Dhr. Seven and Amber Larson, Wisdom Quarterly (COMMENTARY)

The Buddha, Battambang, Cambodia, S.E. Asia (Kim Seng/captainkino.com/flickr)

 

We have already been responding to Jeffery Kaung's letter in brackets. But let us go more deeply.

Kaung, everybody should always avoid "unlawful sexual practices." One need not avoid sex; yet, one need always avoid misconduct in regard to satisfying one's sexual desires. And that is easy to do... except in a repressive society that denies one sexual access. Our societies, East and West, now deny us, or try to deny us, legitimate avenues of sexual expression outside of marriage. That may make sense in conservative parts of Asia, as in rural or small communities, but it does not make a lot of sense in urbanized city environments which emphasize the individual to the detriment of extended familial affiliations.

This has to apply to females just as much as males even if India was already a patriarchal and sexist society that assumed sexual agency only for males. Females have the same agency and, therefore, are liable to get in the same sort of karmic trouble as males. Who can believe that when, for example, a man has sex with a married woman, only she is guilty of cheating on her husband? From a literal and closed minded reading of Buddhist texts (i.e., AN X.206), only he would be guilty. She would be said to have seduced him into a great deal of karmic trouble, but no mention is made of her infidelity to her husband, presumably because she has no agency and therefore no ability to make an intentional choice to cheat, which of course is ridiculous.

And with regard to child molestation, which is a severe form of "sexual misconduct" or "unlawful sexual practices," a female can certainly molest just as a male can. Would anyone in this day and age think, "Oh, she's a female, she has no sexual agency, so she can't possibly be guilty of intentional sexual conduct, how much less misconduct"? It's preposterous. Wisdom Quarterly speculates that it was the sexism influencing the Dharma, and not the Dharma itself, which left us with this one-sided set of rules for males only. We hear precious little about the nuns, Buddhist females at the time of the Buddha, or Buddhist girls and women today. 

That is our era's sexism continuing to diminish women aided and abetted by the sexism of the past, and the male Monastic Order, the Bhikkhu Sangha, has much to answer for keeping this unequal state of affairs in place. The status quo, which the Buddha did so much to overturn, was quickly set back up and given legitimacy as if the Buddha had participated in oppressing females when he was the first world-teacher to elevate them to equal status. 

If one says that the Buddha didn't go quite that far, but instead subordinated them to the Monastic Order, then one has not read the Bhikkhuni Vinaya (The Nuns' Code of Discipline with its origin stories explaining each rule), which enumerates ahistorical garudhammas or "additional nuns' rules" that could NOT have come from the Buddha (see the scholarship of Ayya Tathaaloka). 

• The Extra Rules for Nuns Ven. Tataaloka (Ayya Tathaaloka) on the eight "Principles to be Respected" by nuns (garudhammas) and the formation of the female Buddhist Order (bhikkhuni-sangha). The additional monastic rules for women are a "definite historical impossibility." (See also The Buddhist Nuns of California)

But we are all taught that he offered eight or more additional rules to his stepmother, Maha Pajapati, the world's first Buddhist nun, who gladly accepted them to wear like a beautifying head dress or hair piece. Someone, likely sexist male monastics, inserted those to ensure the supremacy of the male Monastic Order. The abbot from Burma you quote without naming is neither likely to realize that nor admit it if he does.

Ask Maya: Corrupting the Dharma? (video)

Maya, Ashley Wells, CC Liu, Seven, Irma Quintero, Seth Auberon, Wisdom Quarterly

The Mysterious Disappearance (Tom Tomorrow/thismodernworld.com)

The twin exhibitions in San Francisco (SFAAM) and Pasadena (NS) are deep explorations.

 
Recently, an anonymous reader brought our attention to the destruction of the Dharma in America by capitalist and selfish motives:

The reader draws our attention to something really bothersome. The traditional Dharma -- the authentic Buddhist teachings as laid out by Siddhartha Gautama after his great enlightenment and taught for 45 years -- is being corrupted in America. It is under attack. Why? The specters of money, fame, and power threaten to undermine and overwhelm our spiritual teachings. 

Case in point: there is a website of a supposed "mindfulness" meditation teacher, one Michael Taft, who claims that people saying they learn meditation from Buddhist teachers is unfair. Should we be serene and listen to his point, or let ourselves get furious? (Serenity trumps fury). Are people like this degrading and destroying the Dharma? (Could be. But he says right up front that hat he is "secular and science-based," which is an obvious way to make more sales. What he is calling mindfulness, as so many in the world of science now do, is not Buddhism. It may be Buddhist, but it is stripped of its Buddhism and is just something out there to be used for other ends; it doesn't sound like Taft is promising enlightenment or an end to suffering or even a trip to heaven. It's just the same old stress management approach, and maybe that's fine). What does "mindfulness" mean nowadays?

Mindfulness has existed for millions of years, and anyone who says so is right about that. But, reader, you have a point. What it means in Buddhism is very specific, not just as a general reminder to practice "bare awareness" but as a set of techniques to bring about liberating-insight. Whereas anyone might say, "Pay attention" and we might even pay attention without being reminded, no one but a buddha teaches the insight practices (particularly the causal links of Dependent Origination) but a buddha and the subsequent disciples of such a world teacher. You're right.

This guy is published on the Huffington Post and Scientific American, and he lectures at conferences. Why would anyone listen to him?

They have to listen to someone, reader. The Buddha taught his true disciples well in the Kalama Sutta, not adhering to view but investigating on their quest for truth. And for the intensive practitioners (monastic and lay alike), he advised them be lamps and islands unto themselves taking no other teacher but the Dharma as their guide and themselves (Mahaparinibbana Sutta).

Too often and too quickly we give up our own wisdom for the presumed knowledge of another. We need both. We need discernment when listening, and we need unbiased reflection when considering our own level of right view. Be serene; even if Taft should kill the Dharma singlehandedly -- and it doesn't sound like that is what he is doing -- you could still keep sight of the lamp and the island.

An oversimplification of the message. What the Buddha really asks before teaching the Dharma is, Do these basic things agree with your own experience and observation, your own sense and heart? Are greed, hatred, and delusion harmful or harmless?

 

I am Amatue. Don't stare.

Every teacher, assuming he is even a legitimate teacher and not just a self-seeking individual out to make the rare and precious Dharma a money-making instrument or vehicle to fame. (Elsewhere the Buddha says that a fool seeks fame for things s/he does not possess, whereas a worthy person seeks no notoriety or acclaim for things possessed like enlightenment, insight, or wisdom). So let the foolish be, if they will not be curbed by a kind admonition, as the harm they do is not our responsibility but theirs. And our own faults are ours to see, or to have someone kindly point them out to us. Thank you, reader, for not criticizing us for all of our failings. We sure have them for anyone to point out. Reader, do something to benefit yourself and others. It is easy to criticize and to point fingers at Taft and bad teachers as there are plenty of them, but the True Wheel is hard to find. So this is what we would like to see: Research it and tell us, What is "mindfulness" really as the Buddha taught it?

If you could find that out -- and tell us and all of the other readers -- is would be a mighty help to us, to Taft, and to others who might fall sway to the nonsense many people speak in the name of the Buddha, Dharma, and enlightened community.

When I think of all the centuries of teachers who patiently and selflessly worked to maintain the purity of the Buddha's teaching, against all odds, to have an [donkey] like this...

True, true, it would be a tragedy. But come, friend, do it for the real Buddha, do it for the Dharma. Investigate and report back to us. We will have our editors cross check it and publish it here. Where is the real Dharma to be found, where is there a legitimate teacher? We can tell you, but it would be much more productive if you search and report back. That is what Siddhartha did.

Hipster haven: an alt to an alt to shout about

No, no, don't laugh. Come forward. What do the poets teach us? Keats says, "When the bad are full of passionate intensity, what do the good do? Complain? Point fingers? But not do a good thing to make the situation better? We're all for complaining, our favorite pastime/wasteoftime. Be we also try to unearth the real Dharma and restore it to the world while bringing attention to corrections and deviations.
 

This desert lawn sucks! - Yeah, where do they get the water? - What, dumb[donkey], I mean Beavis? I didn't mean it sucks water. I mean it sucks... - Oh yeah, huh huh huh huh huh...

  

The way to cool is brands?

QUESTION 2: How was Coachella? Brokechella was much better than returning for Weekend Deux. But Coachella? Bradley explains it best. He was offered a job, two weekends at the big music fest and a VIP all access pass. Late into Saturday night he turned around and suddenly noticed: No one was smiling. They had paid $800 (not including parking, which is $100 more, food, or drinks and stuff), and they were blase. They were having phone-mances, rocking their cellular devices like dates under the remains of the prophetic bloody moon. One would think that having spent all that money and facebooked it and tweeted and instagrammed the h*ck out of it there would be more than this. But you have to ask yourself, whether you're sporting a VIP pass or just a regular radio-chipped (RFID) capital-expenditure-monitoring and policing device,

Is that ALL there is?

Cristina echoes Peggy Lee in asking, Is that all there [f-ing] is? with a twist.

• India's Spiritual Legacy (general tours) will be offered daily at 1:00 to complement the special exhibition Yoga: The Art of Transformation, on view from Feb. 21-Sunday, May 25, 2014. This tour features objects in the Asian Art Museum South Asia, Southeast Asia, and Buddhist Himalayas collections. (Museum blog)
• Korean art at the San Francisco Asian Art Museum
• Roads of Arabia: Archaeology and History of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Oct. 24, 2014-Jan. 18, 2015)
• Is domestic violence kind of SEXY? (cartoon)

ASK MAYA: Meditation vs. Absorption? (Part 2)

Maya, Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson, Kelly Y., Wisdom Quarterly  ASK MAYA (See PART 1)

Enlightenment is not an ancient dream but a modern reality (michellemortagemusings.com)

 

Part 2: Enlightenment

Note that the "point" of meditation is not meditation itself. Nor is it absorption.
 
The Buddha was interested in virtue, but not virtue for virtue's sake. He was interested in virtue because he realized that it led to concentration (a calm, collected heart/mind).

He was not interested in concentration for concentration's sake. Nor was it all the marvels a calm, collected, concentrated mind/heart is capable of. The point of virtue is that it is the basis for concentration. The point of concentration is that it is the basis for WISDOM.

Enlightenment (bodhi) sees nirvana. (SC)

What is the heart/mind's greatest potential? Enlightenment. And here is how to arrive at it:

1. What is the problem? Suffering is the problem. 2. What is the cause? Ignorance (which causes and conditions craving). 3. What is the solution? Nirvana. 4. What is the path to nirvana? It is the path to enlightenment. The first glimpse of nirvana is the first stage of enlightenment: stream entry.

 

Modern tree sitter Amanda Senseman (PD)

If one meditates, one might become absorbed. If one gains the first absorption, one will notice that it is too close to the ordinary distracted state we live in. Seeing this defect, one can move to the second absorption, which is better but still flawed.

Noticing the flaw in the second absorption, one can move to the third...fourth [...eighth]. From the fourth, full of equanimity and one-pointedness of attention, it is very easy to come out and turn the mind/heart to the unique teachings of the Buddha: special mindfulness practices (such as Dependent Origination) to see things as they truly are. How?

Everything that is of a nature to arise is of a nature to fall.

 

Under the original Bodhi tree (BG)

If one emerges from the fourth absorption -- the heart temporarily pure, the mind crystal clear -- and turns to insight meditation practices, wisdom can arise.

 

This arising does not happen by accident, without causes and conditions. It all begins with an intention to meditate, followed by effort, then effortlessness, then the absorptions (at least the first), then emerging and turning to the unique practices the Buddha taught. This, indeed, is the way outlined in general by the Buddha as the Noble Eightfold Path.

ASK MAYA: Meditation vs. Absorption?

Maya, Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson, Kelly Y., Wisdom Quarterly  ASK MAYA

Not excited, not distracted, not asleep, not doing, wakeful-attention to a single object eventually leads to what we were always missing. (Sue90ca/flickr)

  

This question comes from Wisdom Quarterly reader Ron: "What is the difference between meditation and absorption?" Here we answer in a more practical than theoretical way with instructions.
 

Meditation is dull and unclear until...

"MEDITATION" (bhavana) is a very general term. It literally means, "bringing into being." So it is often translated as "mental cultivation" or "self development." The mental and self can be misleading if taken too literally; it is not a brain or head thing, nor is the ego being built up. Intellectualizing the process or cultivating ego are the opposite of what's happening.

 

One might cultivate or develop many beneficial things such as virtue (the foundation of concentration) or calm or restraint.

 

One might develop one's knowledge of the Dharma (Buddhist Doctrine) through fantastically woven Mahayana stories penned long after the Buddha but written as if the Buddha had said them. Or one might get closer to the source by studying Theravada "lists," sutras, and commentaries.

Or one might learn the precepts, further precepts, or Disciplinary Code for long-term intensive practice. Or one might study the life of the Buddha and various figures from ancient India, such as these four fascinating enlightened Buddhist nuns: Khema, Uppalavanna, Bhaddhakaccana, and Sundari Nanda. Little is heard of them today as nearly all of the focus is put on monks, kings, and warriors. (The first two were the Buddha's beautiful chief disciples, the third his former wife, and the fourth his princess sister).

Stay awake (PeterFroehlich/flickr.com)

Or one might learn a meditation technique from a teacher and regularly cultivate it.

Sitting-meditation to bring "right concentration" into being first means settling the mind/heart (more correctly, letting it settle). This is done so that it can strengthen and achieve its potential. What potential?

The heart/mind has the miraculous ability to so focus its attention that it becomes one-pointed. This temporarily purifies it. 

Absorption! (Jess Allison)

"ABSORPTION" (jhana) is this effortless focus as the mind/heart is "absorbed" or pulled into the appropriate single object of its attention.
 
Getting to this point can be a long slog or a spontaneous occurrence. (No one for whom it happens spontaneously was expecting it, so it is better to prepare for a long slog. Expectations kill concentration).

So does it take effort, or is it effortless?

 

Until one lets go of the striving, efforting, grunting, and "trying," the heart/mind will not cohere and blossom. This is why we refer to it as "effortless." 

 

But one had made the effort to cultivate virtue and to meditate with regularity, which develops the Five Factors of Absorption (jhananga). Meditation will all seem to have been preliminary and preparatory when one tastes the first absorption. All of that effort was unnecessary and in the way? Yes and no. Would we have stayed with it and gotten here if we had not put forward a tremendous amount of effort to abstain from many distracting things, to develop regularity in practice, to inquire, to study, and so on? Virtue is the foundation. It's benefit is "concentration" (samadhi).

Samsara is turbulent, swirling flood (FP)

Concentration is a misleading English translation. The word in modern American English suggests scrunching our foreheads and trying. That is NOT samadhi. 

 

Imagine when one wants clear water, but it's cloudy; one wants it clean, but it's full of obscuring particles in suspension. What is the best way to get it clear?

Let it settle. How much effort does that take? None or next to none. But we're going to need tons of effort to be patient, sit still, and wait. "Patience is the highest virtue," the Buddha said. As an American, that's the last thing we have. Clear water? Drain it, filter it while pouring it back in, irradiate it, and throw in some chlorine because we're busy! Who has time to wait and do nothing?

 

The heart/mind is naturally clear, but there are all of these defilements floating around so that we never see things clearly. And we will do anything -- except the easiest and most natural thing -- to clear things up.

ANSWER: The difference between "meditation," usually thought of as sitting crosslegged even though it means so much more, and "absorption" is like the difference between muddy turbulent water and a crystal clear still forest pool.

One can suddenly see clearly in a still forest pool (nyanamolibhikkhu/plus.google.com)

 
The Buddha gives an analogy to explain the first two Factors of Absorption, "applied-attention" (vitakka) and "sustained-attention" (vicāra).
 
These factors form the bridge between meditation and absorption. They are like the effort a bird makes to get into flight and the effort(lessness) to stay in flight. One is messy jumping and flapping, the other easy holding and gliding.

• Translating vitakka as "thought-conception" and vicāra as "discursive thinking," as was done by the earliest Western translators is incorrect and completely misleading. Scholarship by nonpractitioners has this liability. Ven. Pa Auk Sayadaw, who is both a scholar and a meditation master with many accomplished Western students, was able to clarify this matter for us.

"The first absorption is free from five [hindrances], and five [Factors of Absorption] are present. Whenever the meditator enters the first absorption, there have vanished: sensual craving, ill-will, sloth/torpor, restlessness/worry, and doubt. And there appears: applied-attention,sustained-attention, rapture, joy, and concentration (samādhi)" - Path of Purification (Vis.M. IV).

(jhanasadvice.com)

Another analogy used is that of poured water, which is choppy and broken. It is contrasted with poured oil, which is steady and unbroken. If one practices consistently and correctly then it no longer becomes anything about thinking. Instead, it becomes all about "getting in the zone." As soon as we start thinking, we are no longer in the zone. The same is true of absorption, which is free of discursive thinking. It is full of one-pointed attention. It's all zen (jhana). It is different from "the zone" in sports because it is full absorption; there is only one object of attention. 

 

Translating absorption as "trance," as the earliest Western translators did, can be misleading because it suggests that there is no object of attention at all. There is only one object.

 

Note, not all objects of meditation can lead to absorption. For example, we loosely say we were "totally absorbed" in a movie or videogame such that we lost track of time. That form of high external stimulation in no way leads to meditative-absorption. In fact, it leads away from it because the mind/heart becomes weaker and weaker, growing more and more dependent on intense stimulation.

 

The Buddha suggested the breath as suiting most temperaments (among 40 different objects of meditation), but it is very easy to misunderstand what he meant. Fortunately, he explained it to Ananda. He meant the subtle breath at the tip of the nose just under the nostrils when it becomes so still as to be almost imperceptible. And it will be imperceptible until the mind intensifies enough to notice it no matter how subtle it has grown. This is one of the great benefits of choosing the breath, he explained to Ananda: The more one pays attention, the subtler the breath grows. The subtler it grows, the more one needs to pay attention. This feedback loop leads right to absorption BECAUSE it leads to more subtlety with more attention.

 

 
If one strains or pushes or is otherwise disturbed, the breath will instantly be disturbed (becoming grosser and easier to notice). This does not strengthen attention, and one must again wait for it to settle into the subtle breath, which is the object of meditation. Therefore, a balance must be kept or one will go from strain and overeager striving for something to happen to sleepiness and lapsed attention (distractability).

Any strain reflects craving. And it is the very problem pointed out in the famous Indian expression ridiculing the origin of meditation: "One meditates, mismeditates, premeditates, overmeditates... One is like a cat or an owl waiting by a mouse hole..." This is what meditation was in the beginning according to the Buddha. It comes from the Buddhist "Origins of Life on Earth" story (the Aggañña Sutra, DN 27). It is called "meditation" (from the stem related to jhana), but it is not right-meditation. It will not lead to absorption. But why? They look exactly the same!

Looks have little to do with these matters. What is the state of mind of an unsuccessful meditator? Expectant, eager, craving, impatient. Like a cat or an owl, one looks patient just sitting there staring hour after hour. That is not patience; that is greed. When one meditates in another way, fully attentive but not expectant, eager, impatient, or full of craving, suddenly things happen. One did not do them; they happened. But one did set up the causes and conditions without which they would not have happened.

In absorption there is no thinking about the meditation object. One is aware of it without evaluation and without lapse. Meditation, on the other hand, means bringing attention back to the object again and again every time it wanders, which can be millions of times. Absorption refers to being immersed in one object without distraction or wavering or struggling. It is very blissful. People would never guess how blissful it is. (Next we will explain how to take this to enlightenment).

• Meditative Absorption: The First Jhana

YOGA means...

Maya, Seven, Wisdom Quarterly; David Ibrahim (DivineYogaLA.com); FoxPowerYoga.com

WHAT IS “YOGA”? 

Yoga means stretching our heart, balancing our mind, and breathing into our innermost selves.

 

“What is this precious love and laughter budding in our hearts? It is the glorious sound of the soul awakening up.”

– Sufi mystic poet Hafiz

Lord Shiva embodying the divine feminine

Divine Yoga LA is led by David Ibrahim, a teacher inspired by yoga’s power to deeply heal and transform the hearts and lives of those who practice it. Ibrahim is known for bringing a fresh, modern interpretation which nevertheless holds strong to the ancient teachings. His soothing voice, sincerity, and presence are hard not to notice. His teaches in an old mining town along Route 66 in the foothill community of Monrovia, which sits in one of the San Gabriel Valley, in suburban Los Angeles. Divine Yoga LA focuses on Hatha Yoga (uniting Sun and Moon, masculine and feminine, yang and yin, assertiveness and receptivity), meditation, and focused breathing practiced alongside inspirational words and music. More + video

• NEXT TIME: Yogi David goes to see Thich Nhat Hanh!

Whatever happened to sex and Ami Fox?

Maya, Wisdom Quarterly

Dear Maya: Ask your question, any question, in the comments section (Wisdom Quarterly).

Ami Fox in arm balancing pose (FPY)

Dear Maya, whatever happened to the yogini who wrote so many great pieces on yoga carried by Wisdom Quarterly? And can someone still have sex when she's pregnant, or is that even normal to think about? 

- Madison G.

"What does the Fox say?" Hey, Maddy, have you considered asking Ylvis? Sadly, Ami Fox (FoxPowerYoga.com) moved from metropolitan Los Angeles to rural Oregon, to a little town with a giant multinational corporation, following her Latin husband's new job opportunity.

She now encourages towering redwoods to transform sunlight into energy using chlorophyll while raising lots of energetic kids. She is a great yoga teacher in the Power Yoga (modern ashtanga) tradition. That's much easier to do in a big, bad city than in a small, staid community.

Sex poses or yoga positions? Be careful.

Having been pregnant while teaching us arduous balance poses, Fox was the person to ask about sex. There are yoga poses to avoid while pregnant, like any that put weight on the belly. So I can think of a few sex positions that might put the same sort of pressure there. Sex is fine while pregnant with a few provisos.  

 

Caveat emptor ("buyer beware") of what you're consuming with a "baby onboard." For more details, ask your doula. Don't have a midwife yet? The doctor at your PPO may know something, but I would get a second opinion about anything those kinds of doctors advise, avoiding most if not all of the allopathic "medicines" they prescribe, particularly toxic vaccinations. According to Wisdom Quarterly's favorite sex and addiction specialist, Dr. Drew Pinksy, it should be just fine. Get a checkup.

• NEXT TIME: Maya answers the meaning of life!