Beauties of Meditation 4

Trigger Warning: This post contains EVEN MORE images of unclothed women sitting in non-pornographic religious poses. If you are offended by uncovered human bodies, especially female ones, then skip this post, and have a nice day.

     Ironically, the pictures for this “pictorial guide to the harmonious symmetry of the undraped meditatrix” were collected and arranged several months ago, around the time that I posted the third installment of this particular series, and thus when I was still an ordained monk. So this, the fourth installment (the others being here, here, and here, and there may be another after this one, eventually), is the first “girlie” meditation pictorial that I have posted without being, debatably, grotesquely transgressive. Monks aren’t supposed to like girls, or rather they aren’t supposed to like scantily clad or naked ones.

     But, I have been a man, and a human, for longer than I was a monk, and it is good to be true to oneself. My fascination with feminine beauty was an instrumental contributing factor, though not the only one, in my exit from the Bhikkhu Sangha, and my relinquishment of the status of a Great Elder. Many purists would of course opine that admiring feminine beauty is a serious no-no, but I really don’t care. I can’t really afford to care because it is built right into me. As the great philosopher Popeye used to say, I yam what I yam (but I ain’t no sweet potato).

     On the other hand, I fail to see why pictures such as those which follow should be so outrageous. They are, after all, human beings just sitting there. In fact, it seems to me that a woman in a meditative or prayerful posture is adopting about as non-sexual and non-pornographic of a pose as is humanly possible. What could be less erotic than a spiritual pose associated with the transcendence of worldliness? That has been a central theme of these pictorial posts from the beginning. If a meditating woman with no clothes on is pornographic, then naked women in general are obscene. And they’re all naked under their clothing.

     Some people, especially the most religious and the most MGTOW, have been scandalized or outraged by pictures like the ones below, and a few of them expressed outrage, or at least very stern disapproval, in response to previous posts. Why? The pictures are not pornographic, at least not necessarily. Whether they are pornographic or not depends on the attitude of the viewer. Thus if you see pictures of naked women in simple meditative poses as something nasty or wrong or as “porn,” then I would suggest that perhaps you have a dirtier mind than you would like to believe. A few have posited other reasons for sternly disapproving of meditating nudes, for example the belief that most, if not all, of the women who pose for these are abused white slaves; though I really don’t see it. My guess is that most women who pose for these are showing off their “yoga” skills and their, eh, harmonious symmetry, quite willingly. There are a few who are porn models and actresses, so their personal lives may be ethically messed up and unhappy, with drug addictions or deep emotional scars or some such, but I assume that most are exhibitionist amateurs. But anyhow we are dealing with two-dimensional forms here, and not so much actual women meditating or pretending to meditate. All we are seeing is pictures.

     Probably since I was a teenager it has struck me that the human race is not yet fully civilized so long as we are unable to look at a person in a state of nature, that is, uncovered by clothing, as one was born, without considering it to be obscene or indecent. Is the human body obscene? That depends on the mental states of the person considering it. But though a person in a state of nature is “indecent,” graphic footage of people shooting and killing others, or even of people simply overflowing with hate, is considered appropriate for prime time public viewing. But this is not the place to dwell on the insanity of human society.

     The fact is, though, that we humans are neurotic about sex. Our nearest living relatives, biologically speaking, are chimpanzees, and they reportedly have sex about twenty times per day, even when the females are not in estrus (the number of times increases dramatically when the female chimps are “in season”). We humans, evolutionarily, have moved towards monogamy, but we are still sexual as hell, and the transition is not fully complete. So we are ambivalent, liking sex more than we think we should, and sometimes pretending to be more “proper” than we really are…which borders on dishonesty. It is certainly no coincidence that naked people in pictures considered to be pornographic tend to be at the peak of reproductive age, and healthy-looking enough to be good breeding stock. It’s a matter of mating instincts, and of domesticated animals (that’s us) trying to ignore the fact that we still retain wild instincts. But trying to deny them doesn’t make them go away.

     Anyway, I’ve been very busy editing books, communing with a real live beautiful female, and otherwise transitioning out of monasticism and into a more “free form” existence, which includes more embracing of “transgression”—to exist is to transgress. And since, as I say, these images have been waiting in the Beauties of Meditation 4 folder for months, I figure it is convenient to post them now, especially since now I don’t have an Order of monks to scandalize by doing it. If any of you are still scandalized regardless, well, your reactions are your own. Just don’t blame me (or anyone else) if you are unhappy, because from a Buddhist perspective, our dukkha is ultimately all our own doing, and self-inflicted.

     One note about my choice of pictures: Some may object to the trend of feminine skinniness in these images. Personally I do prefer more voluptuous, curvaceous females as being more esthetic; but I take what I find on Internet images searches, and it turns out that most women who pose scantily clad or unclad in yoga poses tend to be thin, and maybe even vegan. Also they tend to be young, and of breeding age. We do what we can.

this one is from a video game I think

trans Shiva?

not sure about the headlights effect
(it was like this when I found it)

also not sure about this one


  1. I suppose there are some who consider the yab yum symbolism of certain traditions obscene.
    What does Buddha himself have to say?

    1. Orthodox Theravada Buddhists would consider the yab yum to be not only obscene but blasphemous.

      As for naked ladies in general, strict Theravada would advise not looking at them, or if that were not an option, not to look at them with lust. And if even THAT is not manageable, then it is advisable to restrict one's lustful ogling to one's own mate.

    2. Yayyy - Titties!!!!!
      Is that the correct response?

    3. Elf On The ShelfJuly 9, 2021 at 7:49 AM

      You're not a monk anymore you're an adult, so you can do what you want and you don't have to explain or justify yourself to anyone - refers to your introduction.
      If this is how you want to spend your time, your choice.
      It does raise a few questions though:-
      So you're not 'right' anymore? Degenerative behavior like porn addiction is usually more of a lefty mindset.
      Have you see this?
      Brian and Evalion discuss porn and she makes the correct argument (in my view) that porn just turns white men into cucks. You've got a girlfriend why aren't you focussed on her?
      How does your girlfriend feel about your lusting after other women?

    4. It is surprising to me that pictures of people simply sitting as though in meditation, in non-pornographic poses, elicits responses of "porn" and "porn addiction," which is more of a reflection of your own attitude than anything else. And no amount of commentary on the subject has any obvious effect. Although that is one reason why I post these, to highlight this strange aspect of "civilized" human nature.

    5. Elf On The ShelfJuly 10, 2021 at 8:00 AM

      Actually David I think that is either a disingenuous or naieve response.

      You cross the line when you post blatant pornography. You can't deny that hentai/elf pics (your last post) or shibari pics (this post) aren't pornographic in nature.
      Hentai/Elf is usually real pictures just 'cartooned' over with a computer program - that's why it's illegal in a lot of countries (because of the age factor).
      Shibari, for it's practitioners, like all BDSM, is based on externally imposed hierarchical structures that have been internalized and reacted on.
      So when you post these pictures you promote the continuation of abuse and mental bondage.

      But there is another problem - porn always comes between a man and a woman. If you have a woman you should be focussed on her - and if you were you wouldn't need or want porn - so why arent you?

      Another problem with porn is it promotes unreal idealized perfect forms - and that will make you unsatisfied sooner or later because most women over 35-40 don't have such form, and nor do a lot of them in their 20s! So when you become unsatisfied your focus shifts to the porn and not your relationship, because the porn gives you an ideal that is unattainable in real life. So this is not a productive route to go down.

      Finally, from a Buddhist perspective (as you know) porn (or even addiction to a woman's form, or lust) is still samsara and still bondage.

      I stopped calling myself a Buddhist when I gave it up. As a non-Buddhist I think the appreciation of a woman's form is entirely natural and healthy - within the context of a relationship - if keeping my desire within the context of a loving relationship is what you call 'civilized' then so be it, I am proud to be civilized.
      Why do you call yourself a Buddhist?

    6. So the cartoon meditating naked elf in the last BoM was "blatant pornography"? Again, that depends on your own attitude, which strikes me as rather prudish.

      And again, you fling the word "porn" around as though it were obvious that naked women sitting in yogic poses are obscene.

      Whether these pics come between my sweetheart and me remains to be seen.

      As for the Buddhist aspect, it is some rather mild "bad karma" to look at these pictures with lust, or even esthetic appreciation of beauty. I tried to be a Buddhist saint for years and in my case it didn't work, so I am making peace with my samsaric nature to some degree, as almost everyone must do. I call myself a Buddhist because I interpret the world through a Buddhist lens, even though I am not willing/able to be a perfect saint in the realm of self-restraint and morality.

      There will probably be another installment in this series by the way, insh'allah.

    7. Whatever one's motives, the fact remains that there be some poor soul out there who will get off on these pictures and generate bad karma, however "minor". It's like setting a table of colorful liqueurs out on the sidewalk as a kind of performance art without regard for the 10 years sober alcoholic who might walk by, succumb, wreck his new life, and wind up dead. So why do such a thing? One could argue the drunk is responsible for his own actions but again I ask why do such a thing? Why why why?

    8. To exist is to transgress, and the more one exists the more one transgresses.

    9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  2. Perhaps the next installment will be of young strapping men with voluptuous testicles in full lotus.

    The bony, flat chested vegetarian chicks are so boring. I think most men would go for the curvy Indian woman...for purely spiritual reasons of course.

  3. To live is to transgress, but why tempt people to transgress? The Buddha taught suffering and the end of suffering, he did not teach suffering and how to make more suffering. Then again, one could post pictures of women in burqas and catch the eye of some freak with a burqa fetish!
    So much for my ealier preachments. We are all royally screwed!

    1. Simply to challenge people's point of view causes suffering, so long as we ignore the fact that all suffering is ultimately self-inflicted.

    2. It's almost like saying I can shoot someone in the face without malice or remorse as long as I'm convinced that he was asking for it.

    3. Shooting someone in the face is rather more violent and unwholesome than simply showing a person with no clothes on sitting in meditation. Personally I think many of the averse (and possibly even self-righteous) reactions are more unwholesome than the exposed titties themselves, or my inclination to expose them further. But with your attitude it would seem that nobody should do or say anything that someone else (no matter how touchy or irritable or prudish) might use as an excuse to react negatively. In my opinion that attitude is just plain fucked up. That's essentially the attitude that leftist "cancel culture" has weaponized, and I refuse to follow along. I do as I please, and you are not required to read the blog.

    4. Yes, my example was quite fucked up. My attempt at playing devil's advocate went too far, to say the least. In this saha world everything is subject to distortion and decay. In the West we still have this ingrown demarcation line between sacred and profane, thanks in part to the Puritan tradition.
      It even infected the Catholics. You never saw anything more glorious than Michelangelo 's David, and you never will again.

    5. That girls at puberty may find
      The first Adam in their thought,
      Shut the door of the Pope's chapel,
      Keep those children out.
      There on that scaffolding reclines
      Michael Angelo.
      With no more sound than the mice make
      His hand moves to and fro.
      Like a long-legged fly upon the stream
      His mind moves upon silence.

      (from "Long-Legged Fly" by Yeats)

    6. Beauty's a doubtful good, a glass, a flower, Lost, faded, broken, dead within an hour And beauty, blemish'd once, for ever's lost, In spite of physic, painting, pain, and cost.
      (Shakespeare, from some website of quotes)

    7. Even better:
      In the room the women come and go
      Talking of Michelangelo...
      (T. S. Eliot, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock)


Post a Comment

Hello, I am now moderating comments, so there will probably be a short delay after a comment is submitted before it is published, if it is published. This does have the advantage, though, that I will notice any new comments to old posts. Comments are welcome, but no spam, please. (Spam may include ANY anonymous comment which has nothing specifically to do with the content of the post.)


Most Clicked On