APPENDIX IN the CHAPTER I

N 1. - Opinion of the Theologians.

Here, as in all the body of Soutra, the pursued purpose is the satisfaction of the woman, independently even the generation or the intention to increase the mutual love. As well as we pointed out it in a previous note, these last two purposes can, with the eyes of the theologians which we quoted, to legitimize the touch recommended by the Indian author. It results, moreover, implicitly, in the case of marriage, the first paragraph of the art. 920 of the moral theology of P. Gury.

920. - There is no grave sin, nor even light, according to the more common and more likely opinion, on behalf of a wife who gets excited by touches to spread his ( her;its ? ) semen immediately after the act in which the only husband spread her ( it ? ):

1 ° Because this semen is intended to carry out the conjugal act, so that the couple is quickly only a single flesh, and, as well as the husband can get ready for the act by touches, the wife can also end it by touches.

2 ° Because, if the women, after such an excitement, were anxious to repress the natural movements, they would risk to sin seriously.

Sanchez says: Conjugi tardivo ad seminandum consuledum is C ante concubitum tactibus venerem excitet, C vel sic possit in ipso concubitu effundere semen.

This opinion is doubtless based on the generally admitted ( supposed ? ) opinion which the coincidence of both cramps génésiques favors the conception (refer to the note 4 of the appendix of the Chapter I and in the appendix of the Chapitre IV du Titre IV).

We have to suppose it: 1 ° because of the following question which puts Sanchez:

The year sit mortale quoties not simul conjuges semen consults effundant.

Is there mortal sin when both couple gets to prevent the simultaneity of their respective cramp?

2 ° Because, in quite other case, the personal touches are defended ( forbidden ? ), as well as it results from the paragraph below of the article 920 already partially quoted from the Father Gury:

« Touches on itself with the aim of the venereal pleasure in the absence of the other husband, according to the opinion of some, establish ( constitute ? ) a grave sin, because the husband has no right to use his own body for his pleasure, but only for the conjugal act. Saint Alphonse considers this opinion as more likely and as that must be followed in the practice. »

There are question nowhere in Kama Soutra of the personal touches. The ease of the customs has to make them very rare in India, excepted ( except ? ) for those who make vow of chastity. But as the Indian casuists believe these last ones incapable of no sort of incontinence, they had to consider the personal touches as an unimportant quantity.

N 2 - Opinion of the doctors.

AMBROISE PARÉ

In her treaty of the generation of the man ( 1573 ) Ambroise Paré advises to the husband to prepare his wife so that both semens can meet together:

« The man were lying with his partner has to her ( it ? ) mignardiser, tickle, caress ( cherish ? ) and move if he found that she ( it ? ) was hard in the spur; and the farmer will enter the field of human nature in the estourdy, but that in the first place did not make his ( her;its ? ) approaches so that she ( it ? ) is esguillonée and titilée so much whether she ( it ? ) is been in love the desire of the masle and so that the water comes to him ( her ? ) to the mouth there, so that it takes will and appetite to live and to make God's small creature and what both semens can meet together, because no women are so quick in this game ( set ? ) as the men ( people ? ). »

The Doctor Jules Guyot quotes and rests ( supports ? ) the opinion of Ambroise Paré; Paul Garnier fights ( disputes ? ) him ( it ? ).

Doctor Paul GABSIER (Of Onanisme).

« Except rare exceptions, the woman does not feel spontaneously the instigation which at the man results from the erection of its organs; she ( it ? ) tries ( feels ? ) him ( it ? ) only by her ( its ? ) contact with him when he ( it ? ) provokes her ( it ? ) and passes on her ( it ? ) by his ( its ? ) caresses. From there the necessity of the preludes while observing this rule ( ruler ? ): » That the genitalia of one of the sexes have to receive only the natural action of the genitalia of the other sex with the exception of quite other contact or shaking, the caresses of the couple before and after the union not that must extend in these organs. Practised opposite lead to the onanisme in two which has for the woman the most disastrous consequences: the depravation and the loss of the health. The onanisme in two determines almost always the isolated onanisme, and each of these onanismes engenders frequently either the hysteria, or the inflation and as a consequence the hypertrophy of vaginales glands, that is the elongation of the collar of the matrix, or a development of the clitoris which requires the excision, that is the cancer of the matrix. The biggest of these troubles is the nymphomania and the slightest the loss of the voice ( vote ? ).