Too Rooson - thanks for the appreciation of the essays. I would do more, but they take real time. I try for one a week and do the rest in blogs, which are somewhat off the cuff ideas that I happen to be thinking about. For some essays, I have to be in the mood. The next planned will be pretty dark - about death, about as dark as it can get. I'm not quite there yet. ASAP, I promise.
For now - I have promised to think about the proscription against sex in spiritual endeavors of all sorts, and now get back to it because it came up again in another unlikely place - the book "Inner Paths to Outer Space," whose authors are about as do-your-own-thing as one can get. It was in the final article where Rick Strassman discussed organizing a "trip". He put forth a slew of suggestions, including keeping the setting safe, getting all your odds and ends pulled together and so on - but these were gentle and practical suggestions. At one point, though, he turned absolutist: "in no way should sexual touching or intercourse be allowed during a trip" (my paraphrase); but, AS ALWAYS, he did not explain why. They never do. Should we simply know that sex and spirituality do not go together? And if so, why do I feel left in the dark?
Already I have pointed out a few things: some traditions see the loss of masculine energy as the reason; others, that sex is too intimately linked to the material - that it is the path to human materiality itself. We also know that sex can cause jealousy and hatred and violence. I think we can say that it is too primitive an emotion to play in the spiritual - that it is, in fact, the most primitive and arousing drive that we have. Unlike eating, it demands that at least one other participates, and the motives for such participation may be unholy indeed - S and M, dominance, all-too-casual use and so on. Here I get it. Perhaps that explains Strassman. But many other traditions proscribe marital sex (and sex of any kind) for days before a spiritual event. For most of us, this precludes "use" - few feel used in marital sex, most do not go in for weird mind games as such in this situation, and it hardly seems to matter in regular life whether we did it with our spouse a few days before a spiritual event.
For sex in general, I can understand; for marital sex (or the equivalent), I can only say that: 1) part of the prohibition has to do with the "power loss" idea of earlier times (and some current traditions). For instance, it has only been in the last 30 or so years that the idea of power loss fell from favor in our culture. Professional sports players were admonished by their coaches well into the 60's - and perhaps much later - to not have sex the day of or the day before a major event. For all I know, there may be something to it, although present thinking sides against this; and 2) that sex in any form detracts from thoughts of the spiritual. But this can also be disputed. Most of us know full well that the right form of intimacy is about as close as many of us will get to the mystical experience - and, in the right way, it most certainly is. The loss of self, the feeling of love...it seems all too perfect a mimic of spiritual ecstasy. Perhaps that is why it is prohibited - because it is a primarily selfish act that masquerades as a mystical experience, but...couldn't we then say that about the meditator in his chapel or cave? Isn't he primarily, at least at first, into it for himself, following some impulse that he can't deny?
But this is a problem that is an abstraction for most of us. What is not is the problem of old age, both for others and for ourselves. At the current time, my family is wrestling with what to do with our mother, who cannot care for herself. For my wife and me, we could remortgage and not send our kid to college, which would give her the money to live at home with professional care; or we could take her in ourselves, which would mean round-the-clock vigilance, including feeding, diaper changing, bathing and so on. Or we could do what most do - get rid of any remaining assets and give her over to government care. This is a WWJD moment, where philosophy hits the road. As for ourselves, what do we expect when our time comes? Would we want our children to sacrifice everything for our last few months or years? I do not ask this question to make an obvious answer for the first, but just to put the whole thing in a totality. I know what we will probably do - what most everyone else does. But is this right? It is more complicated than what I have proposed, but some have complained that sometimes my blog is too abstract. This is not abstract. What is the right thing to do? FK
For now - I have promised to think about the proscription against sex in spiritual endeavors of all sorts, and now get back to it because it came up again in another unlikely place - the book "Inner Paths to Outer Space," whose authors are about as do-your-own-thing as one can get. It was in the final article where Rick Strassman discussed organizing a "trip". He put forth a slew of suggestions, including keeping the setting safe, getting all your odds and ends pulled together and so on - but these were gentle and practical suggestions. At one point, though, he turned absolutist: "in no way should sexual touching or intercourse be allowed during a trip" (my paraphrase); but, AS ALWAYS, he did not explain why. They never do. Should we simply know that sex and spirituality do not go together? And if so, why do I feel left in the dark?
Already I have pointed out a few things: some traditions see the loss of masculine energy as the reason; others, that sex is too intimately linked to the material - that it is the path to human materiality itself. We also know that sex can cause jealousy and hatred and violence. I think we can say that it is too primitive an emotion to play in the spiritual - that it is, in fact, the most primitive and arousing drive that we have. Unlike eating, it demands that at least one other participates, and the motives for such participation may be unholy indeed - S and M, dominance, all-too-casual use and so on. Here I get it. Perhaps that explains Strassman. But many other traditions proscribe marital sex (and sex of any kind) for days before a spiritual event. For most of us, this precludes "use" - few feel used in marital sex, most do not go in for weird mind games as such in this situation, and it hardly seems to matter in regular life whether we did it with our spouse a few days before a spiritual event.
For sex in general, I can understand; for marital sex (or the equivalent), I can only say that: 1) part of the prohibition has to do with the "power loss" idea of earlier times (and some current traditions). For instance, it has only been in the last 30 or so years that the idea of power loss fell from favor in our culture. Professional sports players were admonished by their coaches well into the 60's - and perhaps much later - to not have sex the day of or the day before a major event. For all I know, there may be something to it, although present thinking sides against this; and 2) that sex in any form detracts from thoughts of the spiritual. But this can also be disputed. Most of us know full well that the right form of intimacy is about as close as many of us will get to the mystical experience - and, in the right way, it most certainly is. The loss of self, the feeling of love...it seems all too perfect a mimic of spiritual ecstasy. Perhaps that is why it is prohibited - because it is a primarily selfish act that masquerades as a mystical experience, but...couldn't we then say that about the meditator in his chapel or cave? Isn't he primarily, at least at first, into it for himself, following some impulse that he can't deny?
But this is a problem that is an abstraction for most of us. What is not is the problem of old age, both for others and for ourselves. At the current time, my family is wrestling with what to do with our mother, who cannot care for herself. For my wife and me, we could remortgage and not send our kid to college, which would give her the money to live at home with professional care; or we could take her in ourselves, which would mean round-the-clock vigilance, including feeding, diaper changing, bathing and so on. Or we could do what most do - get rid of any remaining assets and give her over to government care. This is a WWJD moment, where philosophy hits the road. As for ourselves, what do we expect when our time comes? Would we want our children to sacrifice everything for our last few months or years? I do not ask this question to make an obvious answer for the first, but just to put the whole thing in a totality. I know what we will probably do - what most everyone else does. But is this right? It is more complicated than what I have proposed, but some have complained that sometimes my blog is too abstract. This is not abstract. What is the right thing to do? FK
RSS Feed