♥The connection between Buddhism and non-orgasmic sexuality

Submitted by wings on
Printer-friendly version

Buddhism and sensuality are usually at odds with each other. Monks take vows of celibacy, and they seek to avoid sensuality in all its forms. So how does Buddhism fit in with non-orgasmic sex?

First off, the strict rules only apply to monks. Lay people do not have to be celibate. However, the Buddhist view on sensuality is skeptic for a reason.

Getting rid of all addictions is one of the most important ideals in Buddhism. You may have heard of The Middle Road, a concept that is seen in most religions. Do not overdo any one thing.

So Buddhists can have sex, and if they do have sex, it should definitely be non-orgasmic. The challenge is to not become dependant or addicted to sex, because if you do, you lose sight on the fact that happiness is in the mind, and not in the objects you desire.

So the connection between non-orgasmic sex and Buddhism is that non-orgasmic sex is less addictive than regular sex, and since Buddhism is all about not being addicted or dependant on anything, it makes sense.

NB: This is my ongoing investigation of the connection between Buddhism and non-orgasmic sex. I have not exhausted all the possible connections, and i may have to revise some of my ideas if they do not hold up to scrutiny.

Thanks for the article

A very interesting read.

I think their relationship is a little too radical for me, but the basic idea (togetherness without traditional sexuality) intrigues me, and if I ever am to have a partner, it would be something like that.

Far too radical for me

This relationship seems quite strange and is not duplicated much, if at all, in the Buddhist world, as far as I know. It's received attention from a journalist, in part, I think, because of its unusual nature.

I read either in this article or in another source that the Dalai Lama and other teachers have stated their opposition to to the relationship. The objection, as I remember, was because the man has taken monk's vows.

Read Sky Dancer: The Secret Life and Songs of the Lady Yeshe Tsogyel by Keith Dowman for clarity about how the first enlightened Tibetan, Yeshe Tsogyel, treated sexuality. Intercourse without orgasm was part of the path to enlightenment!

"Adopt the pace of nature; her secret is patience."
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Tsogyel

[quote=SnowyOwl]Read Sky Dancer: The Secret Life and Songs of the Lady Yeshe Tsogyel by Keith Dowman for clarity about how the first enlightened Tibetan, Yeshe Tsogyel, treated sexuality. Intercourse without orgasm was part of the path to enlightenment! [/quote]

You probably know that there are two major schools of thought in Buddhism, one that embraces a metaphysic worldview (Mahayana), and one that doesn't (Theravada).

Personally, I tend to identify mostly with the non-metaphysical worldview, and the Tibetan Buddhism is mostly Mahayana. From what I know about the book you mention, it is a Mahayana text. But thank you for weighing in, I would love to hear your other thoughts on Buddhism, Mahayana or not! :)

Decided to copy this here

[quote]At Paro Taktsang I began the last austerity to be practised for my own benefit. This was the austerity of 'the seed-essence of co-incident pleasure and Emptiness.' With my consorts Atsara Sale, A Bhutanese boy called Sale and Atsara Pelyang, all three invigorated by nutritious herbal elixirs, I disciplined myself in the cultivation of creative skill to its full potential for seven months through day and night without respite. At first, shaking and trembling, my body was enervated and my mind was stunned and intoxicated. Lymph saturated my whole body, above and below, and diseased, aching, feverish and trembling, I came close to death. But later, all the lymph was transmuted into the nature of seed-essence and pleasure flooded my entire body. Initially this pleasure was contaminated by passion, but soon it became a field of Awareness and finally an unremitting flow of Awareness...the resulting seed-essence was not capable of evolving into dualistic vision. p.85 [/quote]

From this thread: http://www.reuniting.info/node/6901

Happiness is in the mind???

Not *my* mind. What is happiness anyway but the opposite of some other less desirable state of mind. I don't have a knowledge of exactly what Buddhism is in totality but I believe that all fundamentalist practices no matter what they are - lose something of essence of truth ... if not IMHO lose site of it all together once a particular practice is taken on.

I hope I didn't offend anyone. I think meditation shouldn't necessarily be a practice for example to still the mind... to "get" to a place of peace... or to accomplish solidarity or "freedom from the world"...but rather...meditation, as it is, lets us become very familiar with the thoughts (impersonal and unrelenting that they are) that we are prone to have. To distinguish and differentiate our thoughts from an observer stance. Not to say we are the observer or the thoughts, but just to notice.

I know this post doesn't necessarily fit in...but I was responding to this quote from the initial post here:

Wings Said:
[quote] "So Buddhists can have sex, and if they do have sex, it should definitely be non-orgasmic. The challenge is to not become dependant or addicted to sex, because if you do, you lose sight on the fact that happiness is in the mind, and not in the objects you desire. " [/ quote]

Happiness

I don't think meditation should be limited to certain goals. People can use meditation for any reason they want to. There are different kinds of meditation with different goals.

The question "what is happiness" does have many answers. To me, right now, it is the freedom from the things that make us suffer. It is the absence of aggression, wanting and ignorance. From that comes happiness.

Happiness cannot be in the objects we desire, because the objects we desire are not what they appear to be. Everything is impermanent and in constant flux (this is basic Buddhism). Happiness comes partly from realizing this.

Wings Said: "I don't think

WINGS SAID:

"I don't think meditation should be limited to certain goals. People can use meditation for any reason they want to. There are different kinds of meditation with different goals."

None-The-Less humans 'limit' meditation with being goal-oriented and humans do use meditation for 'any reason they want to.' (Ironically when trying to find 'emptiness' (for example) we notice there seem to be 'goals' or a direction that the mind feels compelled to go in.) HA!

WINGS SAID:
"The question "what is happiness" does have many answers. To me, right now, it is the freedom from the things that make us suffer. It is the absence of aggression, wanting and ignorance. From that comes happiness."

I think I am having difficulty with the word 'happiness'. Freedom from wanting anything other than what is happening right here and now and freedom from desiring love, acceptance, and approval from another person (for example) is not what I would call 'happiness'. It's rather void of anything really. It's rather uneventful yet full at the same time. The space I'm referring to holds nothing and is yet full and can hold all opposites but can be classified as none of them (the opposites). Experience is subject to the level of the opposites. So, I'm only saying that happiness is difficult for me. (I've been known to be addicted to happiness, even and if I speak honestly about my experience - I am equally as uprooted from my center when unhappiness leaves me. ) Abeyance and relief from our 'aggression', freedom from 'wanting' and the gaining of knowledge to counter 'ignorance' makes us feel better AND all of those concepts come from and originate from the mind.

Therefore - Happiness that come from the mind is only another opposite and I don't want happiness any more than I want to identify with any one experience. I am not that anyway. Thank Goodness.

WINGS SAID:
"Happiness cannot be in the objects we desire, because the objects we desire are not what they appear to be. Everything is impermanent and in constant flux (this is basic Buddhism). Happiness comes partly from realizing this."

Happiness is not what it appears to be. Everything is impermanent - including happiness.

In the accepting of all that experience is - I find I am not experience itself but can be the space for all of it.

Happiness is the only goal

[quote=Yin Moon]
I think I am having difficulty with the word 'happiness'. Freedom from wanting anything other than what is happening right here and now and freedom from desiring love, acceptance, and approval from another person (for example) is not what I would call 'happiness'. It's rather void of anything really. It's rather uneventful yet full at the same time. The space I'm referring to holds nothing and is yet full and can hold all opposites but can be classified as none of them (the opposites). Experience is subject to the level of the opposites. So, I'm only saying that happiness is difficult for me. (I've been known to be addicted to happiness, even and if I speak honestly about my experience - I am equally as uprooted from my center when unhappiness leaves me. ) Abeyance and relief from our 'aggression', freedom from 'wanting' and the gaining of knowledge to counter 'ignorance' makes us feel better AND all of those concepts come from and originate from the mind.

Therefore - Happiness that come from the mind is only another opposite and I don't want happiness any more than I want to identify with any one experience. I am not that anyway. Thank Goodness.[/quote]

If you strip Buddhism of all its metaphysical aspects though, I find that the ultimate and only real goal is happiness - freedom from suffering. This is possible, because Buddhism posits that the "natural" (read:free) state of mind is happiness, and in the process of ridding yourself of all the addictions and poisons of the mind, you move towards the ideal state, which is ... well, I don't know what it is, but happiness is definitely part of it.

Sometimes I think people think too much, trying to make too many unnecessary connections between concepts, but it's all words. For me, there is one goal in life, and that is happiness. Feeling happy. Why would you want to feel any other way?

Is the goal of Buddhism

Is the goal of Buddhism inner peace or happiness? Those are not the same. Isn't the goal to make life like your awareness of most of your body. Mindful lack of disharmony. There's genuinely aliveness, but it's neither positive nor negative in totality.

Happiness vs. intoxication

[quote=freedom]Is the goal of Buddhism inner peace or happiness? Those are not the same. Isn't the goal to make life like your awareness of most of your body. Mindful lack of disharmony. There's genuinely aliveness, but it's neither positive nor negative in totality.[/quote]

Inner peace is a part of happiness, ie. you can't be happy without it. The way I see it, we all seek happiness - consciously or unconsciously (which can lead you down the path of intoxication. This is the reason why ignorance is a poison of the mind.)

Buddhism teaches many things, and there are things that are necessary to understand, for example the non-existence of the self, everything is impermanent, etc. But these elements are only means to an end - happiness. If you understand all these elements, you come closer to being happy.

Everything we do, we do to make ourselves feel better, to be more happy. Problem is, when we do not know that intoxication is different from and counterproductive to happiness, we engage in intoxicating thought and action without realizing it. The challenge is to identify which actions and thoughts create true happiness, and which only creates intoxication.
 

I'm not sure about Buddhism,

I'm not sure about Buddhism, but other wisdom traditions have a concept of always moving up or down a ladder. I'm not sure I agree with this happiness seeking. Inner peace to me seems to imply an alignment of the inner and external worlds such that whatever conflict remains is surmountable. That may lead to happiness or unhappiness or neither. Lack of inner peace will almost always lead to unhappiness. I can agree that we seek to not experience unhappiness, but I'm not certain that requires that we seek happiness. If happiness is not attained, there is disappointment. If we resist nothing and seek nothing, happiness just is or isn't.

On intoxication I found http://www.sufimessage.com/alchemy-of-happiness/The-Intoxication-of-Life...

Happiness isn't either/or

[quote=freedom]I'm not sure about Buddhism, but other wisdom traditions have a concept of always moving up or down a ladder. I'm not sure I agree with this happiness seeking. Inner peace to me seems to imply an alignment of the inner and external worlds such that whatever conflict remains is surmountable. That may lead to happiness or unhappiness or neither. Lack of inner peace will almost always lead to unhappiness. I can agree that we seek to not experience unhappiness, but I'm not certain that requires that we seek happiness. If happiness is not attained, there is disappointment. If we resist nothing and seek nothing, happiness just is or isn't.

On intoxication I found http://www.sufimessage.com/alchemy-of-happiness/The-Intoxication-of-Life...

If you seek to avoid unhappiness, you are trying to become more happy. I am not saying happiness is absolute - it is very much a relative phenomena. I think of happiness as a complex of thoughts and actions. Different actions and thoughts either detract from or add to the complex. The more extensive and sturdy the complex gets, the happier you are. This is a very simplified way of looking at happines, but I hope you get the general idea.

about the link- looks interesting, will read it tomorrow, I am almost asleep in front of the computer...

How so?

[quote=wings]
If you seek to avoid unhappiness, you are trying to become more happy. [/quote]

How so? I seek a genuine center. Not the extreme of unhappiness or happiness. Perhaps a place on the happiness ladder from which one feels no compulsion to move from or toward anything.

Less unhappy = happier

[quote=freedom]
How so? I seek a genuine center. Not the extreme of unhappiness or happiness. Perhaps a place on the happiness ladder from which one feels no compulsion to move from or toward anything.[/quote]

Why would you not want to be at the top of the happiness ladder, or at least as high up as you can get? I get the genuine center-idea, it's a core Buddhist thought, but being happy is the goal that makes the most sense (or at least, the least nonsense). Every other goal we have is a stepping stone to gain happiness, and many of them are necessary in order to come closer, but as I see it, the end result should be happiness.

 

Where's the top?

Where's the top? You'll never get there if you keep going. That to me is the strongest support against a goal of happiness. There is no end. You can always have more. Genuineness or inner peace seem better goals because they are self-limiting. The West seems happiness obsessed. It moves crap off the shelves. What do the Buddhists say about happiness as a goal?

[quote=wings] Every other goal we have is a stepping stone to gain happiness, and many of them are necessary in order to come closer, but as I see it, the end result should be happiness. [/quote]

Does this not reflect the happiness obsession? Everything you do revolves around happiness? Is that true? You body isn't functioning at this moment for happiness. What does that tell you? Imagine the ladder being a treetop. If you climb too high, the branches can't support your weight. There is a sweet spot.

The quest for more happiness ends with Nirvana.

[quote=freedom]Where's the top? You'll never get there if you keep going. That to me is the strongest support against a goal of happiness. There is no end. You can always have more. Genuineness or inner peace seem better goals because they are self-limiting. The West seems happiness obsessed. It moves crap off the shelves. What do the Buddhists say about happiness as a goal?

[quote=wings] Every other goal we have is a stepping stone to gain happiness, and many of them are necessary in order to come closer, but as I see it, the end result should be happiness. [/quote]

Does this not reflect the happiness obsession? Everything you do revolves around happiness? Is that true? You body isn't functioning at this moment for happiness. What does that tell you? Imagine the ladder being a treetop. If you climb too high, the branches can't support your weight. There is a sweet spot.[/quote]

Well, the "sweet spot" is what Buddhists call Nirvana - total enlightment. What that is precisely, I cannot tell you, naturally. But it is an end of our development and search for happiness.

happiness does not "move stuff off the shelves" (meaning supporting capitalism, I take it) - intoxication does that. Buy more, get more intoxicated. It's got nothing to do with happiness.

The fact that my body is a product of evolution, and therefore not designed to go for happiness instead of intoxication is just an obstacle. Maybe the biggest obstacle. Not everything I do revolves around happiness. My body is not designed for happiness, but for procreation. Our nature is the result of evolution, but that doesn't mean we have to be slaves of nature. Not everything natural is good.

Let me try another approach.

Let me try another approach. If you want, can you be at happiness? I've been to Tibet and Tibetan areas of China. Due to language barriers I couldn't interact too much. My sense was that there is a focus on an inner peace with the now as the path to Nirvana. Nirvana isn't up or down the ladder. It is where you are. It is always present. It isn't the end of development. You can grow within Nirvana without moving elsewhere.

For arguments sake, let's maintain that intoxication and happiness are different. But perhaps we've become intoxicated with our quest for happiness. Happiness needs no quest as it is present now. If happiness were elsewhere, how could one make the choice to be happy?

If you feel your body isn't designed for happiness, perhaps you don't need happiness. What purpose would happiness serve for you? Does it serve you or your mind? Does it enhance you or your perceptions of you?

The quest for spiritual virtues and happiness are the same

"Nirvana isn't up or down the ladder. It is where you are. It is always present."

Nirvana isn't a place, it's a state of mind, a state of being. It is the end result of understanding the world, which coincides with happiness.

"For arguments sake, let's maintain that intoxication and happiness are different. But perhaps we've become intoxicated with our quest for happiness."

Well, first off, intoxication and happiness is definitely not the same. Have we become intoxicated with our quest for happiness? I really can't answer that. I do not feel intoxicated when I think or do things that will make me happier.

"Happiness needs no quest as it is present now. If happiness were elsewhere, how could one make the choice to be happy? "

The choice to be happy is actually a choice to pursue happiness. Happiness is potentially present in every moment, but to feel it, you have to go through a development that makes you see and understand the world in a certain way.

"What purpose would happiness serve for you? Does it serve you or your mind? Does it enhance you or your perceptions of you?"

There are no higher purposes. Everything else takes second place to happiness. Why would you want anything else than happiness? I can't think of anything that I would want more.

Happiness goes hand in hand with all the values you mention. You can't be happy without them. So the quest for spiritual virtues is the same as the quest for happiness.

I liked this

talk very much. Thanks for posting it. Let our first thought be towards one another "I want you to be happy." But to have a business model with this... completely revolutionary.

As long as you have enough

As long as you have enough awareness the same transformation of your sexual energy to higher energy will happen even if you go into the orgasm landscape. My opinion is that the slowness of karezza and the great lengths taken to keep the energy calm is the requirement of people that do not have strong enough awareness yet to transform the energy when it gets to hot and filled with desire. Even ejaculatory sex can done without any loss of energy, actually with gains in energy, if you have enough awareness and are open enough when you do it. THe user Seth Ananda at thetaobums.com which is very experienced in tantra wrote a post about how that is the case for him in periods when he feels unusually open and free. THe user MAL at the same forum learnt some simple awareness techniques in the Kundalini Awakening Process course that allows him to have ejaculatory sex, even ejaculatory masturbation, without loosing but actually gaining energy. In Buddhist tantra they use emotions such as hate and extreme lust and then transform it. THis is way too difficult for people with out a VERY solid base in meditation and energy practices. So for most of us, including myself at this point, following the "standard protocol" of Karezza is necessary in order to get lost in the wrong kind of energy. But that is not actually because of the protocol itself but the level of awareness it allows an average person to have.

Thanks for your thoughts

We think there's a fair amount of science that explains why we mere mortals need to stick with karezza...at least until we're walking on water. Smile Read our book Cupid's Poisoned Arrow if you're curious.

In any case, the goal of this practice...at least on this site...is strengthening harmony between partners, not moving the kundalini. In other words, it's a bit different from tantra, which seems to be more focused on individual spiritual questing even if a partner is employed in the process.

Well, that`s what I said

Well, that`s what I said isen`t it. That most people, myself included, need the Karezza approach in order to make this work. However, it is interesting, and I would actually say important, to understand that the key factor is awareness not slowness in and of itself. THe slowness allows most people to be sufficiently aware and not grasp too much. But with after cultivating enough awareness one is able to transform lower energy to higher energy more easily. That is why I gave the examples from Buddhist tantra. With enough awareness and letting go you can be more flexible. Diane Richardson says many times in her books that it is awareness that transforms the energy. It is good to know this so on does not atatch oneself to the outer form of doing things too much and only feel bound to using it when it serves its purpose.

Well, I started reading

Well, I started reading Mantak Chias books and experimenting with them but naturally gravitated towards letting things happen only through awareness and intent and had more success with that. Only later have I read Diana`s books and I don`t have a girlfriend now and don`t want to have one for quite some time so when I have sex I don`t want to have it like that because I think it easily makes you fall in love and I try to avoid that now. So what I have gotten from Diana`s books was really mostly a confirmation about how I felt it was right to do these things for me. The thing I have learnt from here that I have been able to apply somewhat is the natural interplay between the penis and vagina when you just let things happen. I try to cool things down some of the time and just feel the interplay which is wonderful.

No, I have just ooked at his

No, I have just ooked at his website. I firmly believe in the wisdom of keeping the energy out of the "red zone" to avoid hangovers (that is unless you have enough awareness and then the red zone actually changes character). So I would follow a strict Karezza protocol for a long time untill I felt familiar enough with it and then try out variations to the approach and track the effects. I am drawn to an approach that balances active as in moving both physically and conciously moving energy and passive as remaining physically still and letting the energy go where it wants so maybe I will like Bass`approach. Thanks for the tip.

OH, for a great resource

OH, for a great resource about Buddhism that should clear up some of the arguments here check out Shinzen Youngs website and look in the article section. Especially his articles about equanimity, escaping into life and pain are good for understanding essential Buddhism.

I can`t remember exactly. I

I can`t remember exactly. I think there is only one maybe to about equanimity but then there are other ones about the other topics I mentioend and a bunch of others about other things. He explains things as clearly as a scientist