Valentine's Special: On Sex And Enlightenment

[Mondsee]

On 18 de febrero de 2017 at 1:56 PM, Deep said:

I would recommend having sex before enlightenment because your lust will decrease after enlightenment.

@Deep In theory you could have a point, but I'm afraid that recommendation is hard to put in practice because:

On 16 de febrero de 2017 at 8:00 PM, Mondsee said:

in the end both are things that are not so easy to schedule on a calendar. We cannot tell when it's going to be the right time for good sex, it'll come, or not, and same applies for enlightenment. If we're lucky and focus on it, it might surprise us some day at any time!

 

[Empty]

@Mondsee I heard Osho saying that he enjoyed Sex more when he became enlightened!!

[Mondsee]

@Empty Maybe, maybe... But that's not what I'm about here.

I'm referring to the fact that better or worst, if he hadn't had sex before he became enlightened, he wouldn't have been able to state he enjoyed it more after enlightened, because he wouldn't have been able to compare it.

[Empty]

@Mondsee 

I think to become enlightened, nothing should be a barrier. Sex, relationship, money problems, etc.  However, it is wiser to have those things before becoming enlightned

 

Edited February 19, 2017 by Empty

[Emerald]

On 2/14/2017 at 2:01 PM, Mondsee said:

Soooo... I'll start by saying that i was kind of ashamed of asking this publicly, but since I haven't gotten the question out of my head for days, here I go:

I don't really know how to explain this without telling a little about how I experienced love in my life, so bare with me please. I always think back to my early teenage years with a smile on my face, specially when I remember when I started liking this one guy, and then I discovered he liked me back. We started dating for... quite a long time actually, and it was so nice just being with him, and talking about all sorts of stuff together and during that period, we wouldn't even touch each other, like... not at all, maybe just a little hug to say hi.

One day he asked me if I wanted to be his girlfriend, for me there was no answer other than yes, and only then did we kiss for the first time. If being just around him was for me the best thing in the world, when we kissed I was sure there was nothing better in life. It all slowly developed and I had time to cherish every single new experience as the best thing in life, even holding hands was something extremely special and I would think about it for hours. At some point, the kisses were no longer only in the mouth haha and I thought it was amazing how every time there was really something even better out there to discover. Sad ending: we finished school, moved to different countries and after the first semester we broke up. That is a different story, but what is relevant here is that we never reached the point of having sex.

Ever since then, I've had a couple opportunities of having sex (specifically coitus) both in a serious relationships as well as in rather casual encounters, but I've never wanted to because I believe in waiting for the right person and time to make the best out of it, just the way I did with all other things that come before sex. I remember feeling a little pity for my high school girlfriends that had jumped from not even having a boyfriend to having sex and missing out and enjoying all other things around that. I thought for them, holding hands with someone would never be as special as it once was for me, because they already knew it all. I thought of it as reading the last chapter of a book before even starting it. I might be wrong, but that is what I believed.

Now you might be wandering what this all has to do with enlightenment. Well currently, I'm single, in fact, I'm single since not so long ago, and coincidently, this was the time when I started learning about enlightenment (coincidently because I started watching Leo's videos in chronological order about one and a half years ago), and I thought, well, let's assume the highly unlikely scenario of me doing all the hard work to become enlightened, and me actually getting enlightened before I ever had sex. Wouldn't it be then like skipping a middle step? I imagine sex at its best might be like... ok, maybe not the best, but one of the best experiences of the (unaware, i.e. unenlightened) human being. So if you have good sex and are not enlightened, then you might experience first as the best thing ever, and then... there is still enlightenment waiting out for you, to show you you were wrong! There was something even better! But if you get enlightened and then have sex, then I agree, sex might then be even better, but you'll never had experienced the one step before that, the "unenlightened amazing sex".

Please understand this is how the question came to be, and I know that will very likely not be my case, but I'm still interested in what you think about this. Should we seek enlightenment after enjoying the entire potential of non-enlightenment life, or just seek enlightenment right away because who wants to waist time living a limited life? Don't you see it as spoiling to yourself that all what you already knew as good, can be extremely better?

Thank you for reading up until this point! I hope it wasn't so boring! 

Enlightenment has a lot to do with letting go and seeing reality as it is. This means letting go of mentally created frameworks and rules. It seems to me from the post, that you have a lot of ideas and personal rules that revolve around sex. Rules that are likely subtly projected onto reality (not enough to where others could call you dogmatic or judgmental), but probably strictly enforced on yourself internally from the ego's inner bully. Things that are okay. Things that are not okay. Things that are preferable. Pre-conceived notions, ect. This is just a guess, from my own past experiences, but it sounds familiar. But, as a married woman, sex is a lot like eating. It's very enjoyable and can be intense, but there doesn't need to be any extra meanings attached to it as relationship newbies often expect.

It also seems like you have a lot of ideas and notions surrounding enlightenment. So, I recommend letting go of all of these ideas and listening to what you really want and how you really feel. Be aware of what you really want. Do you feel like seeking Truth? If yes, seek Truth. If no, don't seek Truth. Do you feel like having sex? If yes, have sex. If no, don't have sex. Do you feel like having sex and seeking Truth? If yes, do both. If no, do neither. Don't listen to the thoughts, listen to the emotions. Thoughts lie, emotions do not.

Life is leading everyone to enlightenment anyway, as enlightenment is more toward Truth and chaos. It's easier to make a mess than to maintain a home. And, in this analogy, the mess is enlightenment. It's the natural state. So, don't be afraid to make a mess and break rules. Let yourself do things that seem to contradict each other. All you have to do is let your illusions unravel themselves. So, seek enlightenment through getting in touch with Truth. Truth (aka reality) can be found in the present moment and the emotions you're feeling. 

So, I would start with getting a really deep understanding of what motivates you and what you really want. Then, have no preconceived notions, and steer life in any direction that makes you feel expansive. Let your intuition guide you, not your thoughts. 

[Mondsee]

3 minutes ago, Emerald Wilkins said:

Enlightenment has a lot to do with letting go and seeing reality as it is. This means letting go of mentally created frameworks and rules. It seems to me from the post, that you have a lot of ideas and personal rules that revolve around sex. Rules that are likely subtly projected onto reality (not enough to where others could call you dogmatic or judgmental), but probably strictly enforced on yourself internally from the ego's inner bully. Things that are okay. Things that are not okay. Things that are preferable.

True, I was educated in a traditional culture where everyone deny sex before marriage although everyone does have sex before marriage. The church is still a very very central institution over here, so I do believe all that nonsense might have had an impact on me, and much more back then when I was a girl that wanted to do things "right", whatever that might have meant. But all that story I'm just telling to let you know how I came up with that idea. And the plane idea simply is that if someone never has had sex, becomes enlightened and then has sex for the first time, he or she won't be able to compare it to sex before enlightenment.

12 minutes ago, Emerald Wilkins said:

It also seems like you have a lot of ideas and notions surrounding enlightenment. So, I recommend letting go of all of these ideas and listening to what you really want and how you really feel. Be aware of what you really want. Do you feel like seeking Truth? If yes, seek Truth. If no, don't seek Truth. Do you feel like having sex? If yes, have sex. If no, don't have sex. Do you feel like having sex and seeking Truth? If yes, do both. If no, do neither.

I agree with this but...

12 minutes ago, Emerald Wilkins said:

Don't listen to the thoughts, listen to the emotions. Thoughts lie, emotions do not.

...listening to my emotions, is listening to my thoughts, just in an unconscious way. In the end, emotions are the product of our thoughts! Therefore, Thoughts lie, and emotions follow them.

But yes, I also agree many questions can find its true answer by practicing introspection.

[Emerald]

41 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

True, I was educated in a traditional culture where everyone deny sex before marriage although everyone does have sex before marriage. The church is still a very very central institution over here, so I do believe all that nonsense might have had an impact on me, and much more back then when I was a girl that wanted to do things "right", whatever that might have meant. But all that story I'm just telling to let you know how I came up with that idea. And the plane idea simply is that if someone never has had sex, becomes enlightened and then has sex for the first time, he or she won't be able to compare it to sex before enlightenment.

Don't worry about this. It will all be the same. Sex will function the same way as before. Only you'll be more connected and aware of the reality of the matter. You will be with the experience and not with your interpretation of the experience.

43 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

...listening to my emotions, is listening to my thoughts, just in an unconscious way. In the end, emotions are the product of our thoughts! Therefore, Thoughts lie, and emotions follow them.

But yes, I also agree many questions can find its true answer by practicing introspection.

This is not the case. Emotions are primary, and the thought come afterward to make sense of the emotions, to make them make sense to the human mind. Now, I think what you're thinking about is that a thought (as a lone occurrence) can spark emotions. You think "I did a great job." and you feel happy. You think "I'm such a failure." and you feel sad. This is true in this respect. But the emotion happens before thoughts come in and attempt to make meaning of the emotions. To bypass the emotional reaction and go straight to the thoughts and interpretations is what makes the emotion unconscious. Because you're bypassing reality for an interpretation of reality. It's the same problem with unconsciousness of all phenomenon. Unconsciousness is to bypass reality for the interpretation of reality that's created by thoughts. So, listening to your emotions is not listening to your thoughts in an unconscious way. Listening to your emotions is to become more conscious of the reality that gives way to thoughts, so that you understand that your thoughts are a measuring tool that too small to quantify the infinite reality. 

[Mondsee]

On 2/19/2017 at 4:41 PM, Emerald Wilkins said:

This is not the case. Emotions are primary, and the thought come afterward to make sense of the emotions, to make them make sense to the human mind.

This might be a debatable point. You are suggesting thoughts come after emotions to explain them to the mind, like this:

EMOTION --> THOUGHT

I'm not quite sure that emotions are primary. If emotions are primary, then where do they come from? where and why do they originate? I see the source of emotions in thought:

THOUGHT --> EMOTION

What I think that can be primary, is instinct (not to be confused with emotion) so there is an external situation (rather than thought) and an instinctive reaction follows:

EXTERNAL SITUATION --> INSTINCTIVE REACTION

On 2/19/2017 at 4:41 PM, Emerald Wilkins said:

Now, I think what you're thinking about is that a thought (as a lone occurrence) can spark emotions. You think "I did a great job." and you feel happy. You think "I'm such a failure." and you feel sad. This is true in this respect. But the emotion happens before thoughts come in and attempt to make meaning of the emotions.

Translated into this example you are suggesting that:

YOU DO SOMETHING --> AN EMOTION ARISES --> YOU EXPLAIN IT TO YOURSELF WITH THOUGHTS

You do something --> Happiness arises --> You think that was a good thing, and explain to yourself that's the reason you feel happy

You do something --> Sadness arises --> You think that was a bad thing, and explain to yourself that's the reason you feel sad

 

Translated into this example I am suggesting that:

YOU DO SOMETHING --> YOU EXPLAIN IT TO YOURSELF WITH THOUGHTS --> AN EMOTION ARISES

You do something --> You think that was a good thing --> Happiness arises

You do something --> You think that was a bad thing --> Sadness arises

On 2/19/2017 at 4:41 PM, Emerald Wilkins said:

To bypass the emotional reaction and go straight to the thoughts and interpretations is what makes the emotion unconscious. Because you're bypassing reality for an interpretation of reality. It's the same problem with unconsciousness of all phenomenon. Unconsciousness is to bypass reality for the interpretation of reality that's created by thoughts. So, listening to your emotions is not listening to your thoughts in an unconscious way. Listening to your emotions is to become more conscious of the reality that gives way to thoughts, so that you understand that your thoughts are a measuring tool that too small to quantify the infinite reality. 

Lastly you suggest this:

YOU DO SOMETHING --> AN EMOTION ARISES AND YOU IGNORE IT --> YOU UNCONSCIOUSLY EXPLAIN IT TO YOURSELF WITH THOUGHTS

Which is equivalent to:

YOU DO SOMETHING --> AN EMOTION ARISES AND YOU ACKNOWLEDGE IT --> YOU CONSCIOUSLY UNDERSTAND THE SOURCE OF THOUGHTS

To this last model I believe that:

YOU DO SOMETHING --> A THOUGHT ARISES AND YOU IGNORE IT --> AN EMOTION UNCONSCIOUSLY ARISES

Which is equivalent to:

YOU DO SOMETHING --> A THOUGHT ARISES AND YOU ACKNOWLEDGE IT --> YOU CONSCIOUSLY UNDERSTAND THE SOURCE OF EMOTIONS

So maybe this is all a rethorical misunderstanding and you’re trying to recommend that I listen to my INSTINCTIVE REACTION. Is that the case?