I Learned More About Sex When I Gave It Up

May 29th, 2012
4.5
Your rating: None Average: 4.5 (6 votes)

This article was originally posted on Andrew Cohen's BigThink.com blog, "The Evolution of Enlightenment."

The best way to learn about sex is to give it up for a while....  

Thirty years ago, when I was in my mid-twenties, I was a serious spiritual seeker. I’m married now, but during that time I had a number of committed relationships, and when I wasn’t in a relationship, I had flings. Being young and healthy, I was endlessly attracted by the sexual allure of beautiful women. And because I was also a committed meditator, I was becoming more and more aware of the many different ways, both gross and subtle, in which I experienced a profound lack of freedom in relationship to the arising of sexual desire. Over time, I came to recognize that the sexual impulse, once awakened, has a mind of its own.  At times I found myself almost feeling used by the force of nature for its own ends. It’s not that I wasn’t enjoying the ride. It’s just that it was dawning on me how little control I really had over this overwhelming biological instinct. I didn’t have a problem with sex per se, but I felt more and more uncomfortable realizing how little freedom I experienced in relationship to it. Like so many men, when I felt the itch, the only obvious response was to scratch. The erotic imagery that was pouring through my mind, when seen in light of my growing meditative awareness, made me feel more like a conditioned robot than a freely choosing sexual being.

During this same period, I was also reading about great Eastern enlightened masters who were proclaiming the enormous spiritual benefits of sexual abstinence. While I had no intention of becoming a monk or a lifetime renunciate, I became more and more curious to find out what they were speaking about. When my lover at the time and I broke up, I decided to take the plunge. And please keep in mind, I was not living in some monastery high up in the mountains. I was living in the heart of contemporary culture, with all its inherent stimulations—sexual and otherwise—the Big Apple. One day followed another. One week followed another. One month followed another. And suddenly I found myself six months into the wild adventure of celibacy. 

I can still remember the dumbfounded look on a friend’s face when I told him that I’d made it through half a year without having even one orgasm and I was still alive and well! He obviously thought I was mad and couldn’t relate in any way, shape, or form to what I was talking about. I can’t tell you how happy this made me—not happy that I wasn’t having sex, but happy that I no longer felt like such a victim of my own lust. I experienced freedom for the first time in my life in relationship to the most overwhelming force in the universe. And it was so sweet. 

In this experience I saw clearly that my access to happiness, joy, and lightness of being was not dependent upon the regular experience of sexual intimacy. This was nothing short of a religious revelation and it was so, so liberating. “You mean that in order to be truly happy, deeply happy one doesn’t have to be with anyone or have anyone?” No, not really! Wow . . . Many men feel that if they don’t have sex or regularly experience an orgasm that they’re going to die. Maybe not literally die, but close to it. It’s an irrational, biological fear that our culture stokes on a daily basis. That this is not in fact true may sound obvious to some of you, but at a semi-conscious level, I truly believe it’s not that obvious to most men. So to know that we don’t need orgasms to be happy or to feel free is a truly enormous and liberating discovery. It certainly was for me. 

After maintaining the practice of celibacy for almost three years, I started to notice a shift in myself. It seemed as if the lesson had been learned and that my position of abstinence was becoming inauthentic. So when I met a beautiful Chinese woman who was an acquaintance of my brother’s, it was just a matter of weeks before we became lovers. Sex was the same as before—but it was also different. After my “fast” I noticed a freedom in my consciousness that had not been there before. I didn’t feel like a sexual robot living out someone else’s fantasies. It also was refreshingly simple, sweet, and human

I learned more about sex during that three-year period than I have before or since. I know beyond any doubt that my own inner freedom and happiness are not dependent upon the presence of another human being or on any particular biological experience. If we know we don’t need each other in the desperate ways in which we often imagine we do, it changes the romantic and sexual dynamic that we share culturally in dramatic ways. If we can let go of the false promises of the sexual and romantic impulse, when we do come together, we will be able to do so from a much deeper place in ourselves. 

If humanity is evolving, then the timeless truth of spiritual enlightenment must evolve as well. With this breakthrough insight ten years ago, the “Guru & Pandit” dialogues between Ken Wilber and Andrew Cohen were born.

In each issue of the award-winning EnlightenNext magazine, Cohen and Wilber collaborated to deliver mind-expanding investigations that helped to define the contours of a new spiritual worldview for our time. Now, we’re pleased to announce that the Guru and the Pandit are going virtual. Starting on Saturday, June 2nd, Integral Life and EnlightenNext will host four new dialogues between Wilber and Cohen in 2012—live and online, broadcast for free to thousands of listeners worldwide.

Join Andrew Cohen and Ken Wilber on June 2nd for a free broadcast exploring the exceptionally juicy topic of sex and sexual ethics!

CLICK HERE TO LEARN MORE AND REGISTER!

4.5
Your rating: None Average: 4.5 (6 votes)

Comments

I think a problem of understanding arises when we juxtapose "timeless truth" and "evolve" in the same sentence. For many folks there is a vague ascription to Pythagoras who said "truth is that which does not change." I say vague, because even though Pythagoras primarily was referring to the "physical" and we are here talking about the metaphysical, the two realms sort of meld at some semi-conscious level. If evolution means change over time, there is a certain cognitive dissonance when we juxtapose truth and evolution. In making judgements or pronouncements about such things one needs to remember that we don't speak from outside the sphere of experience. We are immersed in it. Objectivity is questionable. I think Dylan Thomas said something like "even though the poet as a barometer, he is still a part of the weather."
If humanity is evolving, then the timeless truth of spiritual enlightenment must evolve as well. Must it??? Or is this a possibility rather than a certainty, a given? As hopeful as the message may be for humanity, I become uneasy when Truth is spoken in this assertive, non-open way. Could just be my very skeptical nature :-). I wonder whether at least some others also feel that such pronouncements may be overstating what we truly can and do know . scg.

Artists love novelty and love creating stuff -- nothing new here.

As for humanity evolving, that seems to happen anyway, and I don't understand this idea of trying to identify with that aspect.

All generations faced problems and tried to work with those problems, and just because the problems are now linked at a planetary level, doesn't mean we have to solve them using a particular notion of spirituality or community.

My guess is that the coming changes will be very subtle (it won't look like anything has changed), but nevertheless they'll be surprising and their effects won't be registered for a generation, yet in hindsight it'll appear obvious how it they were a "needed" solution to a problem. So I'm not sure how it helps to identify with unpredictability per se, and make it a core motivator -- trying to be "completely different" -- other than to just let go, and enjoy the dance.

But still, I don't feel that Nature ever wastes anything -- so along the way there are many experiments running in parallel.

Yes Susanne, there are indeed others who also feel that such pronouncements are somewhat overstated.... Since from a direct experiential perspective, the experience of what is commonly referred to as "spiritual enlightenment" arises as a very discrete state(s) of consciousness involving all dimensions of the person.

It seems that what is "evolving" is our understanding and interpretation of these states and complex developmental processes. May it not very well be that "enlightenment" is simply another stage of development that allows and fosters the capacity of human beings to create and integrate systems of thought that transcend and include our essential and fundamental drive(s) towards further development and inclusion?

Best Regards,

Paul

I agree Susanne that it's quite difficult to write about these questions of "truth", "enlightenment" and "humanity evolving". You appear to have a particular take on the comment "If humanity is evolving, then the timeless truth of spiritual enlightenment must evolve as well" as being an edict about some sort of assertive, non-open expression of "Truth". I understood the statement quite differently and simply as a logical conclusion: if our spiritual lives cannot be separate from our humanity and if humanity is evolving then spiritual enlightenment or consciousness is also evolving. It's not saying anything about "what we can and do know" only that the process is continually evolving.