In Defense of Promiscuity

 I have been a member of 2 Tibetan buddhist communities and in both communities the teachers appeared to be confused themselves about the difference between sex as a spiritual practice and sex as promiscuity or as dating.

There is a big difference. Sex as spiritual practice is about surrender and does not lead to attachment. So far I have not met a teacher who is actually developed enough to offer this option. They may exist.  I am interested to hear if anyone feels they have met such a teacher. It has nothing to do with the situation described in this article. 

Personally, I have decided working it all out in my own committed relationship is the best option for me.

Was this 19 year old woman very highly developed and able to engage with multiple spiritual teachers at that level? If she was, would she be propositioning a Zen teacher in a room full of other listeners? And apparently doing this whenever she met a "qualified" teacher?

Does this sound like nonattachment and surrender?

It does not to me. It sounds no different than women who chase rock stars and hockey players. The psychotherapists in the crowd would probably suspect a deeply wounded relationship with her father and a superficial yearning for attention, covering over a deeper yearning for a teacher who will say no to her and guide her deeper to her woundedness so she can heal.

What about the teacher? Let's wait the next installment and see how he responds to her. If he has sex with her he is feeding his own narcicism and violating her spiritual search. If he doesn't,  there is  an opportunity for him to assist her in the long journey of waking up and healing her core wounds.

Is Jun Po playing with us by naming this writing "In defense of Promiscuity"(which is what a yes to this student would be). I hope so and if he is thanks for the fun!

...is the rest of this series? What is going on here? Is I-I no longer supporting this idea in some official way?

--

"The Left Hand Path, not merely the Right ... must take the lead."

~SES pg. 148

This seems that you wanted to share your own escapade of how you were sexually desired. The topic is all about You! Lucky You.   

With all the intellectuals on this site, and the use of deep philosphical insights and spiritual related heavyness that we bring to sex, maybe we all could consider the possibility of watching some Howard Stern and some of the adult film stars he has on his program to lighten us all up.

They maybe more developed in that line and we could laugh at our conditioning and just plan have fun. And is it really heavy and serious or are we just bringing heavyness and seriousness to it thus blocking out the experience of fun, or whatever experience you as creator want to create.

Yes, consider the possibility that maybe a Zen master could lighten up about sex by watching Howard.....just in that line of development.

I don't know how the story will turn out, but I'm grateful for your post.

Mark

sex with a spiritual teacher severs the student teacher relationship. no one should confuse themselves with the clarity of this point.

(tweeted yesterday)

Boundaries are broken if a teacher sleeps with a student.  Boundaries add structure.  Structure allows for safety.  Safety allows for expansion into the realization of who we ultimately are.  This way the ego is in service to the "I Am".  Saying these boundaries are not relevant or unimportant is having the ego in service to itself.   

 “Everybody {including spiritual teachers} wants to taste

A little something carbon-based

Sex is proof the Holy Ghost

Crawls around in stuff that’s gross”  --Stuart Davis {brackets mine}

This is an intriguing and thoughtful post, thank you so much Jun Po Roshi for your openness and courage to “go there” with this topic. I am very interested to see where this one goes.  I guess my own answer to “should spiritual teachers sleep with their students?” would be that it really depends on the teacher and the student in question and the context.  I can see both the possibility for a hugely positive and enlightening relationship for both parties, or some really heinously sick stuff.  Or some mixture thereof. 

One of the things that drew me to Vajrayana Buddhism ( I was raised Lutheran--Catholic Lite) was the option that clergy had to be celibate or not, and that there were respected teachers in the community who were single, dating, and nobody seemed to have a problem with it.  I received invaluable teachings from clergy who were married and had children (so they were obviously having sex!) about marriage and sexual love as spiritual practice—their own experience with the daily grit of relationship gave them an ability to teach deeply about compassion and nonattachment in the messy heat of romantic love.  The concept that all experience: lust, love/relationship/parenthood, sex, anger, desire, grief, etc. could actually be useful in spiritual practice resonated with me deeply.  I found practices and tools to understand and embrace my sexuality and also to have good boundaries and clear values about sex in a culture that is extremely confused about the whole business.  As an abuse survivor I badly needed a safe place to sort all these things out from a spiritual perspective, and I received that in abundance from the Karma Kagyu sangha.  And no, I never slept with a teacher and I never heard of anyone who did, and I think that in general that's a good thing.  

I often hear the sentiment expressed among Buddhists about wanting to “get beyond” such messy, pants-around-the-ankles, embarrassing stuff as sex and relationships.  It has always bugged me because it seems just another hangover from Christian culture—we need to be “above” sex, and that especially goes for our spiritual teachers.  This seems to lead to a culture of secrecy and shame in sanghas—rather than dealing with the irrepressible nature of sex openly, it is swept under the rug. 

I owe a great deal of my current happiness in marriage to the courage of my Karma Kagyu teachers in keepin’ it real—holding a space into which I could ask the difficult questions closest to my heart, and answering me with profound honesty, humor and kindness.  Thank you Jun Po Roshi for showing the same courage and honesty in writing from your own experience.  Looking forward to the next post….

This issue is so complex with so many levels and so many perspectives.  It would seem to me that, as someone above mentioned, it is necessary to see how our actions will impact others.  One perspective that was left out was that of the "student".  How will it affect her, if the teacher and she have sex.   Boundaries are important.  If the "student" and "teacher" have an affair, he is raising her above that of the other sangha members.  Any "promotion" will be suspect, even if deserved, from this point on.

If the woman is truly "awake", she will not need to be his "student".   She could sit by his side, which would be the truth of their relationship.  Or, he could offer his sexual/romantic self conditioned on her finding another teacher.  Boundaries would not be violated.  Green thinks that there is no hierarchy.  Hierarchy is very important here.

I remember Genpo's talk about the "student/teacher" relationship and how it is important for there to be a hierarchy.  He talked about his teacher and how he couldn't accept the "water" if he didn't get under the spigot.  The leveling of the playing field by sleeping with a student is going to do exactly what he said it was important not to do in order to learn.  This relates directly to the "student" in this case. 

In the story above, the young woman began by asking a flirtateous question.  He responded with a similar answer.  She initiated it and he took it one step beyond.  I believe he said he had noticed her before.  (Is this a real story?)  Each person needs to decide at this point what they want.  What do you really want?  How will this affect others in my life?  Is it something I can do and be totally honest with people about (including my sangha) if they ask?

I do not see the student as being "helpless".  As a matter of fact, she is being pro-active about what she wants by asking the question.  He, though, is in charge.  He can set boundaries and so can she. 

Sanghas replicate families and the hierarchy there in many ways.  Who is in charge?  I love the post that talks about the guidelines for IMS.  Very clear and add structure.  Green doesn't like structure.  Some structure is good and creates boundaries, clarity and space.

This is all on the manifest Earthly level.  On this level we do know some of what the story is (the one written above).  It is very simplistic.  As far as Genpo, we do not know.  We only make up our own stories about this.  On the Earthly level we can be saddened by the events at Kanzeon Zen Center and Big Mind, etc., and losing our own projection that we have whapped onto our beloved teacher.  We can be saddened by what this may have done to his family.  We can be saddened by what the actions of both parties have done to Genpo and his student.  On another level, we can never know what this will do, what this will bring.  Maybe divorced from Zen, Big Mind will flourish like never before.  Maybe his marriage will grow stronger.  Maybe he by giving up the power that he had, he will find total unconditional love for himself without having to be anyone special.  We just can't know.  This is on the highest level, though.  On the everyday life level we need to honor our commitments, until we cannot any longer.  At this point true honesty is imperative.  We are never locked into anything.  If we remember who we really are at the ultimate level, we (as one person said above) only are hurting ourselves if we are not totally honest.  The precepts are not "adhered" to but are rather done naturally out of knowing who we are.  If we remember who we are ultimately, we never need to lie.

Now would be an excellent time for Big Heart to flourish

Jun Po Kelly Roshi-- Zen Abbot, ex-LSD manufacturer, 2nd-tier romance novelist

Keep it up Jun Po!  Shouldn't be hard with such a Goddess ;)

My preference is that teachers simply state:  

    In our group, this is what we do, and this is what we don't do. (and that list can be anything)

For example, "in our group the married teacher sometimes has affairs, and everybody knows about it, including his wife"

I can then ponder for myself whether I agree with that or not, and if I don't, I can wonder whether I'm on the wrong side of the pre/trans fallacy, or whether they are, and if I can't decide, then I can wonder about it as a big human experiment, and question whether I want anything to do with it.

But if a teacher or therapist or whatever, says to another:

    Sex with a student is not appropriate.

And then they go ahead and do it anyway later, then they have broken their word.

I don't imagine it is easy for anyone in the public limelight who is admired by the young nubile audience. I don't presume to judge that sort of situation. 

But if it is going to happen, then just be honest about it.  "Look, from experience we know that monks end up having 'inappropriate' sex so we're just going to stop claiming that we don't. If you tempt us we probably will, so we're just not going to have that rule anymore. We try not to be promiscuous, but officially, there is no rule, and officially, even if there were such a rule it would be an empty and misleading one which creates falseness, two-ness, dis-."

It is the same with marriage vows. People can ponder over the complexity of the matters, but simply, if a person makes an agreement, then they keep the agreement. If they break the agreement, they fess up right away, they don't let an affair continue for weeks and months and years. If they are a couple who intend to carry on with others as a lifestyle, then let that be their agreement. 

Besides, I would guess that part of the complexity is that, the moment a monk declares, "we don't have sex with students!", the most nubile prettiest thing you could imagine will spontaneously appear in the front row, and say, "oh really?"

So if people want to make that the challenge which they want to work with, then they'll be challenged in that way. 

It is like if someone wanted to make their integrity about money the thing they wanted to become very conscious and firm about, then next thing you know a giant sack full of cash will fall off the back of a lorry, testing whether they can exercise their integrity to do the right thing.

PS EDIT:

If a Zen master said to his audience, "I am a Zen master, and by the way -- and I'm serious -- if any of you young pretty radiant divine women want to have sex with me, meet me in the bar afterwards.", do we imagine the outcome of the romance story might look a little different? 

I've just started wondering why I've been waving the "keeping your word" stick around so much in my comments.

I just realised that the post is called "In Defense of Promiscuity", but its timing is in relation to "adultery" (if I have understood correctly.)

So the difference between the two -- promiscuity and adultery -- has to do with agreements and integrity and keeping the word, keeping the vows, honouring trust.  

It is almost like some kind of test; can the intellect be clear enough to respond to this blog without mixing it up with Genpo Merzel's story?  The scenario raised here is about promiscuity, not adultery. Peculiar.

Is this blog supposed to be related to Genpo Merzel story??

So happy to see this up Jun Po.  

This topic reminds me of a blog post of Stuart's I remember being very struck by back in the day:

http://www.stuartdavis.com/blog/uh-oh-its-back-sex-we-must-regress-include-and-heal-then-move-again 

Jun Po -- is this issue REALLY about sleeping with students?  I don't think so, although that is a part of it, which you are addressing here.

The point, to my mind, is that Genpo failed the interpersonal test of "what will the impact of my actions be on my wife and family" (1st); then 2nd, "what will be the impact of my actions on my sangha?"; and then, perhaps, third: "what will be the impact of my actions on the broader integral movement?"

I also fail this test sometimes, although grace be to spirit so far have not had an extra-marital affair.  My failures are in other areas.  When I fail and when people point out my failure, then hopefully I try to address it.  Having a community of people who will point out my shadows is crucial. Perhaps Genpo was lonely at the top -- did not have this kind of support system.  As men, I believe we really need to work to develop this for each other.  

To reiterate: your headline misses the point to me.

Yours,

Durwin 

--

Durwin Foster

durwinfoster@gmail.com

Jun Po, thank you very much for blogging here. I have enjoyed reading about your life and your teachings a great deal.

I don't know if you intend to write a second part to this; it sounds like maybe there is a second part coming. In any case, I have a question or comment or two in the meantime.

For one thing, I wonder if you really mean to use the word "promiscuity." Different dictionaries will give different definitions, but sometimes the word has very strong connotations that I am not sure you intend. Here is the definition of "promiscuous" from the the American Heritage dictionary:

pro·mis·cu·ous    (pr-msky-s) KEY 

ADJECTIVE:

1. Having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners; indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners.
2. Lacking standards of selection; indiscriminate.
3. Casual; random.
4. Consisting of diverse, unrelated parts or individuals; confused: "Throngs promiscuous strew the level green" (Alexander Pope). [2]

Regarding the first definition, I don't think you could mean "indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners." I'm not sure you even mean "having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners." In any case, I imagine people could interpret your post in many different ways, perhaps in some ways that you wouldn't condone, so more detail might be helpful.

Just for fun I will run down a list of questions I think are relevant when it comes to teachers sleeping with students, including some that have already been raised:

1. Will it be evolutionary for the student in each quadrant?
2. Will it be evolutionary for the teacher in each quadrant? For his or her family in each quadrant?
3. Will it be evolutionary for the sangha in each quadrant?
4. How will it affect individual members of the sangha in each quadrant?
5. How might it affect particular relationships between the teacher and other students? For example, could it become a distraction or lead to mistrust?
6. How will apprentice teachers and dharma heirs behave if their teacher uses or used the study body as a pool for dating and sex?
7. Will it be evolutionary for the dharma? How will it be received by the larger culture in which the sangha exists? There could be a lot of variation here, depending on region and country.
8. How important is sex in the dharma? What place does sex have in the dharma itself?
9. If a teacher has a sexual relationship with a student, could it perhaps obstruct a longer-term relationship between two students?

One thing we have to consider is the UR aspect--promiscuity can lead to transmission of all sorts of diseases. These diseases can affect the body/mind in degenerative ways. Viruses, for example, can have a severe effect on the mind that might not help Zen practice or other spiritual practice but might in fact make it much more difficult. Condoms won't always prevent these diseases. I don't think limiting sexual partners or preaching monogamy or abstinence is puritanical when we consider these UR facts. These modern UR facts may even support the wisdom of some of these premodern precepts. Of course there are also UL emotions to consider, among many other things.

Finally, if the student body is available to teachers for dating and sex, should this be stated plainly in the "About" section on the sangha website? Should it be an explicit part of the sangha's charter or dharma, or should students be left in the dark about this and find out as time goes on? I've looked at the material at mondozen.com, not for the first time, and I've read and heard many beautiful, profound, and powerful things. I love the Five Elements of the Hollow Bones Path, for example, and also your videos with your wife about couples and love, but I don't see any talk about sexual promiscuity or any suggestion that promiscuity among Mondo Zen teachers is condoned. If anything, it seems to leave the opposite impression. You do talk about responding with love if your wife were to say she wanted to sleep with your younger brother and that you would help out by bringing the music and fruit (in the "What Is Love?" video), but you also say that that doesn't mean that her sleeping with your younger brother would necessarily be a good or wise idea. Maybe you could unpack that scenario a little more.

It seems to me you might have left an impression with this post that you didn't intend. It seems to me a better representation of your teachings might be "In Defense of Love," and of course Love can't truly blossom if we are rigidly constrained by fundamentalist (Amber) precepts, but likewise I would say that Love couldn't truly blossom without those Amber precepts, either. It seems to me that you might agree.

In any case, I have enjoyed hearing about your beautiful life and teachings.

Love,

David

Hi Folks,

Promiscuity is a word with a bad connotation, like the word slut, which is why the title of the book is so catchy. The Ethical Slut is a great book about how to be moral and hygenically safe and have sex with multiple people. I highly recommend it. This thread was titled "defense of promiscuity," not defense of spiritual leaders having sex with students, so-- what is the thread really about?

I'd like to see some more authenticity here. There's a conversation underneath this conversation. Some of the posts refer to Genpo directly. Thank you to those people for their directness.

Having multiple sex partners is not the same issue as spiritual teachers having sex with their students. BUT The Ethical Slut is a book that makes one thing very clear: if you are lying to any of your partners, you are out of integrity.

I'm not sure monogamy works. I'm not sure it's important. I'm not sure whether there are instances in which it is appropriate for a spiritual teacher to have sex with a student or not. But I am sure that sex should be conducted ethically, honestly, and openly. Whatever agreements married couples make about sex should be honored by both people. I don't say those agreements have to include monogamy. In fact, likely they shouldn't include monogamy since so many people "cheat."

I think it's time we took a good hard look at our expectations about sex (still so influenced by our Puritan ancestors) and take a good hard look at what's really going on in our world. Sex is used to sell, sex is used to entertain. Sex is everywhere, magazines, movies, Internet. And we allow that. But when it's intimate, with flesh and skin and real bodies, then we get squeamish.

When are we going to get real with ourselves? When are we humans going to admit that we are sexual beings and we want to express our sexuality? Wouldn't more loving and intimate physical contact be better than billboards of impossibly sexy women? Are these "perfect' expressions of sex actually shadow leaks from our intimacy-starved culture? We focus so much on controlling our sexuality, or repressing it, when we will see sex for the emotional and spiritual nourishment and art form it is and begin to focus on expressing it exqusitely, (not for commercial purposes) but for the intimacy, connection and altered state feelings of love sex can evoke?

When will we finally outgrow our preconceived notions about sex, our early conditioning, our guilt and shame? Are we mature enough to be "ethical sluts" yet? The Ethical Slut by Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy is a classic in the ployamory (love of many) community. We Integralists can learn form communities that deal directly and specifically with sex. There's already wisdom out there, more perspectives available to include.

Whatever happens, whatever is going on, let's not lie about it. Let's not pretend. Let's account for human nature, and let's embrace our sexuality and our morality to transcend and include both.

And if we're going to have a conversation about Genpo, or about spiritual teachers having sex, lets admit to that. As to promiscuity, do we have to keep fighting this same battle again and again? Remember "free love?" I do. Some people are not cut out to be monogamous or prefer not to be. Or some situations call for non-monogamy. Can we just be honest and creative enough to sculpt each relationship according to its unique needs and demands?

I'd like to see a lot more honesty around the topic of sex. I'd like to see a lot more first person sharing, people getting real about what's true for them sexually (but of course that would feel very vulnerable and scary.) It's just too easy to sit around making third person judgments on others. And I'm not sure that advances our understanding of sex or how it drives us.

I hope Part 2 will be coming soon.  :-)