Of all the aspects of what a spiritual
life is “supposed” to look like, the dynamic of human
sexuality engenders some of the greatest controversy. Depending on
whom you listen to, sex can be a doorway to illumination and divine
unity, and it can be a self-indulgent pathway to destruction. A majority
of the conundrum seekers face are the differing frameworks that both
ancient and modern teachings offer that address human sexuality.
The Eastern Indian text of the Yoga Sutras laid forth by the sage,
Patanjali, over 2000 years ago was part of the first wave of the
Western embrace of Hindu spiritual culture and traditions. It is,
along with more widely known religious tomes like the Bible and the
Koran, one of the first spiritual guidebooks filtered through human
interpretation and perception that presented itself as Whatever You
Call the Higher Power’s Indisputable Word as to what a religious/spiritual
practice demands. In the Yoga Sutras, aspirants are taught that mastery
over the senses is a necessary step in the attainment of enlightenment.
For many, this criterion was taken quite literally and often expressed
by suppression and self-denial. As we all know, one of the results
of suppression is eventual rebellion, regardless of whether it is
societal or individual.
For some, celibacy is a very appropriate choice reflective of an
authentic understanding of where a person is. But forcing oneself
to push away a large portion of their natural human impulses that
arise from basic instinctual behaviors embedded in our DNA based
on an arbitrary set of “rules” can be disastrous. Forced
celibacy, and/or a mindset that sex and pleasure is “bad” and
will sully a person’s consciousness and keep them separate
from God often results in even greater destructive secondary reactive
behaviors: there are countless stories of priests molesting children
and both men and women finding outlets for their sexual needs in
guilt-ridden secrecy.
Part of what I’ve observed is that people are unclear about
the difference between “conquering” and “transcendence.” If
you look at the world in terms of white and black dualities-light/dark,
good/bad, male/female-you will consistently be struggling with which “side” you’re “supposed” to
be on.
A unified perspective looks at existence
as a reconciliation of opposites; the Yin/Yang symbol that comes
from the Taoist teachings shows the coexistence of white and black
with a point of merging between the two; in other words, we cannot
have day without night. They are intertwined in an endless dance,
just as all apparent opposites are. Therefore, It is ridiculous to
think that we will ever be FULLY light or FULLY dark in terms of
how we show up in the world. A consciously chosen movement towards
the “light” part of the consciousness wheel does not
mean we will fully eliminate our “dark” side, and the
notion of conquering it is futile. Rather than trying to amputate
a part of our self, we can simply choose to transcend it if we so
desire. It’s always there, but we choose not to go there, to
not play on the other side of the playground-not because doing so
is “bad” in terms of a dualistic point of view-but because
we eventually reach a place inside where it simply doesn’t
interest us. Transcendence means the aspect simply loses its “charge,” its
attraction. Conquering implies that the attraction still exists;
we are just stuffing it.
So what is of value here in terms of the topic of sexuality is to
not get caught in the trap of looking at sex as necessarily either “good” or “bad.” Nothing
means anything unless WE decide it does. If we view sexuality from
a position of neutrality and detachment as to its’ meaning,
we are then free to look at it with different eyes.
What IF Mary and Jesus got it on? Why does that frighten and threaten
so many people’s idea of what it means to embrace a holy life?
Does the idea of Jesus having sex with Mary, a woman he loved, have
to threaten people’s idea of what Christianity or Christ Consciousness
is? Why does something natural to being human stir up so much controversy?
In recent years, “the spiritual set” (and I say
that in very broad terms), not wanting to deny their sexuality and
live a life of celibacy, looked for a way to reframe the physical
act into something beyond basic sensual primal gratification (as
if that were necessarily “bad”). So then we saw the trend
toward “sacred sexuality” and the embracing of Buddhist
tantric sexual practices as a means of both justifying desire and
connecting it to the realm of gods and goddesses. Continue reading ->
