Sexuality in spirituality

Andrew Sanchez572 said:I’m starting this thread because I’ve been thinking quite a bit about celibacy lately. I took a quick look through our archives, but honestly, I couldn't find anything that really hit the mark. Most discussions regarding sexuality and spiritual paths seem far too broad and superficial for my liking.

In this particular space, I would love for us to focus our discussion on how we might utilize sex, sexual energies, and specific techniques to facilitate spiritual growth and progress... perhaps even exploring the concept of sex itself as a fundamental spiritual principle.

I know I’ve mentioned this in a few other places on the forum already, but I’d like to once again recommend Osho Rajneesh’s little booklet, "Yoga, Tantra and Sex"—if I recall the title correctly, 😳.

Sexual rituals are woven into so many different spiritual traditions, ranging from tantra all the way to Western Hermeticism, so I find it rather curious that a dedicated topic like this hasn't been established yet 👋

Andrew Sanchez572 said:If you actually managed to conquer your own desire, it simply means you didn't want it badly enough in the first place 🙂

Andrew Sanchez572 said:my point exactly
I have absolutely no desire to live in celibacy—honestly, I don't think anyone else whose spiritual practice involves things like sexual rituals would want to, either.
So, it isn't really a question of willpower (since you were specifically focusing on power), but rather a matter of pure desire and intention.

brightnomad5 said:Engaging with sexuality in this manner is recommended for those who possess a spiritual inclination but find living in celibacy to be unfeasible. However, in tantra, the objective isn't the act of sex itself, but rather the redirection of sexual energy toward a different purpose—a process that carries significant risks when attempting to reach a final spiritual goal.

While Eros is natural, within material existence, it most often manifests in a distorted way—if not outright perverted—relative to its original nature.

Indeed, it all comes down to choice, and that choice is rooted in the inclinations of the heart. Such inclinations often depend on a valid and comprehensive view of reality and all the potential possibilities within our reach. If an individual is limited in their knowledge of what is actually available to them, then their inclination—and subsequently their will—will be equally restricted, simply because they aren't accounting for something else that is right there for the taking. What I mean is that free will only truly holds meaning once every single possibility has been carefully considered... only then. Otherwise, it is entirely possible for a person to lean toward one thing merely because they are living under an illusion or remain ignorant of other options, or of everything at their disposal, and how those things might impact their ultimate destiny...

Andrew Sanchez572 said:🙂

Indeed, it all comes down to choice, and that choice is rooted in the inclinations of the heart. Such inclinations often depend on a valid and comprehensive view of reality and all the potential possibilities within our reach. If an individual is limited in their knowledge of what is actually available to them, then their inclination—and subsequently their will—will be equally restricted, simply because they aren't accounting for something else that is right there for the taking. What I mean is that free will only truly holds meaning once every single possibility has been carefully considered... only then. Otherwise, it is entirely possible for a person to lean toward one thing merely because they are living under an illusion or remain ignorant of other options, or of everything at their disposal, and how those things might impact their ultimate destiny...

you've made this quite complicated 😁
celibacy is restrictive, whereas sexuality (spiritual) is liberating 🙂
what I am trying to say is that many people in spiritual circles assume celibacy is the default, when very often that celibacy serves as a mere facade for their own sexual insufficiency, their impotence, and their emotional or affective stiffness.
Similarly, for some people, claiming sexuality is part of their spiritual practice is actually just a cover for their inability to exercise self-control or achieve a more refined experience.

but neither path is correct, nor are they honest regarding one's true spiritual journey.

Andrew Sanchez572 said:...hm.....
I honestly feel that people who are overly obsessed with sex struggle to actually integrate it meaningfully into their spiritual practice.

You frequently use the word 'natural' when discussing sex, and you seem to equate 'natural sexuality' solely with reproduction. Isn't that just a little unrealistic, considering humans remain sexual beings from childhood all the way through death?

That 'principle' you keep bringing up is rooted entirely in patriarchal, monotheistic, Abrahamic religions. It isn't universal, nor is it inherent to our nature. But then again, believers often love to label their specific religious dogmas and principles as being 'natural.'

brightnomad5 said:In pure spirituality, there is no such thing as physical sexuality, because there is no material body, no material mind, no material senses, and no material objects to perceive... none of the elements involved. 😁 Therefore, physical sexuality has nothing to do with spirituality or spiritual Eros. It can only be utilized in a way that is more advantageous (or less detrimental) than someone simply indulging in raw, unrestrained physical sex—a physical activity that provides "intense pleasure" merely because they cannot control that impulse and have become "addicted" to the sensation of physical or refined gratification that the act offers.

It is entirely realistic. Natural sexuality implies conception (though certainly not exclusively so! However, one cannot cherry-pick components and exclude parts of that sublime whole, because then it ceases to be what it is by its very nature. Whether it involves pleasure, emotion, conception, or anything else within that unity). Any intentional interference with the flow of such sexuality—any deviation from its natural course—is clearly unnatural. It is the result of exercising (or abusing) free will, rather than following the nature of the act itself.

Humans are sexual because sex serves a purpose throughout most of life (especially for men). A person may eat throughout their entire life, but that doesn't mean overeating is natural. 😁 Everything has its own nature and purpose, and since humans possess free will, they can choose to act against nature, though that comes with consequences. Someone who overeats eventually compromises their health. This isn't just a religious or spiritual principle; it is a fundamental biological reality, much like sexuality. But, free will exists... so everyone is free to do as they please.

It is entirely realistic. Natural sexuality inherently involves conception (though certainly not exclusively!!! but one shouldn't be timid and exclude any part of that sublime whole, for if one does, it ceases to be what it truly is by its very nature! Whether it be pleasure, emotions, conception, or anything else contained within that totality). Any intentional interference with the flow of such sexuality or any redirection of that natural course is, clearly, unnatural, and the result is an exercise (or misuse) of free will rather than following the natural essence and nature of the act itself.

Humans are sexual because sex serves a purpose during the majority of life (particularly in men). Humans also eat throughout their entire lives, but that doesn't mean it is natural to overeat 😁 Everything has its own nature and purpose, and since humans are beings endowed with free will, one can choose to use things in an unnatural way according to that freedom, though appropriate consequences will follow. One who overeats disrupts their own health over time. This isn't just a religious or spiritual principle, but a fundamental physical principle, much like with sexuality. But then again, there is free will... so, let everyone do as they please.

Andrew Sanchez572 said:On a material level, there exists material sex, whereas on the spiritual level, there is spiritual 🙂
if you view sex merely as something coarse, selfish, and addictive, then, naturally, you are overlooking its function of exchange, giving, creativity, and love, and by doing so, you are closing yourself off from those types of experiences through sex.

It is entirely realistic. Natural sexuality inherently involves conception (though certainly not exclusively!!! but one shouldn't be timid and exclude any part of that sublime whole, for if one does, it ceases to be what it truly is by its very nature! Whether it be pleasure, emotions, conception, or anything else contained within that totality). Any intentional interference with the flow of such sexuality or any redirection of that natural course is, clearly, unnatural, and the result is an exercise (or misuse) of free will rather than following the natural essence and nature of the act itself.

That is completely unrealistic. A woman is only fertile for about three days a month. For all the other days, both the man and the woman can enjoy sex without offspring as a consequence. Not to mention that after menopause, a woman also cannot become pregnant, even though she remains capable of experiencing orgasm.
celibacy can be, and most often is, quite aggressive toward natural human sexuality. Don't men in celibacy experience nocturnal emissions? How natural does that seem to you?
Animals experience sexuality in its most natural form. And among them, there is no celibacy, except when they are ill 🙂
And yet, when I speak of sacred sexuality, I am not suggesting that every instance of sexuality is sacred, but rather that absolutely any instance can be 'sacralized.'

Humans are sexual because sex serves a purpose during the majority of life (particularly in men). Humans also eat throughout their entire lives, but that doesn't mean it is natural to overeat 😁 Everything has its own nature and purpose, and since humans are beings endowed with free will, one can choose to use things in an unnatural way according to that freedom, though appropriate consequences will follow. One who overeats disrupts their own health over time. This isn't just a religious or spiritual principle, but a fundamental physical principle, much like with sexuality. But then again, there is free will... so, let everyone do as they please.

Could you please clarify this for me, specifically regarding how it applies to men?

Why on earth would you assume that having sex automatically means someone is overindulging?
One might say that celibacy is much like fasting when you look at it through the lens of dietary habits.
However, viewing sexuality as a tool for spiritual practice is more akin to being mindful of the fact that everything one consumes provides nourishment... though I suppose that analogy isn't quite perfect.

That is completely unrealistic. A woman is only fertile for about three days out of the month. For the rest of the time, both partners can enjoy sex without any possibility of pregnancy. Not to mention that after menopause, a woman can no longer conceive, even though she is still fully capable of experiencing orgasm.
Celibacy can be, and often is, incredibly aggressive toward our natural human sexuality. Don't men in celibacy just end up carrying around a lot of repressed tension? How natural does that actually seem to you?

Animals experience sexuality in its most natural state. Among them, there is no such thing as celibacy, except when they are ill. 🙂

To be clear, when I talk about sacred sexuality, I’m not suggesting that every sexual act is inherently sacred. However, I firmly believe that any form of sexuality can absolutely be "sacralized."

Could you please explain this to me? I’m particularly interested in how this applies to men.

Why do you assume that having sex automatically means someone is overindulging?

If you look at celibacy through the lens of nutrition, it’s a lot like fasting.

But treating sexuality as a tool for spiritual practice is a bit like realizing you're just eating prasad. Though, I suppose the analogy isn't exactly perfect.

Andrew Sanchez572 said:Honestly, about 90% of what you’ve written feels more like a rigid religious dogma than actual lived experience.
Look, I certainly respect your perspective and your decision to steer clear of practicing spirituality through sex, but I think you’re somewhat underselling the people who actually walk that path.
In my view, sexual magic, Western tantra, and tantra in general aren't some kind of deviant behavior at all.

Furthermore, both men and women can engage in sexual magic—and pretty much anything else for that matter—entirely on their own, which is actually quite beneficial during the initial stages...
Personally, I haven't had much experience practicing this within a partnership, and I find I feel much better when I perform these practices solo.

Thirdly, regarding semen: beyond the fact that it can be redirected back through certain exercises, it also serves as an energetic guide. It can even be consumed as a sacred substance following a sexual ritual (along with vaginal fluids, naturally). The release of both semen and vaginal fluids, and their subsequent mingling, is a vital element; that mixture becomes consecrated once the ritual is complete.

Look, I respect your position and your decision to steer clear of practicing spirituality through sex, but you’re underestimating the people who actually choose that path.

I don't view sexual magic, Western tantra, or tantra in general as being some kind of sexually deviant phenomenon.

Furthermore, both men and women can practice sexual magic—along with any other discipline—entirely on their own. In fact, practicing solo is actually highly recommended during the initial stages.
Personally, I’ve had very little experience practicing this within a relationship; I find that I feel much better when I do it on my own.

Thirdly, regarding sperm: beyond the possibility of redirecting its energy through specific exercises, it serves as an energetic guide. Following a sexual ritual, it can be consumed as a sacred substance—along with vaginal fluids, naturally. The release of both seed and vaginal fluid, and their subsequent blending, is the essential component; this mixture becomes consecrated once the ritual is complete.

brightnomad5 said:I approached this topic through a purely logical and philosophical lens. I didn't realize I was throwing out theological citations—though I have plenty of those at my disposal from various texts—so I don't see the basis for this objection. Even if I had been quoting scripture, there is no reason why such an explanation should be dismissed simply by labeling it "dogmatic" and attaching that negative connotation to it. The truth is, everyone loves sex and finds ways to justify it, but everything I said is a straightforward, verifiable fact; if someone takes offense to that, that’s their problem. Personally, I wish I could balance both at once and find the absolute best way to integrate them: sex and spirituality.

Look, I respect your position and your decision to steer clear of practicing spirituality through sex, but you’re underestimating the people who actually choose that path.

Who, when, and where exactly was I being condescending? I was simply stating my principled stance on a specific phenomenon and providing the reasoning behind it. 😕

I don't view sexual magic, Western tantra, or tantra in general as being some kind of sexually deviant phenomenon.

I’ve said before that if someone can’t master their sexual energy through celibacy, they can still redirect it toward awakening higher levels of consciousness. It’s certainly a better path than succumbing to mindless debauchery or the reckless misuse of sexuality. However, even that isn't anywhere near the optimal way to reach one's spiritual goals. It’s simply a practical alternative for those who, for whatever reason—whether objective or subjective—find themselves unable to practice more advanced methods.

Furthermore, both men and women can practice sexual magic—along with any other discipline—entirely on their own. In fact, practicing solo is actually highly recommended during the initial stages.
Personally, I’ve had very little experience practicing this within a relationship; I find that I feel much better when I do it on my own.

There are various ways to work with sexual energy, but at its core, a sexual encounter is a connection between a man and a woman—though, naturally, that's entirely up to individual free will and whatever anyone chooses for themselves.

Thirdly, regarding sperm: beyond the possibility of redirecting its energy through specific exercises, it serves as an energetic guide. Following a sexual ritual, it can be consumed as a sacred substance—along with vaginal fluids, naturally. The release of both seed and vaginal fluid, and their subsequent blending, is the essential component; this mixture becomes consecrated once the ritual is complete.

Wait, what? 😕 Consume? What exactly do you mean by "consume"?

He can't even reach a climax without ejaculating, so what's actually the point of the semen?

brightnomad5 said:I approached this topic through a purely logical and philosophical lens. I didn't realize I was throwing out theological citations—though I have plenty of those at my disposal from various texts—so I don't see the basis for this objection. Even if I had been quoting scripture, there is no reason why such an explanation should be dismissed simply by labeling it "dogmatic" and attaching that negative connotation to it. The truth is, everyone loves sex and finds ways to justify it, but everything I said is a straightforward, verifiable fact; if someone takes offense to that, that’s their problem. Personally, I wish I could balance both at once and find the absolute best way to integrate them: sex and spirituality.

Look, I respect your position and your decision to steer clear of practicing spirituality through sex, but you’re underestimating the people who actually choose that path.

Who, when, and where exactly was I being condescending? I was simply stating my principled stance on a specific phenomenon and providing the reasoning behind it. 😕

I don't view sexual magic, Western tantra, or tantra in general as being some kind of sexually deviant phenomenon.

I’ve said before that if someone can’t master their sexual energy through celibacy, they can still redirect it toward awakening higher levels of consciousness. It’s certainly a better path than succumbing to mindless debauchery or the reckless misuse of sexuality. However, even that isn't anywhere near the optimal way to reach one's spiritual goals. It’s simply a practical alternative for those who, for whatever reason—whether objective or subjective—find themselves unable to practice more advanced methods.

Furthermore, both men and women can practice sexual magic—along with any other discipline—entirely on their own. In fact, practicing solo is actually highly recommended during the initial stages.
Personally, I’ve had very little experience practicing this within a relationship; I find that I feel much better when I do it on my own.

There are various ways to work with sexual energy, but at its core, a sexual encounter is a connection between a man and a woman—though, naturally, that's entirely up to individual free will and whatever anyone chooses for themselves.

Thirdly, regarding sperm: beyond the possibility of redirecting its energy through specific exercises, it serves as an energetic guide. Following a sexual ritual, it can be consumed as a sacred substance—along with vaginal fluids, naturally. The release of both seed and vaginal fluid, and their subsequent blending, is the essential component; this mixture becomes consecrated once the ritual is complete.

Wait, what? 😕 Consume? What exactly do you mean by "consume"?

Who, when, or where did I underestimate anyone? I was merely presenting principled stances regarding a certain phenomenon and providing the reasoning behind them. 😕

I mentioned that sexual energy, if one cannot master it through celibacy, can be channeled toward awakening higher levels of consciousness, which is preferable to debauchery or promiscuity—or similar (wrong or evil) uses of sexual energy and sexuality. However, that is not even close to the optimal way to achieve a spiritual goal. It is simply a viable option for people who cannot apply those other methods due to various reasons (whether objective or subjective).

Hmm... manipulating sexual energy can be done in various ways, but a sexual relationship is a union between a man and a woman (by nature—through free will, however one chooses to act).

Huh? 😕Consume? What exactly do you mean by "consume"?

Andrew Sanchez572;18037654 said:How can you say that? You've been saying all along that the only natural way to have sex for reproduction is within a male-female couple.
We don't need an excuse for sex, any more than we need one for breathing.

Nice—no. 🙂 I haven't approached this from a theological standpoint (not yet). The fact that logical reasoning happens to align with theological views only adds weight to that logic and supports its validity. I was simply speaking about how things are.

but in the very next quote 😉
why would one way be better than another?

Actually, your objection came before the quote you are referencing here, so it should address what preceded it rather than following it—otherwise, it lacks a basis. 🙂

Furthermore, there is no condescension toward people involved ("but you are looking down on those who do it"). I am discussing methods for achieving a goal, and the fact remains that certain methods are more effective for reaching a specific objective than others. For instance, if you want to run a marathon, bodybuilding isn't exactly the best training method, and vice versa... Simply put, some ways of achieving a certain goal are better, more successful, appropriate, easier, or more suitable... call it whatever you like.

And if you think the condescension lay in that bolded part regarding people who cannot apply those other ways to themselves: if someone truly cannot do something, stating that is merely an observation. Where is the condescension in that? If I say someone cannot bench press 500 lbs, and that is the plain truth, where is the condescension? It is a simple statement of fact. Moreover, I emphasized later in the text "for any reason (objective or subjective)," which means that when I say they "cannot," I am referring to more than just subjective reasons; I am including objective ones as well. This proves multiple times over that this is not condescension, but a simple statement of potential facts.

why would one way be better than another?
I can practice abstinence, and I am, but that isn't my spiritual path.
you know, there are different types of people with different spiritual practices and goals, so there is no "better" or "worse," just differences.

Simply because it is better, in principle. Besides, all successful followers of spiritual paths and serious spiritual teachings agree on this. Celibacy isn't just a rule in theology or religion, but also in mysticism (where it is even more pronounced than in theology), philosophy, and to some extent, even in purely physical disciplines (like at the elite level of professional sports, where it is often recommended).

I am not disputing your personal freedom of will; that is your business. I am speaking about principles, credible teachings, and traditions as they are, examining these questions through logic and reasoning. If you don't believe me, check with experts in those fields—they will tell you the same thing, with only minor variations.

dogma

It could be considered dogma (if we define dogma as truth revealed by God), but it is also a plain fact.

drinking, eating

sperm and vaginal fluids? 😲 ("thirdly, sperm—aside from the fact that it can be redirected back through certain exercises—is also an energetic conductor, and can be consumed as a sacred substance following a sexual ritual (as can vaginal fluids, naturally)."

Sure, you could even consume feces. You could eat human flesh, too; our stomachs would digest it just fine, and who knows what else... Everything "can" be done as long as someone doesn't find it disgusting or see anything wrong with it. In fact, a pig enjoys consuming waste, especially if it's warm; they particularly love it fresh and warm, though they don't reject or recoil from cold waste either—on the contrary, they love that too... so technically, it "can"

As for the sperm and vaginal fluids, that enters the realm of black magic and carries very dire consequences for one's destiny, besides 🤮

Well, tastes vary, says the devil, as he strips off his pants and sits in the nettles.

It seems to me that you won't grasp much of what we are discussing regarding actual well-being, and it really ought to be understood if this is something you consider "possible." I wouldn't recommend it to you at all, though I don't want you to interpret that as an attempt to suppress your free will. 😉 (I am consciously risking judgment by addressing you personally in this final paragraph)

Elizabeth Bishop4 said:It’s probably oral.

He can't even reach a climax without ejaculating, so what's actually the point of the semen?

People who practice tantra claim that a man can actually reach a climax without any ejaculation at all. It makes me think there's probably some kind of internal switch you can flip.

Practitioners of tantra claim a man can reach climax without ejaculation. This suggests there is likely some kind of biological switch involved.

brightnomad5 said:I believe there is a slight misunderstanding regarding my point about underestimating people—specifically when someone claims, "But you're just being dismissive of those who choose that path." My intention isn't to belittle anyone's choices, but rather to discuss the efficacy of different methodologies used to reach a specific objective. It is a matter of practical application. For instance, if one's ultimate goal is to run a marathon, training exclusively through heavy bodybuilding isn't exactly the most efficient route to success, and vice versa... Some methods are simply more suited to certain outcomes than others; some paths are inherently more effective, more successful, or more appropriate for the task at hand... It seems things have become a bit more manageable lately......more appropriate... call it whatever you like.

And if you happen to believe that the condescension was tucked away in that bolded section—the part about "...for people who prefer those other methods"... I simply cannot... To apply this to oneself...

It is quite simply because they are superior, in principle. After all, this is a point upon which all successful followers of spiritual paths—and indeed, even the most serious spiritual teachings themselves—can reach a consensus. Celibacy isn't merely a rule confined to theology or organized religion; it is deeply embedded within mysticism as well (perhaps even more emphatically there than in theology), and extends into philosophy, and to some extent, even into purely physical disciplines... such as in elite professional sports, where it is often recommended...

It could certainly be categorized as dogma—if we define dogma as a truth revealed by the Divine—but at its core, it remains a simple, undeniable fact...

Technically speaking, one could consume excrement. One could even consume human flesh; the human digestive system is perfectly capable of processing it without any physiological complications, and who knows what other biological possibilities exist... All of these things "can" be done if one doesn't find them repulsive or perceive anything inherently wrong with them. In fact, pigs actually enjoy consuming waste—especially when it is warm. They particularly favor it when it is fresh and warm, though they certainly don't reject it when it's cold; on the contrary, they quite enjoy that as well... so, strictly speaking, it "can" be done...

As for sperm and vaginal fluids, that enters the realm of black magic and carries very dire consequences for one's fate; besides that, 🤮

It seems to me that you won't be able to grasp how much any of what we are discussing actually benefits someone, and it really would be wise to understand that if you feel it's "okay" for you. I certainly wouldn't recommend it to you, though I don't wish for you to interpret that as an attempt to repress your own free will. 😉 (I am consciously risking judgment by addressing you somewhat personally in this final paragraph...)