| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
 Posted - Aug 22 2012 : 11:54:24 PM
|
Will someone let me know if the following journal entry of mine resonates as TRUE--in terms of the mechanics of spiritual sexual unfoldment?
. . .
If a man could have a bountiful selection of women to pick and choose from at any time, would that ever satisfy him?
No, it wouldn't, because it would just be an amalgamation of fleeting pleasure with NO DEPTH. Depth is only achieved through monogamy. Monogamy in itself does not achieve depth. Rather, monogamy provides the gateway and opportunity for DEPTH. Just like consistency and persistency in using a single meditation technique yield depth in the dive into inner silence, so would the refinement of sexual experience with a single partner reap a more wholesome and sustaining reward than sampling multiple partners. Also, monogamy is deeply built into the design of maintaining a cohesive and thriving family structure.
However, to move beyond lustful pleasures, one must experience such a level of transcendence that would dwarf and make seem silly and trivial the more carnal desires.
This is the only way to be satisfied in a monogamous relationship--if the partners have become portals for each other to infinite fields of ecstatic bliss and ever-renewing divine experience. |
|
|
maheswari
Lebanon
2520 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 01:28:12 AM
|
quote:
if the partners have become portals for each other to infinite fields of ecstatic bliss and ever-renewing divine experience.
mmm i love it...personally your post dear BT resonates very well with what i would like to have in a relationship...infinitly expanding depth,intimacy .... |
 |
|
|
Rajeev Sethi
India
50 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 08:58:37 AM
|
| DEPTH in a relationship comes when both partners can vibe and connect on the conscious and subconscious level. I feel DEPTH is not linked to monogamy or polygamy. |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 09:08:26 AM
|
Yep. Agreed here. Many do not see that a full committment to one partner is a doorway to freedom!
quote:
One person will give you the experience that a million people could give you. There’s only one mind. Your partner will bring up every concept ever known to humanity, in every combination, so that you can come to know yourself. If you can just learn to love the one you’re with, you have met self-love./ Byron Katie
|
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 09:17:25 AM
|
Many thanks, maheswari.
Rajeev...Here's another metaphor that seems fitting. If one finds a tree that bears perpetual fruit, why bother wasting time and energy picking from other trees?
It just seems like logic and love should intertwine in this case. Would be interested to hear more as to how depth can be achieved through polygamy...
Thank you both...this is helping me dissolve an internal struggle. |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 09:19:32 AM
|
Excellent emc. Great affirmation. Like that quote.  |
|
|
|
Rajeev Sethi
India
50 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 09:44:49 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bodhi Tree
Would be interested to hear more as to how depth can be achieved through polygamy...
Does Monogamy guarantee DEPTH?
|
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 10:37:14 AM
|
The risks with polygamy as I see it is 1) biological - the brain is programmed to increase the rewarding dopamine system with more partners. More prone to addiction. 2) psychological - easier to escape when tough times come with one of the partners, then it's convenient to go to the next and get some dopamine rush instead. Bypassing the transformation possible. 3) Social - causes more trouble than joy after a while due to entanglement. If you can't make ONE partner happy, you sure can't make more happy! 4) Karmic - when you take a person on - you also take on the whole family karma! It's usually quite a lot to deal with since it's designed to clash with your own to show all the wounds yet to be healed.
Just my 2 cents. Have not yet met a happy poly, more than initially in the exciting phase. |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 1:57:59 PM
|
Wow. Those 4 points ring very true, EMC.
Rajeev, I don't think monogamy guarantees depth...it just facilitates and allows depth--much more than polygamy. |
|
|
|
kami
USA
921 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 10:30:18 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bodhi Tree
Will someone let me know if the following journal entry of mine resonates as TRUE--in terms of the mechanics of spiritual sexual unfoldment?
. . .
If a man could have a bountiful selection of women to pick and choose from at any time, would that ever satisfy him?
No, it wouldn't, because it would just be an amalgamation of fleeting pleasure with NO DEPTH. Depth is only achieved through monogamy. Monogamy in itself does not achieve depth. Rather, monogamy provides the gateway and opportunity for DEPTH. Just like consistency and persistency in using a single meditation technique yield depth in the dive into inner silence, so would the refinement of sexual experience with a single partner reap a more wholesome and sustaining reward than sampling multiple partners. Also, monogamy is deeply built into the design of maintaining a cohesive and thriving family structure.
However, to move beyond lustful pleasures, one must experience such a level of transcendence that would dwarf and make seem silly and trivial the more carnal desires.
This is the only way to be satisfied in a monogamous relationship--if the partners have become portals for each other to infinite fields of ecstatic bliss and ever-renewing divine experience.
Hi Bodhi Tree,
Love your wisdom that comes through in your posts. Thank you 
Agree whole-heartedly with this in many ways. Monogamy definitely suits many of us.
However..
Established polygamists would disagree, maintaining that depth and salvation are to be found in those relationships. Who's to say they are wrong? Aren't there infinite possibilities in Truth?
Also, although it would be fantastic and ideal for both partners in a monogamous relationship to expand as spiritual beings, that is rarely the case. Many of us come to the spiritual path when already in a committed relationship, to find that the other has no such inclination. The imbalance that occurs with this situation (especially when Bhakti is supercharged) can be disruptive to the relationship. It can be easy to be misled into thinking there is someone else who is better "out there".. But.. This perceived imbalance is also a perfectly timed blessing that pushes us along on our path, often catapulting us further than without it.. And for this alone, it would be preferable to "stick it out", not due to a forced morality or convention (nothing wrong with that, of course). I've also heard that expanding inner silence can bring to light all that has never worked in a particular long-term relationship, accelerating the inevitable break-up.. Infinite possibilities
In my humble opinion, "depth" in any relationship is never dependent on the other person. When I'm open, giving and joyful, I find depth in every relationship. Intimacy with oneself seems to be the only ingredient needed..
Love,
kami |
Edited by - kami on Aug 23 2012 10:41:53 PM |
|
|
|
machart
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Aug 23 2012 : 11:36:58 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bodhi Tree
This is the only way to be satisfied in a monogamous relationship--if the partners have become portals for each other to infinite fields of ecstatic bliss and ever-renewing divine experience.
Totally disagree...infinite fields of ecstatic bliss?...ever renewing divine experience?
Try just being content with who your current partner is....you may have a chance at happiness.
I.e. love the one your with...
Bodhi....you married?
|
Edited by - machart on Aug 23 2012 11:57:46 PM |
|
|
|
Rajeev Sethi
India
50 Posts |
Posted - Aug 24 2012 : 12:51:27 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by kami
Established polygamists would disagree, maintaining that depth and salvation are to be found in those relationships. Who's to say they are wrong? Aren't there infinite possibilities in Truth?
In my humble opinion, "depth" in any relationship is never dependent on the other person. When I'm open, giving and joyful, I find depth in every relationship. Intimacy with oneself seems to be the only ingredient needed..
Very True |
Edited by - Rajeev Sethi on Aug 24 2012 01:33:23 AM |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Aug 24 2012 : 1:14:03 PM
|
Kami--that is very illuminating. I especially like the idea that depth is not dependent on the other person as much as our own openness. That's super real.
On that note, Machart, I was married for a short time but the relationship crumbled in part because of my lack of openness. I was drinking/drugging alot and lost in the spiritual sense (no ishta or daily practice routine). When she left I sobered up and had a kundalini experience and consequently found AYP and have been fueling the bhakti ever since. But I really like your insistence to "love the one you're with" and reside in contentment--appreciating the miracle of the most simple qualities of a partner. I sometimes get too hungry for ecstatic experiences, so thanks for the reminder.
Thanks for these responses--incredibly helpful! |
|
|
|
kami
USA
921 Posts |
Posted - Aug 24 2012 : 9:15:52 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bodhi Tree
Kami--that is very illuminating. I especially like the idea that depth is not dependent on the other person as much as our own openness. That's super real.
On that note, Machart, I was married for a short time but the relationship crumbled in part because of my lack of openness. I was drinking/drugging alot and lost in the spiritual sense (no ishta or daily practice routine). When she left I sobered up and had a kundalini experience and consequently found AYP and have been fueling the bhakti ever since. But I really like your insistence to "love the one you're with" and reside in contentment--appreciating the miracle of the most simple qualities of a partner. I sometimes get too hungry for ecstatic experiences, so thanks for the reminder.
Thanks for these responses--incredibly helpful!
Hi Bodhi
Ecstatic experiences, as you know, can be strongly enticing and addicting. Better to watch out for that hunger..
Love to you,
kami |
|
|
|
karl
United Kingdom
1812 Posts |
Posted - Aug 25 2012 : 04:47:38 AM
|
Funny how things come up. I'm working with someone and they said that they wanted someone who had been through the same thing as they were going through.
I have always been a one woman guy, not because of any inbuilt values or moral compass just because that's how it turns out I am. If relations are not working then I have moved on and learned each time.
I watched friends taking on two or three women at a time, they were always describing the sex they had with these women, but it was just an annoying buzz to me, like a small child telling me about his toy cars.
Early on I realised that women were looking for depth in a relationship, that uncomplicated sex wasn't real, even when it seems it must be, there is always the vague hope it's going to turn into something more. If there wasn't, then it's just masturbation, a purely physical need and with two people it can never be that unless it's a business proposition.
Guys I knew, always started out with a head full of notions, they were a sort of Macho belief that they dominated and controlled the situation, but they often ended up crying like babies as the relationship turned into a kind of conflict.
What I'm getting to is that I have never experienced the choice of having many women, because my operating system has just never worked like that. I once has a close friend who had left her partner, approach me after a night out and asked me why we hadn't been to bed together. My reply "we have never been sleepy enough" .
So, for me it is difficult to relate. If I go into a sweet shop I'm never stunned by the choice around me. I have already decided on one type of sweet and although I might be deciding when I'm looking at all the jars, I will always come out with just one type. I already know that many sweets are not better than one sweet, they just spoil the enjoyment, one always comes out better than the next and then you are left with sweets you really wish you hadn't bought.
Phew, this is a bit rambling can we discuss a monogamous relationship with Motorcycles as it appears I err in that department. Same thing though  |
|
|
|
Kahlia
161 Posts |
Posted - Aug 25 2012 : 09:04:30 AM
|
Love the OP. So over the "new age" fad at the moment that promotes polyamory, & that tantra is really about being polyamorous. The lie that some try to impose on others by telling them the more spiritual they are means the more lovers they will have & that to be free & experience love & joy spiritually means to have no sexual boundaries & numerous lovers.
|
|
|
|
Victor
USA
910 Posts |
Posted - Aug 25 2012 : 8:50:31 PM
|
I am having a monogamous relationship with my motorcycle. I am very devoted to her and due to my love she keeps me alive on the road. I always care for her and frequently adjust her or replace parts so that we are a better fit together. We meditate together on road trips and she keeps me from spacing out due to having to be alert and in the moment whenever I am with her.
As for women, I am trying to not be monogamous but I find that I usually fall for one and then others are neglected. Often the one that I do fall for and gives me butterflies is not a good match for me at all in the long run so I resist these attachments to the best of my ability and keep going back to my motorcycle.. |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Aug 25 2012 : 9:01:05 PM
|
Thank you Karl! That is about as honest and real as it gets. Some penetrating insights in your post--especially "there's no such thing as uncomplicated sex". Ain't that the truth. The sex act seems to involve a karmic engagement of energy fields, literally--and since the vast imprints of our karma are contained in the nervous system--when two nervous systems entangle...that is surely a complex dance involving many layers of experience/intention/trajectory.
Kahlia, your blunt assessment of the new age fad for polyamorphism reminds me of my experience in San Francisco--where in some "spiritual" circles that dynamic seemed common. I also perceived that lifestyle to be too loose, too "free spirit", and too oblivious to the complications/entanglements/consequences (as Karl said) of a sexual relationship. |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Aug 25 2012 : 9:05:18 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Victor
I am having a monogamous relationship with my motorcycle. I am very devoted to her and due to my love she keeps me alive on the road. I always care for her and frequently adjust her or replace parts so that we are a better fit together. We meditate together on road trips and she keeps me from spacing out due to having to be alert and in the moment whenever I am with her.
Gut-busting LOL! |
|
|
|
maheswari
Lebanon
2520 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 06:03:46 AM
|
| hahaha Victor i loved your post |
|
|
|
karl
United Kingdom
1812 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 07:51:07 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Victor
I am having a monogamous relationship with my motorcycle. I am very devoted to her and due to my love she keeps me alive on the road. I always care for her and frequently adjust her or replace parts so that we are a better fit together. We meditate together on road trips and she keeps me from spacing out due to having to be alert and in the moment whenever I am with her.
As for women, I am trying to not be monogamous but I find that I usually fall for one and then others are neglected. Often the one that I do fall for and gives me butterflies is not a good match for me at all in the long run so I resist these attachments to the best of my ability and keep going back to my motorcycle..
I have been a polygamotorcyclist for some time now, always had thoughts about other models, kept checking out their curves and specifications. Italians attract me like nothing else, fiery, passionate and often fickle although I have had flings with Germans, Austrians and a couple of pretty British models.
Up until a few years ago I kept my wallet in my pants and stuck to one bike at a time. Two years ago my faith buckled and I now have two gorgeous Italian beauties to ride. Funnily enough, after two years I'm going back to having just one. I think having two has ended my roaming eye.
Strangely the one I have chosen as a steady partner is quite old and has a few battle scars, it isn't as good in the corners or as pretty, but we have a bond now. I have to nurse her at times because of her age, and every ride is an intense experience wondering if she can manage it, or will she conk out leaving me unsatisfied by the roadside. I love this lack of predictability and the battles cars and grime of real world use. She can still go like the clappers and the moan from her air box......man it's orgasmic.
|
|
|
|
kami
USA
921 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 08:30:00 AM
|
Victor and Karl,
Just for posterity's sake - neither of you is equating motorcycles with women, are you??
Twenty-first century, all these advances.. And yet... tsk, tsk..  |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 08:35:40 AM
|
| Ha ha! Just a bystander, but no, I didn't get the impression that either of them was saying women and motorcycles are equal. Correct me if I'm wrong. |
|
|
|
karl
United Kingdom
1812 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 08:37:05 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by kami
Victor and Karl,
Just for posterity's sake - neither of you is equating motorcycles with women, are you??
Twenty-first century, all these advances.. And yet... tsk, tsk..
Oh I err don't really know, it's all so mixed up |
|
|
|
Kahlia
161 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 09:38:16 AM
|
This motorbike thread complements the football one nicely.. Do I see a theme here?
:p] |
|
|
|
Victor
USA
910 Posts |
Posted - Aug 26 2012 : 2:15:36 PM
|
| Motorcycles never get jealous of women. Quite the contrary, they often tend to get along very well |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Tantric Self-Inquiry
