Sex, a service to self act? Always?

[raistlinflux]

Now that we seem to be on the topic of sexuality, I was wondering
about this, since I saw many people claim that sex, if not based on
love, just the desire itself that is, is a service to self oriented
desire.

Well what about when you don't know a person, you've never met them
in your whole life, yet you are so attracted to them (and I'm
speaking here about sexual desire) that you feel like you would just
want to please them in a sexual way as best you can without expecting
anyting in return except their appreciation or even love. How is
that "self serving" when a phisical desire makes you give everything
in order to please a person, even if it is through the act of sex?

To my understanding, if you leave "love" totally asside from a
relationship, then sex becomes nothing more than a game of cat an
mouse, of master and slave and vice versa, always changing, and from
the dynamic of this continual change comes the pleasure itself.
If you add love, I think the equation balances itself out.

But getting back to my main point, is the sexual act/desire always a
service to self act if you do not love that person (yet)?

PS: As an aside, I still think that we're all getting too dogmatic
about STS and STO like these are the words of God! They're a simple
interpretation of a concept we can't fuly understand (since true
knowledge is not of this dimension in the first place), yet we seem
to base our judgement on these facts. It's like trying to build a
wall but the bricks at the bottom are made of plastic instead of
concrete. I just try to keep an open mind and not get stuck in simple
words, there's a lot more that simply can't be explained and despite
that this is the best we can come up with, let's not get a fixation
with them.

[darktemplarssj]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=-9CxTB66xFXeOfZWA6LXW_qIPp1fOyVOEDclcR02A-Q_gYOKPlbsg8n08B19Z8YqC3vjeYSaIK3MrgnT2osY_A), "raistlinflux" <raistlinflux@y...>
wrote:

First of all refer to post 14844. I talked about this topic
directly. I got this gnosis from a man who claims to be the "only
tantrik master of the west", his name is Barry Long. He says that
the higher sexual act is done without desire. Which seems wierd
coming from our society's point of view. We lust after others, well
this lusting doesn't much get you anywhere in the end.

Another invaluable quote is from OshO, one of the few mystics that
doesn't circumvent the concept of sex in their speaches says:
"first you experience excitement, then you experience love, then you
experience bliss" I guess thats the progression. Theres alot of
talk about the first state in our society, Pop stars, tomb
raider,Playboy ect... But to get to the second state you have to be
selfless. These are quantatively related to energy ray transfers and
their intensity. Eventually if you pursue this you reach the third
state, which is categorized by the breaking away from time, into
timelessness. Just like deep meditational yogis can.By the way, i'm
young too, not even 21 for another 5 monthes.


> Now that we seem to be on the topic of sexuality, I was wondering
> about this, since I saw many people claim that sex, if not based on
> love, just the desire itself that is, is a service to self oriented
> desire.

Lower energy transfers, yes, below the green ray,and these are
insatiable drives, this gives meaning to the very word
"lust" which exists less and less above the yellow ray transfer.
>
> Well what about when you don't know a person, you've never met them
> in your whole life, yet you are so attracted to them (and I'm
> speaking here about sexual desire) that you feel like you would
just
> want to please them in a sexual way as best you can without
expecting
> anyting in return except their appreciation or even love.

That is a green ray transfer. I've had similar feelings, it's not
exactly lust, but it is usually mixxed for me. Although I don't
believe any higher rays than green can be accessed without pratice
and actually being with the person.

How is
> that "self serving" when a phisical desire makes you give
everything
> in order to please a person, even if it is through the act of sex?
>
> To my understanding, if you leave "love" totally asside from a
> relationship, then sex becomes nothing more than a game of cat an
> mouse, of master and slave and vice versa, always changing, and
from
> the dynamic of this continual change comes the pleasure itself.

That is orange ray transfer. So you are exactly right, there's
no "love" per say in an orange ray transfer, no real love until 4th
ray.
Look at our lovable 2nd density friends(rememeber each ray
corresponds to a density also) always playing and frolicking.
Another good example of orange ray is a kid on christmas morning. So
much energy for his gifts,with no real meaning in it , just energy.
It's something that slowly faded from me as I got older.

> If you add love, I think the equation balances itself out.

As you move upwards yes it balances, until you reach violet ray
energy transfers where essences merge. This is where you get things
like "quantum tantra" which is sexual bioluminessense between
individuals.

>
> But getting back to my main point, is the sexual act/desire always
a
> service to self act if you do not love that person (yet)?

Not really, but most of the time it's mixxed, you get into
complicated ratios of ray transfer here. But I think i really know
what you mean. I had the "I want to die for a beautiful girl"complex
for a while, maybe a little bit still. I think it was a sign of
burgeoning 4th chakra action.

>
> PS: As an aside, I still think that we're all getting too dogmatic
> about STS and STO like these are the words of God! They're a simple
> interpretation of a concept we can't fuly understand (since true
> knowledge is not of this dimension in the first place), yet we seem
> to base our judgement on these facts. It's like trying to build a
> wall but the bricks at the bottom are made of plastic instead of
> concrete. I just try to keep an open mind and not get stuck in
simple
> words, there's a lot more that simply can't be explained and
despite
> that this is the best we can come up with, let's not get a fixation
> with them.


But the concepts can be applied much better than classical "good and
evil" Although the more you look into STS and STO the more subtle
they become

Anyways, I'll be on vacation for a week, and i'll look forward to
reading how this thread progresses between now and then.
Good Journey
-Dave

[Jim Holmes]

"I got this gnosis from a man who claims to be the "only
tantrik master of the west", his name is Barry Long. He says that
the higher sexual act is done without desire.

Does this mean I should only do it when I don't want to with someone
that I am not attracted to?

Kinda makes you feel guilty if you enjoy it doesen't it? Shades of
Judaeo-Christian naughties.

I am curious about his relationships with his students.

To which shading of desire does he refer?






Main Entry: 1de.sire
<javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?desire01.wav=desire')>
Pronunciation: di-'zIr, dE-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): de.sired; de.sir.ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French desirer, from Latin
desiderare, from de- + sider-, sidus heavenly body
transitive senses
1 : to long or hope for : exhibit or feel desire for
2 a : to express a wish for :
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=request>
REQUEST b archaic : to express a wish to :
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=ask> ASK
3 obsolete :
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=invite> INVITE
4 archaic : to feel the loss of
intransitive senses : to have or feel desire
synonyms
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=desire>
DESIRE, <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=wish>
WISH, <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=want>
WANT, <http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=crave>
CRAVE,
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=covet+ (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=covet+)> COVET
mean to have a longing for.
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=desire+ (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=desire+)>
DESIRE stresses the strength of feeling and often implies strong
intention or aim <desires to start a new life>.
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=wish+ (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=wish+)> WISH
sometimes implies a general or transient longing especially for the
unattainable <wishes for permanent world peace>.
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=want+ (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=want+)> WANT
specifically suggests a felt need or lack <wants to have a family>.
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=crave+ (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=crave+)> CRAVE
stresses the force of physical appetite or emotional need <craves
sweets>.
<http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=covet+ (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=covet+)> COVET
implies strong envious desire <covets his rise to fame>.
J
Jim

From: darktemplarssj [mailto:whited4@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=AwmX6ky3iw8-sxR3rV3A9hX8W2vomlIXWe2xQ-_ardPyUSMdc8X4fWuWCSqnRXSSOAaXUUN0z-sI)]
Subject: [asc2k] Re: Sex, a service to self act?Always?


--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=QZyKNJmeGo_WW3eJDrNZx8hJgMfScqgcFQgnIb jeEfuT0h-1lL_PSUrb1MarJpC8rcIS15PorCcL4nKC), "raistlinflux" <raistlinflux@y...>
wrote:

First of all refer to post 14844. I talked about this topic
directly. I got this gnosis from a man who claims to be the "only
tantrik master of the west", his name is Barry Long. He says that
the higher sexual act is done without desire.

[raistlinflux]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=OXYoLBubxZ4gQioYHT4XgADkYOiw6RaAAeqgBf H2uhMyjH4eutbeghNgTt4GxT4pY5It9Z5v5-xbEO-Rlg), "Jim Holmes" <amitoo@s...> wrote:
> "I got this gnosis from a man who claims to be the "only
> tantrik master of the west", his name is Barry Long. He says that
> the higher sexual act is done without desire.
>
> Does this mean I should only do it when I don't want to with someone
> that I am not attracted to?
>
> Kinda makes you feel guilty if you enjoy it doesen't it? Shades of
> Judaeo-Christian naughties.


I think he what he's trying to say here is that once you get to a
certain point of self-understanding and "enlightenment" if you will,
then sex becomes something more than a desire to please or be pleased.

[raistlinflux]

Hi Dave, we'll see you around
I have read quite a few of your posts and I enjoy reading them.

As for our discussion on sex without love being always STS, I tend to
agree with what you said. It's in a way a mix.
That feeling which you refered to as "an I would die for her/him
complex" is just a stepping stone. There's both STS and STO in this
desire derived from the phisical. There's a dedication to someone
you're amazingly attracted to, a desire to serve without knowing the
real reason (be it lust, attraction, love, beauty whatevver it is).
Almost like offering someone love without asking for anything in
return.

I also agree with you when you say that the actual energies can't
be touched or experienced until both people are in the same
situation. This is kind of like the stereotypical story in today's
world, about that guy that is totally in love with the most beautiful
girl around yet she doesn't even know he exists.

It's funny to find yourself in this situation and then years later
when you moved on you sometimes realize that she truly wasn't all
that at all. It was a lot more of just a phisical attraction than you
originally thought.

Anyway,
that's my thoughs on it

love is all
Vlad

[David Wilcock]

From: Jim Holmes

"I got this gnosis from a man who claims to be the "only
tantrik master of the west", his name is Barry Long. He says that
the higher sexual act is done without desire.

Does this mean I should only do it when I don't want to with someone
that I am not attracted to?

Kinda makes you feel guilty if you enjoy it doesen't it? Shades of
Judaeo-Christian naughties.

I am curious about his relationships with his students.

To which shading of desire does he refer?

DW: And to what does he refer in the chosen name of "Berry Long?" ;)

- David

[McNulty, Michael]

VIad,

I wonder how many people, who have had "an I would die for her/him complex"
and not have the love reciprocated, would stand with it and continue to love
the other person with the same passion. Never seeing them, as you suggest
might happen, as being less than worthy of their love.

Love,
Michael

From: raistlinflux [mailto:raistlinflux@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=GfG4FItgKgEPTOoNZt9H6HbjraP6iXLSJPdM1h ykYHwS_z1-fWEzk62ViLqL3yaUXH_ufAd02UxK0jMpPdtD)]
Hi Dave, we'll see you around
I have read quite a few of your posts and I enjoy reading them.

As for our discussion on sex without love being always STS, I tend to
agree with what you said. It's in a way a mix.
That feeling which you refered to as "an I would die for her/him
complex" is just a stepping stone. There's both STS and STO in this
desire derived from the phisical. There's a dedication to someone
you're amazingly attracted to, a desire to serve without knowing the
real reason (be it lust, traction, love, beauty whatevver it is).
Almost like offering someone love without asking for anything in
return.

I also agree with you when you say that the actual energies can't
be touched or experienced until both people are in the same
situation. This is kind of like the stereotypical story in today's
world, about that guy that is totally in love with the most beautiful
girl around yet she doesn't even know he exists.

It's funny to find yourself in this situation and then years later
when you moved on you sometimes realize that she truly wasn't all
that at all. It was a lot more of just a phisical attraction than you
originally thought.

Anyway,
that's my thoughs on it

love is all
Vlad