"Total Celibacy"- what does it mean?

For what is worth I think the C's on that particular question were talking in generalities.
In what is most likely for the average person.
Meaning that the average person likely would not be able to dissociate sex of its STS nature of possessing and pleasure for the self, so it would be "faster" to just become celibate in all senses.

Perhaps it should be taken in consideration that this question was asked in a very general context, or at least it seems to me.
 
Looking around the forum I came across this post by Laura herself.

Answering the question "Can I graduate to 4th density through total celibacy"

Laura said:
The answer to your question is, in a word, NO.

My impression of that response is that it was highly corrupted by one of the individual's present in the room at the time of that session. That is not to say that sexual energy is not harvested by 4D STS, but all is not as simple as one would like to think. As the Cs later said, if you are celibate or suffer in order to GET something, like "graduating to 4D", you will get just the opposite. That is a self-serving desire.

Best to search the forum here for the phrase "abuse of sex" and read about that before you think you can DO anything.
 
Iron said:
For what is worth I think the C's on that particular question were talking in generalities.
In what is most likely for the average person.
Meaning that the average person likely would not be able to dissociate sex of its STS nature of possessing and pleasure for the self, so it would be "faster" to just become celibate in all senses.
This makes sense to me and you may be right.
Iron said:
Perhaps it should be taken in consideration that this question was asked in a very general context, or at least it seems to me.
Sorry if it seemed that way, it was not intended to be so general. In fact, I was mostly thinking about the intention behind any action and that the motivation for an action is an important factor.
On the way home from work a thought came to me, almost as if someone else was asking me, "what was my intention in starting this thread"? I was somewhat startled by that question and it caused me to think about it.
The answer is : for some reason I just started thinking about celibacy and what Gurdjieff and the C's said about it and I wanted to see if I was getting the right meaning about it. I was not thinking about 4D at all. I quoted the text from the C's because of the phrase "total celibacy" and was thinking that it must mean any sexual activity with or without a partner, that's all. I can see why it seems like I was asking if celibacy would help one get to 4D faster because of the quote I used.
Anyway, I seem to not be able to communicate my meaning and am often misunderstood no matter how hard I try to explain.
I feel very sad that this is turning into noise so I will stop replying here.
Thank you for your reply
 
opossum said:
Anyway, I seem to not be able to communicate my meaning and am often misunderstood no matter how hard I try to explain.
I feel very sad that this is turning into noise so I will stop replying here.
Thank you for your reply

I don't think you need to worry about it, it does not seems you are not able to comunicate and others are simply giving you different perspectives, so do not feel sad and :rockon:
 
Opposum said:
The answer is : for some reason I just started thinking about celibacy and what Gurdjieff and the C's said about it and I wanted to see if I was getting the right meaning about it. I was not thinking about 4D at all. I quoted the text from the C's because of the phrase "total celibacy" and was thinking that it must mean any sexual activity with or without a partner, that's all. I can see why it seems like I was asking if celibacy would help one get to 4D faster because of the quote I used.
Anyway, I seem to not be able to communicate my meaning and am often misunderstood no matter how hard I try to explain.
I feel very sad that this is turning into noise so I will stop replying here.

I might be wrong, but, not thinking of whether total celibacy will help one reach 4D or not, maybe the question to ask, is what role does sex play in terms of the evolution of man from, lets say 'exterior man' to 'interior man' as Mourivieff puts it in Gnosis.

Gnosis Book 1 said:
The exterior man has three 'I's: the 'I' of the body (physical), the 'I' of the Personality (mental), and potentially the real 'I' (spiritual). The-oretically, the real 'I' should have assumed the responsibility for comanding the whole system. But since the fall of Adam, the real 'I', in its aspect as the inmost heart, has been relegated to the background of consciousness, dominated by the mental 'I' of the Personality. The latter, who commands by default, so to speak, lacks unity. Changing, floating, multiple, he can only act in a disorderly manner. Thus the 'I' of the body, who should normally obey the mental 'I', frequently imposes his own purposes upon the latter. The usual example of such domination is that of adultery, due to sexual attraction without any spiritual ties.

So, as far as I understand it, if someone is having sex, and the reason being because of the domination of the 2 lower I's, that of the personality and that of the body whilst ignoring the spiritual or real I or not taking it into account, then it shows they are ignoring there part of them that is real and divine. The part that we are trying to identify with. Uhmm, it also shows that they are still mechanical and reactionary. Also it shows that they are willing to use another person just to satisfy there own needs and I think this is made worse if that person is aware of it because it shows they have made a choice which might be different from someone who is unaware and thus acted by default subject to his reactionary nature.

Also maybe, the question of giving all or paying all applies here, given that one is after esoteric evolution??

Gnosis Book 1 said:
This can be understood when we know that esoteric science in its teaching goes far beyond simple information. Its purpose, in fact, is nothing less than the transformation of the very being of those who study it, a concern completely outside the scope of positive science. Because it generally deals with those of the unjust who nevertheless aspire to the light, it calls on them — in the words of St Paul, to: 'Put off the old man, and put on the new man, that is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of Him that created him.' In every case where esoteric science offers all, it demands all in return. One must pay all. It is impossible to reach the True by the path of lies or hypocritical games, because in this case we seek to be, rather than to appear to be.

So, I think it comes down to, if you seek to be or just to appear to be...

However, as people have said, if you have a spiritual connection with someone then sex is fine as far as I understand. But, maybe, the 'spiritual connection' should be something that is real and not illusory just like 'love' nowadays can be mistaken for the real thing all the time being a means of feeding and exercising STSness due to lack of understanding of the factors in play... Maybe this is where discernment comes into play??

Anyways, this is just my 2 cents. Might be wrong. Just giving my thoughts. Feel free to correct me...
 
opossum said:
Bud said:
A possibly related thread that I had forgotten about just got bumped:

Can I Graduate to 4th density through Total Celibacy?
I don't see that it is related other than the title. I was asking a legitimate question and did not in any way think that celibacy in and of itself was a shortcut to 4D. I was trying to establish exactly what the phrase meant and I think the question was answered well by the replies. I have learned a lot about both G's and the C's view on the subject . Again, thank you all for your replies.

FWIW, my apologies if I gave the impression you weren't being understood or that I was presuming something other than what you stated. I understand that you have found what you were looking for. :)
 
luke wilson said:
However, as people have said, if you have a spiritual connection with someone then sex is fine as far as I understand. But, maybe, the 'spiritual connection' should be something that is real and not illusory just like 'love' nowadays can be mistaken for the real thing all the time being a means of feeding and exercising STSness due to lack of understanding of the factors in play... Maybe this is where discernment comes into play??

Anyways, this is just my 2 cents. Might be wrong. Just giving my thoughts. Feel free to correct me...
Thank you Luke. Yes, I think discernment is the key. I have thought about this often and I have wondered if it is wise to seek any kind of romantic relationship while working to reach a certain level of awareness and self-knowledge. Thank you for re-phrasing my question also. I will try to be more specific in my wording in the future.

Bud said:
FWIW, my apologies if I gave the impression you weren't being understood or that I was presuming something other than what you stated.
I did get that impression, however, that does not mean you gave it to me. No apology needed but thank you for being considerate that I may have misunderstood your meaning. :)
 
The problem I see with regard to sex-a part of the misuse of its energy part of the other centers- it is his practice. I mean
relations. Sex is complacency, therefore, is STS. Launched a Question: We can have sex without seeking self-satisfaction? We can working with energy that having sex-by that I mean something hieros gamos-? Or the entire issue of tantra, the rite of hieros gamos and energy assumptions about sex work are fallacy? I see an issue so ambiguous that I would speak with clarity him.
 
Álvaro said:
Launched a Question: We can have sex without seeking self-satisfaction?

IMO, this is really what's all about. This is the question that we should all ask ourselves before we enter an intimate relationship.
 
Robson said:
Álvaro said:
Launched a Question: We can have sex without seeking self-satisfaction?

IMO, this is really what's all about. This is the question that we should all ask ourselves before we enter an intimate relationship.

I don't think it is that simple. Self-satisfaction can be had even by those who don't have sex.

Being STS, even someone who doesn't have a drive to have sex can feel good from having sex primarily due to the chemicals (oxytocin and whatever released in orgasm). There are also people who feel holy by sacrificing to not have sex, as if any sex is bad. In some cases it can be twisted to extreme by their own feelings of unworthiness, whether that be from religion or being invalidated by narcissists.

The main point I disagree with is that as human beings with hormones, do we ever forget that a part of sex does include self-satisfaction?

Maybe the easier way to put it would be how Laura and others said, paraphrasing here: If your partner was somehow unable to have sex, would you have things in common to still be with them?
 
This is so interesting, and not to hijack the thread

it's actually kind of funny, cause i was just having these same thoughts on Sex lately, and most of you guys have given great answers to ponder and understand.

here my thoughts on it fwiw:

Sex can be done in 2 ways a higher way and a lower way, the lower way which is the way most human beings do it, is merely physical and self serving in its entirety, but then there's the other way which as said above, requires the spiritual connection and beyond being physical only, it is a physical expression of higher emotions for one's partner, trust, knowledge, respect, and communication.. it's so to speak the fruit of the tree of intimacy between two beings.

what Gurdjieff meant from what i understood, and you are all welcome to correct me is, by observing oneself, one becomes aware of how much energy one uses for sex, thinking, seeking, imagining, which is mostly (if not entirely) mechanical.

for any process that one undertakes, one requires energy no matter what (just like in our bodies with mitochondria), if one is, so to speak, able to redirect this energy into one's aim then one has better chances at achieving it, while at the same time, one starts to work on that mechanical behavior by cutting it's energy source more or less.

so the subject of sex discussed on In Search of the Miraculous from what i came to understand, aims at making one aware of the immense amount of energy used in this mechanical behavior by explaining how it works on all centers, and how to recognize it by observing it in oneself at all levels.


just my two humble cents here :)
 
Alejo said:
what Gurdjieff meant from what i understood, and you are all welcome to correct me is, by observing oneself, one becomes aware of how much energy one uses for sex, thinking, seeking, imagining, which is mostly (if not entirely) mechanical.

for any process that one undertakes, one requires energy no matter what (just like in our bodies with mitochondria), if one is, so to speak, able to redirect this energy into one's aim then one has better chances at achieving it, while at the same time, one starts to work on that mechanical behavior by cutting it's energy source more or less.

so the subject of sex discussed on In Search of the Miraculous from what i came to understand, aims at making one aware of the immense amount of energy used in this mechanical behavior by explaining how it works on all centers, and how to recognize it by observing it in oneself at all levels.

It also gives new meaning to Gurdjieff's discussions about "masturbation" and "prostitution", i.e. not necessarily in relation to sex itself but in all fields of life. He once asked a waiter to stop the musicians in a restaurant from playing, because in his words, they were "masturbating" (playing for themselves and misusing energy?).
 
Approaching Infinity said:
It also gives new meaning to Gurdjieff's discussions about "masturbation" and "prostitution", i.e. not necessarily in relation to sex itself but in all fields of life. He once asked a waiter to stop the musicians in a restaurant from playing, because in his words, they were "masturbating" (playing for themselves and misusing energy?).
Good example! And prostitution? Any thoughts on what would constitute non-sexual prostitution?
 
opossum said:
Approaching Infinity said:
It also gives new meaning to Gurdjieff's discussions about "masturbation" and "prostitution", i.e. not necessarily in relation to sex itself but in all fields of life. He once asked a waiter to stop the musicians in a restaurant from playing, because in his words, they were "masturbating" (playing for themselves and misusing energy?).
Good example! And prostitution? Any thoughts on what would constitute non-sexual prostitution?

In my department at work it's all about stroking the boss, who doesn't know anything substantial about the operation of nor the meaning of what the company does.

I'm about to be fired mainly because I don't do this.
 
Back
Top Bottom