The Practice of Sacred Sex

In the last workshop in Lexington you described sacred sexuality as an activity that allows our recalibrated energy to enter into the physical. Would you define sacred sexuality and explain the concept further?

Sexuality involves more than the technology of reproduction. It is also the attitude of creating oneness. It is a technology of wholeness, which of course is sacred; so it is spiritual. Therefore sacred sexuality is a two-level thing. It is bringing the reproductive technology to the highest level possible, and it is creating an experience of wholeness by using that technology at its highest level.

The reason that I am pushing it right now is not, as some have suggested, that it’s the only thing I can come up with to grab people’s attention. It is because it is one of the easiest, most obvious, confirmable results of recalibration, meaning that, amongst those who are consciously recalibrating, sexuality is no longer desired at the same level as it had been. Since recalibration, the nature of the results that you can have with a sacred focus on sexuality is different, and to be desired.

You have said that sexual union is a way that the Source can permeate our being, yet a recent study reveals that only thirty percent of women are able to have an orgasm during intercourse. How much is that Source connection thwarted when male and female orgasms take place at different points during sex, and why do women seem to have that difficulty?

First, I want to do a bit of clarification about orgasms. There is probably a great misunderstanding—a mythology—about orgasm that throws off the ability to claim the power that it offers. The myth is that orgasm is the peak point of physical release, and that the ejaculation by both male and female must happen together. If that were the case, the whole teaching of extended orgasm would be rather fruitless, wouldn’t it, because to maintain that electrical dispersal—which is what it is—at that point of release for over half an hour would be physically damaging instead of beneficial. Orgasm is the process of buildup, release and winding down, so two people are actually likely having it at the same time during that union—the hour or two hours or half hour they spend together—when they both have release. That could justifiably be called simultaneous orgasms, although maybe not simultaneous peaks.

Is there an advantage to simultaneous peaks? Yes. But so much of an advantage that one should worry about it? No. Part of the teaching about nonphysical orgasm that I’m getting into in the next workshop has to do with orgasm being that long period of time, and why it also would fit in with non-partner orgasm.

As for the question about the difficulty of orgasm for some women: When someone is non-orgasmic they always need to look for organic possibilities first, because there are certain environmental chemicals and medical drugs that can cause an inability to either make the neural connection—which says, This part of the body is getting very tense in a very pleasurable fashion—or certain structure or musculature issues that can lead to the body’s inability to respond. So eliminating those first, you’re going to be dealing with two things. Orgasm is a physical response, as well as a mental one. There will not be the mental response if there is not trust and safety—they are imperative. Safety is not defined as dark, quiet, in your own bed while the children are asleep. It can be the mile-high club in an airplane cubicle where someone might walk in at any moment. It’s defined by the individual.

Orgasm is also a physical expression. And when I say physical this time, I mean technology. There is a technology of sensuous stimulation that creates orgasm. There are spots in both males and females that create the electrical connections that bring it about. I’m not sure that a large percentage of the readership is going to appreciate this statement: there are very, very few non-orgasmic women; there are many more non-orgasmic men—which is the reason there are so many non-orgasmic women.

Now the next obvious question would be, So what is that technology? And here is where I get to say, Come to the workshop.

In February’s workshop in Lexington you suggested three ways of approaching sacred sex: having an orgasm without touching at all, orgasm without touching the erogenous zones and orgasm without penetration but with touching. In addition you mentioned extended orgasms. Please elaborate on these three approaches, which one to start with and suggestions on how to achieve them.

Yes, that was so interesting, wasn’t it? Everybody got very caught up in how that was possible. First, what I was saying was that in working towards intentional, spiritualized sexuality, I would recommend those three steps. They were not three different versions; they were passageways. First you do the one, and then you do the other, and then you do the other. And that process would in fact bring about the ability to better have extended orgasms.

So it wasn’t three separate things; it was part of a greater process. Actually what I’m going for is teaching you how to handle the technology of sex with a sacred intent. And of course the easiest way to do that is to teach you how to have sex without having intercourse, because the first thing that’s required in the western mind is to get away from that idea that sex and intercourse are the same thing, that two bodies join and one or both have an orgasm and then it’s over and five minutes have passed and you go and cook supper. In sacred sexuality the purpose is the whole experience. What is required is retraining the pleasure part of the mind to recognize that the purpose is not orgasm. Orgasm will happen as a result.

So it begins by retraining the senses. Then it progresses to learning the other’s body, and finally it moves into allowing orgasm but without that western intercourse connection. Those three together will bring about the discipline required to extend that orgasm as well, which is a different teaching. But as I said in that workshop, get started here, and then we’ll work on the greater aspect of it. In that first stage—without touching—it’s purely a mental work. It is a mental work attached to limited—non-erogenous—physical stimulation in the second stage, and it’s the mental work attached to certain physical stimulation in the third stage, but with a very controlled release allowed, which moves into a creative rather than a primal and physical-mental orientation.

You’re going for the attitude of expanding sensual awareness. You might work a month, every day, with and without a partner, trying to establish any one of those three passageways. That was sort of my greatest entertainment out of all the comments coming back to me because nobody in this society is going to easily go with that idea of a nonphysical orgasm. And if anyone was doing step one for fifteen minutes and then moving to step two, they weren’t understanding the process. I was saying that it’s an attitudinal thing, not a technological thing. I had more in mind such things as creating an atmosphere conducive to making love so that you learn what those different atmospheres are. You learn what stimulates the pleasure zones of your mind. Maybe that is poetry or erotic films or talking to one another in a particularly sensual way. You learn to stimulate the brain as a sensory/sensual organ.

Does it involve self-touching at that point? No. It is a mental process. Bring yourself to an absolute height of sexual luxury by thinking, talking, smelling, seeing. And of course that’s so foreign, forget the other two steps! If you choose to reach for sexual satisfaction rather than orgasm, when it’s over you don’t have frustration.

In the same way that in a brain-damaged person the speech function might be taken over by the visual center, you can train that sexual brain, the pleasure areas of the brain, to expand the places that register pleasure, so that it is not just the hypothalamus and reactive physical, but it’s also the playful, creative, and so forth.

Once you have strengthened that “muscle”—the brain—then you want to retrain the body that one thing can be as sexual as another. Well that certainly doesn’t play well with people, does it—that what is considered non-sexual becomes sexual? It becomes sexual because of two things—and this is a very interesting but absolutely primary physics principle—because of resistance and attraction. The resistance is due to the body’s being deprived; its primary sensual zones are not being touched. But the brain is able to attract or reawaken the pleasure centers that are in every portion of the body when it must. Essentially what you’re doing is teaching your whole body to become a pleasure zone, but the only way you can do it is by making the body think it’s not going to have its pleasure zones.

This kind of sexual discipline seems particularly difficult for people who are without partners.

It’s much easier for people without partners. Much easier. It’s much harder for those with access to partners. They’re the ones who get impatient, who want to just get it in there and get going. It’s much easier without! You can expand, because you don’t have the distraction of another or the hope of getting into the familiar routine. Sex is so associated with rapid attainment that you bypass that whole process of retraining the body. The stimulus of another person in this process is a detriment.

How can we keep these things sacred instead of trivializing them? There’s such a feather-in-your-cap attitude about sex and orgasm.

The trivialization is a defense mechanism. If you’re afraid that you cannot do it or will not have the opportunity, then you’re going to have to make it unnecessary. When you know that you’re doing the best you can where you are with what you have and you still can’t do what you believe is necessary to be what you want to be, then it has to be the technology that’s silly, not you. Now the cannot can be many things; there is no partner; it won’t happen; or I do not have the discipline. And it’s very important that this not become a ranking of spiritual ability. It is a spiritual ability, but it is not a ranking of spiritual potential.

You can spend your whole life learning how to walk on water, or you can just take a boat and get there and have other things to do with your energy. Sacred sexuality is an opportunity to increase the paths available to you. It is not the only path to spiritual mastery. But insofar as this world is just recalibrating and physical access is a very specific means into spiritual attainment, it is a very good means of creating extra paths.

Is sacred sex as you have defined it different from the Hindu practice of Tantra Yoga, which emphasizes sex?

In the earliest forms of that Hindu worship—the Tantric label came about much later—ritualized sexual practice (and I’m slightly differentiating ritualized from sacred) was a means of worshipping Kali. Kali, like Macha, is the representation of the destroyer, the bringer of death who is then the bringer of life. In the great circle of life, beginning and end are the same—rather than the time-line that Westerners want to make—here is the beginning at one end of it and here is the end. The worship of Kali recognizes that the destruction of the doorway is a new beginning, an opening of another door.

So if, looking at the pantheon, you were to say every aspect of physical attainment represents a gift of worship to and from the gods, then what would sexuality be a part of? Well, it is the giving up of oneself as two lovers merge into one another, and it creates new life in that process of letting the singular life go. So of course it would be Kali. However, the later technology of Tan­­tra is very much a worship of the rules and techniques, rather than remembering what that foundation was about, very much the way Christianity has become the worship of the rules that the Apostles derived from what Christ said.

If you are not consciously recalibrated, are you still able to get into the sacredness of sex?

Sacred sex does not require somebody who is consciously recalibrated, because conscious recalibration is no more or less recalibrated than unconscious recalibration. But the synthesis required of an individual in order to have the awareness of recalibration creates a higher consciousness as well within sexual activity. So it does not require conscious awareness of recalibration, but the steps that bring you to that state of awareness will naturally create a more potent experience.