posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:15 PM
I like the opening post - this has been my experience too.
What is more, already the act of being aroused by commercial images divorced from love for a while - like net porn - seems to have a radiating bad
effect for a few days even if one does not have an orgasm.
Things go out of whack - you can call it bad luck, lack of understanding people etc.
Here I disagree with some of the people who support the OP. What counts from the point the very first post is not ejaculation or no ejaculation (and
their equivalent in a female being) but whether you are divorced from love or not.
Although the Tantric approach certainly has its own merits, I have experienced it more and more that the results of arousal without orgasm can lead to
very extatic states indeed, and started to spontaneously grow to like this more than simple orgasm.
When I am either celibate or have loving sex though, a lot of things improve as if by magic.
As a therapist myself (from a more rational school called NLP) I have compared these days for years and actually there seems to be differences that
cannot be attributed to anything else. If desire is divorced from a feeling of love it feeds negative entities.
It is interesting how many people misunderstood the opening post and thought that the OP said all masturbation was bad or that it says all orgasm was
bad. Maybe because there was an intelligent summary of tantric sex right after the opening post.
Yes, there are schools of religion as well as tantra that teach that, but that is not the interesting part in this thread.
I believe some people should be celibate because that is a good way for them, some should masturbate (but preferably being aroused by a person they
feel at least some degree of love and understanding towards, and NOT to commercial, manipulative images), some should try tantric sex with their
partner, and some should have regular normal orgasms with partners they love. What this thread shows is a warning derived from experience and a theory
that goes hand in hand (I am referring to the lecture on scalar science by Jonathan) that whatever sex you do, try not to let it separate from love
and not to let it mix with negative thoughts and feelings and you will have a much easier personal energy.
I think few people listened to the lecture cited in the opening post - it is rather long and I am listening to it in installments - I am at 2 hours
right now. The curious thing is I usually have no patience to listen to stuff on videos - I do far too quick reading and frequent places like this for
fun and education. But this Jonathan guy is really neat. He has this different theory about atomic structures, dark matter, the Earth, and healing
cancer - he calls it scalar because healing for example takes palce by a scalar jump from cellular or tissue consciousness to the whole of your being.
It is very intriguing and I think people who come in here arguing (including scientific skeptics) would do better listening and reading this captioned
lecture. You could argue with it but a few things are clear to me:
1. modern physics IS concerned with thinking at the level he does, in fact there is a whole school of astrophysicists who do
2. he is not a god or guru or moral judger or any kind of master, he does not want you to follow him or worship him or pay him, he simply wants you to
consider his thoughts which he says are accessible to us all anyway. I don't know if he got these interesting thoughts in meditation, from eating
magic mushrooms, or tantric sex, I don't know much about him anyway except that THIS lecture the OP cites has a lot of merit.
3. his scalar explanations about the nature of the physical universe do have some psychological consequences, one of which is the statements of the
opening posts - paraphrased: the wrong mix of dark energy and directed proton energy can result in partial destruction of structure
4. his thinking does have very strong parallels to Chinese Daoism as well as to the Shiva-Shakti schools of Indo-Tibetan mysticism - but he
methodically applied this thinking to dark matter surrounding galaxies, the so-called wave/particle theory etc.
I also agree that net porn as well as TV are deeply manipulative. My favorite book, War in Heaven, a funny mediumistic assessment of the development
of mankind calls these the Fifth Stage of Theocracy.
For all those that dislike the stern medieval attitude of the Judeo-Christian tradition or Mohammedanism, we can say that the powers without love have
developed new ways to enslave people by subliminal stuff as well as the presuppositions and anchoring well known in therapeutic sciences - in essence,
being addicted to porn or TV
is the same thing as being sacrificed to Aztec or Phoenician gods, or being denied life in the inquisitorial style of Christianity (as opposed to the
words of Jesus which are naturally endorsed by any spiritual person who understands them.)
Absolute skeptics should try to elicit some out-of-body experience - e.g. with the help of the vibrations put out by binaurals or the Monroe Institute
and once they have an experience like that we would be able to have an intelligent argument. Otherwise it makes no sense to participate in a
discussion like this, with the only added proviso that I also dislike Theocratic slavery of any kind and I guess this is where we agree. Where we do
not is that although I am very keen on science, I do not think we have the ultimate word and scalar and dark matter theory could be actually where we
would go beyond quantum physics.
Thank you all, especially the OP.