An Alternate View of Christ

I have been studying Christianity for many years, from monasticism to mysticism to the various orthodoxies and heresies, and wanted to present here my best interpretation for the person of Jesus and the early faith. This is an alternative view, but I think it is a better version for someone using the historical lens, who wants to understand Jesus from a perspective that is modern, mature, and holistic.

1. It is clear Jesus – who we might refer to by his historical name, Joshua ben Joseph – was a true spiritual teacher.

2. Jesus seems to have been familiar with esotericism and mysticism (these are my terms not his), strands of which have existed in Judaism throughout its history.

3. Jesus spent many years in contemplation and withdrawal; we see this alluded to briefly in the Gospels, where Jesus was in the “wilderness” and when he is a student of John the Baptist.

4. Jesus and John the Baptist were likely connected to a group in ancient Judea called the Essenes. We would associate the Essenes with asceticism, the contemplative life, and the mystery religions today. The Essenes believed in a life of retreat into the wilderness and the practice of the inner life.

5. When he began his ministry, Jesus’ teaching was fundamentally given “underground.” He preferred to teach directly a limited number of disciples (who in history we call the “twelve apostles”). Beyond this we don’t know his precise teaching or much about these disciples.

6. When Jesus does have contact with the public, he preferred to teach in parables, or symbolic stories.

*There are many examples of Christ’s esotericism in the Gospels, but let’s look at one occasion when he speaks to the apostles: “To you [my direct students, the apostles] it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them [the public] it has not been granted.”

*This is overall a very prudent approach for one teaching these topics; as their niceties are hard to understand, and it is easy to be misunderstood or misconstrued.

7. There is a great deal of mythologization about Jesus; some of this is based on symbols communicating important truths, while some is fiction.

8. It is very difficult to know exactly what Jesus said or taught and we must make our best guesses at it. There was likely a list of aphorisms (sayings) of Jesus compiled early on that was the most authentic source of his teaching; this work likely influenced the Gospel writers.

9. The Christian Gospels are clearly revealed texts, written under religious inspiration. They are dense, rich texts which communicate important and essential truths about spirituality and human nature.

10. At the same time, the Gospels have many eccentricities, and are imperfect texts, as all revealed texts are. We may distill the essential element out of them and appreciate them, but should also subject them to criticism.

11. The Gospels were written a minimum of 50 years after the death of Jesus, and it is probable none of the authors had direct contact with Christ himself.

12. Here are a few areas which I have been suspicious of over the years.

*Miracles

In the period of the Roman Empire during which the Gospels were written, a trope existed in which the ability of spiritual teachers was proved by their demonstration of spiritual powers. In the East, a “siddhi” is the term for a spiritual power a holy person or saint might manifest. In the Gospels, there is the interesting term “dynamikos” (power) which is alluded to at times when Christ performs the miracles.

There are other writings from around this same era of magicians and thaumaturgists (miracle-workers) who work similar wonders as Jesus. Most of these figures have been forgotten to time. It is interesting that the true teacher Jesus was the one whose account remained, and became a prevailing force.

I think these miracles are partly based on authentic manifestations that sometimes happen to spiritual seekers (the charisms), and are partly exaggerations, mythologizations, and fictions used to “prove” the attainment of Christ.

*The Son of God

This is one I am relatively certain of. When participating in a modern Christian mass, Jesus is referred to as the (singular) “Son of God.” There is a whole teaching in Christian dogma today about this, linking Jesus as “the” Son to a “God the Father” and a “Holy Ghost.”

This seems to be a misunderstanding of the Essene teaching of the “ben Elohim” (sons of God). Jesus seems to have referred to himself as one of the sons of God (plural), with the idea being that anyone could become a son of God if they followed his teaching. This line of reasoning also elucidates the teaching of the early church fathers, the idea “God became man that man might become god.” This teaching is sometimes called the idea of deification or divinization (theosis).

Christian teaching often posits that Christ had two natures, divine and human. Based on the above, it follows that all men can realize this possibility, and become fully divine and fully human like Christ.

*Jesus of Nazareth

This is one I am not as certain of, but have been suspicious of over the years. The idea Jesus originates in the town of Nazareth has been questioned by scholars and archaeologists. So, one alternative is “the Nazorean” or “of Nazareth” is a mistranslation of the correct “Nazirite.” The Nazirites were a sect of the Essenes, which would clarify more of Jesus’ origins.

*The Virgin Mary

Here I must admit I have never been a big fan of the cult of Mary, though over the past years I have in some ways been altering my perspective. Christian teaching says that Jesus’ mother “was born without original sin” and that she conceived Jesus without having had sexual relations: that Christ’s birth was of a virgin.

I feel that this is very clear mythologization, and we can find analogues of virgin birth in the religions and mythologies that were contemporary to the Gospels.

One problem with Mary is beyond her motherhood and holiness, we don’t know much about her. This has been an obstacle of mine in appreciating her as a spiritual figure. Perhaps it is that Mary was a holy woman, who also gave birth to a son who went on to become a holy man. Yet there is also evidence against this in the Gospels; for instance, the scene when Christ is teaching in the synagogue and Mary calls out, “He is out of his mind!” This brief scene in the past suggested to me that his mother was a worldly woman, unaware of the true nature of her son.

Orthodox Errors

While these would be very “bold” pronouncements to make in a conventional theological context, these are my main issues with Christian dogma.

*Physical Resurrection

The Resurrection of Christ is one of the most important parts of the Christian Gospels. The earliest Gospel (Mark) has an ending in which the disciples go to the tomb and find it empty; then the Gospel ends ambiguously. The two next Gospels have Jesus’ appearances to the disciples (which might be construed as intuitions or spiritual communications). However, by the time of the last Gospel (John), this return is now a full bodily resurrection, with Thomas famously touching Christ’s wounds.

This narrative has led to the modern teaching that Christ’s promise is of physical resurrection as opposed to spiritual resurrection. Unfortunately, I find this flawed and do not see any reason for a return to the physical body.

*Redemption Theology

This doctrine is a major pillar of all modern branches of Western Christianity, and one I have a problem with. While this dogma does reconcile Christ’s martyrdom, suffering, and death with the larger narrative of the Bible, I do not feel it is an appropriate interpretation.

This teaching usually goes something along the lines of this. “Man has original sin due to Adam; so, God sends Christ to suffer and die, and by doing so he ‘redeems’ the sin of mankind.”

I find this a very simpleminded understanding of Christ’s death, and an unnecessary one. Here I do feel the Eastern churches have been better at maintaining their integrity, as they have left many of these events open-ended for the individual to discern as “mysteries,” as opposed to giving easy canned narratives to preach to the public from the pulpit.

Teachings of Christ

Here are the four major tenets I get from careful study of the Gospels.

I. Metanoia

The call for the complete transformation or conversion of man to conformity with truth or God.

II. The Beatitudes

The teaching of the themes of universal love and acceptance.

III. The redemptive power of suffering

The teaching that suffering ennobles or elevates man.

IV. Christ’s conquest of death

The meaning of the Resurrection: that eternal life is possible for man.

Plan of Action

Proceeding forward, the plan is to practice using the following methods.

1. First, conducting reality checks throughout the day. Asking "am I dreaming?" then consciously answering "yes" or "no." The hope being if this practice is habituated it will be repeated during an actual dream, and produce lucidity.

I am still subscribing here to the idea that dreams-lucid dreams-OOBEs exist on a spectrum, with dreams being the lowest level of the spiritual plane and OOBEs the highest.

Dreams ---------> Lucid dream ---------> OOBE

Keep in mind I am still contemplating the eccentricity of this as a practice. Lucidity in the sleep state is a very particular skill to develop; it is far removed from the spiritual practices of asceticism and renunciation. It remains for me to discern if this skill is required for "conscious dying" (if so, few ever acquire this skill).

2. Second, to continue attempting the Michael Raduga "indirect method." To set the alarm clock each night, then attempt to use each "deferred awakening" as an opportunity to separate. If separation fails, I will try to cycle separation techniques.

So far this has proved difficult to remember and put into practice. Many times I awaken and do not remember to make an attempt. Other times I will try to separate but then not cycle separation techniques. And still other times I do not have any deferred awakenings.

That said, this Raduga method is the most recommended for those without OOB experience to habituate you to separation (the idea being direct techniques then become easier after this).

*Should separation succeed, I am also interested in practicing the "deepening techniques" (using the five senses to amplify clarity) recommended by Raduga. I am very interested in this. As I mentioned earlier, my dreams have always been low in reality (about 5% of daily sense experience), so the idea the OOBE can be hyperreal is fascinating to me.

3. Third, failing at the other methods, to simultaneously attempt the direct method recommended by Robert Monroe, Jeff Brooks, and the mystics of history.

My Inner Director has not been recommending this to me; however, without success with the other approaches, I will return to this approach and cultivate its practice.

A couple weeks ago I was able to induce the experience of vibrations, though they were modest and concentrated mostly in the hands and feet. The work week reduced the opportunity to sit and meditate, and the vibrations went away.

I am aware of others who say these vibrations can become an overwhelming sensation (I have not experienced this). While experimenting a couple weeks ago, longer meditation times and various other experiments did not seem to amplify the vibrations (though they did seem to correlate with motionlessness, relaxation, and closing the eyes).

Thoughts on Jeff

An obstacle I have run into is that there are areas where my Inner Director does not agree with what Jeff Brooks says. This is not a conflict that I take lightly. I have been learning from Jeff for many years, recognize his arahantship, and am inclined to agree with him on more than 90% of what he says.

A sincere seeker must listen to what the Inner Voice says (while also being sure not to be talking to oneself...) and subject oneself to true teachers. But what happens when the two contradict each other?

One obstacle is that I discovered Jeff, and recognized his attainments, due to the Inner Director showing me to him. But, now it is telling me something different, that the time has come to go your own way. 

This does raise an issue. If I still recognize Jeff's arahantship, it means that arahants may be wrong about some things. But, this is not a question that I will claim an answer to.

The areas where my Inner Director disagrees with Jeff Brooks.

1. Understanding of the Four Noble Ones. 

Jeff's model of these is strongly correlated to advanced contemplatives.

Jeff's stages

I have ponder these stages for years.  I have read Buddhist teachers speculating that the 4 stages of noble beings represent attainment of the 4 jhanas.  I do not see this.

I. Streamwinner represents one who has attained many of the charisms, so this would be 3rd to 4th jhana.

II. Once-returner suggests one who has attained the immaterial domains via OOBE on a consistent basis.

III. Nonreturner represents one who has so mastered the OOBE that no craving remains for the material domains.

IV. Arahant (enlightenment) is one who has fully negotiated the 4 immaterial domains, and has thus completely lost the sense of self, so that there is no craving for identity.  This one will see that the entire universe is one's body, and all beings are just cells in one's organism, which is infinite.

Alexander's response

How sure are you of this? As it goes against what my Inner Director has taught me about these stages. I, II, and III I have understood as all pre-contemplative attainments - that while rare they are possible for all those who are sincere and earnest on the spiritual path; while III and IV are attainments of contemplatives proper.

If you are certain I will not dispute it, though it would imply entry into the stream is almost impossible. It also nullifies the experiences of most human beings. It means if one is a non-contemplative, a life of accumulating virtue or wisdom has no value. It means all those throughout history who pursued a life in the spirit but had no knowledge of meditation had experiences of no value.

Jeff's response

Considering most mystics are marginalized by the devout, and the devout are often the cause of why the contemplative component of religion is most often lost, then it seems reasonable to me to consider seriously that mere devotion only leads to belief delusion, and otherwise no genuine spiritual attainment.

If one day I come to a different understanding, I will correct myself, though I have had my current understanding now for many years.

Let's put revealed knowledge (intuition) to one side, and reason through this for a moment.

1. Is the physical world an emanation of a benevolent, transcendent Reality?
2. Though the spiritual path may be elusive and hard to find, such a Reality would not damn all of humanity.
3. Most people do not discover the contemplative life.
4. Throughout most of human history, the ability to find true teachers and spiritual knowledge was extremely difficult. Any progress toward liberation would be precious.
5. The two lowest Noble Ones are far from freedom;  they are just commitments they will not drop lower than a human birth and their number of rebirths is finite.

For more on this you may want to examine the post on discerning attainment and the purpose of the Gurdjieff work.

It is my theory that I may have more insight on this than Jeff does. Since he began having out-of-body experiences at the age of six, while I followed a very mundane path, I had a more immediate knowledge of the states of being a streamwinner and a once-returner. This, I think, may explain the different understandings.

2. Role of the Pre-Contemplative Life. 

One of the things I have found from reading mystics over the years - let us take John Climacus, Teresa of Avila, or Evelyn Underhill as our example - is that they begin on the level of ordinary life and spend a significant amount of time describing the transition process from a material world focus to an immaterial world focus.

There are many terms for this shift throughout culture and civilization; purification, metanoia, conversion, pratyahara, withdrawal, the "new birth."

The completion of this transformation then makes the practice of the contemplative life possible. One's values have shifted, the dysfunctions of the mind and emotions have been addressed, and quiet peacefulness arises. In some traditions this transformation is all that is required for an immaterial life rebirth.

Let us take Teresa of Avila's Inner Castle as an example. In the Inner Castle, mansions 1-3 represent the purgative life (the process we are describing here), 4-5 the illuminative life (the early stages of contemplation), and 6-7 the unitive life (liberation).

A nonreturner (one who does not return again to a human birth) would be one who has passed through the steps of purgation, and has arrived approximately at the fourth mansion. They may not necessarily be an arahant, but they will not be returning again to a human birth.

Jeff's focus is strongly on the contemplative life proper. While he does examine the spiritual crisis, he does not seem to think that good people who have changed their focus are on the path to freedom if they lack spiritual attainments.

My theory here is again based on a difference of experience. Jeff's experience of effectively "the end" (the out-of-body experience) from a young age likely molded his view on the pre-contemplative life, which he more-or-less skipped over. I also suspect Jeff's experience of marginalization from the orthodox Buddhist community may also inform his perspective on pre-contemplative fates.

Indirect Method Attempts

Log

5/17

Continuing with the alarm-interrupting-sleep practice. This evening did so in combination with an attempt at the "direct method" (after awakening, sit motionless, and meditate into sleep). No results. However, recalled a large number of dreams (perhaps the largest ever): 9? Had one false awakening.

5/18

First attempt with the "indirect method." Woke with the alarm, then each natural awakening tried to exit. Don't think I really followed the steps correctly. Hard to remember them all when one wakes up. I may have had three natural awakenings and tried on some level to exit each time. No results. No dreams recalled.

5/19

Second attempt with "indirect method." Had one attempt at it this night. Don't think I followed the steps correctly. No dreams recalled.

5/20

Intended to try with the "indirect method" but don't think I had any natural awakenings. Don't recall any attempts. Four dreams recalled. One false awakening.

5/21

One attempt with the indirect method this night. Actually partially followed the steps properly this time. Did the first "exit" attempt then "cycled" the exit techniques. The "wiggle a phantom limb" seemed to perhaps have actually brought results. Seemed like a ghostly limb may have been wiggling. But, was unable to get any farther than this. Recalled perhaps 11? dreams this night.

~

1. I am trying to keep in mind the three methods to provoke the OOBE amongst the above - including the lucidity method via dreams. It is interesting that one can be hyperconscious in the waking state but have none of this carry over into sleep. These are different skills and the lucidity in sleep is something entirely different.

2. I wonder what would happen if I died at this moment. Would I lack lucidity in the after-death state? Or would lucidity then emerge?

3. The false awakenings are interesting. Of course, they are happening and I still lack consciousness during them. Not sure how to cultivate dream lucidity. I have been asking "am I dreaming?" at random intervals throughout the day.

4. My dreams throughout my life have always been very low in "reality," not much higher than the level of imagination. They have perhaps 5% the realism of day to day sense experience. I am interested in the "deepening method" described by Raduga. The accounts of OOBEs I read always describe them as being hyperreal. It would be very interesting to experience this.

5. Raduga explains even if one moves or stirs after awakening, to still try to exit using the indirect method, and to be disciplined and cycle the exit attempts. Will try to keep this in mind.

6. Reflecting on the above practices, I am a little incredulous about the eccentricity of all this. Not necessarily for me, but for humanity in general. If training in all this is really required for "conscious dying" then very few people can ever do so. What number of human beings would ever learn about these things? Or practice them?

~

Valdy's Response

Hello Alexander

The simplest way for me to get OOB is to use a suggestion as I go to sleep that I want to go OOB while I am dreaming. When you are dreaming you are already OOB so to find yourself OOB is not a big shock. A suggestion to "go OOB while I am dreaming".

My first OOB was spontaneous, it came from a huge life crisis and happened while I was awake. My body suddenly started to vibrate the way Monroe explains. To me it felt like, for example starting a small car, putting it in neutral and putting the accelerator to the floor, a sudden vibration like that but with no movement. My first OOB took about 4 hours and I presume that I broke some boundaries that now make it easier for me to get OOB. This first OOB was going OOB while I was awake. In order to get out I had to let go, and then had to let go of letting go.

Valdy

The Indirect Method

One writer, Benjamin, says there are three chief ways of entering an OOBE.

There are three main ways to enter the ‘State’; before sleep, during REM dream sleep and upon waking from a nights sleep.

*Before sleep state induction. this requires a set up ‘pre-sleep’ that primes you biochemically and physiologically to enter the state.

*REM dream sleep induction requires a grasp of Lucid Dreaming and is a bit hit and miss for the newbie.

*Waking state induction requires the ability to recognize that you have woken up and at that very moment remembering not to move, roll over, scratch an itch or open the eyes... or even to start listening to the noises around you. It takes a bit of practice but it is a very successful way of entering the State.

His thoughts here affirm the importance of the REM state to induce the OOBE. REM is a part of his first method (why there is the non-REM "pre-sleep"), is the state in a dream, and is the state in the early morning waking method.

What he says is consistent with the idea that dreams-lucid dreams-OOBEs exist on a continuum. Using his #2 method, by becoming self-aware in a dream one can transition the experience to an OOBE.

These three ways seem consistent with other writers. Another writer, Michael Raduga, lists the same:

There are three primary types of techniques that make it possible to enter the phase: direct, indirect and dream consciousness.

(...) Direct techniques – entry into the phase without any prior sleep, after excessive physical movement upon awakening, or having been awake for at least five minutes.

Indirect techniques – entry into the phase within five minutes of awakening from sleep of any duration - provided there has been minimal physical movement.

Dream consciousness – entry into the phase through becoming consciously aware while a dream episode is happening.

Michael Raduga is a very interesting person. He seems to hold classes to teach the OOBE to students in Russia, and writes from a long list of case studies and experiments. He is a consummate "pragmatist" and does not pay much attention to "theory." He writes some unique thoughts based on his histories:

For 90% of the population, [direct] techniques are the most difficult

This explains why my Inner Director is not telling me to meditate. Based on this, a meditation induced OOBE is the most difficult for one with no OOB experience.

It has been clearly proven within the School’s student body that novice practitioners do not benefit from beginning a training regimen with direct techniques. This is because direct techniques require a thorough understanding and masterful application of indirect techniques in order to be effective.

This affirms a thought I made above, that the need for an accidental "first" OOBE was required.

The incorrect notion that the phase state is extremely difficult to enter is due to the fact that people are more often drawn to the more difficult direct techniques. It is always better to approach direct techniques only after becoming expert in the use of indirect techniques.

Raduga advises using the "early morning waking" method mentioned earlier by Benjamin, and then transitioning to other techniques.

the direct method will account for about 15% of all experiences, the indirect method 50% (half of those being immediate separations upon awakening, and the other half using the techniques), while the remaining third of experiences will be had thanks to dream consciousness.

Here he lists the percentage for each induction method for the experienced OOB experiencer. So, this should be what is experienced for one familiar with the OOBE.

After many experiments with his OOB school, Raduga has devised a method which he claims is extremely effective at letting anyone have an OOBE.

Raduga Method

1. Sleep 6 hours then wake up with an alarm clock

2. Go back to sleep and have the intention to awaken motionless and with the eyes closed, and with the intent to separate on awakening

3. On awakening, attempt to separate by simply sitting up, rolling out, or trying to levitate

4. If separation fails, attempt four cycles of separation techniques like rotating, wiggling, swimming, or rubbing the hands

Raduga claims great success at getting even those with no OOB experience to separate with his method. I will give his approach a try.

Raduga says one should practice deepening techniques if one separates:

Sensory experiences within a fully realized phase experience are as realistic as those in everyday reality. In almost one-half of all cases, practitioners observe that reality-based surroundings pale in comparison to the vibrant detail and color of the phase space. To this end, after entering the phase, a practitioner must perform deepening techniques to enhance and solidify the degree and quality of phase reality.

These techniques consist of simply using each of the five senses while in "phase," to amplify their clarity.

Having said all this, I have some concerns with Michael Raduga, which I find perplexing.

During my first years of practicing out-of-body travel, I was sure that my soul was actually leaving my body and that I was therefore immortal.

Raduga goes back and forth with these very agnostic statements. He is certainly nothing like Monroe in this regard. In one part of his book it seems like he is affirming that consciousness can exist independently of the body, and in another part he seems to say it can't.

Raduga's agnosticism is just very strange to me, as this is the central question of human existence. Is it possible to survive the death of the body? There could not be a larger question than this to answer. The levity with which he, who has had OOB experiences his whole life, fails to want an answer to this question, I cannot comprehend.

But after undertaking endless experiments, it turned out that my “soul” was not travelling through the physical world at all, but throughout something else entirely.

It seems this may be the source of his foundering, which is a consistent experience of OOB practitioners. Generally, when visiting the physical world they find it is different in some way. Or, they struggle to be able to interact with or influence the physical world consistently. But, I find it strange that this would be a source of uncertainty for him.

he [Robert Monroe] understood the phase more as an actual exit of the mind from the body, which is why the term “out-of-body experience” (OBE) was introduced.

(...) the large influence of mysticism on Monroe’s work and views cannot be ignored. (...) The majority of phenomena described in the book have not been verified in practice. The only attempt at conducting a full-fledged scientific experiment proving that the mind left the body was unsuccessful

I am not sure if this is correct. From what I have read over the years, there were many failed experiments at the Monroe Institute at OOBE-to-physical world verification, but there were also successful affirmations made in some of the experiments that could not be attributed to accident.

[the OOBE] is often referred to under different names as the highest possible human achievement in various religious and mystical movements (yoga, Buddhism, etc.).

He has some knowledge of religion and mysticism.

It is also often considered to be the same state that people experience when dying. In many Eastern practices and religions, like Buddhism for example, where the main goal is to stop the cycle of reincarnation through remaining conscious while dying, it is believed that conscious dying can only be accomplished through ability to enter the phase, which would be a form of training for the moment of death and remaining conscious during it.

He demonstrates knowledge of the OOBE's importance for Buddhism here, though refuses to subscribe to a belief himself.

One consistent thread in the book is Raduga's disparaging attitude toward mysticism.

Despite a large serving of esotericism, [Sylvan] Muldoon’s books, (especially the first one) contain a lot of helpful, practical information

(...) the notions of “out-of-body experience” and “astral projection” have already lost their mystical halo,

I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt, and based on what Raduga says I have to assume that most of his experience with "mysticism" is through nonsense writers. Based on the writers sampled in his reading list at the end, this seems to be the case. Throughout his entire book he does not have a single mention of a real mystic, like John of the Cross, or any other great writer on these topics, like Plato. So, it is likely he is uneducated on religious or philosophical thinkers. I just have to rebuke his negative view here, as every great mystic I am familiar with is the summit of reason and practicality.

Thoughts on Sexuality

Some thoughts on sexual practices and the spiritual life.

1. The "Middle Way" is usually taught to be between the extremes of asceticism and materialism, though the Buddha's prescription is still for contemplatives to be nonsexual. There is a famous passage in which the Buddha rebukes a contemplative for having sexual relations.

The Buddha

Worthless man, haven't I taught the Dhamma in many ways for the fading of passion, the sobering of intoxication, the subduing of thirst, the destruction of attachment, the severing of the round, the ending of craving, dispassion, cessation, unbinding? Haven't I in many ways advocated abandoning sensual pleasures, comprehending sensual perceptions, subduing sensual thirst, destroying sensual thoughts, calming sensual fevers? Worthless man, it would be better that your penis be stuck into the mouth of a poisonous snake than into a woman's vagina. It would be better that your penis be stuck into the mouth of a black viper than into a woman's vagina. It would be better that your penis be stuck into a pit of burning embers, blazing and glowing, than into a woman's vagina.

A similarly great spiritual teacher is also quite clear on his thoughts on sexuality.

Christ

If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It’s better to enter eternal life (zoe) with only one hand or one foot than to be thrown into eternal fire with both of your hands and feet.

Christ

There are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.

Christ

But I say, anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Patanjali - consistent with the yogic idea that through celibacy, "energy" is gained or the spiritual body is "transformed":

Yoga Sutras

Brahmacarya pratisthayam, virya labhah

[When] continence [is] well established, energy [is] gained

 2. I had a very attractive young girlfriend when I was a teenager. Around this time, I experienced an "awakening" to begin the spiritual quest.

Two revelations occurred to me at that age: 1. that my inner world was a mess and 2. that there was a great inner "work" that could be accomplished and would lead to freedom.

These realizations made me feel that the relationship was not appropriate, given the inner work that could be completed. "I should set my inner house in order," I thought, "before complicating my situation with a relationship." I ended the relationship and decided to work on these new revelations. It could not have been a great experience for this young girlfriend. ;)

3. A revelation also came to me at this same time about sexuality. I remember the sense that there was something very "quaint" about human sexuality. By this I mean I felt a kind of condescension about it, the sense of "oh that is so charming," as though sexuality was a simple, basic, perhaps even silly version of something higher. I felt that all the stresses and conflicts felt by people over it were very silly from the perspective of an "adult" or an "old soul" (?).

These intuitions resulted in a very different relationship with sexuality. The idea of a compulsive pursuit of it become impossible. At the same time, I do not mean to say that I became "un-sexual."

4. A sense of contentedness and dispassion developed; and, like one trusts in the cosmos to deliver one from everything, I expected once progress on the psyche had been achieved a good relationship would follow. This did not come about.

5. It is here where one does consider - if one's partner really knows one better than anyone - an issue with one engaged on this "quest." As it is not so easy for a partner to fully understand the niceties of this "work." It is an issue with exploring the ideas of "esotericism."

6. When I say that I did not become un-sexual, I mean that it came to me that human sexuality could reach its highest expression in a sexual "idyll." That such a thing was possible. However, it also became clear to me that realizing this ideal was very elusive and (for the most part) not achievable in the average lifetime.

It also occurred to me 1. how unimpressive my own physical form was and 2. the shortcomings of most partners in also meeting such an "ideal." I realize this may come off as a narcissistic line of reasoning.

There is a very unique passage from Buddhism which fits this, however:

Nanda Sutra

Then, taking Ven. Nanda by the arm — as a strong man might flex his extended arm or extend his flexed arm — the Blessed One disappeared from Jeta's Grove and reappeared among the devas of the heaven of the Thirty-three [Tāvatiṃsa]. Now on that occasion about 500 dove-footed nymphs had come to wait upon Sakka, the ruler of the devas. The Blessed One said to Ven. Nanda, "Nanda, do you see these 500 dove-footed nymphs?"

"Yes, lord."

"What do you think, Nanda? Which is lovelier, better looking, more charming: the Sakyan girl, the envy of the countryside, or these 500 dove-footed nymphs?"

"Lord, compared to these 500 dove-footed nymphs, the Sakyan girl, the envy of the countryside, is like a cauterized monkey with its ears & nose cut off. She doesn't count. She's not even a small fraction. There's no comparison. The 500 dove-footed nymphs are lovelier, better looking, more charming."

We see that even the pursuit of pleasure and apparent selfishness, if fully followed, is leading one toward a higher end. Thus, it is important not to discount sexuality, infatuations, or relationships as antithetical to the spiritual quest.  As while they may be selfish, un-ideal, or imperfect, they are also expressions of the desire for union.

7. A claim sometimes made by spiritual teachers is it is possible to reach a completely "dispassionate" state. That this is in some way an ideal, a goal. I was thinking about this in relation to a line from Buddhism:

Secluded from sense pleasures, the aspirant abides in jhana.

 The word "secluded" is what I find interesting here. On the one hand, "seclusion" suggests a state of dispassion, a state in which one does not feel the "fire" of desire. At the same time, "seclusion" also implies a "fleeing," a putting oneself in a situation in which one is not exposed to temptation. So, it is an interesting word to use, and suggests there is no ideal dispassionate state.

8. The values of celibacy are questionable. The idea that continence is spiritually transformative, or results in the production of new energies, is questionable. True, the simplification of life is a value; true, the quelling of passion and the increase of dispassion are a value; and true, the reduction of conflict and stress are a value. But, there is little to be said for the practice beyond this.

There are many contradictions here in all this, but somewhere in it is wisdom.