I left Albuquerque for Northern California and rather than drive the whole way at once I stopped in at Wes Wolcott's. I had met Wes previously at the Conference for Shamanism and Sacred Sexuality in Santa Fe the previous January. He is a videographer and has produced DVDs for Margot Anand and others in the Tantra world. While there, I filled him in on what I had been learning about internet marketing and suggested that we could benefit through a collaboration.
I arrived in Northern California in time to create the Yummatopia website for Amber and Carolena. I feel quite fortunate to be a part of what these two gals have put together; a place to explore and increase yumminess in life. You can visit the site at: Http://www.yumatopia.com
I got my STD results back and all the tests were negative. Good thing, too. I found beautiful woman whom had also been recently tested and we had fun. Although we like one another and share a strong energetic connection, I find that we have quite a few difference in our approach to life. This may be a good thing.
Anyway, I returned to Wes's place and it was providential to do so. I am finding it a pleasure to meet and work with some really amazing people including Bo Lebo, Marci Javril and Mare Simone. I just consulted for Marci about increasing her web traffic and successfully cloned Mare's website. I was appalled to hear that her hosting company was charging her $300/mo. How dare they! Anyway. More later.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Friday, January 4, 2008
Making Love Last: A Tantric Perspective
How can we make love last?
O.K. Now we are into the can of worms!
From a spiritual perspective, it is an odd question since we exist in a sea of eternal love.
It is also something of a trick question since it is based on a trick of the ego. According to Bodhi Avianasha, author of Jewel in the Lotus, (a tantra classic) temporality is a symptom of being in the ego-mind whereas timelessness indicates being in the heart space. So when we are in the presence of love, it is timeless. It is only when we are in our ego-state that we are concerned with time and with making love last.
It also begs the question of "Love with whom?" This question brings in a cascade of secondary considerations and cultural conditioning such as 'soulmate,' 'polyamory,' 'serial monogamy' and all the variations we see in society.
I would suggest 'being unconditional love with no attachment.' When I am drawn to someone, simply to express love for them and draw closer. When I am not, simply express love for them and put distance between us. 'Being unconditional love' runs counter to our programming. We are taught that love is located outside of ourselves and we must seek it and that there are certain conditions to be met. What if that's simply not true?
What if by simply being love, there is no implicit 'deal?' What if loving someone doesn't entitle us to relationship?
These days I find that when I cease clinging to a love that I think is scarce, I discover it is abundant. When I stop trying to ensure that love continues and simply let go, that it is all around me. This may occur in one person or in a progression from person to person. It is my experience that there is but one woman out there and she has a million faces. What there is for me to do is to love her and make hot love to her when she wants me to.
O.K. Now we are into the can of worms!
From a spiritual perspective, it is an odd question since we exist in a sea of eternal love.
It is also something of a trick question since it is based on a trick of the ego. According to Bodhi Avianasha, author of Jewel in the Lotus, (a tantra classic) temporality is a symptom of being in the ego-mind whereas timelessness indicates being in the heart space. So when we are in the presence of love, it is timeless. It is only when we are in our ego-state that we are concerned with time and with making love last.
It also begs the question of "Love with whom?" This question brings in a cascade of secondary considerations and cultural conditioning such as 'soulmate,' 'polyamory,' 'serial monogamy' and all the variations we see in society.
I would suggest 'being unconditional love with no attachment.' When I am drawn to someone, simply to express love for them and draw closer. When I am not, simply express love for them and put distance between us. 'Being unconditional love' runs counter to our programming. We are taught that love is located outside of ourselves and we must seek it and that there are certain conditions to be met. What if that's simply not true?
What if by simply being love, there is no implicit 'deal?' What if loving someone doesn't entitle us to relationship?
These days I find that when I cease clinging to a love that I think is scarce, I discover it is abundant. When I stop trying to ensure that love continues and simply let go, that it is all around me. This may occur in one person or in a progression from person to person. It is my experience that there is but one woman out there and she has a million faces. What there is for me to do is to love her and make hot love to her when she wants me to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
