Desire as something sacred
I'm tired. Even working half-days this week, just dealing wtih the pain has exhausted me. I'm thinking too much, my mind is churning a wide range of subjects, and because of the pain meds and muscle relaxers I can't really concentrate or meditate, so my mind is going round and round. Presently, I am trying to reconsile the concept of 'desire' in my life without the benefit of true contemplation... in some ways this entry is a continuation of my March 21, 2005 journal post.
I think that 'desire' is perhaps the singlemost misunderstood concept in the world today, so before I write any more on the subject, I should probably clarify what I mean by 'desire'. In the context of what I am thinking, desire is more than just sexual longing... Desire is the energy that strives for transcendance. It is the unending quality of yearning that drives us to persevere.
Dr Epstein writes that "the first step in healing our relationships with our own desires is to challenge our fundamantal orientations toward desire" and stop seeing it as 'self'. If I do this, then I must accept that I am not responsible for my desires. I am only responsible for how I relate to them.
But while the acceptance of Desire is essential to deepen my experience of self, of consciousness, it is not necessary to own that desire. There is a growing shift in my perspective on Desire as a force in and of itself, a force that drives us to continue living despite endemic suffering...
Hillman said that we are taught that our rages, fears, passions, loves, drives, desires etc are our personal responsibility, that somehow, somewhere, they are located inside us. But he contended that ...hmm... that though they are felt deeply and are suffered inwardly, that the fact of these feelings and these sufferings does not make them 'ours'. He believed that emotions are there to make us _theirs_, to possess us, rule us, win us over completely to their vision.
It makes sense that my long history of repressing emotions and desires cut me off from myself, as much as those who identify almost completely with their emotions (like Stephanie?) are cut off from the self because they are possessed by them. In repression or possession, we lose the capacity for wonder that our emotional lives make possible. Desire is one means of keeping us in contact with this wonder. So seeing Desire as having its own agenda frees us to look at it more objectively.
I remember something Sappho wrote about Desire, that it comes from elsewhere, stirs us up, makes us question who is in charge, and carries the possibility of enrichment as well as the threat of obsession.
I think... I think... that the arising of desire is an opportunity to question, not _what_ or _who_ I desire, not what I am to _do_ with desire, not how I am going to make _sense_ of desire... but rather, what does desire want from me? What can it teach me?
I am coming to see Desire -- the energy that is Desire, not the act of desiring -- I am coming to see it as something sacred. I am shifting from an ego-based identification with desire into a more reflective consciousness that permits an appreciation of what is sacred in the mundane world. In learning to see Desire as sacred, there is a transformation in the way I view and experience a lot of things... For example, I have always felt the demands of those I love as a violation of sorts, a form of greediness. I have always equated love with demand, because it always has strings, or because things are taken for granted, or worse, taken without permission, or assumed that something remains unchanged because it is unspoken. My problem is that I have always seen demands as violation... and so I have tried not to make demands myself. It always seemed to me that people wanted too much from me, that they desired too much, and that the want, the demand, the desire, indicated a failing in one of us.
All my life I thought it was wrong to desire, but I've realized that all my life I've keep my desires too small. Too limited. There is this division in the world, this belief that we had to conquer desire in order to become better people and better the world, that desire is wrong or bad, that is controls us.
What created this 'division'? The belief that the seeds of suffering lie in the endless pursuit of our passions. That there is virtue in disengaging ourselves from desire.
The separation of the spiritual from the sensual, of the sacred from the relational, and the enlightening from the erotic, is a mistake. Can we experience detachment and intimacy at the same time? Yes. Can we learn to distinguish between clinging/craving, and desire? Yes.
There are two ways to hold what we desire:
One way is with a closed fist, the other is in an open palm.
One way is clinging, the other way is allowing what we desire to 'be'.
We can try not to come into contact with our desires, we can push them away, we can deny them. But they will be there, pressing at us ever stronger, becoming unhealthy obsessions. It is not that desire should be controlled... it is that _what_ we desire should not be internalized to the point that we cling to it for fear of losing it, or grasp desperately for it when it comes into range.
Desire is a butterfly we should allow to alight on in the palms of our hands, and behold in joy and delight.
It is becoming more and more obvious to me that while therapy and meditation offer me reliable venues for exploring who I am, for growing, and becoming and experiencing myself, they are the base of a triangle, and at some point I am going to have to accept and explore Desire in a love-relationship. Because I am coming to see Desire as something sacred, I am beginning to realize the importance of experiencing desire as something sacred in a relationship that is intimate emotionally, mentally, spiritually and sexually.
So that is one of the things I am thinking about. That, and super-string theory, and quantum mechanics, and the art of writing erotica, and the master gardener program at the University, and that shoji screen-making course I would love to take, and ... oh lots of things.
I think that 'desire' is perhaps the singlemost misunderstood concept in the world today, so before I write any more on the subject, I should probably clarify what I mean by 'desire'. In the context of what I am thinking, desire is more than just sexual longing... Desire is the energy that strives for transcendance. It is the unending quality of yearning that drives us to persevere.
Dr Epstein writes that "the first step in healing our relationships with our own desires is to challenge our fundamantal orientations toward desire" and stop seeing it as 'self'. If I do this, then I must accept that I am not responsible for my desires. I am only responsible for how I relate to them.
But while the acceptance of Desire is essential to deepen my experience of self, of consciousness, it is not necessary to own that desire. There is a growing shift in my perspective on Desire as a force in and of itself, a force that drives us to continue living despite endemic suffering...
Hillman said that we are taught that our rages, fears, passions, loves, drives, desires etc are our personal responsibility, that somehow, somewhere, they are located inside us. But he contended that ...hmm... that though they are felt deeply and are suffered inwardly, that the fact of these feelings and these sufferings does not make them 'ours'. He believed that emotions are there to make us _theirs_, to possess us, rule us, win us over completely to their vision.
It makes sense that my long history of repressing emotions and desires cut me off from myself, as much as those who identify almost completely with their emotions (like Stephanie?) are cut off from the self because they are possessed by them. In repression or possession, we lose the capacity for wonder that our emotional lives make possible. Desire is one means of keeping us in contact with this wonder. So seeing Desire as having its own agenda frees us to look at it more objectively.
I remember something Sappho wrote about Desire, that it comes from elsewhere, stirs us up, makes us question who is in charge, and carries the possibility of enrichment as well as the threat of obsession.
I think... I think... that the arising of desire is an opportunity to question, not _what_ or _who_ I desire, not what I am to _do_ with desire, not how I am going to make _sense_ of desire... but rather, what does desire want from me? What can it teach me?
I am coming to see Desire -- the energy that is Desire, not the act of desiring -- I am coming to see it as something sacred. I am shifting from an ego-based identification with desire into a more reflective consciousness that permits an appreciation of what is sacred in the mundane world. In learning to see Desire as sacred, there is a transformation in the way I view and experience a lot of things... For example, I have always felt the demands of those I love as a violation of sorts, a form of greediness. I have always equated love with demand, because it always has strings, or because things are taken for granted, or worse, taken without permission, or assumed that something remains unchanged because it is unspoken. My problem is that I have always seen demands as violation... and so I have tried not to make demands myself. It always seemed to me that people wanted too much from me, that they desired too much, and that the want, the demand, the desire, indicated a failing in one of us.
All my life I thought it was wrong to desire, but I've realized that all my life I've keep my desires too small. Too limited. There is this division in the world, this belief that we had to conquer desire in order to become better people and better the world, that desire is wrong or bad, that is controls us.
What created this 'division'? The belief that the seeds of suffering lie in the endless pursuit of our passions. That there is virtue in disengaging ourselves from desire.
The separation of the spiritual from the sensual, of the sacred from the relational, and the enlightening from the erotic, is a mistake. Can we experience detachment and intimacy at the same time? Yes. Can we learn to distinguish between clinging/craving, and desire? Yes.
There are two ways to hold what we desire:
One way is with a closed fist, the other is in an open palm.
One way is clinging, the other way is allowing what we desire to 'be'.
We can try not to come into contact with our desires, we can push them away, we can deny them. But they will be there, pressing at us ever stronger, becoming unhealthy obsessions. It is not that desire should be controlled... it is that _what_ we desire should not be internalized to the point that we cling to it for fear of losing it, or grasp desperately for it when it comes into range.
Desire is a butterfly we should allow to alight on in the palms of our hands, and behold in joy and delight.
It is becoming more and more obvious to me that while therapy and meditation offer me reliable venues for exploring who I am, for growing, and becoming and experiencing myself, they are the base of a triangle, and at some point I am going to have to accept and explore Desire in a love-relationship. Because I am coming to see Desire as something sacred, I am beginning to realize the importance of experiencing desire as something sacred in a relationship that is intimate emotionally, mentally, spiritually and sexually.
So that is one of the things I am thinking about. That, and super-string theory, and quantum mechanics, and the art of writing erotica, and the master gardener program at the University, and that shoji screen-making course I would love to take, and ... oh lots of things.
posted by KR | 4/08/2005 03:50:00 PM
7 Comments:
Kelly, it has become apparent from reading your last post that you are a deep thinker. I find that the common theme to your post is the need to identify and understand your desires. I personally don't find this to be such a daunting task. If you stop over-analyzing your basic, primary needs and desires, and allow them to manafest themselves naturally, you will see that there's no need to complicate the matter. In simple terms , relax and get some poon tang!!!!
Yes, I am overly analytical. It is partly my nature and partly my scientific training. I cannot 'just' anything -- I must understand. Unlike most people, who want more than anything to be understood, I want to understand. Of course, I recognize intellectually the impossibility of it, but that does not undermine the desire to know and understand that drives me.
Kelly,
Just curious, are your parents teachers or scientists?I have noticed that children of highly intellectual , overly analytical parents tend to magnify this trait X 100(not scientifically accurate). I suspect that this might be the case with you. My advice would be to try and not think about the subject of sex in analytical terms,but to try and approach it as a naughty curiosity that you are willing to explore and run a series of experiments with wild abandonment!!!
Sorry, no, my parental units were not teachers or scientists. I did, however, live for 5 years on a commune, and was educated there for 4 years before being forced to attend school 'in town'. There was no shortage of adults to learn something from, and my favorite 'teacher' was a ski-bum with a PhD from the University of Chicago. We were actively encouraged to explore whatever interested us, and I was a natural observer.
As far as sex goes... I have no problems with wild abandonment or sexual satisfaction. I have a healthy sex drive and
I've always tended to have a very 'male' attitude toward sex. I just tend not to allow much depth as far as emotional intimacy goes, and its been a recurring complaint from my lovers over the years. So I am attempting to address the issues that prevent me from mixing physical and emotional intimacy.
Wait, I am confused, you are having complaints from MALE lovers about lack of emotional intimacy? You always throw me for a loop! Maybe you are referring to FEMALE partners because I cannot see MALES complaining of lack of emotional anything.If you are referring to FEMALE partners, this would make more sense!It seems as if you have acquired more of the masculine traits of logic and reasoning , and less of the female traits of emotions and nurturing.Am I correct , or am I way out of line on this one?
I have had both male and female partners. Some of us are funny that way, you know--attracted to the person rather than the gender. My partners have always been intelligent and sensitive people, people with depth. Men are used to women being emotional creatures who are warm and loving and giving of themselves. They become used to it, they come to expect it. Then there is me. I'm rational, informed, contemplative, and unexpressive emotionally. I can be very warm and fun and I love sex, but don't tell me that you love me while you are coming, don't kiss and hug on me after sex, and don't try to converse--just let me roll over and go to sleep, damnit! Obviously, this is not a common response and it unnerved most of my partners. Some it intrigued and they went about trying to make me love them they way their other partners had loved them, but it just wasn't something I could do. And often as not, they blamed themselves as being somehow unworthy, when in fact the failing was in me. Due to sexual trauma when I was just entering puberty, I don't mix my deep inner-self and the emotions arising from it with sex or my sex partners. Not to say I don't love them. I did and I still do. I just held something very important back and they (rightfully) complained that I was emotionally unavailable. Capiche?
>Capiche?
Yes, I fully understand you now. I was a bit confused about certain things, but you have fully clarified these issues. Well.....I must say that I am a little suprised by your honesty and outright candor, but I realize that it's all part of your straight forward and logical mindset.I guess we both share long lasting effects from our "trauma", because I also don't want to hear " I love you" while i'm coming, and much like you , I also want to "roll over and go to sleep, damnit! "
Post a Comment
<< Home