Please, do not claim healing

Whenever you are tempted to write a blog posting or a reddit comment, or just claim in casual conversation, that your spiritual, mystical, "alternative" method has healing properties, I urge you to stop right there.

You might have a few personal experiences, and if that works for you, fine, great, go on and do whatever you do. As long as you claim general good feelings, improved vitality, you got no debate from me. Thousands of factors go into that, your method might very well be one of them, at least for you, and maybe a few others as well.

All of that changes once we talk about real physical or mental issues, be it the flu or cancer or depression.

The fact is, you do not have a clue whether your method works or not, and chances are it doesn't.

The fact is, you are very likely falling prey to your own biases. You are likely a victim of confirmation and selection bias, probably of loss aversion too. You have not accounted for a possible placebo effect. You are probably not a medical doctor. You do not know all the factors that might play a role, nor do you have any idea how to deal with those in your assessment.

Assuming that what you describe even is a real effect, which is highly doubtful, you do not know the mechanism behind it, and "quantum consciousness" or "qi" probably ain't it.

We all have read about an astounding quantity of bullshit methods: prayer, crystals, reiki, semen retention, invocations of literally thousands of gods and demons. The list is nearly endless.

They cannot all be right.

They can indeed all be wrong.

Your method, in all likelihood, is just as wrong as all the others.

When you claim physical healing, and you do so with the right tone, some assumed authority, and maybe some quote-mining, there is a good chance that you lead people astray. People who are in dire need of real treatment. People who suffer. You give them false hope, and in the worst case, this will lead to their death.

What you are doing is unethical.

Stop it.

------------------------------

On this blog, I have tried my best to avoid any claims of that sort. I avoid words like "healing" in general, because I think it insinuates more than it should. However, we all slip up, so if you still find something like that, please drop me a note (betlamed@gmail.com), and I will review the posting in question.

Goddess: The Ghost Of Matriarchy Past

http://goddessofsacredsex.com/who-is-the-goddess/

Ach. You know, on the one hand, I kind of like those romantic notions of ancient female goddesses and a golden time in which sex was without shame.

After all, the shaming of sex is a bane everyone in the so-called "west" feels. (And probably everyone else, too.) As far as religion goes, a strong injection of feminine divinity, along with a more healthy attitude towards our physicality is surely called for and sadly missed!

The Hopi, the Germanic tribes, Babylon were frequently suspected of having employed matriarchal systems. In general, the idea of an ur-matriarchy seems to stem from the 19th century.

But on the other hand, we have precious little evidence that there ever really was a powerful matriarchy in place. Much less a matriarchy spanning the whole of humanity. True, temple prostitution did exist - but whether those prostitutes actually held a lot of power is quite doubtful. True, there are lots of little statues of fat women with huge breasts - but are all of them objects of reverence, do they all represent The One Female Goddess? (The reduction to One God, whether male or female, might be seen as patriarchal by many a feminist, by the way.)

From what I've read so far, we have only very little evidence of actual matriarchies. When you read the article I linked, which is fairly typical of the... shall we say "spiritual" reading of such hypotheses, it's a mesh-up of second-wave feminism, thinly veiled kinky eroticism, and new-age eclectic spirituality. It takes everything it can find, by way of free association, and attempts to create a myth from it.

Charming, but hardly scientific.

Moreover, there is often a kind of scientific conspiracy theory going on in those articles. Because female history has been hushed up by patriarchal historians, therefore every little sign of female activity is a hint at an overarching matriarchy. It's just bad science.

It's a compelling, fascinating, enthralling fantasy. But, for better or worse, that's all it is.

Tantra Goddessses, Sacred Rituals, And USPs

Once you delve into twitter and friends, when searching for tantra-related information on the web, you're about to dive into a world of hyperbole, self-proclaimed experts and sex-work sold off as healing.

Lots and lots of "goddesses" abound in that world. So many of them, I keep worrying they might step onto each other's soil and spoil it. After all, they all wanna make a buck out of their worshippers' needs, don't they? Well, I guess there are enough needy clients out there, so probably there is no scarcity here.

Their massages are "sacred rituals", their services are "ceremonies", and they themselves are "goddesses" or "healers".

Are you trying to pull my leg?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not opposed to sexual services. Nor do I have an issue with some fancy role-playing. And also, just to make it abundantly clear, am I not an advocate of "authentic tantra". I think it's just another way to oppress people.

None of that... What I am opposed to is dishonesty and misrepresentation. And that's what's going on here, in my very humble opinion.

For example, someone out there keeps advertising "verified healers & certified tantrikas". (I'm not singling them out as the bad guys - there are a gazillion sites like that out there, this is just one example that I happened to happen upon.) Their website looks suspiciously like the ads placed by brothels, what with skantily clad goddesses and all...

But who knows... so I searched that site for information on their verification & certification process. Needless to say, I didn't find any. To my surprise, I did actually get an answer on twitter. The site administrator claimed that they know some Tantra teachers, and they check the advertisers' credentials with them. - I was also informed that they needed to have extensive background in sacred sexual healing. But then again, it was important to point out that this doesn't have anything to do with being a "valid tantra practitioner"...

Now, this gives me all kinds of headaches from all the scratching. On the one hand, this is more than I anticipated. On the other hand, it just leads to more questions: What is those reputable teachers' process of certification? How can being certified have nothing to do with being valid in one's line of work? How does one check that extensive background?

In other words, how can we even devise criteria for who is an actual, certified, valid tantra practitioner, and who is not? From my own personal biases, I reject the concept of chakras, I cringe at the mention of lingams and yonis - and still, I feel that I do have some experience with tantric breathing techniques, and that I have thought and felt and experienced my way around full-body orgasms through several years, to a degree that I think many "professional tantrikas" lack. Then again, I don't have a lot of formal training. So, would I get through the certification process, or not? (Okay, I'm a guy, and they probably don't take those anyway, but you get the point.)

It strikes me as very odd that a tantric massage is a "ceremony", sexual services are "sacred", the practitioners are "goddesses" - and yet they are "certified and verified". How on earth does one verify a goddess?

I mean... yeah, I get it. We surround sexual services with a nice clean layer of "spirituality" to make it all a bit more reputable. That's how capitalism works. In most western countries, practitioners cannot openly offer sexual services, so they made the best of it, and created a USP out of the psychological, spiritual, non-sexual parts. It's extremely clever... and extremely dishonest.

By doing so, those people play into the common sexual inhibition, prudishness and bigotry, instead of working against them. They cash in on people's incompetence at expressing their sexual urges, instead of working to shake it. They alleviate the pain, but they avoid addressing the underlying issue. All while posing to do "healing", meditation, "energy work", etc.

It is saddening at the very least, and quickly turns to sickening and revolting after a while. If this is shakti at work, then I don't want to be your shiva. I do not dance with you, sorry. Your dance is too macabre for me.

If tantra is in any way a "spiritual" endeavor (I have my problems with that word, but I hope it is sufficiently clear what I'm aiming at here), then it should lead to more clarity, more openness, more honesty. And then the "teachers", "healers" and "goddesses" who make an earthly appearance to guide us to the light should themselves be the pinnacles of honesty.

But then they cannot sell off a sexual massage as a "sacred healing ceremony".

What are you looking for?

In a video that was mainly just the usual dribble and diatribe about "spiritual materialism" and "mystical dangers" etc., there was one line that actually did hit home with me: The question, what are you really looking for in your meditation, yoga, tantra, etc.? Are you looking for awareness? Are you looking for entertainment? For power?

Of course, to this teacher, it was clear that, out of these, awareness is the only valid option; and I don's see things like that at all. If it is power you seek, that's your call, it's just never been one of my own primary goals.

However, I do endorse knowing what you're doing, and I think that it is a good idea to answer this very question, not once or twice, but every once in a while, with regard to your favourite "spiritual" practice.

A Nagging Doubt

I do not believe in deities. I do not believe in spiritual energies like qi or mana, meridians, acupuncture. Neither do I believe in astrology, tarot, or the kabbalah (the one esoteric system I still hold dear, if simply for its incessant overflow of symbols and associations). Homeopathy? Duh. Don't get me started.

One can not believe what one does not believe. I don't think it's true, and it makes no sense to try and convince myself of it.

But, sometimes, there is this idea in my head that all the "energy exercises" that I perform almost daily - and which proved extremely worthwhile to me - might do a lot more for me if I just gave in to the belief that those "spiritual energies" actually exist.

I must admit that this is a very seductive possibility.

I can well imagine that there is indeed a very real foundation for that in the human brain. After all, religion didn't come from nothing. Feeling connected to the earth, the air, the universe as a whole - not only in a symbolic, psychological way, but as an actual reality - surely must be a tremendous experience.

It is quite ironic: I have the tools, now, to basically create those feelings "at will". Six, maybe seven years ago, I would most probably have attributed reality to them and gone on a wild, enthusiastic spiritual ride. But alas, then I didn't know how. Now that I have learned a few things, I could, but I won't do it.

It would be nice to have a little belief switch: Switch it on, believe in whatever wacky spiritual idea you like. Perform your exercises and have the most intense transcendental experiences. And then just switch it off again and go back to thinking critically.

And of course, in a way, drifting into the nondualistic, non-discursive depths of "Self", is a bit like that, only without any words that could describe those beliefs.

But ultimately, I think one just has to live with it. You can't get the placebo's full effect while knowing that it doesn't contain any active ingredients. Once you've pulled back the curtain and paid attention to the wee man there, there's no way to close the curtain. You can never unsee.

And of course, the upsides outweigh the disadvantages by far.

Ego and Self

One metaphysical approach to psychology that I particularly enjoy is the following:

There is ego, and there is self.

None is better or worse than the other, both just are. Ego is about setting boundaries, affirming yourself, being your own (wo)man, independent and strong. Self is about being connected, in tune with everything, at one with others and the universe as a whole, interdependent and without any need for boundaries, endless, loving, unconditional.

Most metaphysical "spiritual" systems seem to have some bias for self over ego. Modern western psychology, on the other hand, mostly doesn't.

(The problem is, I suspect, ultimately unavoidable: The sentence above - "both just are" - is itself an expression of self, not of ego. It's an expression of nonjudgment over judgment. Perfect balance seems impossible. So, the best we can do is be aware of the issue and not, as my usual motto goes, fall for our own b.s.)

Basically, what I think is that you just naturally go from one state to the other, and back again, several times every day or even every minute. It's fun to realize in what state you are, right now, and there are visualisations that can help invoke one state when you need it.

In fact, those visualisations are so obvious and unexciting that I hasten to name them. Strong roots that connect me to all the world? My crown chakra completely open to the whole of the universe? A strong, white, glowing like that surrounds me like a vigorous armor and protects me from outside influences? The knightly warrior, ready to strike?

I'm sure you catch my drift and can come up with your own images for the two states, if you so decide. It's a fun little exercise to evoke those states, perfect for a rainy day, and probably of some use in more serious contexts, too.

The most important bit here, though, is the realization that you do change your state over time. When you're completely disconnected from everything, wrapped up in anger and rage, you're in a state of ego. Now is probably not the time to go bargain for that raise. But you know that you will be in a different stage, a few minutes or maybe hours later. So you just have to wait, or if you're impatient, practice changing states.

Note that this is precisely the opposite of an "esoteric typology": These are not character types, but rather states or functions of the mind. This has nothing to do with being a "left-brainer" vs. a "right-brainer" (oh how I abhor that nonsense!), analytical brainiac vs creative artist. Even your most hard-headed businessman depends on his empathy, if only for acquiring new customers. I find those typologies extremely limiting, because they tend to see a human being as static, fixed, unable to change. When you feel that you're too analytical for your own good, or that you need to set up more and stronger boundaries, well, change it, focus on the aspect that you want more in your life! Just... don't forget that the other part is equally important and necessary for your wellbeing.

Well and of course, please, never forget that this is not "true". I guess we can show different states of mind with MRIs or CATs or something like that. But I highly doubt that "ego" and "self" can be shown in the brain. It's just a rough approximation of personal experiences that seems to work for many people.

I find this to be tremendously relieving.

It Happened So Fast... (A Word of Warning for Aspiring Meditationists)

When I got into buddhist meditation, I was in a major depression. Regular meditation practice helped me with that - it made me a lot calmer. And for quite a while, it was good. Very good, actually.

Now, most buddhist writers (and speakers) place a lot of emphasis on being here and now, not blindly following the fantasies, slowly disidentifying from the "monkey mind", the "mindless mind chatter".

So, ever so slowly, while becoming calmer, I also got more disengaged from some of my old thought patterns, some of my old feelings. That was good, because it was bad feelings and destructive thoughts that got me depressed in the first place.

But at some point, I realized that I had gotten more than I had bargained for. I had lost some of my desires. But did I actually WANT to lose them? Among those desires was my desire to write good literature (in my mother language, of course, don't you worry!). But I didn't realize that there might be a connection; I just assumed that it was one of those naturally occurring periods in which I didn't fancy writing so much. And writing had often been connected with intense suffering, so actually, that felt pretty good, too. So I had no motivation to change that, I assumed that it would just come back at some point (as it always had), and anyway since I didn't know what was going on, I had no way of changing it either.

A while later, I got into tantra. I learned how to create ecstatic feelings at will. And for quite a while, it was good. Very good, actually.

Now, tantra places a lot of emphasis on being here and now, not blindly following the fantasies, instead focusing on deep breaths and utterly slow motions.

That was good, because it made me feel happy, and there's rarely a guy out there who couldn't use some slowness and endurance in their sex.

But at some point, I felt my sexual desire floating away. Not that it felt bad - it was just weird, and slightly astounding. (Maybe I should tell you that I'm basically horniness incarnate. I cannot remember any time before that - after hitting puberty of course - when I didn't want sex. Not. One. Day. Seriously.) I thought it might just have to do with getting older and thus, less flooded with hormones. So there wasn't really a lot I could do about it, and as I said, it did feel really good in a way, so I let it go.

But a week ago, I got back into my old habit of keeping a dream diary, and then a few days later, I started reading a book on daydreams. Basically, it's about how they're a good thing, how they are necessary for any creative effort, for planning, for building a life.

Then it suddenly hit me: I have basically made a habit out of treating my daydreams with disrespect. I was always a rather introverted kind of guy, I enjoy having a conversation with myself in my own mind, I like building inner-world universes. If I don't treat my fantasies right, of course I don't get what I want! Of course I lose my creative spark.

So I'm rebuilding my daydreams now. I'm keeping a daydream diary along with the night-dream diary, and I consciously build up those sexual fantasies again.

So...

Not that I'm blaming anyone, or whining around. I took this upon myself, and now I found another detail, and that is excellent. It's just one more part of my journey.

I just feel that those experiences need to be shared, so that, if you plan to delve into some form of meditative practice, you know that something like that can happen to you. It's not necessarily bad, either - just something to watch out for. If you feel that your fantasies are overwhelming, and they're giving you a hard time, then that's exactly what you want: some distance. If you're low on energy and in a constant mellow state.. probably not so much.

I think the bottom line is that meditation, tantra, etc. are all tools. Excellent tools. But they're not perfect,  they're not ends in themselves, and as with any tool, using them has a downside that one should be aware of.

And never never never never EVER let anyone tell you that your daydreams are a bad thing, filthy, sinful, or something to be avoided. (Of course, there is something to the buddhist perspective that you shouldn't identify with your thoughts, and of course, this is yet another tool that has other downsides that I'm not seeing yet... but... it's complicated. I'll say more about it once I actually know what I'm talking about.) I say honor your daydreams, treat them with respect, hone them, nurse them, water them like beautiful flowers. They deserve your best, and they will pay you back what you give them, interest and all.

The "As-If Method"

So, I believe that the supernatural is either nonexistent or incomprehensible, and I try to only believe propositions that are logically consistent and for which there is evidence.

Of course, this leads to a problem.

We know that the human mind is quite a bit irrational. We know that self-fulfilling prophecies are a real phenomenon. It is pretty much a given that there are quite a few irrational beliefs flowing around in that big fishbowl that I call my head.

Let's call this the "problem of meta-rationality". The essential question is, how to deal rationally with irrationality? Is it more rational, for example, to assess my own potentials in life realistically? If I remember it right, several studies suggest that healthy humans overestimate their own influence on their situation. If you don't do that, you're depressive.

So, is it better to believe that I am a bit better than I probably am, knowing that this might indeed make me a better human being in the long run? How to deal with a belief that is obviously counterfactual, or just unfalsifiable, but it simply makes me feel better? After all, I'm convinced that feeling good is a good thing, not only for the person who feels that way, because a mind flooded with good feelings will probably not have any intentions of starting a war or something.

I think there is a way out. I call it the "as-if method".

I think it is perfectly valid to choose to interpret the world in a certain way, even if there is no proof that things actually are that way.

I find this to be much more honest, much more realistic, much more consistent than just assuming that all my irrational, unfalsifiable beliefs are true.

"I choose to interpret the world as if god existed." -- Yes sure, why not? "I choose to interpret the world as if it consisted of nothing but love." -- Yeah, cool, go ahead! "I choose to interpret the world as if everyone was my enemy." -- Well, if you absolutely think that this is what you want, yay, more power to you!

Personally, I choose to interpret the world as if my breath was a strong flow of colorful, hot energy flowing from my lower abdomen all through my body, up into my head, and back again.

The question whether it is true becomes irrelevant at this point (most probably it's not). I find this to be deliciously pleasurable, empowering and beneficial.

Truth matters to me. A lot. The other value that I think is equally important is happiness and peace for as many people as possible. What if both values can not be achieved at the same time? By choosing my interpretation, I can have both. It's the never-shrinking, everlasting cake. Finally.

Shiatsu

Last week at the spa, I had a very interesting and instructive experience with shiatsu.

Passive stretching and that specific style of massage feels extremely good. Not a big surprise there, but an excellent reason to grant myself some more regular shiatsu sessions. The movements have a relaxing and activating effect at the same time. And besides, the flexibility and agility of those masseurs is pretty impressive.

Now about the "energetic" part. Shiatsu is not meant to be a simple stretching exercise. It's meant to work on your "meridians". Now, this specific practitioner did something very interesting: She predicted that, since she had worked on my "bladder meridian", I would probably have to use the restroom more often the following day.

Did I? I have no clue. For one, I was sweating all day in the sauna, and therefore drinking a lot; secondly, I really couldn't tell whether I peed more than usual; and thirdly, she gave me the suggestion beforehand, so in case there was an effect, we can't tell whether it came from the massage or from the suggestion.

But in hindsight, another thing stands out. Imagine a western doctor treating you for... whatever, a nosebleed. And at the end of the treatment, said doctor says, "Oh by the way... I gave you something for your bladder, you'll have to use the restroom a lot these days."

Wouldn't you be a bit upset? I, for one, can imagine suing that doctor all over the place. I rather like to know beforehand what I will be up to, or if there are any side-effects to a treatment. That is because I like to take my decisions myself. Strictly speaking, this is an invasion of my privacy and physical integrity.

Of course, I wouldn't do that with a shiatsu practitioner, and I don't think anyone would.

The reason for this is shockingly simple: When a western doctor gives you a prediction, you can bet almost all your money on that prediction coming true. When a practitioner of some eastern massage technique does the same, you can bet that the prediction will come true in exactly 50% of all cases.

Now, I don't even want to claim that there is literally NOTHING to meridians. I'm perfectly convinced that those old chinese (or, in the case of shiatsu, those not-so-old japanese of the late 19th century) knew a bit about the human body.

But I am equally sure that their metaphysical, "energetic" explanation kept them from developing their knowledge to its full potential.

I would bet that because the "energetic" explanation is unfalsifiable, and therefore utterly useless. You cannot disprove any specific part of a theory like that, therefore the theory cannot be expanded upon or improved.

In other words, the "bladder meridian" will most probably have an effect on the bladder in some cases - namely, those cases where they hit on an actual nerve center by chance. In all other cases, nothing will happen. Or perhaps, something entirely different from what the practitioner expects. Happily, since our body is constructed to withstand outer influences to a large degree, most effects will either be beneficial or insignificant. That is, in my view, eastern practitioners' real competitive edge.

And of course, because eastern medicine never ever claims any actual effects - it's only ever for prevention, never for healing - you cannot decide whether there is something to it or not. If the desired effect does not appear, then there's always some explanation for that. And even that practitioner at the spa only said that it would "probably" happen.

I will definitely go on with shiatsu. I will ask the next practitioner to refrain from giving me their predictions beforehand. One week later, I will ask them, and then compare notes.

Starting Point for an Explanation

So, assuming that tantra actually does something for its practitioners - a fact that many seem convinced of, so it cannot simply be disregarded - what is a non-mystical explanation?

Let's look at one classical instruction (for guys - it's actually the one I practice the most):

"Focus on your breath. Upon inhaling, breathe as deeply as possible into your pelvic floor. upon exhaling, clench your PC muscles and direct the energy from the sex chakra up the spine."

This roughly translates to: "Focus inward - feel your breath - feel its flow - breathe deeper and deeper now - and as you go deeper and deeper inside, disregarding conscious thoughts that only come in the way, relaxing and feeling those good feelings, notice how the energy flows..."

To me, this sounds suspiciously like a trance induction. I'd hazard the guess that that's what it really is. Shifting the focus around inside your body helps to abandon verbal thinking, thereby driving you deeper into the trance. And of course, clenching the PC muscles does have a physical effect and produces sexual feelings, because it massages your prostate, and because the anal area is an erogenous zone (even if many males don't like to admit that).

As an experiment, you can try focusing the breath on totally unconnected areas. I don't know about you, but if I inhale into my left leg, and then exhale into the right leg, I get pretty much the same results. If that's not quite as much fun, probably that's because focusing on the organ that is producing those delicious sexy feelings is the best way to intensify those feelings?

I think we might be on to something here. No voodoo involved, no hindu gods invoked, no transcendental energy fields presupposed.

It simply makes sense, that's all! I strongly feel that this practice makes me stronger, that I'm actually more energetic and have more willpower if I do not ejaculate, but practice tantra instead.

This factor remains unexplained, for the time being. I have no frakking clue why not ejaculating makes me more energetic. If I had to guess, I'd say it's simply because I'm more horny, and tantra is a clever way to sublimate this horniness into useful actions.