This is one of those that I waded through, so you don't have to. It is also is one of those you will find referenced, again and again, in the semenretention community, as a "foundational text" of sorts.
As in so many texts of an esoteric or religious nature, the main epistemic methods applied in this book are free association, unfounded claims, and working backwards from the conclusion.
Lee has read some buddhist and hindu books, has collected whatever floated his boat, and cooked a big old stew from all that. Add one (1) bible passage (Mt 19:12), and you have apparently proven that Jesus taught yoga, was celibate, and that the catholic church gleaned its power from - you guessed it - celibacy. Formal citations or syllogistic arguments are something to sneer at and avoid at all costs, it would seem.
He claims that celibacy is necessary for any and all achievements, ranging from the simple to the highly complex, from personal and social, from culture to enlightenment. He explicitly states that "[w]ithout the highest sexual morality, no other morality is possible. The keeping of
no other law is possible. No social order is possible. No human culture is possible." When a male has an orgasm, or even so much as focuses too much on the female form, everything is lost. The only solution is celibacy. He recognizes, at least, that there are two paths: complete renunciation, and gradual evolution towards that lofty goal.
The closest Lee ever comes to an actual argument, is when he claims that males lose energy through semen the same way that women lose energy in menstruation. Why this is supposed to be the case, is anyone's guess. It's in the old scriptures, it is in Julian Lee's head, therefore it has to be true. As proof, he names the usual: males appear tired after orgasm. He claims that males have a form of "PMS" for at least 24 hours - you may or may not agree. If you disagree, then the whole book is moot.
Lee doesn't offer any practical advice, except for meditation. He dismisses all of tantra and - in an oddly specific twist - decries the Yoga Journal, rejects "new agers", progressives, and people who dislike George Bush (junior or senior, he doesn't say). He goes on a long rant against those groups, culmitating in the curious proclamation that "the average Christian, because he at least retains some morals regarding sex, is actually much closer to the Yogic path than most "new agers.""
He knows that "transmutation is necessary for celibacy", but he doesn't tell us how to transmute. Nor does he seem to be aware of the distinction between orgasm and ejaculation (no wonder, since he rejects tantra). Orgasm means expulsion of the all-valuable "pearls" (a term he uses quite consistently) and shakti, and that creates all evils in the world - while celibacy creates everything good.
As in most texts on the topic, the female part of the species play next to no role at all - not even as guides for men; they only exist as seducers to men and thieves of his shakti-induced powers. Homosexuality is a grave sin (stemming from, you guessed it, masturbation), and nonbinary sexuality doesn't exist at all. There is an extreme black and white morality at play - renunciation is good, lust is bad, sex is only for procreation.
Not all in this book is totally bad - at times, it can be quite inspiring:
"When you become entirely devoted to the Lord of Creation, All of creation becomes
devoted to you." At least, that's nice! However, these cases are few and far between. All in all, it is a terrible book, not innovative, boring, trite and conservative.
There are a lot of quotes from Patanjali, Paramahansa Yogananda (his favourite author of all), and buddhist Suttras. So if nothing else, one can use it as a kind of reference for looking stuff up.
The book is mostly interesting because, as stated above, it is one of the "foundational texts" of semen-retention. It just goes to show that the movement is steeped in hindu and buddhist religiosity, political and social conservatism, vitalism, sexism and steadfast animosity against intellectual debate and rationality.
How it might be improved:
Apart from the obvious - add some rational arguments as to why celibacy is supposed to do all those good things - the book would benefit tremendously from some empathy and guidance for newcomers. Lee offers nothing in the way of practical exercises, and it is somewhat hard to see why any penis-owner should take it upon themselves to refrain from any and all orgasms, possibly for the rest of his life. (Women, by the way, would seemingly get to cum all they want... an obvious conclusion from the premises, but I wonder if Lee saw it.) Just for "living in accordance with" some undefined "great universal Law", probably will not cut it. Speaking of cutting, cutting out a few of the rants would make the thing a lot easier to read.
