Nash is inviting me to try to be more patient with David Deida’s teaching weak points and hippy language, and try to see what he has of value to share.
It’s true I am less patient and not as good a listener as he is, however I do like to be inspired to point out flaws in other’s views, as well as riff off of others good ideas.
I wrote a few initial criticisms in the comments, then added this larger critique of a new age attitude to sex and relationship.
This might be confusing if one isn’t already grounded in Buddhist emobodied teachings. It might sound like I’m against deeply connecting to the heart. I actually often explicitly in many ways practice deeply feeling into my lovers being.
But see if this makes sense to you:
My opinion is that you MUST fuse cave-man ordinary joe language and attitude together seamlessly with Zen mind and tantric sex. No seams, no cracks.
There is no inner light to find. It’s allready all right there.
This is the Vajrayana, or Mahayana Buddhist, or Zen, or Tantric viewpoint. Tatagatha, or suchness, or nowness. There is no mystical inner dimension or realm. Yet Buddha mind is our mind and outer experience, all at once.
It’s inneffable yet simple, and takes either a moment to realize or decades to glimpse, or one can work for the realization and it never comes.
But it’s very seductive, and loving, to accept and appreciate. That’s a big part of Zen mind, or Tantra. That inner light is already right there. Her laugh, her pussy, her sexual energy, and even her jealousy.
Truly loving yourself and the world and your lover is fucking important as fuck. What you love isn’t some hidden jewel. It’s right there in front of our faces.
Using hippy new age language actually is an insult to real love. Because it’s not really loving at all. It’s loving the make-up, and not the face.
Pissing in her mouth is just as much Buddha Mind as is kissing her in the heart chakra.
THAT REALIZATION itself, and the absurd humor of it, is the essence of my seduction. We laugh all the time at the absurd shit and shine. It’s all grist for the mill. Nothing is sacred, everthing is sacred.
If something is sacred, that’s an insult to what sacred means. You can’t have sacred vs not sacred. That’s insulting.
That’s not what love means. Not what sex means.
Update:
We tried to record our conversation last night, but the ambient noise was too loud.
It was a long cocky funny and romantic loving evening. The cocky funny can happen only if you …
Fill in the blanks yourself.
You know how some people can get away with insulting others, while others can’t? Why is that?
I was trying to use my Buddhist background to explain it, but you can use more common sense language also.
It’s about deeply accepting ourselves and the human condition, and laughing at the absurdity of it.
You can be cocky funny about anything – making jokes about wanting to fuck the hot little child like girl across the street, jokes about incest, etc, etc, if you actually love.
A deep and penetrating love is mystical. Is a true mystical magical power.
Just like Nash’s ability to listen is a true mystical magical power.
And most anyone can do it, to some degree. It’s just quite a lot easier for the girl to open to and in love within an environment of all embracing (yet disciplined and boundaried) paternal sexual love.
Like I always say. You can make a woman instantly fall in love with you so simply. Just love her inner slut, and show it. The profane is the sacred. Boom. She’s yours forever. “Daddy loves you, you little fuck.”
Oh, you also have to make friends with the part of you that wants to own her. So you make friends with her inner slut, and own her, at the same time. You know she has drives, try your best to reign them in as much as you care to, while respecting her free will. Common sense mature human boundaries; you try to keep her seduced, and laugh at the absurdities of the human condition of high free flowing libido.
If you only love her inner slut but don’t want to own her, that signals weakness and naivete. You could just be a thirsty doormat.
Update: I understand that just saying the word “dominance” is clumsy and will bring up unwanted associations.
If you want to think about what dominance is, think about dressage; where a man or woman becomes one with a horse and trains it to dance. The horse does incredible side and backward steps, and together the two become beautiful and elegant. Or think of other equestrian arts.
That’s what dominance means. It’s listening to, loving, respecting, guiding and being guided by. Joining, yet from a position of authority.
Update: Last night we talked about how neither of us grew up with any decent imprinting of what a healthy loving relationship looks like.
Because my mother was fucked up, I had to work through dozens of weird relationships, trying to figure out for myself how to get the tons of sex that I need, and to give and get the love I need.
Does that make sense? If I was well imprinted, it would have been natural and my boundaries would have been better and I’d have more skills imprinted right in.
Instead I had to learn them the hard way.
However part of that learning process was still through imprinting. I found mentors and teachers.
I’m pretty sure that imprinting is a very crucial part of learning. Buddhists say so; you need face time with your mentor/teacher. I think it’s because of the sub-verbal communication that you can’t get any other way.
Relevant: https://krauserpua.com/2016/04/30/reveal-vs-restructure/
Update: Nash said:
“Give it 50% classical dominance, and then… look to see the TYPE OF LEADERSHIP where he is talking about opening her heart… what could he mean? Is he teaching you something that will cut back on LMR (junior level goal) or… blow open sex, as you show her you can not just lead, but lead TOWARD a place most men can’t take her… where she cannot take herself… to OPEN HER… to BLOOM HER OPEN.”
This is not just dominance. Or leadership… but leading her someplace very specific.
I never went to university. Which I think in some ways is an advantage, because for me continuing education was my education. When I was in the states I’d usually be taking various continuing ed and meditation related classes.
Learning is not a life stage, it’s a life style.
And so I’m learning from you. I’ve complimented you many times on what I see as some outstanding abilities. Very rare. You’re an incredibly good listener, plus very skillfully diplomatic, in a cheerful way. Great at comraderie.
It inspires me to try to listen a bit better. It’s not easy.
Yes, I think you’ve picked up on and put into words something important.
It’s not just dominance for the sake of it.
Putting it into words is tricky. By now you’ve read my recent post where I made great pains to point out that “the profane is the sacred”.
And above you talk about opening her to the sacred.
There are two ways to do “state control”. One is to get yourself into a good mood. The other is to accept whatever mood you currently have, exactly as it is, with no need to alter even a single bit of it.
Both are state control.
There are two types of meditation. One is doing something with your mind, the other is not altering your mind at all. You can’t really do the latter, without a lot of doing the former. Not usually; a few rare people seem to pick up on that faster. Some never get it, no matter how hard they try.
Buddhists say that the nature of mind is, already, love and compassion.
Awareness itself; just naked awareness.
But they also do loving kindness meditations. I very often deliberately raise that sweet warm awareness in my chest, and physically feel a real living embodied love.
Yet I do believe that we can’t pidgeon hole it. The profane is also the sacred, and if not, then we don’t really love.
You have to love HER. Not just what we want her to be.
Love and forgive AND train her.
So yes, it’s opening her to a place. But to a place that she already is. She doesn’t have to go anywhere.
Holding that attitude by itself is transfroming and gets her there.
Sheer lusty paternal love.
As you know I’ve studied with several chi-kung and healing touch teachers. One of the more profound teachers taught how to simply listen with the hand. Profoundly listen and see divinity with the kinesthetic sense, without altering anything at all.
Doing that feels very profound and transformative to people. You don’t try to transform anything at all. Yet the bare awareness itself is the divinity, and does transform. Many of the students had also studied various more directly transformative energy work, and found the pure listening style to be more effective and profound.
But it’s not a philosophy. It’s a doing.
I bet you have seen men that can do “dominance” and the DIVINE… and that last bit is what make these guys 10X more effective.
…But I am certain these guys are for real. They are POWERFUL SEDUCERS… and precisely because they use different tools.
I want their tools. Respectfully. And I want to introduce those tools to men that are ready.
It’s unusual to even notice these “different tools”.
Tradition holds that when the Buddha got enlightened, he had decided to just shut up about it, because he assumed no one would be able to understand him if he tried to talk about it.
Yes, there certainly are different tools. There is real charismatic spiritual power possible. Love at first sight with young hot women several physical attraction points above a man is possible, not just once in a lifetime, but consistently, over and over, like a routine.
Talking about it is nearly futile. Most people first of all simply won’t believe it. Of those that do, who is willing to do the work to experience it first hand, in their own life?
Random Xpat Rantings 
We tried to record our conversation last night, but the ambient noise was too loud.
It was a long cocky funny and romantic loving evening. The cocky funny can happen only if you …
Fill in the blanks yourself.
You know how some people can get away with insulting others, while others can’t? Why is that?
I was trying to use my Buddhist background to explain it, but you can use more common sense language also.
It’s about deeply accepting ourselves and the human condition, and laughing at the absurdity of it.
You can be cocky funny about anything – making jokes about wanting to fuck the hot little child like girl across the street, jokes about incest, etc, etc, if you actually love.
A deep and penetrating love is mystical. Is a true mystical magical power.
Just like Nash’s ability to listen is a true mystical magical power.
And most anyone can do it, to some degree. It’s just quite a lot easier for the girl to open to and in love within an environment of all embracing (yet disciplined and boundaried) paternal sexual love.
Like I always say. You can make a woman instantly fall in love with you so simply. Just love her inner slut, ans show it. The profane is the sacred. Boom. She’s yours forever. “Daddy loves you, you little fuck.”
Oh, you also have to make friends with the part of you that wants to own her. So you make friends with her inner slut, and own her, at the same time. You know she has drives, try your best to reign them in as much as you care to, while respecting her free will. Common sense mature human boundaries; you try to keep her seduced, and laugh at the absurdities of the human condition of high free flowing libido.
If you only love her inner slut but don’t want to own her, that signals weakness and naivete. You could just be a thirsty doormat.
Last night we talked about how neither of us had grew up with any decent imprinting of what a healthy loving relationship looks like.
Because my mother was fucked up, I had to work through dozens of weird relationships, trying to figure out for myself how to get the tons of sex that I need, and give and get the love I need to.
Does that make sense? If I was well imprinted, it would have been natural and my boundaries would have been better and I’d have more skills imprinted right in.
Instead I had to learn them the hard way.
However part of that learning process was still through imprinting. I found mentors and teachers.
I’m pretty sure that imprinting is a very crucial part of learning. Buddhists say so; you need face time with your mentor/teacher. I think it’s because of the sub-verbal communication that you can’t get any other way.
Relevant: https://krauserpua.com/2016/04/30/reveal-vs-restructure/
Is this attitude K or R selected? Is it alpha fucks, or beta bucks?
It’s BOTH at the SAME TIME.
It doesn’t alternate back and forth, one microsecond at a time. It’s not two parallel streams.
It’s BOTH – all at once.
Think about that!
There need be NO dichotomy whatsoever between bad boy cad and father figure provider.
There is NO binary system AT ALL. Unless YOU make one.
The girl is fucking her bad daddy.
Which makes her a bad girl.
And yet they love and are deeply bonded to each other.
It’s amazing how everything is boxed up and has its own little space in your mind, I guess some people would call the boxes a belief system or set of principles?
I think this makes your experience and participation in life so clinical and inhuman. You force these experiences into shapes they weren’t meant to take to fit in the boxes, nullifying any real learning for cold objects that don’t represent reality. Is this what you’re talking about?
Throwing away those boxes is the first step to an appreciation for existence and lust for life.
I’ve started reading progressive meditations on emptiness and this is essentially the same idea right?
It’s funny because I had a conversation about this exact idea with a friend. I tried to get to grips with whether having these boxes is useful or not. I found that all the flashes of sublime inspiration and bliss I’ve had were where I momentarily threw away any preconceptions or conceits and just lived in the moment.
Just a few thoughts… are there any more basic books on buddhism you might recommend?
Wow, I didn’t expect anyone would find that book, after I mentioned it.
It’s more of a mind-owners-manual than a philosophical text. It’s meant to guide your regular meditation practice so that with the combination of study, meditation, and contemplation, your real lived experience changes.
Yesterday I was trying to remember and again experience the world in that way I used to tap into some decades ago, where awareness was more decentralized. Not so simple a task. Might never really ever happen again in my lifetime, but more and more lately I’m respecting my past efforts and coming back to those roots. In my own, new ways, as who I am now.
About boxes, it was a metaphor for how we compartmentalize competing world views and agendas and personalities inside ourself. Sometimes we act and believe this way, sometimes that. Sometimes we project out our inner Jungian unincorporated “shadows” selves onto others. So the metaphor was that we could listen to more voices in our head at once, and let them be friends.
An example was the role play J and I played yesterday, where we played rape, and out of myself came the personality of an aggrieved bitter sexual outcast, having sexual revenge on teasing little hotties who never put out. I had no idea that personality was inside me at all. And it was confusing to be all at once, bitter, angry, and hugely sexually aroused and having an orgasm in a very pretty girl.
My idea is that to incorporate that shadow self, I have to let him exist. Listen. Bare awareness itself, is healing; but you have to listen.
I’m not afraid of that part of myself. In role play, he did no harm at all; the opposite. She had quite a great time and we became even closer, if that’s possible at this stage of our pair bond.
I was reminded lately of Frank Herberts Dune series and the crazy character of the abomination Alia, who, having remembered all her past genetic lives within the womb, did not have time to incorporate all of them, and instead became fragmented.
You can have many voices, fragmented. Or you can have many voices in concert.
No boxes means in concert. Some boxes sometimes become quiet, so that other boxes can have full power and attention, but the point of a concert is that all instruments are always available, as best suits the need of the concert.