Is Not Wanting Sex Abnormal?
Questioner: Sir, I’m a celibate. But people around me think it’s a huge deal. They would rather experience the other end of this extreme which is temptations and urges. They think abstinence is a minority practice. Why this shift in value system? More importantly, how can people be tempted towards something they know nothing about? Coming to my main point, I’m a thirty-three year old celibate. My question is, why is it considered so uncommon when it seems very natural to me?
Acharya Prashant: Numerically, proportionally, it is something that most people do not practise, so they do not take it as common. Because we lead lives that have a lot to do with the body, therefore to most people it appears very natural that life will be spent doing what the body commands to do. So, that’s the only reason people find it uncommon and to some extent they are justified because if you just count the numbers, not too many people will be celibates. So, to that extent, yes.
But what is to be understood is that it is not between this body and the other body, the matter, the real question, is not between this body and that body. Are these two bodies meeting or not? A woman’s body, a man’s body or whatever. It’s not a thing between two bodies, that’s not the principal question. The principal question is between me and my body, it is not between my body and somebody else’s body. The question is, what is the relationship between me and my body? Who am I and what is my body to me for? What is my body to me for?
If I see that I am in the middle of a war, then my body is for the sake of fighting that war. If I see that my instrument, my resource, this body is itself in some very absurd way my problem, my bondage, then I have to liberate myself from my instrument, so that I can use the instrument as an instrument. Otherwise the instrument is some kind of handcuff.
If the gun sticks to my hand, is it an instrument anymore? Before I can use the gun as an instrument, first of all I need to liberate myself from the gun. The body is my gun, right? And I have to use it for my own purpose, the purpose of the gun is secondary. The gun does require upkeep, I have to service the gun and there are so many other things that keeping a gun requires. So, I have to obviously take care of those things.
But I remember, first thing, that the gun is for me, I’m not for the gun. The body will probably ask for many things because that’s how the body is programmed. And I will listen to all those things, I’m not so on into enmity with the body; so, I’ll listen to those things. But the first question is, the more important question is, “Am I able to use my body constructively at all, creatively at all or am I living just to serve the body?”
So, the body says, “I want to procreate,” and one procreates, and an entire sequence follows from there. And then you are servicing the needs and the consequences of the body and bodily action all your life. So, the framework itself needs to change. You see, if the framework is not optimal, then even the best answer within that framework is of little use.
So, we will raise our question. We will say it is not about what others say with respect to me and my body, or what others are doing to their own body, first question is, “To what use am I putting this resource? To what use am I putting this resource?” Because one does not live for too long, probably more than one-third of one’s life has already been spent, thirty-three. How much of it remains? Probably another thirty-three useful years at the max? Great resource this body, fantastic resource, is it not? Think of it. Think of the mind. Think of the unique configuration of limbs that we have. Think of the thumbs. Think of how in some ways we are very uniquely positioned among all species. The question is, “What have we done with this (pointing towards the body) that we have received?”
So, someone comes to me and says, “I have been sexually very active,” I will say don’t tell me that because that’s of very little interest. Tell me, to what use has this body been put to. What have you been doing with it? That’s the real question. Someone says, “I like to eat a lot.” All right, you eat a lot and then what do you do with what you have eaten, that’s gone into the body? Then, after that?
So, these questions are of secondary importance. The most important question must be remembered. Soon, this body will no more be available. Soon, the opportunity to live in liberation will be gone and there is no liberation once the body is no more there. Am I using it in the right way? And the body is all that we have, remember please. Because the mind is the body, the brain is the body, memory is body, experience is body. All resources are to the body, all wealth, all possessions are to the body. So, am I using all this in a wise way? Yeah, that’s the question.
Questioner: Thank you for answering that. You have basically echoed what my thoughts are. For me, you know, there’s been many arguments from other people, like you know you’re keeping yourself from experiencing pleasure by not doing whatever that needs to be done.
Acharya Prashant: See, there are pleasures of all kinds. They say that there is physical pleasure and that is to be accepted. Yes, there is physical pleasure and on its own it does appear quite important. But the thing is, as this particular species, we are capable of much deeper pleasures. And not a lot of those deeper pleasures are impeded by the pursuit of physical pleasure.
Animals, they have principally just this pleasure to turn to, right? If an animal is to have pleasure, he is not going to write a poem, he will probably look for a mate. Human beings too can find a physical mate and have pleasure, but what about the higher pleasures then? We are not criticizing this very ordinary pleasure. We are asking, “Where are the higher pleasures?” So, that’s the question to ask. “Are there higher pleasures in life? Are there higher pleasures?”
Questioner: Yes, absolutely. To me, joy has always been more important than pleasures of the body. Which brings me to my next question. “Why should I marry?” I think it is a very selfish act to select a groom based on his physical appearances, his accolades, his academic achievements, family background or any such things. Most fortunately, in this decision, my biggest supporter has been my mother who raised us as a single parent. Does it make us crazy that we are not bowing down to societal expectations regarding marriage?
Acharya Prashant: Think of life as a long unending game of tennis mixed doubles. So, on the other side is the opponent pair, on this side, there is the woman and the man. Let the woman represent all the women, let the man represent all the men—the two halves of the population, roughly. They play alongside, that’s what they are supposed to do on the court called life. They play alongside. They fight alongside each other. Occasionally, you will see some high fives. They are not supposed to start marrying each other on the court, that’s not what the court is for. You are not going to see a wedding ceremony on Wimbledon Centre Court.
Both of you are not looking towards each other, you are looking at the opponents. You are coordinating with each other as fellow soldiers, as comrades. That ought to be the relationship between the two genders—we fight shoulder to shoulder. We march alongside each other and we coordinate so that we can beat the enemy. If you marry each other, then you become each other’s enemy, how will you beat the enemy on that side of the net?
Think of a small army battlefield consisting of both men and women, do they start marrying there on the battlefield? Do they start raising kids on the battlefield? Please understand the times we are living in, please understand the condition of the planet today. It’s war. And men and women, the right relationship between them is that they ought to be fellow soldiers in fighting the war.
Fellow soldiers are friendly to each other, they take care of each other, they don’t distract each other. And marrying and raising a family, all that is consumption of vital energy, energy that should have gone towards fighting the enemy. Energy that should have ideally gone into fighting the enemy is going towards fulfilling each other’s demands and catering to each other’s emotional whims. And all of that is an integral part of the marriage package, is it not?
“You now belong to me.” “You own me.” “I possess you.” “You should understand things even before I speak something out.” Meaningless trivia, hollow gossip, endless wastage of time and the enemy is celebrating. Ace after ace, and these two lie huddled in a corner celebrating the honeymoon. 6-0, 6-0, 6-0 [representing tennis score].
Even a normal service is ace because there is nobody to return the serve. The fellow is lying unconscious. Instead of the racket, he has the partner’s body in his hands. This analogy is not too far-fetched, is it? They will say, “No, but life is not a battle and life is not about facing somebody on a court.” It is. I am saying, look at the world we are inhabiting today. It’s a war.
It’s not just that you are losing the war if you let vital energy dissipate, it’s also an injustice to the other one, the partner. The partner too deserves, if not to win, then at least to give a solid fight. You are distracting the partner from fighting his battle properly. He will become occupied with you rather than the right things in life.
A lot of people will find this very unacceptable. They will say, “What do you mean by right things in life? This is the right thing in life. Like a proper man, get a wife, raise kids.” I beg to differ. I do not see how this is the purpose of life—get a wife, raise kids. Any Tom, Dick, Harry can do that. And by Tom, Dick, Harry I do not even particularly mean humans, one of my rabbits is Tom, that cat is Dick, that dog out there is Harry. Even they raise families. What’s so special about doing all that, that you call that as the purpose of life? And if somebody someone doesn’t do that, then you frown at him or her.
Nothing against the family, provided the two persons are like partners on the court, assisting each other towards the victory, not just caressing and fondling each other and smooching on the court. That’s so ugly, the crowd will boo them out. You need to concentrate there, right? You need to concentrate on the ball, on the right ball. You don’t need to concentrate on your partner. Your partner should be a very passive presence, dependable, yet not a distraction. Are you getting it? And such a partner, mind you, need not be of the opposite gender.
Marriage is a social construct, it is not an existential obligation. You find it serves your existential needs, go ahead, marry, but do not take it as one of the unavoidables in life. Man and woman flying a fighter plane with the mission to bomb the enemy territory and they start making out in the cockpit. Let’s say the plane is a four-seater, some priest is also accompanying them. And now he says, “I need fire to make you go around it.” So, they crash the plane and there is a lot of fire. The enemy rejoices.
Be together. Fly the plane. Bomb the damn enemy. That’s love, is it not? Or do you have to really keep pecking at each other in the cockpit? Peck-peck-peck-peck.
Questioner: This is exactly my thought process. Ideally, two people should not be together because of their selfish interests; rather as two companions marching towards the same goal. But people think it’s an unreasonable expectation.
Acharya Prashant: If it’s impossible, it’s impossible, fine. I am not waiting for someone to come my way. If someone incidentally comes, it’s beautiful; if someone doesn’t come, I still have a lot of things to do. Who is sitting here waiting for a Mr. special to arrive one particular day? If it happens, it happens. Same thing for sex. If it happens, it happens. One is not waiting for it. If it happens, one doesn’t stop it, if it doesn’t happen, one doesn’t force it; because one has far more important things to take care of. That’s all.
Questioner: Thank you very much, Acharya Ji. Namaste.
