Does Fornication deplete Chi?

don't get over-excited... I'm just passing

Having too much sex knackers men out, fact. Especially once you get past your youth.
The Chinese were just trying to find a way for men to enjoy sex without getting knackered rather than having to avoid it, so they developed techniques to control ejaculation.
They then discovered if you did that too much you could hurt yourself, so they then said you should (depending on age) ejaculate once every say, ten times you had sex. Different taoist schools recommended different techniques depending what was approved by the imperial court of the day. These ideas have been suppressed at times and also promoted by different emperors. (Incidentally during the cultural revolution the PRC published manuals on how young people should avoid masturbation. How enlightened of them.)
Ejaculation control tecniques enable men to experience orgasms without coming physically - and hence being unable to continue having sex until rested - and to continue having sex as long as they and their partner want to. Sex becomes invigorating when practiced this way.
Unfortunately in the west ejaculation is often described as 'male orgasm' which is a gross lie and a disservice to both partners' sexual satisfaction. I have practised these techniques myself on and off for twenty years now and find that regardless of any supposed health benefits or not, they make you a better lover, make sex more enjoyable and long-lasting for both partners - which cannot possibly be a bad thing, ask any woman. I experience orgasms without ejaculating and with ejaculation when I want to. Who cares about qi?
'Qi' is just a vehicle for explanation in Chinese alchemy, I wish everyone would stop trying to understand it in western terms tbh - it's just boring :bang:
PS there are techniques for female sexual health also which control menstruation, but I haven't researched them personally.

 

That statement is true.

Do you know this for fact? Or are you only guessing? I can easily provide the proof that you are wrong. Porn stars are especially good examples of the effects of sexual excess on the body. The problem is you would not understand what I was showing you. It would not be proof to you.

It would be like me trying to explain how a rocket launches into outer space using calculus if I could do that. You probably wouldn't understand because you probably would not know calculus. The explanation is true and right, but you do not have the education necessary to comprehend.

You are only talking off the top of your head. You have no hard fact. "I think this would statistically be very small". Why? What makes you think that? You just made it up because you don't really know this subject, but you want to sound smart so you talk about statistics.

Excessive. Masturbation mulitiple times per week. Sexual activity multiple times per week. Incorrect sex. Sex involving drug usage. Sex involving the holes not specifically designed for sex. Masturbation of almost any type. Homosexual sex.

I can easily prove what I say to someone who is already knowledgeable, someone who is curious, observant and patient, or someone with native intelligence.

I cannot prove what I say to people who think proof of a subject involves the exchange of 4 emails in the course of a 24 hour period. I cannot prove what I say to cynical people, people who cannot admit that other people know things they do not, people who are egotistical, people who are not educated, people who are not very good learners, people who are afraid to do things on their own, or people who are afraid to deny what their authority figures have told them.

There is your problem right there. "Scientists say.......". For some reason you believe anonymous scientists whom you have never spoken with instead of believing me. You are conditioned to believe anything that something called a "scientist" tells you.

You ever wonder of scientists are wrong? They are people just like you and me. In fact scientsts are wrong. All the time. I have.....oh about 40 or 50 news articles saved up for people like you. Articles that say "Scientists were wrong about.....", "Doctors were wrong about....."

Then you need to consider the fact that people lie on purpose. It is like the mind reading thread somewhere else. People tell lies to the young so the young never develop power. Or they never develop it until they are old and they realize they were lied to throughout their youth.

Those people telling you sex causes no harm to the human body are lying, or they are incompetent. Those are the only two possibilites.

What you call psedo waffle is an attempt to make you think. You want everything spelled out nice and clear. I do not do that. That will make you a robot that always comes to me or some other authority figure for answers.

What you call psuedo waffle is opening your mind. I am opening your mind and you don't even know it. That is why you are angry and aggressive. It hurts when your mind opens. You are dealing with the pain by taking it out on the person causing the pain. Me.

They are fact.

You have completely lost all control and you are ranting.

I don't think it was neccessary for you to say that. It is apparent to anyone reading your posts.

Oh My! I can feel my panties bunching up right now!

You are right. It doesn't require kung fu terms to talk about human body functions. It is helpful and revealing to use kung fu terminology to describe the human body. But you don't have to if you don't want.

I think you don't know how to apply kung fu terminology to discussion of the body myself, and that is the impetus behind your declaration.

Oh lord. This is so pathetic.

"I don't understand what you are talking about, but I know I am smarter than you so there", is basically what that paragraph above says.

Aggressive. Abusive. Disrespectful. Know nothing.

Why?

You need to get over whatever it is that has made you irrational. I wasted most of my time addressing your personal situation and describing real life to you instead of the subject at hand.

In a real kung fu class, this kind of behavior is handed off to the students. Only when you become able to restrain your runaway mind, your aggression and disrespect, and show some real aptitude for learning would you ever be allowed personal time with the master.

 

But it isn't and they aren't... you saying something is true believe it or not does not make it so.

lol... Instead of telling me how I wont be able to comprehend your incredible evidence why don't you just show it. As far as I am aware male porn stars don't display increased physical weakness or have shorter life spans than your average joe. If you can easily provide proof that this is wrong then do so. Oh and about me not accepting it if its real evidence I will...

lol... of course its statistically very small! Even just going by own experience with sex I have never damaged myself during sex besides from light bruising (I've had much worse injuries from training!!!) so either Im just incredibly lucky at avoiding the dangers of sex or else they aren't very common. Now when I factor in all the people I know who have mentioned sex and how often they mention being injured by sex again the evidence strongly stacks up against sex being a dangerous activity. It's what the body was designed to do! Why would it injure you?

I'll explain to you why I think your argument is crap look at this analogy:

thebike- Swimming is bad for you it shortens your lifespan and weakens you physically! Just look at how tired you are after swimming and how wrinly your skin gets after long periods in water.
Kavango- What?!? Swimming is good for you! It's a healthy activity for your body. Your tired afterwards because its physically strenuous and your skin getting wrinkly isn't dangerous!
thebike- Swimming is dangerous you can damage yourself during swimming.
Kavango- off course you can but thats not common and it doesn't mean swimming is bad like you say?
thebike- You will never understand my insanely complex evidence because you are not kung fu enough and you have no evidence that being injured by swimming is uncommon.

Do you see how silly that sounds? I actually pity you if you are under the belief that everytime you have sex your risking significant injury...

lol... so sex more than once a week and masturbation more than once a week is excessive and sex in any other 'hole', with drugs(?) and any masturbation is incorrect.

Right so far I would agree with you on drugs and thats not because they lead to 'incorrect sex' but just because drugs are generally bad for you. The notion that having any sexual activity more than once a week is 'excessive' is laughable and your hangups with the variety of sexual activities humans have come up with also doesn't make them incorrect. Masturbation is also known as a healthy activity when not over indulged in so I dont know how you can defend it as always incorrect or why you came up with the idea that only once a week or it was excessive. Again it sounds like your getting this from a book on wizards. Whats your source? Oh and whats wrong with homosexual sex isn't it just the ejaculating bit you have issues with? Lesbians should be fine at the very least?

Great I'm all those things so prove it to me. Except I don't think I have 'native intelligence' what is that? Intelligence of the natives? Do you mean like inherently intelligent? Well anyway even if I don't qualify I'd love to see the irrefutable evidence you keep saying you have.

Oh dear! Well lucky I'm not one of those people here let me help you feel I am worthy of your evidence:

- I know plenty of other people know more about plenty of other things than me.
- I haven't sent you any e-mails. Nor do I ever intend to.
- I have an education.
- I'm a pretty good learner.
- I do things on my own ALL the time!
- I question authority figures regularly!
- I don't think I'm any more egotistical than the next man.

Ok so do I qualify for your super evidence yet? I know I'm cynical so I don't quite meet your extensive requirements but I don't see why you would only be able to convince someone who already agres with you which is essentially what you seem to be getting at above.

Yeah that's my problem I believe people with evidence instead of a random nutbar on the internet who thinks its possible to control other people with thoughts. Maybe you could give me some reason to believe what you say?

WHAT?!? Scientists are people and they get things wrong!!! ARE YOU SURE?!?
Only kidding of course I know that! I also know that the people who tend to prove scientists wrong are other scientists and that since scientists are basing their conclusions of evidence there conclusions are only as good as the evidence they collected. However, I wonder do any of your articles show that science were wrong about sex? If not it's a bit irrelevant, I know the mountains of research could be wrong but you emmm... haven't provided any proof that it is, yet? Or did you just forget about that?

lol... back to the old conspiracies eh? So now scientists are conspiring to make us believe sex is healthy! But to what ends? DO they want us to tired to rebel against the powerful men? Are they then in league with the powerful men who are trying to kill pyschics you discussed in the other thread? Oh God! This is getting exciting!

Oh and there is one other possibility you seem to have missed: Scientists are correct and your talking rubbish.

Trust me I wont be coming to you for answers on anything and it's obvious you can't provide evidence for what you say. You've made that clear already yet you still keep waffling on about this irrefutable evidence Im just not spiritually advanced to accept.

lol... As I said earlier 'do you have any evidence to support anything you say beyond telling people to open their mind?' it seems you don't. Also once again your not upsetting me, see all those 'lol' they actually are points where I've laughed. Your arguments are so ridiculous they are amusing not upsetting! If anything I feel sorry for you.

1. I wasn't ranting I was pointing out that people disagreeing with you does not mean they think you are right like you suggested.
2. Several times you said you did not understand how I, as a kung fu man, could believe the things I did. This is why I stated I am not a kung fu man it was for your benefit so you could stop worrying.
3. Careful that may lead to sexual excitement and then boom 2 years of your life gone in one ejaculation!
4. Agreed .
5. No... that passage said that even if I was wrong about something it doesnt automatically make you right. Sorry if I wasnt clear enough.

Why is it physically impossible to sink your eyes to your genitals? Oh my...

LOL!!! Considering you view the world as full of rogue telepaths, secret government and medical conspiracies and secret superpower people (and regard sex more than once a week as bad!) I am extremely glad that you don't think my view tallies with your 'real world'.

Anyway once again I thank God that I will never have the pleasure of being in a kung fu class like you describe. The funniest thing about this is that you keep talking about people needing to question things but then when anyone does it to you, suddenly they have not got enough respect or don't have the qualities of a good learner. Have a nice day mon ami please don't worry about upsetting me and you still are talking nonsense .

 

Perhaps science is wrong, perhaps eastern ideas are wrong, perhaps a blending of both would yield results?
The cycle is endless, all are possibilities yet currently none are possibilities.

Would all scientists suddenly accept that sex can deplete your energy? Or would they suddenly accept energy ideas?

Would people that think in terms of energy suddenly trust science? The problem I see is this is apples and oranges two different worlds trying to describe the same thing.
CK mentioned masturbation was good so long as it is not excessive, I agree here this is why (to thecycle):
Because not everyone is taught to cultivate (or even correctly can) jing to Qi as we both (thecycle and i) know. To hold in the jing and go AGAINST what the body WAS made to do is NOT natural. Thus Masturbation and/or sex would not necessarily hurt the body as much as restraining the natural process would. However, if you knew how to control this then these things may hurt the body because you are missing out on cultivation.

Lets see if I can give a good example for both of your arguments:
You have a great river flowing NATURALLY following its own path (Jing, or sexual tendencies) To let the river just flow is ideal and is natural.
Though you hear that water is just draining into a sea with no one to use it (excessive sex) so you decide to build a dam. This is not the natural flow of water and you are thus effectively cutting off the nourishment to the greater sea (thus by stopping sex/masturbation you are causing harm)
However, you realize this is bad and actually make side streams to villages (organs) so that people may flourish. You also release the dam and allow the natural flow of water to return to the sea. Now you have a natural flow to the water, yet you are also making use out of what you have.

So plain and short you can abstain completely from sex and injure yourself by making this "dam" or you can just have sex and not really gain anything from it and lose the chance to gain from "the river". Or you can use "The river" to gain from it and nourish yourself as well as keep with the natural flow. Balance. No extremes. Nothing excessive. Ancient Taoists that thought of sexual cultivation had the idea that cultivation should be achieveable in all areas of life including speech, arts of all kinds, and sex. They sought to cultivate themselves even when they slept. They also knew that anything excessive would cause injury.

While not happy with the analogy I hope it can kind of make some sense. Remember just by doing something does not make it effective, you have to understand why you are doing it.

btw 42.7% of statistics are made up on the spot oooo maybe i just made that one up lol.

 

I understand your POV Taoquan and it is ultimately a matter of perspective- as you say science is not really going to be able to comment on whether a mystical & undetectable (at least by science) energy is leaving the body. However, it's the claims about how sex affects your body physically that are indeed debatable. If thecycles only point was because jing leaves your body therefore your life is shortened I would still disagree but I wouldn't take much issue with it, I don't believe in jing but c'est la vie. What I am taking issue with is his insistence that having sex actually weakens you physically and shortens your life. These are not claims about energy they are physical claims that are false and the only evidence he has so far offered is that I have to open my mind and believe he/she is correct. As I pointed out earlier we have plenty of Taoist TEXTS and modern adherents claiming that sexual control is possible to the point were you are not damaged by never ejaculating but I think very few Taoists (if any) have ever actually practiced such a thing. There are also Taoist texts claiming bodily immortality is possible and has been attained by lots of sages in the past do you believe that is possible as well?

 

At the risk of being dragged into debate with you Ckava, the Taoists did not say: "having sex actually weakens you physically and shortens your life" at all. What they postulated was "jing (seminal fluid/semen) is lost through ejaculation (it is) and preserving/preventing loss of jing can help you live longer and stay healthy longer" - the body (endocrine system) is taxed by replacing any lost secretion, whereas preserving body fluids takes that pressure off. The Taoists hold many differing views on sex, celibacy is one, while having lots of sex while preserving jing through ejaculation control (and processing the energy of sex internally) is another. Yin and yang theory says that women are full of yin energies which are unlimited, while men are full of yang energies which are finite. Statistically women live longer than men.
There are no available statistics of whether men who practise jing retention live longer, but having lots of sex without getting tired cannot possibly be a bad thing, surely???

On the subject of pornstars (whilst being enormously entertaining, the ultimate in wasteful ejaculators from a Taoist pov )...
In light of a lack of any scientific evidence a subjective value judgement will have to do....
Compare and contrast the following two people's youthfulness/health, bearing in mind that one practises semen retention, whilst the other practises semen splattering to excess:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Jeremy

(bear in mind that Sting is two years older than Ron Jeremy )

Methinks thy argument mayhap dost wilt somewhit....
PS

Loads of taoists practice this stuff (including me for one) and no, I do not think immortality is possible in physical form as we understand it, though extending life beyond 120 and maybe 200 is certainly scientifically possible, immortality is about transcendence from physicality and the cycle of rebirth - possible imo

 

Actually Taiji believe it or not just like Taoquan I think your perspective on this issue isn't so crazy. I also didn't mean to imply that Taoists said the kind of things thecycle is arguing for I meant to imply that generally speaking when someone is promoting abstenance from sex at least on an IMA forum it's often down to having read some Taoist inspired or New Age Taoist stuff.

I get the theory but I don't think it holds up very well. What they postulated was based on a pre-modern understanding of how the body functions. Now we know that retaining semen does not help you stay healthy. In fact it seems it does the opposite:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1046/j.1464-410X.2003.04319.x/abs/

I can accept the argument that excessive ejaculation would not be good for you (though I doubt it would do you that much harm as long as you were still eating!) but thecycle's definition of excessive is more than once a week!

Your right! And I'm not taking any issue with this practice. I'm taking issue with the insane and extreme claims being made in this thread about the harm sex or ejaculation does to your body. I'm not suggesting that you have to engage in either... I'm just arguing that someone claiming either is harmful to your health is contrary to what human physiology and modern research suggests.

Taiji I was talking about permanent retention of semen without end not people practicing something akin to tantric sex. Still if your never ever ejaculating then congratulations... your probably among a small group of extremely spiritually advanced people who have actually stopped your reproductive system from functioning properly or else you just meant you don't ejaculate often in which case... also congratulations.

Good to hear you don't believe in bodily immortality- could have been up for a disappointment!

And I like your non-scientific comparison- very good!!!

 

Yes and no,
I am of the same opinion of TJB here. Due to Taoist philosophy I believe there is a possibility of full body immortality. However, this has only been attained (as many taoists will also say) by one person and that is Lao Tzu. No other known Taoist has achieved such a high state of immortality as complete immortality is known as the "highest vehicle of transport"
Though of course this is legend and cannot be proven, while I agree with TJB that you are ultimately trying to achieve a spiritual immortality and some of these methods are exactly what is described. It seems most of us can agree that some of the possibilities are "possible". Good debate once again though

 

That's all I heard.

 

You are a malicious, aggressive, abuser. You should be paying me money to talk to you.

Or you don't know what they injuries are. Or you cannot see or sense the injuries.

You seem to have a memory problem. I clearly stated earlier that it is a matter of degree. Sex is like drugs. If you do a little drugs once in awhile, no big deal. But if you do lots of drugs, you will pay for it. If you have normal sex or you masturbate a little, that is within the design tolerance of the human body. But if you have excessive sex or wrong sex, then your body will pay for it.

There is no need to say crap. It is abusive, dismissive and rude. If you are going to be a real kung fu man, then you need to be aware of the consequences of your actions. If you say to someone, "that is crap", they will most likely have negative feelings towards you. If your goal is to instill negative feelings, that is fine. But if you instill negative feelings in others mindlessly, you will experience the consequences of your actions.

That is a fancy way of saying "What goes around, comes around".

Why?

Since you want to do this the hard way, please be explicit about what you are saying. I need to show people exactly how you think sloppy, and what they should avoid if they want to be good thinkers.

Who told you this? The news?

The news said Iraq had WMD. We all know that was a lie. Why do you believe them when they say masturbation is healthy? Are you gullible or simple minded?

That is because you have been too busy insulting me and being sarcastic to actually exchange information with me.

You are mindlessly spouting drivel. Your aggression is running dry but you still want to keep beating me. So you keep pressing the keys on the keyboard like you are punching me in the face with every key press.


I cannot be bothered to read any further. Your mindless attacking is making me sick. If you asked a real question, I apologize for not being able to answer it.

 

How long has this conversation been taking place? A week or so?

How many messages have we exchanged? 5? 10?

Do you really think this subject could be discussed and a reasonable conclusion reached in that amount of time in those number of messages?

 

Don't fret. The teachings of the master always fly over the head of the people below him.

WHOOOOooooooshhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

It's long enough to present some evidence that you're correct.

 

Clearly the reference went over your head.

 

Is it just me who thinks that thecycle seriously needs to get laid?

 

And stop huffing spray paint. The reason he can't explain his postition has nothing to do with anyones ability to understand and everthing to do with what he is saying being a steaming pile of crap.

 

Amen to that. But then again we are not worthy to understand the words of the master.

 

And I've got nice eyes to boot!

So the injuries caused by sex are invisible and unnoticable. We agree!

You think sex or masturbation more than once a week is excessive... nuff said.

There is when the argument is really, really poor and no other word quite sums up how poor it is.

The hilarious paradox of you showing people how to be good thinkers is too much to turn down... I am saying your definition of wrong sex would rule out a large variety of sexual activities alot of humans engage in including for example oral sex. I am saying that just because you say things like oral sex are wrong does not in any way make them wrong. So off you go show my faulty thinking!

I don't think researchers on sex had anything to do with the news coverage of Iraq? Also, I don't know what country your in but in the UK the news never said there were weapons in Iraq it generally reported that various people claimed weapons were there and then printed lots of stories saying they were wrong when it turned out to be so. Also if I had to chose between your two options I'd pick simple!

Wow... I'm the ultimate keyboard warrior!

 

I'm finding it hard to believe that thecycle is not just someone purposely trying to wind people up. What do they say about not feeding trolls?

 

That might be the case here.

What's life if you don't feed a few trolls-
-some strychnine.