Abstract

ABSTRACT Although sexual continence is no longer considered a necessary condition of the philosophical life, various spiritual traditions favour the development of a form of ‘concentration’ (samadhi) of the person which they claim to depend on such continence, and of which a perceived outcome is a natural state of ‘chastity’. Such ‘concentration’is insisted upon on the grounds that it is the condition under which the real nature of things is disclosed to the practitioner. Since philosophers are concerned to discover the real nature of things the implication might be thought to be that sexual continence should come back into favour and philosophers become spiritual practitioners. However, a distinction is made between ejaculatory and non‐ejaculatory sexual activity and the suggestion made that despite the dominant tradition in the West, the relevant forms of concentration may develop under a regime of non‐ejaculation rather than of continence understood as abstinence. This is the context of a discussion of the state of male sexuality and its dedication to the practice of ejaculation, which is seen as a constraint upon the energy available for action and upon the formation of the energy on which the disclosure of reality is said to depend. Male judgments about the plausibility of such claims are themselves contingent upon the state of male sexuality and its dedication to the practice of ejaculation.