My OM Birthday was May 10, 2014 in Boston, MA… just one day before my biological birthday. I took a weekend course with the staff that came mainly from New York and it was awesome. The next few years were quite amazing… to put it in the words of Ruwan Meepagala: “these last 2 years have been the best decade of my life”… the oxytocin was peaking and connections were being made. And now I write this in 2023, 3 years into the deepest distancing and disconnection this planet has seen in awhile.
Looking back, I have felt there were 2 principal failings of OneTaste
I sometimes received calls out of the blue. Other times after a Turn-ON I was approached. But in all cases, someone was approaching me as if I were a paycheck to them or OT. The conversation was being held to motivate the need for me to take another course beyond the intro course.
When certain people could not get me to take the course, they would become angry because their precious pseudo-truth of being-separate and being able to create their reality was failing in front of their eyes.
I attended 2 conflict resolution sessions in OT. Neither I or the other party had any training in what was occurring. And both I and the other party were behaving as if each other was at fault. Imagine that: a group that swears that building up your orgasm allows you to create your reality has conflict resolution sessions that amount to nothing more than blaming, shaming and finger-pointing.
Non-violent communication is a well-established and successful approach to dealing with conflict. But one key thing about NVC is: you can make offers and you can express your feelings and needs and you can seek strategies that meet both parties needs. But ultimately, you do not have any control over the other party.
This is in contrast the OT practice of banning people simply for speaking their mind: they had no interest in non-violent, compassionate communication. the conflict sessions were violent expressions of fear and the strategies were not cooperative or harmonic.
If you take a look at a “solid” spiritual system such as yoga-vedanta or Buddhism, you will find some commonality in theory and practice. And the commonalities amongst bona fide spiritual systems are well at-odds with what oneTaste was trying to do. In all fairness, OneTaste did deify Orgasm, but they did so as a for-profit educational company not as a not-for-profit religious organization. So the comparison is not fair. But again,
But let’s take a quick look at the less-than-fun spirituality of quality systems and compare it with OneTaste. let’s use basic Theravada Buddhism:
|bona fide spirituality||OneTaste||Comments|
|There is no personal self: most of what you ascribe to yourself is impersonal phenomena passing by. Sure you can attach or reject such phenomena, but that is simply an attempt to glue things on to a fictional you that does not really exist||You are a unique powerful individual who has the courage to live their convictions through the power of Orgasm.||Most people in OneTaste are tragically identified with a body that they have no true ownership over. At the moment of death, they will look back at their body and all their connections with attachment and remorse.|
|Whatever is perceived is impermanent: it rises and it falls if left alone. Suffering occurs when you try to persist something. And it is a futile effort because impermanence is the great law.||You can be, do and have whatever you want if you have a regular OM practice and fill up on Orgasm…and if you pay for our advanced courses… they had the nerve to charge their own staff… I know staff who took out loans to go to Magic School.|
|Phenomena occurs due to the doctrine of dependent origination: when it is time for something to occur it will and “you” have no control over it occurring or going away.||You are a unique powerful individual who has the courage to live their convictions through the power of Orgasm.|
|Desire is the basis of suffering – because desire means the mind is not relaxed. When you get what you desire, the mind relaxes momentarily, until another pops. The way to freedom is to note the thought of desire and return to your object of meditation. The way to suffering is to chase after desire.||Desire is your birthright: You can be, do and have whatever you want if you have a regular OM practice and fill up on Orgasm.||Very few serious spiritual paths glorify desire. They warn against it. You might find a crazy-wisdom Tibetan tantra (tan = body, tra=system) teacher who uses desire for liberation.|
OneTaste and Orgasmic meditation could have been the new hippie movement. With OM experience group OM sessions, oxytocin was peaking and flying and the connection juice was snowballing into a worldwide true-love affair: love does not need time: only intimacy needs that. I have had 15 minute OMs of complete merging with my other partner and in most cases, I knew nothing about the other person other than their name and the fact that when I asked “would you like to OM?” they said yes and got down to business.
The reason that oneTaste and OM did not become the hippie movement is that they tried to charge money for their Free Love, unlike the hippies.
Another reason that oneTaste and OM did not become the hippie movement is that their conflict resolution sessions were not based on peace and love, unlike the hippies.
And the reason the hippie movement and onetaste are no longer around is because both movements were spirited not spiritual. A spirited practice is one where you work yourself up into some sort of peak state and then deify that state. A spiritual practice is one where there is no you and any sort of state, be it peak state or trough state is temporary and not worth trying to achieve and most certainly not worth being attached to and by all means nothing to charge people money for.
I’ve received feedback on this article, primarily from OMwiki, the independent non-partisan voice of Orgasmic Meditation
One viewer of this post wrote:
You say in your article that OneTaste failed because it attempted to be a for profit institute. It didn’t fail. Its objective was to maximize profit. In that respect it was spectacularly successful and made the principal founder very rich.name witheld for privacy reasons
First things first, you say “It didn’t fail.” – oh really, so where is it today if it didn’t fail?
Next you say: “Its objective was to maximize profit” -> ok, so how much profit are they generating now? the profit they generated is similar to a male shooting his wad. Profitability without sustainabilty is nothing in my eyes and they have not sustained themselves as a company because they formed a predatorial relationship with their user base. And that penchant for profits is what possibly ran many people off. It certainly was offensive to me.
Next you say: “made the principal founder very rich.” – well, ‘rich’ is one thing, wealthy is another. Wealth includes healthy relationships and long-term growth. So yes, I would say she became rich but at the expense of not becoming wealthy… and she did it at the expense of other people becoming broke financially, emotionally, socially and otherwise.
Finally we have to be clear about what we mean about OneTaste. once Nicole sold OneTaste, they started charging 10 to 100 times what the fees were under Nicole. And they promptly shuttered their doors a year or two later… now, why did that happen? lawsuits? criminal investigation? I’m not sure. All I can say is that when I smell money on someone’s breath, it repulses me and probably did the same to others. But in the end it’s just guesswork.
I don’t. In various contexts, the word “sacred” denotes separation between that which is worthy of exaltation and attention, and that which is not. “Sacred” is a form of terminology that derives its meaning from duality; there is no sacred without also the profane. And if we are going to place OM coherently within some kind of historical context of the range of connotations and applications of that term “sacred”, surely OM falls out on the “profane” side. So OM is not a sacred practice, but a profane one.
Alan Watts has this to say about duality – “So in Zen, a duality between a higher self and a lower self is not made. Because if you believe in the higher self, this is a simple trick of the lower self… If you think you have a lower self, or an ego to get rid of, then you fight against it, nothing strengthens the delusion that it exists more than that. So this tremendous schizophrenia in humans beings, of thinking that they are rider and horse, soul in command of body, or will in command of passions – wrestling with them; all that kind of split thinking simply aggravates the problem, and we get more and more split.”
Typically when I have heard the term “sacred” applied to orgasm, there is some kind of hidden neurosis underlying that application – it may be construed as an act of embrace, but it is also an act of schism, of pushing away that which does not meet the criteria. Rejection of the profane, that which is perceived as beneath us.
“Sacredness” is a concept that is very easily hijacked by the prejudiced mind as a way to denounce the feminine. People get killed behind this notion. OM is about the feminine. Even popular notions of divine feminine, which may or may not meet the criteria of “sacredness”, can become coopted with extreme ease into rejection of other forms of feminine. What about the non-divine feminine? I smell a rat; feminine itself needs no additional moniker. It is simply the feminine. The “divine” piece is a cloak which actually bears the mark of the turned-off masculine, once again claiming false authority to deem the feminine worthy or unworthy.
This is a
post I have been wanting to write for a very long time. I want to
start with the definition of a few terms:
1. MASSAGE: therapeutic touch that is not about sex
2. CUDDLING: intimate touch that is not about sex (http://www.cuddleparty.com/)
3. ORGASMIC MEDITATION (OM): a wellness practice involving two people paying
attention to the sensations at the clitoris as one person strokes
it. It is sexual but it is not sex. It is goalless.
4. MAKEOUT: At OneTaste, the way we do anything is the way we do
everything and everything is an OM. Makeout is therefore a goalless practice
with agreed-upon boundaries. It spans the range from completely non-sexual
(e.g. caressing someone’s cheek) or it may be sexual
5. INTIMACY: an above average degree of flow-state between the mental
bodies of 2 people
6. LOVE: an above average degree of flow-state between the emotional
bodies of 2 people
7. SEX: Note that all of these definitions end with a question mark
because I don’t know what sex is (and would appreciate your input)
Definition 1: an above average degree of flow-state between the procreative
forces of 2 people?
Definition 2: Sex is the apparent division of the father-mother
substance of Mind into apparent opposites?
Definition 3: Any act intended to arouse the genitalia?
OK, now we get to the meat. What confuses me is that society and
conventional relationships put the bar for most forms of makeout much
lower than they would for an OM but the women in OneTaste are far more
selective about who they makeout with than who they OM with. For
instance if I walked up to
someone I had never seen before and said: “you have lovely hair, may I
stroke it” … she just might say yes and she certainly would not file
a sexual harrassment lawsuit. On the other hand if I walked up to
someone I had never seen before and said: “your ass is busting through
those jeans. Would you kindly butterfly your legs open so I can stroke
your pussy.”, she probably would say no and just might file
a sexual harrassment lawsuit.
Continuing, two people making out on a park bench might shock a few
people but not nearly as many people as a public act of OM.
The bottom line is: most forms of make out can occur in public and
would occur between 2 people much earlier than an OM would.
However, in our community, it is the reverse. I can walk up to people
and the very first thing I can say is: “Would you like to OM?” and I
would get a “yes” about 50-75% of the time. From experience, walking
up to people who I already know and asking for a makeout has about a
10% or less success rate. And all of those women would OM with me,
which basically means that most women place a higher premium on who
they will makeout with than who they will OM with. Why is this?
And I find that confusing because many forms of makeout dont require
the removal of clothes and arent even heavily sexual.
Closing this out, I would say that OM has taught me a great amount
about what a woman wants and how she wants it. There is a tremendous
amount of sensation and ecstasy in a woman from a very very light
touch. I can carry that understanding into the rest of her body and
approach makeout the same way.
But, putting this in the context of today’s Play Course, they are having
3 OMs in the play course. OM is not play for me. I put a lot of energy
and attention into my OM practice. Makeout would be playful. Cuddling
would be playful. Some of the exercises in the book “Slow Sex” would
be play. But not OM.
Finally, please note that the first 4 definitions are listed in the
order of willingness for a woman to take that, meaning, she would get
a massage or cuddle more readily than OM and should get an OM more
readily than a makeout.
From Subbudh Parekh:
It is said that there are four main reasons why we engage in anything related to sex
– practical (procreation)
– pleasure (getting off)
– emotional (pair bond, ‘love’)
– spiritual (‘alchemy’, ‘self-knowledge’ etc)
ORGASM is the un-created 3-eyed one, referred to in the Maha Mrityunjaya Mantra, The Mantra for Victory Over Death:
OM TRYAM BAKAM YAJAMAHE – oh 3-eyed one we worship you
SUGANDHIM PUSHTI VARDHANAM – your fragrance permeates and sustains every moment
URVA RUKA MIVA BANDHAN – a tremendous sickness has caught me
MRITYOR MUKSHIYA MAMRITAT – it is ignorance. liberate me from it.
What is a 3-eyed one? It is that which sustains and knows about all the various threes:
* waking, dreaming, deep sleep
* past, present, future
* positive, negative, neutral
* father, mother, child
* craving, aversion, equanimity
* up, down, stillness
* life, death, bardo
* dawn, noon, subset
* cheech, chong, cannabis