Which one is the correct MASTER?

For the last four months, I have sat on my meditation cushion in the morning, and contemplated the following case (koan) given to me by my Zen Teacher:

Master Song Am Eon used to call himself every day, "Master!" and would answer, "Yes?" 

"You should keep clear!" "Yes!!" 

"Never be deceived by others, any day, any time!" "Yes! Yes!"

The paradoxical questions that follow the case have answers that require hours of meditation. The first question, "What is the meaning of Master?" appeared almost instantly to me when asked. The answer to the second question, however, continues to elude me. "Song Am used to call himself and answer himself. Which one is the correct master?"

For the last six years, I have been without a boy or a slave. Although I can easily define what is the meaning of "MASTER," I cannot answer with certainty, "Am I still a "MASTER" without a slave?" If I am still a MASTER, what characteristics identify me as one worthy of owning another person?

I believe there is a characteristic that both MASTER and slave share: discipline. To command another, a MASTER must be able to command HIMSELF, to show a mastery over HIS body. The performance of self-discipline is one of the defining features of every MASTER for whom I have respect. For this reason, I feel I am a still a MASTER because my self-discipline is recognized by those who wish to have this trait groomed within themselves.

In essence, a slave recognizes a MASTER by the model that HE has set. An honourific that is given, not asked for, "MASTER!"

Tomorrow morning, I return to my zafu and hold the question in my mind, "Which is the correct master?" And while sitting, I will call myself "MASTER," and I will answer, "Yes! Yes!"

The Phenomal Bond

I hug my property in front of Reagan National after another Leather run. Six weeks ahead without the property's service. After my property, I walk away, dragging my suitcase to the check-in counter for Alaska Airlines. This is a job my property would normally do for his MASTER. I stand before the ticket agent and sense the absence of another body against mine.

I walk to the cafe and order my own coffee. I then sit down and instinctively look up to grant property the permission to sit beside me. A habitual act. I sit and drink my coffee alone.

I go to the restroom and pull out my cock, aiming my warm stream into the white, porcelain bowl. I think of the willing mouth of my property always ready to nurse out my piss until I have finished. I shake off the last drops, return my cock to my 501s, and button up my jeans. property is not there to serve as my valet and fasten up my clothing.

For the ensuing weeks I will do for myself what he usually does for me. Each simple action will remind me of the physical bond with my property, of its service when I wake, wash, eat, dress, urinate, walk, and cum. My body will feel incomplete without my property beside me. The bond between MASTER and property now realized through an awareness of absence.

Ownership of another creates an apparent paradox. Over time, my body as MASTER has redefined itself according to the service provided by the property. No longer can I as MASTER experience true independence in action. Without property beside me, I must do for myself what my property would do for me.

As participants in BDSM, we recognize the strong connection between our bodies and our identities. We define our roles by actions during play. Essentially, our movements or lack thereof establish identities that we feebly attempt to define by words. Without such action, roles do not exist. The dance of trust requires a minimum of two participants.

Given this, we must immediately dismiss the notion that a man can be a MASTER without a slave. One is defined by the other. It is not an abstract like a tenet of faith, a personal conviction, or a mysterious rapture felt in the bosom. Rather, both the MASTER and the slave carve out their identities based on physical interactions with each other. The MASTER understands this when the slave no longer is present. He must now do for himself what the slave usually does. Every physical need becomes a reminder of the slave.

Thus, the idea of independence as an attribute of strength is absurd when considered within the power dynamic of BDSM. Standing alone, the MASTER realizes that he is not Superman, Nietzsche's conceptual higher being beyond duality. Without his slave, the MASTER realizes that he is very much connected to the worm of the body which the slave addresses through diligent service.