[HawksBurnDown]

It is a slippery slope trying to define what is "natural" when it comes to human desires. For example, is monogamy natural? Is it unnatural to have sexual desires towards minors? Is homosexuality unnatural?

Point here is not about what is natural and unnatural, a topic which you can sit here and debate for days. Point here is between mundane sensual pleasures and super mundane happiness. In order to achieve the latter, moderation of the former is advised.

Hi Deshy,

Buddhism says that Buddha Dhamma are laws of nature. They claim so. Do you agree or not?

Where is the moderation you are talking about? There is a complete absistence for monks from natural human action, that is why I like to point out...Sex is a reality that is where all of us came from. Hapiness is a mundane reality as no one came from the other side of the life yet...

[Info-phone]

My dear Kaarine Alejandra,

I am not talking exessive eating, I am talking bout natural instincts. If we do not eat we die for sure, ıf we do not use our sexual intercourse, our human race will be ended for sure. Sex is where we come from. No one has such a large cover to close over this truth yet...

Respectfully,

Hello Bothi,

Buddha never taught that everybody should abandon sexual intercourse. Also Buddha never intended to impose his teachings to those who do not want to follow them. The commitment with the Buddha teachings is a very personal and intimate choice.

Buddha also encouraged lay practitioners, that are into raising a family, to develop one founded in love commitment.

The commentary of Nyanaponika Thera is quite clear about it:

Of his lay followers he did not expect sexual abstinence. To them he advised restraint and mindfulness, and avoidance of giving excessive nourishment to sex desire. Here, if anywhere, a middle path between unrestrained indulgence and enforced repression was apt. But the Buddha made it clear that full deliverance required full detachment from desire. The gradual progress towards it, however, was left to the degree of insight and self-control possessed and developed by the individual lay follower.

MN 22
The decision of celibacy is personal and it should be taken as a result of the higher happiness one experience from meditation, from an ease mind that is in an absolute absence of craving. In this way, also a lay practitioners can practice sexual abstention if they will. Not only monks.

[Maryjasmine]

Thank you for your comments, Bothi.

You said in your introduction that you were trying to be a Buddhist yourself - and as you don't even know me, I fail to see how you feel that you are able to comment on my attitude to Buddhism.

The need for food and water to keep the body alive is different to lust for sex. Nobody will die if they don't have an orgasm.

As you are an old man, maybe its time to free your mind from the continuing desire for sexual relief.

Dear Aloka,

I understand that what we've got here is a failure to communicate. Because my age has nothing to do with my poor opinions on such a strong instinct that we all have. If there were no sexual relations, none of us would be here...If our minds were free of our thoughts we all would be in nibbana so easily...



May love and compassion lead us,

[gymnAnemoe]

Buddhism says that Buddha Dhamma are laws of nature.

This is an open-ended statement that can mean just about anything to anyone. Buddha's teachings are precise. Suffering, its origin and the path to its cessation are what needs to be investigated.

[BipiewExifese]

This is an open-ended statement that can mean just about anything to anyone. Buddha's teachings are precise. Suffering, its origin and the path to its cessation are what needs to be investigated.

Hi Srivijava,

No one knows the origin of suffering. Because there is no one cause of suffering. If you consider a person born with a birth defect, who is responsible for the cause of this suffering? Buddha's opinion was only on sentimental basis. But we have many more...Buddha's teachings are not as precise as you think.

[heilyprollecyspor]

No one knows the origin of suffering.

Suffering as fact, the origin of suffering, its complete cessation and the path that leads to its complete cessation have been exposed by Buddha in the Four Noble Truths. This truths saw the light after a careful investigation of mind and its properties.

Craving is at the very root of suffering. Insight, meditation and moral observance of our actions are the tools which soon or later will quench suffering.

If you consider a person born with a birth defect, who is responsible for the cause of this suffering? For the case of a birth defect, it is randomness of nature. For the most part, the suffering around the birth defect is the responsibility of the person, unless - as there are cases - that the birth defect, having an organic basis, impairs completely the faculty of reasoning and insightful penetration.

Buddha's opinion was only on sentimental basis. I think that far from a sentimental basis, the teachings of Buddha are scientifically based. Also Buddha has never imposed anything to anybody. He just invites us to verify his teachings. To prove them through understanding, practice and evaluation of results.

Buddha's teachings are not as precise as you think. Bothi, in my opinion, the accuracy and clarity of the teachings of Buddha are the features that have resonate with me. But this is just a personal experience. I can understand that for many others this is not the case.

[Piediahef]

Why sex is not a right action for sangha members?

To get back on topic, some idle speculation from a different angle.

Maybe this rule is simply a reflection of the Indian culture for practitioners at the time. Think about it, historically, his initial followers were probably all practitioners of one form of asceticism or another that were popular in India at the time, and are all male. Not allowing sex was probably just a natural extension of the culture of practitioners at that time. And since celibacy does not prevent one from learning his way, he probably didn't see a reason to relax the cultural rule. Why needlessly cause his followers to throw up their hands and leave?

When Buddha first started taking on followers, he only took men and did not allow women to join him. It is not until later that he was persuaded to allow women. It was not that he has any prejudice against women, but simply a reflection of his space and time. If no one tried to persuade him to allow women, you might be wondering today why sangha does not allow women.

[Trotoleterm]

Moderation note

Off-topic posts have been moved to a new thread "Born with a birth defect"


Thanks,

Aloka

[SawbasyWrab]

Hi Deshy,

Buddhism says that Buddha Dhamma are laws of nature. They claim so. Do you agree or not?

Where is the moderation you are talking about? There is a complete absistence for monks from natural human action, that is why I like to point out...Sex is a reality that is where all of us came from. Hapiness is a mundane reality as no one came from the other side of the life yet...

Sexual desire is natural. It is just nature. But that does not mean you have to indulge in it whenever it arises. You sound like you think sex is a need of the body which, if not fulfilled, can cause more harm than good. This maybe the case with you but not necessarily so for people in general. Sex is not a physical need in the same sphere as breathing or eating.

Celibacy is not an abnormal practice. Celibacy is just sense restraint. Knowingly or unknowingly, most of us practice sense restraint by identifying a greater kind of happiness and peace that arise from not engaging in certain kinds of pleasures. For example, we do not have sex with young children even if they are willing. Do you advise fulfilling this natural need every time it arises? Most of us don’t. Similarly, monogamy is sense restraint. So is celibacy. There is nothing “unnatural” about not giving way to all your human desires whenever they arise. There is nothing unnatural about not being a slave to your body’s every need. Having said that, there is nothing inherently unhealthy about sex either. Just pick the best kind of “moderation” to your practice. The choice is yours.

Now the question is, why are monks expected to be celibate and not given a choice to do what they seem fit for their practice, just like lay people? There could be many reasons for this. One is, if a monk accidentally makes a woman pregnant, should he expect the lay supporters to take care of the baby? Is a monk in a position to devote his time to parenting? If he does, then what is the difference between a monk and a lay person?

Monks rely on the lay community for health, food, clothes etc. The reason is because, people who decide to ordain do so in order to devote most of their time to meditative practice. We do not need a lay community to support another community that engages in all kinds of mundane sensual pleasures while dumping all the responsibilities that come with it back to the lay community such as making money, paying taxes, buying medicine, taking care of kids etc. So this social aspect is one reason.

Another reason is that indulgence in mundane sensual pleasures consumes time and energy. A monk devotes most of his time and energy on meditation. That is why he is a monk, in robes, in seclusion. Monks do not let go of all their possessions, worldly pursuits and go into seclusion to spend their time masturbating. They refrain from acts that can quite easily lead to addiction (such as masturbation/porn/sexual fantasies). I think celibacy is very useful to a monk because it is very easy for a person who is quite secluded, lonely and well supported by a lay community to waste his/her time, mental stability and samadhi on sexual indulgences or fantasies.

A monk needs discipline of the five senses to keep his energies focused on the main goal. If you really cannot do without sex, best thing is not to ordain.

[Wmshyrga]

No one knows the origin of suffering.

lol

"The Noble Truth of Suffering (dukkha), monks, is this: Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, death is suffering, association with the unpleasant is suffering, dissociation from the pleasant is suffering, not to receive what one desires is suffering — in brief the five aggregates subject to grasping are suffering.

"The Noble Truth of the Origin (cause) of Suffering is this: It is this craving (thirst) which produces re-becoming accompanied by passionate greed, and finding fresh delight now here, and now there, namely craving for sense pleasure, craving for existence and craving for non-existence (self-annihilation).

"The Noble Truth of the Cessation of Suffering is this: It is the complete cessation of that very craving, giving it up, relinquishing it, liberating oneself from it, and detaching oneself from it.

"The Noble Truth of the Path Leading to the Cessation of Suffering is this: It is the Noble Eightfold Path, and nothing else, namely: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration.[2]

Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta

[Alex]

Hi Srivijava,
No one knows the origin of suffering. Because there is no one cause of suffering. If you consider a person born with a birth defect, who is responsible for the cause of this suffering?

Hi Bothi,
I suggest that you read up on what Buddha means by "suffering". It's a truth which operates at many levels, you'd be surprised.

Buddha's opinion was only on sentimental basis. Your understanding of Buddha's truths relegates them to this status.

Buddha's teachings are not as precise as you think. I investigate Buddha's teachings and don't 'believe' anything just because it's in a sutta. You can only gain an appreciation for the precision of the teachings if you have insight which follows careful investigation / meditation.

[LongaDonga]

To me, a tranquil mind and emotional satisfaction can only be obtained in a natural way. That is all human natural needs should be satisfied in a natural way.

The Eightfold Path is a natural way. Nibbana is something natural.

For example, when we get angry, do we always follow our anger and get angry or even murder the people we are angry at? No. Instead, most of the time, we wait for the anger to calm down. This waiting for the anger to calm down & dissolve is a natural way.

So why should the defilement of sexual craving be treated differently to the defilement of anger?

The Buddha taught patient endurance is the supreme incinerator of defilements & this is the path to Nirvana.

Khantī paramaṃ tapo titikkhā, nibbānaṃ paramaṃ vadanti buddhā If we are open minded, the Noble Eightfold Path is a natural way we can try or experiment with, if we are interested.

If we have not tried it, how can we criticise it?

If we have not tasted the bliss & freedom of the dissolution of sexual craving, how can we narrow mindedly criticise it?

Sex, most of us have tried. Sex is something common & ordinary.

The Buddha taught (somewhere) the pleasure of sex is 1/16 of the pleasure of jhana or Nibbana (whichever).

Kind regards

[Ambassador]

Dear Bothi,

All my life I have had a demeasured libido. I took the vows of Monks ,and yet not ordained ,but i live like a monk.The hardest part of unattachment to earthly desires,in my case is celibacy. If one wants to have a healthy prostate ,he must ejaculate on a regular basis. Medically proven statement.

We are not children here and saints neither, so these words should not shock anyone.I am 65 years with a libido of a 35 year old man.

Hence the stress caused by this subject,hense some suffering ,hence the attachement to my libido. Maybe one day when my libido has died, this subject will not be a subject of stress for me.

Loong

[newpiknicker]

It seems like hunger and libido, while both natural desires, are a pretty bad to use against each other as analogies. They are significantly different. It's not to me to judge why someone would make the choice to be celibate. If it is something that brings them peace then it is a good thing and I wish them all the best.

[Kolovorotkes]

I agree TheBigBear, and from previous discussions here I can see that such analogies are not useful for many.

[ZZtop]

imo, such analogies are useless for most, if not, for everyone

as buddhists, we, for the most part, eat whatever food is available

but we do not conduct ourselves sexually in the same manner

in buddhism, such analogies are the domain of the animal realm, where urges take precedence over consequences

regards


Bhikkhus, these two bright principles protect the world. What are the two? Shame and fear of wrongdoing. If, bhikkhus, these two bright principles did not protect the world, there would not be discerned respect for mother or maternal aunt or maternal uncle's wife or a teacher's wife or the wives of other honored persons, and the world would have fallen into promiscuity, as with goats, sheep, chickens, pigs, dogs and jackals. But as these two bright principles protect the world, there is discerned respect for mother... and the wives of other honored persons.

Lokapala Sutta: The Protectors of the World
Nakula's father & Nakula's mother went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, Nakula's father said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since Nakula's mother as a young girl was brought to me [to be my wife] when I was just a young boy, I am not conscious of being unfaithful to her even in mind, much less in body. We want to see one another not only in the present life but also in the life to come."

And Nakula's mother said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since I as a young girl was brought to Nakula's father [to be his wife] when he was just a young boy, I am not conscious of being unfaithful to him even in mind, much less in body. We want to see one another not only in the present life but also in the life to come."

Samajivina Sutta: Living in Tune

[911_993_911]

Firstly the wrong word is being used here - celibacy means not to marry anyone, chastity is the word meaning to refrain from indulging in sex. Buddhist monks are celibate in that they do not marry so that they can concentrate on the spiritual rather than the worldly life and are chaste in that they refrain from sex as an extension to the precept of refraining from sexual misconduct, as part of their efforts to renounce desire altogether.

[Thomas12400]

The opening post question is about why sex is not a right action for sangha members and it seems to me this has been well discussed. For me the reactions of others to discussing the topic is a good indicator of how it generally is problematic in any sangha !!!
In my experience, others decisions on celibacy and chastity do not impact on my practice in any way and my current life choices and conditions impact on my choices in this regard. As I have shared previously my practice and life has not led me to need or seek renounciation in this regard.

[12Cickprior]

Howdy,

If one reads the following then may have a view on this issue;

Back in 1971, when I was twenty-one years old, I had an experience I would never forget. I was walking around the large Baudhanath Stupa near Katmandu, Nepal. There was a large group of monks walking that day, spinning prayer wheels and chanting in the brilliant morning sunlight. A middle aged monk in his forties came up to me and asked: "What's it like to be with a woman?" I was shocked that a good looking and healthy man in his forties should have to ask a twenty-one year old what sexual intercourse was like. I had decided years earlier never to become a celibate monk, and that day engraved my feelings even deeper into my soul. You may check the person of this by reading the whole article if you wish:

http://essenes.net/index.php?option=...166&Itemid=772

Lats all be mindful,

[Pa33anger]

hello Bothi

the Buddhist religion is based in faith in the Triple Gem, namely, Buddha, Dhamma & (Noble) Sangha

for the most part, the Noble Sangha are celibate (however, some are not)

for most part, lay Buddhist practitioners are not celibate (however, some are not)

if celibacy is an issue for you, then Buddhism may be an issue for you

for example, Catholicism does not condemn celibacy. Hindu yoga does not condemn celibacy (brahmacharya)

however, Protestant Christianity & Islam are examples of religions that generally strongly condemn celibacy

Each religion that has a celibate tradition has some clergy, ordained following social custom, who are naive & curious about sex.

No religious clergy is perfect, just as no group of lay practitioners are (morally) perfect.

I hope for BWB to have quality discussions

I trust there are appropriate forums for your needs. In Buddhism, it is not appropriate to discuss Dhamma with the disinterested.

regards

Element

[Buddha taught:]

And what, monks, is the power of benevolence? There are four ways of benevolence; by gifts, by friendly speech, by helpful acts and by bestowal of equity. This is the best of gifts: the gift of Dhamma. And this is the best of friendly speech: to teach again and again Dhamma to those who wish for it and who listen attentively.

AN 9.5