Sexual Misconduct

[Wyobassist]

My question is this. What exactly do you think the Buddha meant by sexual misconduct? I liked the Thich Nath Hanh describtion on this web site. I just think in todays society with all the sexual imagry, it has become harder to define. Example: If sex is given freely, but without love and nobody is hurt, does it break the precept on sexual misconduct? Also if there is any adultry in a relationship does the injured person have his/her ego or the other persons failure to follow the path to explain his/her pain.

Any response would be appeciated.

[Taeguk]

Good question, Wyobassist :)

For bhikkus (monks), this has traditionally meant that any sexual activity is considered "misconduct". On certain meditation retreats, participants are asked to observe celibacy for the duration of the retreat.

For laypeople, this has traditionally been interpreted as a prohibition against adultry. In a modern context, I agree that it's hard to define. The precept is, I think, purposely left vague. It's not meant to be a commandment or prohibition against specific activities as much as it's meant to be a reminder: be mindful, be compassionate. Anything that is done with awareness and compassion is, I imagine allowed (for lay practitioners, anyway). Offhand, I would say that unsafe sex (i.e. without protection for both partners), sex without consent from both parties, and/or any kind of infidelity is probably misconduct, but there are no hard and fast answers.

Generally speaking, Buddhism does not place much emphasis on sexuality. In Japan for instance, many Buddhists will actually be married in a Shinto or Christian ceremony since the most they can expect from a monk is a generic blessing. Unlike Christianity, which views marraige and sexuality as being full of spiritual meaning (usually associated with sin and wrongdoing, although the married couple is, supposedly, joined together in union through the power of God), I think Buddhism just views sex as something that happens. Like anything else in the phenomenal world, it can be a source of suffering and attachment, but these unwholesome qualities are ultimately caused not by the thing itself, but by the mind. There is no meaning inherent in sexuality.

It is interesting that Bangkok, a city which is renowned throughout the world for its sex industry, is located in Thailand, an officially Buddhist country. I'd be curious to see if Thomas or schrodinger, who have spent a great deal of time in Thailand, have an opinion on whether Buddhist attitudes toward sex have influenced the industry in Bangkok (and how so, if at all). :unsure:

[Thomas Knierim]

Taeguk has already explained this quite well. The third precept is probably the most vague and therefore people often ask questions about it. It may be supposed that the precept about sexuality wasn't elaborated very much, because early Buddhism grew as a monastic movement. Its disciples shaved their heads and simply stopped having sex. They were celibate. Given this, there weren't too many question about how Buddhists ought to have sex. They simply hadn't. :lol:

I have had the pleasure to discuss this once with Thich Nhat Hanh's monks from Plum Village. Not when Thay was in Thailand last month, but several years ago. One of Thay's core missions is to revitalise and refresh the Pratimoksha (the Budhist precepts and the monastic code) by bringing it into a contemporary framework, relating it to modern society, and writing it out in modern language. So, here is Thich Nhat Hanh's phrasing of the 3rd precept:

Aware of the suffering caused by sexual misconduct, I am committed to cultivate responsibility and learn ways to protect the safety and integrity of individuals, couples, families, and society. I am determined not to engage in sexual relations without love and a long-term commitment. To preserve the happiness of myself and others, I am determined to respect my commitments and the commitments of others. I will do everything in my power to protect children from sexual abuse and to prevent couples and families from being broken by sexual misconduct.

The above does then answer Wyobassist's question:

Wyobassist: If sex is given freely, but without love and nobody is hurt, does it break the precept on sexual misconduct?

Yes, according to Thich Nhat Hanh that constitutes misconduct (albeit less gravely).

I'd say this is a very complicated issue and there are no simple answers to it. All general rules fail at some point. Sex is always a karmic activity and therefore monks and serious practitioners most commonly avoid it. Then again, sexual energy is very powerful. Avoidance might not always work, certainly not for the average person, and it might even cause energy blockages and more serious psychological problems. At the other end of the spectrum, raw sexual desire may be transformed into more subtle and useful energies. This is what the tantrics try to do by ritualising sex.

My personal interpretation of the third precept is that the line between misconduct and acceptable conduct is drawn by the element of exploitation. If there is an element of exploitation in sex, then it is most likely misconduct. For example, sex with a person you don't really love tends to exploit that person's feeling to a selfish end. Sex with a prostitute tends to exploit economic inferiority. Sex with an immature or subordinate person also tends to be exploitative. Adultery tends to exploit the trust and the feelings of your partner. Even with casual sex and masturbation you might be exploiting your own body if it becomes habitual or compulsive. I say "tends to" and "might be", because it always depends on the case.

Taeguk: I'd be curious to see if Thomas or schrodinger, who have spent a great deal of time in Thailand, have an opinion on whether Buddhist attitudes toward sex have influenced the industry in Bangkok (and how so, if at all).

The sex industry in Thailand is a curious phenomenon, given that Thai society is pretty uptight about sex and that there is not much in the way of sex education. Official education is rather prudish and conservative. But then again, most of these girls come from a low-income, low-education background where proper conduct in society might not be on the curriculum. Anyway, that's what most upper class people in Thailand think.

I presume that Thai culture is generally opportunistic and that it's mainly the easy money which drives prostitution. A prostitute can make as much as a doctor. Although she loses face in the eyes of Thai society, Buddhism doesn't condemn her. So, she is not a "bad" person in the Buddhist view. On the contrary, she can make a great deal of merit by giving some of that money to her parents and family. Besides, she could meet a rich husband and lead a carefree live. I suppose that's what the girls imagine who go into this profession.

Cheers, Thomas

[sahyo]

The sex industry in Thailand is a curious phenomenon, given that Thai society is pretty uptight about sex

sex industry doesn't flourish when no uptightness

[scameter]

Hmm... interesting point asheera. That's like how crime doesn't flourish without laws. The alchohol industry was never bigger than when it wasn't legal here in America, and marijuana is the largest selling crop in America, even above corn, almost trippling corn in profit, and yet it is illegal. If everything was legal, what do you think would happen?

[schrodinger]

I'd be curious to see if Thomas or schrodinger, who have spent a great deal of time in Thailand, have an opinion on whether Buddhist attitudes toward sex have influenced the industry in Bangkok (and how so, if at all). Taeguk-

I suppose it is natural to think that someone who has spent over thirty years in Thailand would have some insights into how Buddhism reconciles with the notorious sex industry here. I am tempted to offer the shortest answer: “Beats the hell out of me” and I am afraid even a much longer answer would not be any more satisfactory. However, it is an interesting subject and the question has been posed to me a number of times throughout the years, so I will at least attempt an answer. Keep in mind, that when I first arrived in Thailand I was in my twenties, and much more interested in researching what the nitery entertainment had to offer than enlightening myself about Buddhism. Now, in my fifties and happily married for 22 years, I am much more interested in Buddhism and only somewhat aware of what is going on in the nitery entertainment business. I suppose if we were to average out my knowledge of both subjects, it would draw a nice flat line and amount to almost nothing.
As Thomas mentioned, there is much more to this issue than Buddhism versus sexual misconduct. There is the much broader role of Thai social structure and economics, which are in a constant state of flux as Thailand grapples with changing from an agricultural economy to a mixture of a service orientated and industrialized economy.
What you will find is while the most visible part of the bar scene is centered around urban areas which have a large number of foreign visitors, such as Bangkok, Pattaya City, Phuket and Chaingmai, most of the girls engaging in this business come from the less developed Northeast of Thailand. The Northeast has been the traditional rice-growing region and has lagged behind other areas in developing a service-related tourism industry and industrial estates. Consequently, it is seen as an impoverished area with limited opportunities for young people of both sexes. Here is where Buddhism plays a major role, in my opinion, in that the Sangha does provide a shelter for young boys and adolescent males who are consigned to the monks’ keeping for education, upbringing and moral guidance. No such refuge exists for the young girls who have to fend for themselves and are quite often abused and either run away to join the sex industry or are coerced into it, many times by “older sisters” who are already engaged in this business. Also, Buddhism and Thai society place great emphasis on loyalty to the family unit, with the duty of children to care for their parents in old age being entirely accepted, even if the parents have failed miserably to provide for their children. This cultural pattern, coupled with a relaxed attitude to keeping even the most basic Buddhist precepts, makes it easier for girls to accept whatever fate awaits them. Although there has been a great increase of foreign investment in Thailand, leading to more and more industrialization, the jobs are very low paying with little or no chance at advancement for workers with a low education. As Thomas pointed out, an attractive girl can easily make as much money as a Doctor, so that many of them feel the sex industry actually exploits them less than they would be if working in a factory! Having observed these patterns for over thirty years, I am convinced Thai society is now close to a breaking point. Rather than declining with industrialization, the sex industry has been steadily growing, with even many young boys now entering the field to work in “Boys A Go-Go” type of establishments which cater mainly to deviant foreign visitors, with the Thai government and Ministry of Tourism turning a blind eye as long as tourist revenues keep rising. This sell-out of basic human values on a large scale simply cannot continue without serious social consequences, which is already the case in much of Thailand. The prevalence of gangs, drug usage and violent crime are all on the increase here. Buddhism, with its loose moral code simply cannot provide the strong direction needed to climb out of this abyss. It is my opinion that Buddhism is best adapted to a people who already have an established strong moral code, such as the Ten Commandments, or the Buddhist practice needs to be revised in favor of a much stronger emphasis being placed on the keeping of at least the Five Precepts. Well, as I said, it is a very complicated matter and I probably should have stuck with my short answer “Beats the hell out of me”! :lol:

[sahyo]

If everything was legal, what do you think would happen?

legalizing wouldn't feed in some ways, but as long as humans are taught guilt, when fear attempts using relegion for policing, there will be attempting to financially profit from repression seeking temporary release, comfort, from discomfort

[Michael]

You're talking about anarchy.

Plato describes the process rather well. After anarchy comes dictatorship.

[sahyo]

dictating already, when thinking shoulds/shouldn'ts children,
and wanting laws for attempting controlling

[Michael]

I was responding to your question, Sahyo.

That is what would happen. It has nothing to do with me wanting anything.

At core my heart is anarchistic (without King). Ideally we should rule each other's hearts through the channels of merit and respect. I think perhaps you are judging too quickly. :)

[sahyo]

michael


scam posted:

If everything was legal, what do you think would happen?



and:

dictating already, when thinking shoulds/shouldn'ts children,
and wanting laws for attempting controlling


wasn't saying michael



:)

[scameter]

Asheera, then that simply shows me both that some people enjoy to repress, and those repressed enjoy to profit from the repression of others in an attempt, as you say, to gain comfort from discomfort; while others are repressed inevitably. Capitalism understands and exploits this system perfectly.

[Michael]

This process is inevitable?

Is any process inevitable, the_aphid? Some are more probable than others.

The way I recall Plato describing it, people will not tolerate the chaos of anarchy, therefore they will welcome the individual who has the power to impose order. Nowadays it isn't PC to call dictators dictators. And yes, the political process does not always follow the order Plato described. We live in interesting times.

what if you instead systematically renovated the current systems?

I'm currently working on that for myself, And even with one it's an arduous task :lol:

[/QUOTE]where does Plato describe this descent? [QUOTE]

I think he was describing a process, which as I recall was cyclical, rather than a descent. As to where, you'll find it in The Republic, Book 8.

[Starry_Canopy]

The postings here have been a real eye-opener for me. Till now I had thought that almost all prostitution was by coersion and that over 90% of the prostitutes were subjected to a form of slavery in which they had no interest themselves other than pure survival and escape from punishment from their 'masters'/ 'madams'.

It is also a bit mind boggling to know that rural females from NE Thailand look upon it as a good vocation worth considering.

[bito]

It is also a bit mind boggling to know that rural females from NE Thailand look upon it as a good vocation worth considering.

The impermanence that is relative thought.

[sahyo]

Capitalism understands and exploits this system perfectly.

yes scam, thinking uses such systems for attempting, as if a self, as if to gain something from

[scameter]

No "as if" really. Everyone has a self, some selves are better at leading than others, and those leaders that lead America are, I think, the most intelligent ever. Not all Americans leaders of course; but, ones such as the founding fathers, businessmen, and others are, those who understand human nature (with their knowledge or not) and engineer society to suit it.

[Starry_Canopy]

The impermanence that is relative thought.


The sorrow of the prostitutes that is all too real, albeit impermanent.