The third precept

AbbeyRoad

The third precept is "refrain from sexual misconduct". Out of plain curiosity, what exactly defines "sexual misconduct"?

Cloud

Whatever is considered inappropriate, i.e. adultery, rape, sex with someone who is married, sex with someone under family protection... it depends on the culture, societal norms. It's definitely meant that it should be consensual and there should be no harm in it. All of the precepts are about non-harm/violence, since killing is harmful, stealing is harmful, lying or harsh speech is harmful, inappropriate sexual activity is harmful, and intoxicants lead to breaking the other precepts...

tyloson

Fornication, Masturbation, Pornography, etc.

Things that are considered pleasures of the flesh.

But this precept covers a lot of ground so people may have different views on what it means.

Cloud

@tyloson, You're correct in how it should be interpreted for a monk, but that's not the interpretation for lay practitioners. Lay practitioners are not forbidden from having sex, which you call "fornication", but are not to do any harm in connection with that particular act. Nor is there any prohibition against self-love *cough* or pornography. Again, for a monk yes, for a lay Buddhist no.

This forum is by and large lay Buddhists, and for lay Buddhists. If we were monks, we would have a teacher who has instructed us and to whom we would take our questions!

That's my understanding anyway.

compassionate_warrior

AbbeyRoad, there have been several threads on the third precept, on masturbation, on porn, on sexual misconduct. You can look those up. Inevitably someone brings up the Dalai Lama's statements (based on early commentaries to the third precept) that misconduct includes not having sex during the daytime, not having sex more than 5 times/night, etc. He also believes that sex that is not for procreation is wrong, though I don't think technically it's defined as misconduct, but it increases attachment, same with masturbation. No sex with people who have taken vows (whether of celibacy, or marriage vows), and that includes dharma students, it turns out, since traditionally students of Buddhism took vows of celibacy for the duration of their study. You can read all about Buddhist definitions of sexual misconduct, and get a history of their evolution online at the Berzin Archives. www.berzinarchives.org Some of it is under: Fundamentals of Tibetan Buddhism. There's a history of Buddhist writing on sexual misconduct, which also covers the southern schools.

DhammaDhatu

the Dalai Lama's statements

the Dalai Lama often teaches "lamaism" rather than "Buddhism"

the views of the Dalai Lama often conflict with the Buddha thus, arguably, are not "Buddhist"

DhammaDhatu

in the following sutta, the Buddha did not discourage sexual relations between husband & wife

Husband & wife, both of them
having conviction,
being responsive,
being restrained,
living by the Dhamma,
addressing each other
with loving words:
they benefit in manifold ways.
To them comes bliss.
Their enemies are dejected
when both are in tune in virtue.
Having followed the Dhamma here in this world,
both in tune in precepts & practices,
they delight in the world of the devas,
enjoying the pleasures they desire.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.055.than.html

modanti kāmakāmino’’ti. pañcamaṃ

kama = sensual pleasures

DhammaDhatu

There's a history of Buddhist writing on sexual misconduct...

There is no such thing as a Buddhist "history" about sexual misconduct

When the Buddha first taught his supramundane teachings, these were originally intended for those who had left the household life

"Bhikkhus, these two extremes ought not to be cultivated by one gone forth from the household life. What are the two? There is devotion to indulgence of pleasure in the objects of sensual desire, which is inferior, low, vulgar, ignoble, and leads to no good; and there is devotion to self-torment, which is painful, ignoble and leads to no good.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html

vinlyn

Whatever is considered inappropriate, i.e. adultery, rape, sex with someone who is married, sex with someone under family protection... it depends on the culture, societal norms. It's definitely meant that it should be consensual and there should be no harm in it. All of the precepts are about non-harm/violence, since killing is harmful, stealing is harmful, lying or harsh speech is harmful, inappropriate sexual activity is harmful, and intoxicants lead to breaking the other precepts...

Very good response!

compassionate_warrior

the Dalai Lama's statements

the Dalai Lama often teaches "lamaism" rather than "Buddhism"

the views of the Dalai Lama often conflict with the Buddha thus, arguably, are not "Buddhist"

This has nothing to do with the OP question. A-Road asked for definitions of sexual misconduct, he got a few. We don't know what tradition or school he follows.

There's a history of Buddhist writing on sexual misconduct...

There is no such thing as a Buddhist "history" about sexual misconduct

I didn't say there was. Please re-read my sentence again. :rolleyes:

Jason

Whatever is considered inappropriate, i.e. adultery, rape, sex with someone who is married, sex with someone under family protection... it depends on the culture, societal norms. It's definitely meant that it should be consensual and there should be no harm in it. All of the precepts are about non-harm/violence, since killing is harmful, stealing is harmful, lying or harsh speech is harmful, inappropriate sexual activity is harmful, and intoxicants lead to breaking the other precepts...

I think this is an excellent and precise summary. I've come to a similar understanding myself.

tyloson

@tyloson, You're correct in how it should be interpreted for a monk, but that's not the interpretation for lay practitioners. Lay practitioners are not forbidden from having sex, which you call "fornication", but are not to do any harm in connection with that particular act. Nor is there any prohibition against self-love *cough* or pornography. Again, for a monk yes, for a lay Buddhist no.

This forum is by and large lay Buddhists, and for lay Buddhists. If we were monks, we would have a teacher who has instructed us and to whom we would take our questions!

That's my understanding anyway.

As long as it doesn't become an addiction (which in most cases it does) I suppose porn and masturbation are acceptable.

By the way, fornication is sexual intercourse between two unmarried individuals.

federica

...Which is fine, by most peoples' books.

In my way of thinking, sexual misconduct is anything which compromises a person's sense of personal safety, willingness, dignity or volition.

the do-er, or the done-to.

Even if you decide to swing from a cast-iron chandelier wearing nothing but a pink lurex thong and a lycra spiderman mask, providing it's what you really both want to do - then do it.
Homosexual, bi-sexual, heterosexual. Whatever. If it feels good, do it.
When in doubt - don't.

Simonthepilgrim

the Dalai Lama's statements

the Dalai Lama often teaches "lamaism" rather than "Buddhism"

the views of the Dalai Lama often conflict with the Buddha thus, arguably, are not "Buddhist"

It is always so reassuring to know that we have DD to pontificate on who is or is not b"Buddhist". What will we do when he is banned again for expressing personal views as diktats in the language of antagonism?

Simonthepilgrim

.........................

By the way, fornication is sexual intercourse between two unmarried individuals.

Untrue. Fornication is sexual intercourse; the intervention of social constructs like marriage have nothing to do with it. I think you are confusing it with the original meaning of 'adultery'.

Simonthepilgrim

A public apology to @tyloson. My Shorter Oxford Dictionary (2 vol., 1973) gives: "Voluntary sexual intercourse between a man (strictly, an unmarried man) and an unmarried woman. In Scripture extended to adultery."

Thank you for the PM pointing that out, tyloson. Do you mean that sex outside marriage breaks the precept, in your view?

DhammaDhatu

Main Entry: for·ni·ca·tion
Pronunciation: fr-n-k-shn
Function: noun
: sexual intercourse between two people who are not married to each other

http://www.wordcentral.com/cgi-bin/student?book=Student&va=fornication

Simonthepilgrim

Origin: to have sex with prostitutes.

Simonthepilgrim

Having looked up the etymology (see above), I realise that these discussions about sexual appropriateness have rarely (if ever) addressed the question of prostitution. Has anyone else here had a similar experience to mine when I was stranded at uni in France without money? A couple of weeks working the streets was enough for me, although they did pay for my ticket home.

fivebells

Even if you decide to swing from a cast-iron chandelier wearing nothing but a pink lurex thong and a lycra spiderman mask, providing it's what you really both want to do - then do it.

Your wedding night's going to be interesting.

hermitwin

In the simplest terms, it refers to rape n adultery.

hermitwin

There was a headmaster whose wife was bedridden.
He went to a prostitute weekly.
He went to ask Ajahn Chah whether he was breaking
the 5 precepts.
Ajahn chah said no.

BuckyG

There was a headmaster whose wife was bedridden.
He went to a prostitute weekly.
He went to ask Ajahn Chah whether he was breaking
the 5 precepts.
Ajahn chah said no.

4 real? Would you mind citing a source?

vinlyn

It is always so reassuring to know that we have DD to pontificate on who is or is not b"Buddhist". What will we do when he is banned again for expressing personal views as diktats in the language of antagonism?

Thank goodness he can't excommunicate us! (He can't, can he?)

Dakini

Vincenzi has a nice way of boiling down questions like this to "ahimsa"; if you practice "ahimsa" you don't need to worry about so many details. It keeps things simple.

There was a headmaster whose wife was bedridden.
He went to a prostitute weekly.
He went to ask Ajahn Chah whether he was breaking
the 5 precepts.
Ajahn chah said no.

4 real? Would you mind citing a source?

Bucky, this has to do with the fact that seeing prostitutes was accepted in the Buddhism of yore. I think it used to be considered victimless, a simple transaction. Thinking regarding that has become much more sophisticated since then, so conscientious modern Buddhists acknowledge the abuse and exploitation inherent in the "trade". I wonder if anyone has discussed this with Ajahn Chah. He seems to be sticking to the letter of the "law" rather than the spirit of it.

NOTaGangsta

Just to be safe, the easy way to follow this precepts is by only having sex with your wife or g/f. Avoid the type of sex recommended by pop culture that encourages dirty talk and domination as well.

It's all about the intention.

Sabre

The third precept is "refrain from sexual misconduct". Out of plain curiosity, what exactly defines "sexual misconduct"?

I think the question shouldn't be what defines the precepts, but who defines the precepts. You should be wise enough to set your own boundaries and see why certain sexual behavior is unwise for you personally.

About the first four precepts, it is important to note these are moral precepts. They are there to clear the mind from wrong thinking morally, not sensually. The fifth precept about drugs/alcohol is there mainly to prevent us from breaking these first four. Drinking a beer in itself is of course not immoral, just unskillful and mostly a sensual desire.

Because they moral codes instead of fixed rules they are not that easy to define. Rape and intercourse outside of a marriage are pretty obviously sexual misconduct, but for others pornography might be as well. They see pornography as something done to those girls against their will and don't see it as a morally right thing to do.

Thich Nhat Hanh statement of this precept also includes sexual intercourse without having a solid relationship. I personally think it is very wise way of looking at it. He calls the precept 'True Love'.

True Love

Aware of the suffering caused by sexual misconduct, I am committed to cultivating responsibility and learning ways to protect the safety and integrity of individuals, couples, families, and society. Knowing that sexual desire is not love, and that sexual activity motivated by craving always harms myself as well as others, I am determined not to engage in sexual relations without true love and a deep, long-term commitment made known to my family and friends. 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. Seeing that body and mind are one, I am committed to learning appropriate ways to take care of my sexual energy and cultivating loving kindness, compassion, joy and inclusiveness – which are the four basic elements of true love – for my greater happiness and the greater happiness of others. Practicing true love, we know that we will continue beautifully into the future.

http://www.deerparkmonastery.org/mindfulness-practice/the-five-mindfulness-trainings

Seen like this, masturbation itself is not a morally wrong act. Does that turn it into a skillful act? I don't think so, but I don't think it is 'breaking' one of the five precepts. However, once again, what you would personally consider immoral and unskillful, refrain from that.

As NOTaGangsta wisely said: it is about the intention.

With metta,
Sabre

federica

Even if you decide to swing from a cast-iron chandelier wearing nothing but a pink lurex thong and a lycra spiderman mask, providing it's what you really both want to do - then do it.

Your wedding night's going to be interesting.

Oh, you have noooo idea......

hermitwin, please provide a source for your comment (regarding the headmaster)..... :rolleyes:

federica

There was a headmaster whose wife was bedridden.
He went to a prostitute weekly.
He went to ask Ajahn Chah whether he was breaking
the 5 precepts.
Ajahn chah said no.

4 real? Would you mind citing a source?

....
I wonder if anyone has discussed this with Ajahn Chah. He seems to be sticking to the letter of the "law" rather than the spirit of it.

Let's find out from hermitwin when and where he actually said this first.....

Simonthepilgrim

If you consider TNH's piece on "True Love", I think it becomes clear that marriage is not a 'sine qua non' of this precept. I know of a fair few marriages where there is little or no "True Love": would you consider sexual conduct within such a situation to be according to the precept?

If, as has been suggested, Buddhist morality, as per the Precepts, is situational, marriage in and of itself does not guarantee skillfulness.

being

Of course simon.
I would even go as far as saying, that most of the sexual conduct in this world has very little to do with 'true love' and very much with pure sexual desire.

BuckyG

...I wonder if anyone has discussed this with Ajahn Chah....

I thought he was dead.

Dazzle

I thought he was dead.

He is dead - and I think it was Dakini who made the comment about him and not federica.

andyrobyn

Vincenzi has a nice way of boiling down questions like this to "ahimsa"; if you practice "ahimsa" you don't need to worry about so many details. It keeps things simple.

There was a headmaster whose wife was bedridden.
He went to a prostitute weekly.
He went to ask Ajahn Chah whether he was breaking
the 5 precepts.
Ajahn chah said no.

4 real? Would you mind citing a source?

Bucky, this has to do with the fact that seeing prostitutes was accepted in the Buddhism of yore. I think it used to be considered victimless, a simple transaction. Thinking regarding that has become much more sophisticated since then, so conscientious modern Buddhists acknowledge the abuse and exploitation inherent in the "trade". I wonder if anyone has discussed this with Ajahn Chah. He seems to be sticking to the letter of the "law" rather than the spirit of it.

As much as it would be simpler to have a definitive answer to such a question, often in my experience this is not possible ( which is what makes legislation - which is such a blunt instrument - about activities like prostitution so problematic for societies) .... Most woman I have known who are sex worker here in Australia, have had a history of childhood sexual abuse ... and then so do many other woman I also know who also do not work in the sex industry. Most female sex workers report that their client's are recently seperated or married men. This area always raises lots of questions in my mind and few satisfactory answers whenever I get into discussions about it.

Simonthepilgrim

The women with whom I worked the street of Grenoble rejected the idea that they were "victims" of familial abuse: there was simply more money to be made and too few jobs for the unskilled. They were proud of themselves in a way that taught me more than any of the books on "self esteem". They were supportive of each other and formed a delight-filled community when we all met, both before and after work, at a small cafe/restaurant just behind the city's pompes funebres (undertakers').

compassionate_warrior

@ Simonthepilgrim Might the situation in a town that attracts high-end tourism be different from the scene in average cities or gritty industrial centers? I don't know, just thought I'd ask. Undoubtedly there are women who choose the profession without grim psychological antecedents subconsciously motivating them. But still...how much of a choice is it, if the underlying problem is a) lack of jobs for the unskilled and b) lack of skills, education for women? Men without skills can always work in construction. Not too many women are able to get into that trade, much less survive the harassment that tends to accompany their entry into a male-controlled field. I'd guess that those women in Grenoble would jump at the chance to go to university or learn a trade if it were offered. Or settle into a life of contented domesticity. Life forces difficult or unwanted decisions onto people. Just curious; did any of those women feel she was a victim of her profession? Or were the clients well-mannered? Most women in the profession have to work for expoitive and violent pimps, so your colleagues were fortunate in that regard (sounds like they worked independently). This is far from the norm worldwide.

NOTaGangsta

The Buddha also taught Prostitutes with good karmic roots to stop their profession. Tolerance and acceptance is one thing, being proud one's unwholesome profession is just ignorance and ego. Same goes for crusaders against "harlots" as well, because they are appraoching the whole situation out of anger instead of compassion.

Again, no one is judging anyone or forcing anyone to stop. But when one is ready, someone should step in to convince people to stop their unwholesome choice of living.

"It's for your own good shawty!"

When a drug dealer is happy with their work, do you pat them on the back and happy they are happy?

hermitwin

I think we should keep in mind that sex is a
powerful drive. Sex is not easily accessible to many men.
People in the western world are more liberal towards sex.
If a man needs to satisfy his sexual needs, prostitution
is one outlet. Some would even argue that prostitution
reduces incidence of rape. I dont know how valid that is.

Simonthepilgrim

I think that we, in the West, have had our view of sex distorted by a 'Puritan' ethic so that we see it as bad and dangerous unless restricted by laws and social criticism. For large swathes of our history and elsewhere on the planet, this has not been the prevailing view. As I stood by the tomb of Saint John and looked across to where the great Temple of Artemis/Diana, the virgin mother huntress, once stood, with its sacred groves, I wondered how we had drifted so far in our understanding of the 'holy' nature of the libido.

Many years ago, 1984 to be exact, Bronski Beat released an album called Age of Consent which has, on its inner sleeve, details of the varying ages of 'consent' to legalised homosexual sex across the world - this was removed for the US edition - which demonstrated the arbitrary nature of the idea of an age at which a person can legally agree to sex. It is not some scientifically determined fact; not even as clear, chronologically, as, say, the age of second teeth. As a result, the Precept on sexual behaviour will always be problematical, particularly as we try to untangle what is real and what is only a societal norm.

zendo

Vincenzi has a nice way of boiling down questions like this to "ahimsa"; if you practice "ahimsa" you don't need to worry about so many details. It keeps things simple.

There was a headmaster whose wife was bedridden.
He went to a prostitute weekly.
He went to ask Ajahn Chah whether he was breaking
the 5 precepts.
Ajahn chah said no.

4 real? Would you mind citing a source?

Bucky, this has to do with the fact that seeing prostitutes was accepted in the Buddhism of yore. I think it used to be considered victimless, a simple transaction. Thinking regarding that has become much more sophisticated since then, so conscientious modern Buddhists acknowledge the abuse and exploitation inherent in the "trade". I wonder if anyone has discussed this with Ajahn Chah. He seems to be sticking to the letter of the "law" rather than the spirit of it.

The question Bucky asked was: would you please cite a source for this tale, i.e. where you heard or read it.

I would appreciate that as well.

BuckyG

The third precept is "refrain from sexual misconduct". Out of plain curiosity, what exactly defines "sexual misconduct"?

That's just one translation. The "spirit" of the precepts is non-harm or non-violence. The HEART knows what is harmful/non-violent. Making even a little room in your heart for awareness when reflecting on your sexual behavior will inform you whether or not you are in "violation" of the third precept. I do not think this is the same for all people, but there is probably enough overlap among differing experiences with sexual conduct to advise SOME general ethical guidelines. What these might be is currently beyond me, and I could be wrong. A definitive standard might exist. My suspicion, however, is that if such an absolute or absolutes exist, they are the most effective and the least confusing (at least for members of the "Western" cult of individuality) when applied in concert with the cultivation of heart qualities like loving-kindness (metta), compassion (karuna) and empathy (mudita).

zombiegirl

Some would even argue that prostitution
reduces incidence of rape. I dont know how valid that is.

i wouldn't think so. rape is less about sex than it is about power. but even so, i support legalized prostitution out of compassion to the women. i don't exactly support the profession, but i cannot deny that despite my personal feelings, "the oldest profession in the world" will persist regardless. what concerns me is the safety of sex workers and i can't help but think that if it were legal and regulated, someone like the green river killer probably wouldn't have gotten away with the things he did.

@simon
thank you for sharing your experiences.

fivebells

Any reference to the Green River case demands a link to Neko Case's song about it.

zombiegirl

Any reference to the Green River case demands a link to Neko Case's song about it.

awesome song, fivebells. i've never heard it before. thanks

Dakini

Some would even argue that prostitution
reduces incidence of rape. I dont know how valid that is.

i wouldn't think so. rape is less about sex than it is about power. but even so, i support legalized prostitution out of compassion to the women.

This is an important point, that rape is about power, not sex. So legalizing prostitution doesn't cut down on the incidence of rape. (Wartime rape by the victorious side illustrates this best, perhaps.)

ZG, legalizing prostitution isn't so simple. If you mean by "out of compassion to the women" that women would no longer be arrested, there are other ways of addressing that. Women would still be victimized if prostitution were legalized. men would still want to control such a lucrative profession. We had a thread on legalizing prostitution. Some brief internet research re: legalized prostitution in Nevada revealed that many counties didn't want to have anything to do with legalized prostitution, believing it would attract unsavory elements into their locale (drug users, organized crime). And where prostitution was legalized, the women didn't gain control over their earnings. The law confined them to brothels. They weren't allowed to freelance, and be their own boss. If legal prostitution could be as Simon observed and experienced, then there would probably be fewer objections to it.

DhammaDhatu

Excellent talk here (imo):

http://awakeningtruth.org/audio/Love, Sex, Awakening/Love, Sex, Awakening.mp3