What exactly defines sexual misconduct?

MrAaronch

In the five precepts, what exactly defines sexual misconduct? I'm very curious as to what my limitations are and the reasoning behind the vow.

ThailandTom

Sex outside of a patneriship, sex that is not consensual and on a mutual basis.

vinlyn

I would say sex that causes harm -- emotional or physical -- of any kind.

zenff

When people throw a question back at me it sometimes annoys me.
But I would very much like to do just that right now.

What do you @MrAaronch think is sexual misconduct and where do you draw the line?
It’s your decision, not ours.
The way you really want to live your life is not in a sutra-booklet. It’s in your heart.

Tosh

In the five precepts, what exactly defines sexual misconduct? I'm very curious as to what my limitations are and the reasoning behind the vow.

We can harm a lot of people and ourselves misusing sex (animals too if you're that way inclined; that's mainly for our Welsh members). How are you going to cultivate wisdom when you're harming others or yourself? It will be difficult to get peace of mind to practise.

I agree with the above; it's about not harming anyone.

federica

We can harm a lot of people and ourselves misusing sex (animals too if you're that way inclined; that's mainly for our Welsh members).

:eek: :eek2: :rolleyes:

federica

"One conducts oneself wrongly in matters of sex;
one has intercourse with those under the protection of father, mother, brother, sister, relatives or clan, or of their religious community;
or with those promised to someone else,
protected by law,
and even with those betrothed with a garland"
(Book of Tens, Anguttara Nikaya, X, 206).

Those 'under the protection of....' would be handicapped people, those not of a mental capacity to be able to make decisions for themselves, or those who will be or have been ordained.
Promised to someone else, are those who have had legal arrangements made for a marriage (engaged couples)
Protected by law, would be children or minors, and confined prisoners, unable to decline.
and even with those betrothed with a garland, are those who have simply made an unofficial promise themselves to another (those simply in a current relationship).

Personal interpretation of the 4th precept would be that sexual misconduct means anything that compromises a person's free will, safety dignity and conscience.
This is broadly accepted to be a good definition for modern times, in addition to the Buddha's own clarification of the matter.

And by the way - at no point anywhere, does the Buddha ever illustrate that homosexuality is wrong, unacceptable or to be condemned.

If you come across such a teaching it has more than likely, been added at a later time, and is more doctrinal.

However, as @zenff points out, the rubber hits the road when you are confronted with the potential experience. The way you choose, is up to you.
Just remember the consequences are, too....

federica

Man, how many times have we had this question...?

"One conducts oneself wrongly in matters of sex;
one has intercourse with those under the protection of father, mother, brother, sister, relatives or clan, or of their religious community;
or with those promised to someone else,
protected by law,
and even with those betrothed with a garland"
(Book of Tens, Anguttara Nikaya, X, 206).

Those 'under the protection of....' would be handicapped people, those not of a mental capacity to be able to make decisions for themselves, or those who will be or have been ordained.
Promised to someone else, are those who have had legal arrangements made for a marriage (engaged couples)
Protected by law, would be children or minors, and confined prisoners, unable to decline.
and even with those betrothed with a garland, are those who have simply made an unofficial promise themselves to another (those simply in a current relationship).

Personal interpretation of the 4th precept would be that sexual misconduct means anything that compromises a person's free will, safety dignity and conscience.
This is broadly accepted to be a good definition for modern times, in addition to the Buddha's own clarification of the matter.

And by the way - at no point anywhere, does the Buddha ever illustrate that homosexuality is wrong, unacceptable or to be condemned.

If you come across such a teaching it has more than likely, been added at a later time, and is more doctrinal.

However, as @zenff points out, the rubber hits the road when you are confronted with the potential experience. The way you choose, is up to you.
Just remember the consequences are, too....

this thread was also posted recently,

And also here.

DairyLama

I would say sex that causes harm -- emotional or physical -- of any kind.

Yes, and I think the principle of non-harm is one that runs through all the precepts. Additionally the precepts encourage behaviour that supports Buddhist practice.

Cinorjer

You know, one of the great points about Buddhism is that we don't exactly define anything. Also one of the most frustrating ones, I suppose. Credit where it's due.

When it comes to sin, everyone is a lawyer. Give me an exact definition of any no-no behavior and I'll immediately look for a loophole or exception, and probably will find one, if I have to stand on one leg and squint real hard.

Then eventually that exception or loophole gets closed and the process continues, while perfectly fine behavior gets trapped inside the rule just in case.

So I just use, "Is this taking advantage of someone or breaking a trust?" and go from there. You might have different guidelines.

Jason

Here's something I wrote about it a while back, if you're interested:

The five precepts are the basic training rules all Buddhists are encouraged to observe to the best of their ability. They constitute the basic level of virtue the Buddha advises is necessary for the peace of mind conducive to a successful practice, especially in regard to meditation, and they are seen as gifts "that are not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and are unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & priests" (AN 8.39). While most of them are fairly straightforward, the third needs a bit more explanation seeing as it's somewhat vague.

To begin with, it should be made clear that the precepts aren't equivalent to commandments in that they're training rules that are voluntarily undertaken rather than edicts or commands dictated by a higher power and/or authority. In essence, these precepts are undertaken to protect oneself, as well as others, from the results of unskillful actions. Actions are considered unskillful when they arise out of the mental defilements of greed, hatred, and delusion and lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both (MN 61).

In regard to Buddhist sexual ethics, the third precept states: "I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct." This, of course, will naturally lead one to the question, What is the definition of sexual misconduct? To answer that question, however, we must take into account the other four precepts. The five precepts are an integrated whole, and each precept helps to support the others. The other four precepts are (1) to refrain from harming living beings, (2) to refrain from taking what's not given, (3) to refrain from false speech, and (4) to refrain from taking intoxicants that lead to carelessness.

Therefore, generally speaking, we can say that sexual misconduct consists of any sexual conduct that involves violence, manipulation, and/or deceit, and it specifically includes sex with "those who are protected by their mothers, their fathers, their brothers, their sisters, their relatives, or their Dhamma [i.e., monastics who have taken vows of celibacy]; those with husbands [or wives], those who entail punishments [i.e., those protected by law, such as if they're underage], or even those crowned with flowers by another man [i.e., engaged]" (MN 41). As the Ven. S. Dhammika elaborates:

If we use trickery, emotional blackmail or force to compel someone to have sex with us, then this is sexual misconduct. Adultery is also a form of sexual misconduct because when we marry we promise our spouse that we will be loyal to them. When we commit adultery we break that promise and betray that trust. Sex should be an expression of love and intimacy between two people and when it is it contributes to our mental and emotional well-being.

So, to summarize, from what I've been taught by my teachers, as well as from what I've read in the suttas, sexual misconduct includes any sexual activity that leads to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both, or that involves any person who's already in a committed relationship (e.g., engaged, married, etc.), protected by law (e.g., under age, etc.), or under religious vows entailing celibacy (e.g., monks, nuns, etc.). Hence in Theravada, sex between consenting persons of legal age who aren't already in committed relationships and haven't taken vows of celibacy isn't considered misconduct.

In regard to anal and oral sex, there's a prohibition against sex concerning "inappropriate orifices" (i.e. anal and oral) that can be found in Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosabhasyam, as well as a few other Sarvastivadin texts, but there's no such prohibition found in any Theravadin source. The same goes for masturbation. These were most likely introduced by later commentators such as Vasubandhu.

Personally, I think that a lot of the views concerning marriage and sex are influenced more by cultural, religious and social norms than by any universal constant. And regardless of what any tradition of Buddhism has to say about, I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with sex or masturbation; although I do think that strong sexual desires can cause discomfort in the mind when in deep states of concentration, and can actually make it difficult to develop more refined states of mind in the first place.

federica

@Jason, it seems we're in agreement! I must be picking something up!

ThailandTom

@Jason, it seems we're in agreement! I must be picking something up!

Watch out federica, that red light Alex Trevor was talking about is upon you!!

shays860

heehee, op's picture looks like a lady wearing a corsette with her head down and her back to the camera when you don't know what you're looking at...

MrAaronch

Thank you all for your insight. I just wasn't very sure because I am very new to Buddhism, and @shays860 I freakin know right? lol I needed a good laugh.

Blessings my friends