Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
A pseudoscientific look at the role of craving, sex, and birth in Buddhism.
Jason
God EmperorArrakis Moderator
The Second Noble Truth focuses on the cause or origination of suffering. The origination of suffering is craving (tahna), which literally means thirst in Pali. More specifically, it is the craving that “leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, and craving for annihilation” that is the underlying cause for suffering (SN 56.11). Craving is likened to an arrow that pierces the heart, and ignorance is likened to a poison that spreads its toxins through desire, passion and ill will (MN 105). As with most Eastern philosophies and religions, Buddhism does not view death as the final end of phenomena. In Buddhism, only Nibbana is said to be the final end of phenomena in regards to the arising and passing away of beings (AN 10.58). As you might be aware, according to the teachings on dependent origination, if there are sufficient conditions present, those conditions with inevitably result in future births (SN 12.35). Along with consciousness, craving plays a vital role in the renewal of beings and the production of future births.
To illustrate how craving could result in future births, the Buddha used a simile in which he compared the sustenance of a flame to that of a being at the time of death. Essentially, a flame burns in dependence on its fuel, and that fuel sustains it. When a flame burns in dependence on wood, for example, the wood sustains that flame. However, when a flame is swept up and carried away by the wind, the fuel of wind sustains that flame until it lands upon a new source of fuel. In the same way, a being at the time of death has the fuel of craving as its sustenance (SN 44.9). The last consciousness of a being at the time of death, with the presence of craving, is the cause for the arising of a new consciousness.
In the human realm, this would be in combination with the union of a healthy sperm and egg, although the Buddha often mentioned various other forms of birth in other realms of existence—none of which are free from suffering. Nevertheless, the Buddha states, “Wherever there is a basis for consciousness, there is support for the establishing of consciousness. When consciousness is established and has come to growth, there is the production of renewed existence” (SN 12.38). Thus, whatever the means of birth, whatever the realm of existence, all beings are fettered by craving to a subjective and conditional existence within a state of continuous change, or as we also might say, arising and ceasing.
To better illustrate this, I would like to make an analogy to a theory introduced by Richard Dawkins in his book The Selfish Gene. There he presents his theory that those genes whose phenotypic effects successfully promote their own propagation will be favourably selected in detriment to their competitors, which is essentially a part of what helps species surive and reproduce. He does not mean that the human gene is actulaly selfish, but rather that it acts as if it were. Craving can also be seen to act in a similar way. If we look at craving as being the cause by which this process happens at the molecular level, we can get an idea of the role that craving plays in realm of rebirth. In this pseudoscientific analogy, the propagation of genes is analogous to becoming and birth in dependent origination, and the cause of this process is craving; in the case of genes, it would be craving in regard for the reproductive success of the organism, or of other organisms containing the same gene, while in the case of beings, it would be craving in regard to the production of renewed existence, or the establishment and growth of consciousness.
The role of sex in this evolutionary process is obvious. Sex is the means by which certain species propagate their genes and reproduce. In our species, there is a combination of sexual drives and feelings of pleasure that help to ensure that this will take place. Sex in and of itself is simply a necessary part of this evolutionary process that has been refined over thousands of years. Where Buddhism differs is that these underlying tendencies and desires are seen to be a cause for the arising of suffering as well. One example of what I mean is that the desire for sex and the enjoyment that often accompanies it can lead to unwholesome acts such as rape. Another example is that these desires can lead to another kind of birth.
In Buddhism, there are basically two kinds of births. The first kind of birth is conventional birth—the union of a healthy sperm and egg, along with the arising of consciousness, or in other words, the appearance of the aggregates. The second kind of birth is the rebirth of beings after death by way of craving—the last consciousness of a being at the time of death, with the presence of craving, being the cause for the arising of a new consciousness in one of the three realms posited by Buddhist cosmology. While Buddhism and science generally agree about the first kind of birth, they generally disagree about the second. Therefore, sex in not inherently a bad thing, but indulging in it may lead to undesriable results.
To illustrate how craving could result in future births, the Buddha used a simile in which he compared the sustenance of a flame to that of a being at the time of death. Essentially, a flame burns in dependence on its fuel, and that fuel sustains it. When a flame burns in dependence on wood, for example, the wood sustains that flame. However, when a flame is swept up and carried away by the wind, the fuel of wind sustains that flame until it lands upon a new source of fuel. In the same way, a being at the time of death has the fuel of craving as its sustenance (SN 44.9). The last consciousness of a being at the time of death, with the presence of craving, is the cause for the arising of a new consciousness.
In the human realm, this would be in combination with the union of a healthy sperm and egg, although the Buddha often mentioned various other forms of birth in other realms of existence—none of which are free from suffering. Nevertheless, the Buddha states, “Wherever there is a basis for consciousness, there is support for the establishing of consciousness. When consciousness is established and has come to growth, there is the production of renewed existence” (SN 12.38). Thus, whatever the means of birth, whatever the realm of existence, all beings are fettered by craving to a subjective and conditional existence within a state of continuous change, or as we also might say, arising and ceasing.
To better illustrate this, I would like to make an analogy to a theory introduced by Richard Dawkins in his book The Selfish Gene. There he presents his theory that those genes whose phenotypic effects successfully promote their own propagation will be favourably selected in detriment to their competitors, which is essentially a part of what helps species surive and reproduce. He does not mean that the human gene is actulaly selfish, but rather that it acts as if it were. Craving can also be seen to act in a similar way. If we look at craving as being the cause by which this process happens at the molecular level, we can get an idea of the role that craving plays in realm of rebirth. In this pseudoscientific analogy, the propagation of genes is analogous to becoming and birth in dependent origination, and the cause of this process is craving; in the case of genes, it would be craving in regard for the reproductive success of the organism, or of other organisms containing the same gene, while in the case of beings, it would be craving in regard to the production of renewed existence, or the establishment and growth of consciousness.
The role of sex in this evolutionary process is obvious. Sex is the means by which certain species propagate their genes and reproduce. In our species, there is a combination of sexual drives and feelings of pleasure that help to ensure that this will take place. Sex in and of itself is simply a necessary part of this evolutionary process that has been refined over thousands of years. Where Buddhism differs is that these underlying tendencies and desires are seen to be a cause for the arising of suffering as well. One example of what I mean is that the desire for sex and the enjoyment that often accompanies it can lead to unwholesome acts such as rape. Another example is that these desires can lead to another kind of birth.
In Buddhism, there are basically two kinds of births. The first kind of birth is conventional birth—the union of a healthy sperm and egg, along with the arising of consciousness, or in other words, the appearance of the aggregates. The second kind of birth is the rebirth of beings after death by way of craving—the last consciousness of a being at the time of death, with the presence of craving, being the cause for the arising of a new consciousness in one of the three realms posited by Buddhist cosmology. While Buddhism and science generally agree about the first kind of birth, they generally disagree about the second. Therefore, sex in not inherently a bad thing, but indulging in it may lead to undesriable results.
0
Comments
...
Men, huh?!?:D :wavey:
As you may already know, my primary focus in regard to the study of Buddhism is the Pali Canon; therefore, I do not feel qualified answering your question from a Mahayana standpoint. I will attempt to answer it, however, utilizing the concepts of rebirth that are utilized in the Pali Canon. In the Pali Canon, there are many instances where the Buddha details how a being can experience rebirth in one of the various realms of existence.
To experience rebirth in the Brahma-world, for example, the method for this is the cultivation of the four brahmaviharas, or the four divine abodes. By cultivating immeasurable mental states of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity one is able to produce the causes and conditions for such a rebirth. Hence, through the cultivation of wholesome and skillful mental states, they are reborn in the Brahma-world.
Therefore, my initial assuption in regard to the Mahayana notion of continued rebirth through "not being selfish" is based upon the idea that they are able to do so through the cultivation of wholesome and skillful mental states. That does not mean, however, that such a being is born without any defilements. In addition, rebirth is not contingent solely upon selfish desires, but craving and the results of action, whether skillful or unskillful.
Furthermore, I also think that a distinction should be made between the actions and motivations of an average worldling, and the actions and motivations of someone striving along the path. My initial post was primarily focused on the actions and motivations of the former, while your question is focused on the actions and motivations of someone striving along the path. The majority of the latter are said not to indulge in sexual actions.
Jason
This could, perhaps, sum up the middle way between the extremes and, is certainly what I have both tried to live and to teach my children. Having been born and raised in a somewhat unorthodox 'family' (my parents being unmarried, although living together - unusual and marginalising in the English 'professional' classes of the '40s and '50s of the last century), and going to an unusual school (co-educational) for my class, the advent of the contraceptive pill and the Wolfenden Report led many of us into a set of false beliefs. Among these was the erroneous conclusion that sexual licence was not only OK but healthy as well.
The enormous social impact of the dominance of theory in the '20s and '30s by Freudian ideas meant that we learned that 'repression is bad'. I think that we tend to underestimate the extent of the influence of the psychoanalytic and psychotherapy boom all through the 20th century. The "Let It All Hang Out" generation was given permission by this pseudo-science.
At the same time, we inherited a changed world. The decade following the war saw a desperate attempt to recreate order in a society almost destroyed by the thirty years of war. Our parents wanted to reclaim a youth and a stability, however illusory, that appeared to have been taken from them. The attempt was, of course, doomed. There was no going back because whatever there had been before depended on social substructures that no longer existed.
I am not sure that there was more or less sexual activity after the '60s. Historical accounts of wartime promiscuity and pre-war licentiousness suggest not. The activity was, however, more public and more tolerated.
This more overt and permissive attitude brought about a reaction, of course. And very quickly any sense of dialogue or measure was lost between the permissive and the repressive. This why, I believe, neither can be driven by compassion. If they were, they could listen to each other.
Psychotherapy is not entirely wrong. There is such a thing as unhealthy repression just as there is toxic shame. They cause psycho-emotional disturbance, imbalance and illness. In physical medicine, we know that drugs must be titrated and not given in overdose. The same is true in therapy.
When clients came to see me with psycho-sexual problems, much of the recovery (as with most such problems) consisted of regaining control, of being able, once again, to make choices. The process cannot simply end there. The person who can now choose has be offered a range of choices.
When we think we have no choice, we imagine we are tumbling off a cliff. When we think we only have two choices, we are walking along the very edge of that cliff. Only when we notice that we have a vast range of choices can we truly enjoy the view.
In this dialogue, whether it is about sex or about any other aspect of self-will, it is also, as you point out, Jason, about clinging and aversion. It is, in truth, no more nor less important than habits greed or indolence or avarice. When I take Refuge in the Sangha, I am reminding myself of the 'counsels of perfection' and that they are possible to follow. That I may not achieve perfection in following them is no reason to stop trying, any more than a musician stops rehearsing because the piece is not yet perfect. It is also no reason to sink back into the opposite of these counsels.
I think that it important that Buddhism has retained, as central to the structure, a tradition of monasticism that is slowly dying out in Christianity. The fact that there is exist places for 'extremists' who are prepared to go the whole hog and that this is seen as laudable by the community at large are vital in creating role models of potential excellence.
For the householder, the family person, the parent, just as in all other areas of potential grasping or aversion, the Middle Way can only exist if strung, like a tightrope between the two extremes:
(And you last one was fine, too.
And, yes, that is probably a young thing to say. ;-)