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.
Sensual (not sexual) enjoyment?
pyramidsong
Veteran
Hi there,
New to Buddhism. I was inspired to start this thread because I was just enjoying a bowl of peach butterscotch pudding (at least it was vegan
) and it got me wondering- where does Buddhism stand on enjoying things like sweets, music, movies, alcohol, even sex...?
I'm a little confused. Some Buddhists seem to enjoy these things just fine without it compromising their practise, others advocate almost total asceticism and frown upon engaging the senses more than necessary.
Thoughts?
New to Buddhism. I was inspired to start this thread because I was just enjoying a bowl of peach butterscotch pudding (at least it was vegan
) and it got me wondering- where does Buddhism stand on enjoying things like sweets, music, movies, alcohol, even sex...?I'm a little confused. Some Buddhists seem to enjoy these things just fine without it compromising their practise, others advocate almost total asceticism and frown upon engaging the senses more than necessary.
Thoughts?
0
Comments
But it doesn't mean one should start suppressing ones desires. It's much wiser to just be aware of them. As one grows ones level of mindfulness and thus wisdom, the desires become less powerful 'automagically' and one won't need these 'unnecessary pleasures' anymore.
Peach butterscotch pudding!! wow, sounds great!
I have already gained weight just thinking of it!
Bryan
Hello friend.
Practising Renunciation does not mean that we have to shave our head don the robes and go and live in the wilderness. All it means is that we have to change the way our mind reacts to such things in samsara by recognising that these are not a source of happiness but a temporary reduction of suffering, Certainly nothing to pay Inappropriate attention to. Some people find going off and living the solitary life very helpful in order for them to overcome the perceived problem. Im rather comfortable with being in the midst of it as I am always able to pay close attention to the mind and develop stronger mindfullness and renunciation in the process. Paying attention to the sense doors is very important in training the mind, Also It is helpful in order to transform our mundane experience into something very usefull for example if we are temporarily enjoying mundane pleasures of the sense doors and so on we can collect a vast amount of merit by offering it as an unowned offering to the various Buddha's and so on practising in this way is also helpful for increasinf faith in the 3 jewels and it also creates the causes for us to experience pure enjoyments and environments in future lives
To conclude, One can enjoy these things but enjoy them mindfully and do not develop attachment to them.
There is no "buddhist" stance on anything. Most precepts are left intentionally vague for that very reason. What is ok for you isn't necessarily ok for someone else (i.e. most people can have a beer without a problem. some people have a beer and they need 20 more. for the first, alcohol isn't a problem; for the latter, it obviously is). if you're morbidly obese, chances are, you have a problem with food. if you have untold number of STD's, chances are, you have a problem with sex. so on and so forth.
You don't get brownie points for finding the strictest interpretation of the precepts you can find and adhering to them as if they are the word of God.
Dear Cpaul,
I think the precepts are not left, intentionally or otherwise for any reason.
The precepts are clear and precise, no lying, no killing, no stealing, no use of intoxicants (e.g: alcohol) and no sexual misconduct.
The precepts came about when the general discipline of Lord Buddha's disciple decreased to an unacceptable level. Then the precepts are established according to several incidents. That is how all the 200+ precepts are established, by a series of inciting incidents.
Drinking a beer whatever the quantity is a violation of the precept that states no consumption of intoxicants.
No sexual misconduct means being faithful to your wife and not to be promiscuous.
Abiding by the precepts have its own benefits. And violating the precepts have their own effects.
Buddhism is not about strictness. There is no best way of doing anything, for that matter. If you feel being strict is best FOR YOU, than that is great. Don't think that it's THE best, though, or else you are being closed-minded. I would think someone who chooses a less strict interpretation of precepts would respect you and your decision to be strict, and best for you to do the same.
Dear Thejourney,
I'm sorry I don't get what you're trying to say.
The five precepts for lay people are already 'lax' and not considered strict.
These precepts are the basic, fundamental morality of Buddhism and I cannot find how strict abstaining from the simple matters can be.
What I consider as strict is the observance of the eight precepts or the 200+ precepts as monk which is much more stricter than the ordinary 5 precepts laid down by the Lord Buddha to protect us. To protect us from the retribution of breaking the precepts.
For drinking intoxicants however one may refute that drinking a little alcohol will have little effect on himself. The true effects of breaking the precepts, regardless of they were taken as strict or lax will be made known only to whose mind is clear enough to recognize subtle distinctions of karma.
Moreover, I respect your views TheJourney concerning the precepts
Best Wishes,
Exonesion
if you can enjoy chocolate without attachment , its great.
otherwise you will suffer when you crave for chocolate.
the problem is people are used to their lifestyle, it's hard to change.
in our society , who doesnt tell white lies , drink a little alcohol, and kill a few mosquitoes?
KARMA; EVERY ACTION HAS CONSEQUENCES. so unskillful actions will have negative results. of course killing a mosquito is minor compared to killing a person. but it is still killing.
And for the alchol one, i've read several versions that state "No abuse of intoxicants" as opposed to "No use of intoxicants". Abuse in my book is getting drunk, a glass of wine with dinner I don't personally see as a problem.
To start off I'll begin with a quote extracted from a Sunday Dhamma Talk here about the effects of drinking alcohol.
Note: This is an extract from a Sunday Dhamma Talk and it isn't made up by me.
Firstly, in my opinion consuming alcohol is in itself a bad thing regardless the quantity drunk.
However as you had suggest earlier dear Chrysalid that some versions stated the fifth precept as no abuse of intoxicants instead of no intoxicants.
I've had an experience about consuming alcohol prior to meditation a few years back.
One day, I went to celebrate a festive occasion and I decided to drink some alcohol paired along with some food. It was tasty but I've regretted that decision to drink alcohol later at night.
My meditation was a fiasco, I couldn't concentrate. The mind was completely uncontrollable. Meditation before was an enjoyable experience but after drinking alcohol it is like trying to struggle with a powerful being to calm my mind down. It was an extremely unpleasant experience indeed.
If you're keen to experience the effects of alcohol on the mind itself try meditation afterwards.
Note: No offense is again intended, I'm just sharing my experience about drinking alcohol -_-
Being poked up the bum by a screw-driver wielding demon isn't a good reason in my opinion, if it were I'd be a Christian.
Myself, I find that I can't meditate well after eating dinner, or driving for a long time either. It's always a good idea to wait for the effects of something to wear off before trying to meditate, for a glass of wine the time it takes to wear of is about as long as it takes for the sleepiness induced by eating to wear off too. So, for me, it's not a problem.
LOL. I think you'll find that addicts and alcoholics are currently in 'hell' already in this Samsaric life. You think they need further 'hell training'? This almost sounds like a Christian punishment. Did the Buddha teach this?
No offence is intended, and as a recovered alcoholic, I'm just sharing my experience about drinking alcohol; it is a pretty hellish existence and I can't see how it was my fault. My intention wasn't to be an alcoholic, I had very little guidance as a child (my Father was an alcoholic and my childhood family life was something to survive, rather than a place to learn). Being an alkie or an addict isn't a lifestyle choice; it just sort of creeps up on you.
Maybe I am a little angry - my fault I know - but that 'addicts are certain to be reborn in hell' sounds so judgemental rather than karmic; particularly when we've already been there. Still, if that's the Samsaric way, then who am I to argue? ;-)
"In our society..." So, what are we, lemmings? Isn't "But mom, everyone else is doing it" a child's rationale? Isn't Buddhism partly about discipline, living up to a higher morality, rising to the challenge? And also partly about changing society by changing ourselves, embodying the change we want to see happen around us, to paraphrase Ghandi?
My understanding of the "flexibility" in the precepts is not that we can bend the rules to suit our habits or needs, but that if breaking a precept (lying, stealing) serves a higher good, such as saving a life, then one can permit oneself a transgression. But certainly not as a way of life. Many Buddhist teachers have commented that in the West it's difficult for people to follow even the 5 basic precepts, because the West is so into alcohol. I know plenty of people, however, who don't drink, don't lie, don't kill, even mosquitos. It can be done. (The challenge is in finding a way to get rid of the bugs without killing. It's not that difficult. Where there's a will, there's a way. The precepts are to inspire us to cultivate the will and find the way.)
Why is it that the West is so into alcohol, anyway? Most traditional societies around the world only use fermented drinks (usually only very mildly fermented) as a sacrament, taken only in religious ceremonies. The West always seems to overdo things. Tobacco was/is a sacrament in Native American society, but when Europeans arrived, they got hooked on it and then discovered lung cancer. (Yes, and they got Native people hooked on alcohol to disasterous effect. But those who don't want to die young don't drink at all. If they can pull it off in spite of their genetic low resistance to alcohol, for the rest of us it should be a piece of cake. ...so to speak. Here we are back to food again.)
lie a little , not abuse.
have a passionate kiss with your friend's wife, jeez, its not like i had sex with her.
if something is unbeneficial , why engage in a little of it????
many people associate having a good time with a beer or a glass of wine. so it is completely understandable that people find it hard to completely stop taking alcoholic drinks.
and a lie isn't always a bad thing (as if good or bad things actually existed). If lying is the correct thing to do to your knowledge in a set of circumstances, then do it. In that situation, not lying would be the harmful thing, not lying.
Define unbeneficial. I take it enjoyment doesn't count as being a benefit. If that's the case, I guess we shouldn't do anything else in life that we enjoy unless it directly contributes to the path.
Here's another perspective; lay Buddhists don't necessarily take vows (many don't), so they can, and do, enjoy any and all of the above. Others typically take any number of vows from 1-10 of the basic ones. There's no precept against sweets, movies, music or sex, though there's a point about "sexual misconduct". (HHDL says proper sexual conduct includes using only the organs intended for the act (i.e. no oral sex), and no sex during daytime hours. Pretty restrictive. But that didn't come from the Buddha, it came from a later source.) Once you take a vow, you're expected to observe it, unless you have good reason for breaking it (to serve a higher good in some sort of extenuating circumstance). If you can't observe it consistently, don't take the vow. One does have the option of choosing only some of the vows, or only one. They say it's better to observe one vow consistently than to take 5 (or more) vows, but observe them inconsistently. It's about developing discipline.
Yeah. It's pretty harsh for monks and nuns at least.
It also reminds me of the daodejing:
Sounds deafen the ear.
Flavors numb the taste.
Thoughts weaken the mind.
Desires wither the heart.
The Master observes the world
but trusts his inner vision.
He allows things to come and go.
His heart is open as the sky. ch. 12
This was great!
Thanks!
restraint in speech is good,
good is restraint in mind,
everywhere restraint is good;
the bhikkhu everywhere restrained
is from all dukkha free."[/FONT]