What exactly is "Sexual Misconduct"?

[martinfrank]

I mean law of where you live. In Texas you can marry at a younger age than elsewhere, so you have to abide by the local legislation, wherever you may live. It's not a question of referring to the 5 precepts. The 5 precepts are for those who adhere to Buddhism, the Law is for everyone regardless of Religious persuasion.

1. There is no "law" in the text. And what "law" could there have been at the time of Lord Buddha to refer to? Do you know of another place in the Discourses where Lord Buddha is referring to "the law" meaning the legal system of the location?

Try in the Parajika rule on theft where the law of the land is referenced and a minister is consulted.

I read through the Parajika rule regarding theft and didn't find a reference to a "law". Kindly give a quote where "the law of the land is referenced"!

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

Are you therefore telling us that you are quite happy to break the law where you live because the Buddha has not specifically stated it is appropriate and right to adhere to such Law? Really??
Right......

[Nicolas]

TheNoBSBuddhist: What is so surprising about that? The law of the land is unjust in many places. For example, many gay couples in the world cannot marry because of the law of their country.

[martinfrank]

TheNoBSBuddhist: What is so surprising about that? The law of the land is unjust in many places. For example, many gay couples in the world cannot marry because of the law of their country.

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

TheNoBSBuddhist: What is so surprising about that? The law of the land is unjust in many places. For example, many gay couples in the world cannot marry because of the law of their country.

I'm sorry, first of all, I wasn't talking to you - secondly - You have completely missed the point: if it homosexuals cannot marry because of the law in their country - then they don't marry! The law may be foolish, but they cannot break it, because nobody will marry them! You can't break the law by getting married, if the law states you can't get married! Whether the law is correct or not, is utterly irrelevant, but I see martinfrank has avoided responding. So until he does, your argument is the one I have responded to, even though it is a completely separate issue and off topic.

[martinfrank]

TheNoBSBuddhist: What is so surprising about that? The law of the land is unjust in many places. For example, many gay couples in the world cannot marry because of the law of their country.

I'm sorry, first of all, I wasn't talking to you - secondly - You have completely missed the point: if it homosexuals cannot marry because of the law in their country - then they don't marry! The law may be foolish, but they cannot break it, because nobody will marry them! You can't break the law by getting married, if the law states you can't get married! Whether the law is correct or not, is utterly irrelevant, but I see martinfrank has avoided responding. So until he does, your argument is the one I have responded to, even though it is a completely separate issue and off topic.

From Wikipedia:

United States - Main article: Interracial marriage in the United States

Interracial marriage in the United States has been fully legal in all U.S. states since the 1967 Supreme Court decision that deemed anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional, with many states choosing to legalize interracial marriage at much earlier dates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracia ... ted_States

What if you live in one of the many country where it is [for a Muslim] not legal to become a Buddhist?

In the Pali text of AN 10.176 there is no "law of the country", there is only a person threatened to be punished and that person's gender is female.

Here is the translation by Sister Upalavanna and A.D.Jayasundere:

Gives up sexual misbehaviour with those protected by the mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, relations, the clan, protected by the Teaching, with those who have a husband and [are] liable to be punished or even someone who is garlanded at a ceremony. Cunda, one becomes bodily pure in these three ways.

[are] added by me.

http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pit ... ggo-e.html

About Sister Upalavanna http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_Uppalavanna

Maybe women understand better that Lord Buddha tried to protect women.

[Mkoll]

A person breaks the law if they go over the speed limit. And I don't think there has ever been a driver who hasn't gone over the speed limit. It's actually normal for people to drive over the speed limit where I live and everywhere I've ever been. If you drove less than it (followed the law) and you're not a giant truck or bus going up a hill or something, then you'd get honked at, a line of cars would form behind you, etc.

Are you saying going over the speed limit, thus breaking the law, is against the Dhamma, NBSB?

[Nicolas]

TheNoBSBuddhist: I understand you weren't talking to me, but that does not exclude me from commenting on your post :-)
I understand your point; my example was indeed not a good one. Let me use another example: sexual relations among homosexual laypeople. They are still illegal in some countries, but I don't think there are any rules in the Tipitaka forbidding them (in other words, I don't think there is a qualitative distinction between heterosexual and homosexual relations in the Tipitaka).

[mikenz66]

I do tend to agree with the general principle that if one is dedicated to following the precepts one would respect the laws of the jurisdiction where one is living. To me, the point of the precepts is to develop blamelessness, and therefore be unagitated, which is a basic requirement for progress on the Path. Breaking the precepts themselves explicitly, or a local law, tends to lead to agitation and worry, which is the antithesis of the Path.

In my view, the sensible approach is to avoid actions that one suspects are either against the precepts or against the local laws.


Mike

[Nicolas]

[Mkoll]

I do tend to agree with the general principle that if one is dedicated to following the precepts one would respect the laws of the jurisdiction where one is living. To me, the point of the precepts is to develop blamelessness, and therefore be unagitated, which is a basic requirement for progress on the Path. Breaking the precepts themselves explicitly, or a local law, tends to lead to agitation and worry, which is the antithesis of the Path.

In my view, the sensible approach is to avoid actions that one suspects are either against the precepts or against the local laws.


Mike

I'm curious Mike, do you drive? If so, do you always stay under the speed limit? If you go even 1 mph over the speed limit, thus breaking the law, do you get worried and agitated?

[mikenz66]

I do tend to agree with the general principle that if one is dedicated to following the precepts one would respect the laws of the jurisdiction where one is living. To me, the point of the precepts is to develop blamelessness, and therefore be unagitated, which is a basic requirement for progress on the Path. Breaking the precepts themselves explicitly, or a local law, tends to lead to agitation and worry, which is the antithesis of the Path.

In my view, the sensible approach is to avoid actions that one suspects are either against the precepts or against the local laws.


Mike

I'm curious Mike, do you drive? If so, do you always stay under the speed limit? If you go even 1 mph over the speed limit, thus breaking the law, do you get worried and agitated?

Yes, I get agitated when I drive over the speed limit, and so generally try to stick to it. That's exactly the point I'm trying to get across.


Mike

[Mkoll]

Yes, I get agitated when I drive over the speed limit, and so generally try to stick to it. That's exactly the point I'm trying to get across.


Mike

I guess things are different where you live compared to me. Where I live, if I were to drive below the speed limit on most city streets, I would get honked at, tailgated, flipped off, cut right in front of, yelled at, etc. Of course not everyone would do this and it wouldn't happen everywhere, but there would be enough people doing it in enough places to make it a regular occurrence. These displays of hostility toward me would cause much more agitation than driving above the speed limit like everyone else does.

So you see it's the other way around for me.

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

I do tend to agree with the general principle that if one is dedicated to following the precepts one would respect the laws of the jurisdiction where one is living. To me, the point of the precepts is to develop blamelessness, and therefore be unagitated, which is a basic requirement for progress on the Path. Breaking the precepts themselves explicitly, or a local law, tends to lead to agitation and worry, which is the antithesis of the Path.

In my view, the sensible approach is to avoid actions that one suspects are either against the precepts or against the local laws.


Mike

Exactly. And before anyone asks - I don't drive. And when I did drive, The one thing I did (having members of the police force as relatives) was neither speed, nor drive in ways I shouldn't.

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

From Wikipedia:

United States - Main article: Interracial marriage in the United States

Interracial marriage in the United States has been fully legal in all U.S. states since the 1967 Supreme Court decision that deemed anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional, with many states choosing to legalize interracial marriage at much earlier dates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracia ... ted_States

What if you live in one of the many country where it is [for a Muslim] not legal to become a Buddhist?

In the Pali text of AN 10.176 there is no "law of the country", there is only a person threatened to be punished and that person's gender is female.

Here is the translation by Sister Upalavanna and A.D.Jayasundere:

Gives up sexual misbehaviour with those protected by the mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, relations, the clan, protected by the Teaching, with those who have a husband and [are] liable to be punished or even someone who is garlanded at a ceremony. Cunda, one becomes bodily pure in these three ways.

[are] added by me.

http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pit ... ggo-e.html

About Sister Upalavanna http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_Uppalavanna

Maybe women understand better that Lord Buddha tried to protect women.

None of the points you make actually have anything to do with the topic. The topic is 'What exactly is "Sexual Misconduct"?'. I think the points asked by the OP have been addressed. Your arguments regarding 'Laws of the country' are completely irrelevant: I'm not sure whether it's 'smoke and mirrors' argument or a 'strawman' argument. Very possibly a mix of the two. Either way, it doesn't even warrant addressing in any great detail..... I am certain that the Buddha would certainly have intended his followers - whether ordained or otherwwise - to be mindful and law-abiding. Right Intentions and Right Speech and Action would include being virtuous insofar as the local law is concerned. If you have evidence to the opposite, feel free to present it. That is to say, if you think the Buddha, somewhere, advises people that it is perfectly OK to NOT adhere to the Law of the land, I'd like to see it.