Captivates the Mind of a Man

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by seeker242 » Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:16 am

Pondera wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 5:16 am

Ie. is the core of the sense desire doctrine aimed at relations between men and women?
No. It's just implicating sexual desire as being the strongest sense desire.

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by salayatananirodha » Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:22 am

"Even so, Prince,
whatever speech the Tathāgata knows to be not fact,
not true,
not connected with the goal,
and that is not liked by others,
disagreeable to them,
that speech the Tathāgata does not utter.

And whatever speech a Tathāgata knows to be fact,
true,
but not connected with the goal,
and not liked by others,
disagree- [63] able to them,
neither does the Tathagata utter that speech.

And whatever speeeh the Tathāgata knows to be fact,
true,
connected with the goal,
but not liked by others,
disagreeable to them,
the Tathagata is aware of the right time
for explaining that speech.

Whatever speech the Tathagata knows to be not fact,
not true,
not connected with the goal,
but that is liked by others,
agreeable to them,
that speech the Tathagata does not utter.

And whatever speech the Tathagata knows to be fact,
true,
but not connected with the goal,
yet liked by others,
agreeable to them,
neither does the Tathagata utter that speech.

And whatever speech the Tathagata knows to be fact,
true,
connected with the goal,
and liked by others,
agreeable to them,
the Tathagata is aware of the right time
for explaining that speech.

What is the reason for this?

It is, Prince, that the Tathagata has compassion for creatures."

- MN 58

It must be factual and true (and as well connected with the goal), if it is an accurate translation.
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

santa100
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by santa100 » Sun Aug 12, 2018 2:52 pm

Pondera wrote:As I said; Buddhist’s and Jains were contemporaries. They competed for alms. Your historic understanding of the Buddha’s world is lacking. Here’s an excerpt from the Devadhaha sutta
Your lengthy quote does absolutely nothing to back up your claim. True, some Buddhists and Jains competed for alms, but you claimed the Buddha Himself also carried out this low act and you provided nothing to back that up. So, with nothing to back that up, you're still slandering the Buddha with your ignorant statement below:
Pondera wrote:Then again, he did seem to be in a constant contest with the Jains for the right to alms food.

User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Pondera » Sun Aug 12, 2018 5:16 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 2:52 pm
Pondera wrote:As I said; Buddhist’s and Jains were contemporaries. They competed for alms. Your historic understanding of the Buddha’s world is lacking. Here’s an excerpt from the Devadhaha sutta
Your lengthy quote does absolutely nothing to back up your claim. True, some Buddhists and Jains competed for alms, but you claimed the Buddha Himself also carried out this low act and you provided nothing to back that up. So, with nothing to back that up, you're still slandering the Buddha with your ignorant statement below:
Pondera wrote:Then again, he did seem to be in a constant contest with the Jains for the right to alms food.
No. You’re right. The Buddha himself may not have been included in any competitions for alms. He would have acquired them by his own merit. My main point anyway was that “Buddhists” in general competed for alms with other religious sects.

You, on the other hand, still have to account for your wild conclusions regarding the sutta in this thread. So tell me again where in the sutta there is a hint that the Buddha was referring to dead bodies, children, beasts - etc. ?
Four simple meditations on earth, water, fire, and wind - leading to tranquility and pleasure, equanimity and peacehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1G3qI6G ... sp=sharing

User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Pondera » Sun Aug 12, 2018 5:19 pm

salayatananirodha wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:22 am
"Even so, Prince,
whatever speech the Tathāgata knows to be not fact,
not true,
not connected with the goal,
and that is not liked by others,
disagreeable to them,
that speech the Tathāgata does not utter.

And whatever speech a Tathāgata knows to be fact,
true,
but not connected with the goal,
and not liked by others,
disagree- [63] able to them,
neither does the Tathagata utter that speech.

And whatever speeeh the Tathāgata knows to be fact,
true,
connected with the goal,
but not liked by others,
disagreeable to them,
the Tathagata is aware of the right time
for explaining that speech.

Whatever speech the Tathagata knows to be not fact,
not true,
not connected with the goal,
but that is liked by others,
agreeable to them,
that speech the Tathagata does not utter.

And whatever speech the Tathagata knows to be fact,
true,
but not connected with the goal,
yet liked by others,
agreeable to them,
neither does the Tathagata utter that speech.

And whatever speech the Tathagata knows to be fact,
true,
connected with the goal,
and liked by others,
agreeable to them,
the Tathagata is aware of the right time
for explaining that speech.

What is the reason for this?

It is, Prince, that the Tathagata has compassion for creatures."

- MN 58

It must be factual and true (and as well connected with the goal), if it is an accurate translation.
I’d like to think the same thing too. However, we’d have to rewrite the book on how we imagine homosexual attraction works. Better yet - get the opinion of someone who is more attracted to the same sex than the opposite.
Four simple meditations on earth, water, fire, and wind - leading to tranquility and pleasure, equanimity and peacehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1G3qI6G ... sp=sharing

santa100
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by santa100 » Sun Aug 12, 2018 5:27 pm

Pondera wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 5:16 pm
No. You’re right. The Buddha himself may not have been included in any competitions for alms. He would have acquired them by his own merit. My main point anyway was that “Buddhists” in general competed for alms with other religious sects.

You, on the other hand, still have to account for your wild conclusions regarding the sutta in this thread. So tell me again where in the sutta there is a hint that the Buddha was referring to dead bodies, children, beasts - etc. ?
Thank you for admitting your fault in slandering the Buddha. Regarding the "hint" of AN 1.1-10, I already addressed this exact point thru a series of questions that you never replied:
Regardlesss of your object of interest: an opposite sex if you're heterosexual, same sex if your a homo, both sexes if you're a bi, inanimated objects if you're a fetish,...on and on and on with an endless list and innumerable forms, do you expect the Buddha to waste all his time to exhaustively factor in every single one of them?
In this specific case, ask yourself whether your literal approach to AN 1.1-10 help propagating the Buddha's teaching to non-heterosexual folks? Did you distribute the Dhamma elixir to everyone or only to those who fit your literal interpretation?

User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Pondera » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:17 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 5:27 pm
Pondera wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 5:16 pm
No. You’re right. The Buddha himself may not have been included in any competitions for alms. He would have acquired them by his own merit. My main point anyway was that “Buddhists” in general competed for alms with other religious sects.

You, on the other hand, still have to account for your wild conclusions regarding the sutta in this thread. So tell me again where in the sutta there is a hint that the Buddha was referring to dead bodies, children, beasts - etc. ?
Thank you for admitting your fault in slandering the Buddha.
No worries
Regarding the "hint" of AN 1.1-10, I already addressed this exact point thru a series of questions that you never replied:
Regardlesss of your object of interest: an opposite sex if you're heterosexual, same sex if your a homo, both sexes if you're a bi, inanimated objects if you're a fetish,...on and on and on with an endless list and innumerable forms, do you expect the Buddha to waste all his time to exhaustively factor in every single one of them?
Yes, I do expect the Buddha to exhaustively list each and every persuasion if it is applicable. This sutta is very straightforward - it deals with men obsessing over women and women obsessing over men. No mention of children, beasts, or dead people. THAT was entirely invented by your dissatisfaction with the sutta. It is simply not in there.
In this specific case, ask yourself whether your literal approach to AN 1.1-10 help propagating the Buddha's teaching to non-heterosexual folks? Did you distribute the Dhamma elixir to everyone or only to those who fit your literal interpretation?
Quite obviously, it does not propogate the teaching to queer folk. And the real question is not “how do we make this more appealing to queer folk?” - it’s “why is the Buddha only addressing heterosexual folk?”
Four simple meditations on earth, water, fire, and wind - leading to tranquility and pleasure, equanimity and peacehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1G3qI6G ... sp=sharing

User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Pondera » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:54 pm

The Buddha can’t be wrong - therefore even queer men and women find the opposite sex more attractive despite their choice in life style (which goes against every grain of truth that people believe today regarding gender, choice and sexuality).

The Buddha didn’t lie - therefore his concerns about his religious community are in no way connected with his Dhamma and whether or not it solicits the faith of lay people.

So if the Buddha isn’t wrong, then here is something odd about queer folk. And if the Buddha didn’t lie to get the support of the laity, then the truth of his statements are for the sake of his Dhamma.

Or if that’s too hard to swallow, then you can take santa100’s way out.
Four simple meditations on earth, water, fire, and wind - leading to tranquility and pleasure, equanimity and peacehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1G3qI6G ... sp=sharing

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16476
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by mikenz66 » Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:48 pm

Personal attacks removed.

:focus:

Mike

santa100
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by santa100 » Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:50 pm

Pondera wrote:even queer men and women find the opposite sex more attractive despite their choice in life style (which goes against every grain of truth that people believe today regarding gender, choice and sexuality).

...quite obviously, it does not propogate the teaching to queer folk.

...then here is something odd about queer folk.
Smell like bigotry and homophobia there. Please do provide backup evidence and literature for the claim above, otherwise there's no shame in recanting it. I do have to remind you that there's no place for bigotry and homophobia here on DW forum.

perkele
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by perkele » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:07 pm

I see no homophobia or bigotry here. In my eyes these are perfectly reasonable logical deductions. But you two obviously disagree about the premises.

I think it should be possible to challenge the opponent's premises without resorting to condescension and insults or crying "slander".

I had actually the very same questions in my mind at some point, based on the same assumptions of the Buddha always stating the absolute definite truth and not leaving out any potentially important variations. So I find it interesting to find them formulated here so clearly in a questioning way.

The Buddha was very thorough in iterating through many exhaustive lists of possibilities of all kinds of things and relationships in the world throughout the suttas.
even queer men and women find the opposite sex more attractive despite their choice in life style (which goes against every grain of truth that people believe today regarding gender, choice and sexuality).
This conclusion is doubtful to me, but it at least seems like a natural assumption to me that beings of both genders have an innate at least latent sexual attraction to those of the same species but opposite gender, simply due to their biology, which might be overridden however by other factors. But of course that's nothing I can decisively assert based only on my personal experience. Nothing I am really much interested in at this point either. But I can understand the OP's deductions based on his premises.

My assumption at this point is that these absolutist premises are wrong and the Buddha did leave out variations like homosexuality and bisexuality and only mentioned the most common cases. He did only speak to heterosexuals here because they are the most common case.

I also believe it is perfectly possible for us to intentionally develop lust for the same gender or the opposite gender or any kind of thing (as also evidenced by some stories in the suttas), at least to an extent, against our accustomed or innate preference. Similar like we can develop a liking for cigarettes or alcohol or other things that are instinctively abhorrent at first taste. But I guess with regards to sexual attraction these preferences may be influenced by much more subtle and subconscious social dynamics in our upbringing or processing of possibly unusual experiences or whatever. I think it is to a certain extent due to intentional conditioning that we can willingly manipulate, perhaps to a greater extent due to unintentional conditioning that we went through in this life, but probably to a much greater extent to conditioning from previous lives which we cannot easily change or overcome in this life.

If I recall correctly there is mention in the suttas of practicing to see the unattractive in the attractive and vice-versa, and I think I have heard it stated by Ajahn Martin that this practice is perfected by anagamis.

Just some thoughts from my angle. But I think the OP's thoughts are perfectly reasonable based on his premises. I just think the premises are slightly wrong and the Buddha omitted less common cases in his iterations here.

User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Pondera » Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:18 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:50 pm
Pondera wrote:even queer men and women find the opposite sex more attractive despite their choice in life style (which goes against every grain of truth that people believe today regarding gender, choice and sexuality).

...quite obviously, it does not propogate the teaching to queer folk.

...then here is something odd about queer folk.
Smell like bigotry and homophobia there. Please do provide backup evidence and literature for the claim above, otherwise there's no shame in recanting it. I do have to remind you that there's no place for bigotry and homophobia here on DW forum.
Sorry pal; those are my opinions based on the sutta. Not gunna delve into literature to prove a point as obvious as the one I’m making. You call it homophobia, but the sutta clearly states eg. men are most attracted to women and eg. women are most attracted to men.

I personally believe this is false in the case of homosexual people. So I’m not advocating any form of bigotry or homophobia. If anything, I’m saying there’s a good chance the Buddha is wrong about this issue. Or there is some kind of discrepancy here. And furthermore I don’t buy your solution as a way out. The sutta simply doesn’t allow for it.

Best wishes. I must go back to work now. Thank you perkele for your voice of reason.
Four simple meditations on earth, water, fire, and wind - leading to tranquility and pleasure, equanimity and peacehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1G3qI6G ... sp=sharing

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 4227
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Rubber Forest, Phrao, Chiangmai

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Dhammanando » Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:24 am

Pondera wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:17 pm
Yes, I do expect the Buddha to exhaustively list each and every persuasion if it is applicable. This sutta is very straightforward - it deals with men obsessing over women and women obsessing over men. No mention of children, beasts, or dead people. THAT was entirely invented by your dissatisfaction with the sutta. It is simply not in there.
When the third precept is expounded in the suttas it is done by listing the classes of women with whom a man should not have sexual relations. Not only is there no discussion of what observance of the precept would mean for men of non-heterosexual orientation, there isn't even anything said about how a heterosexual woman should observe the precept. Would you conclude from this that kāmesu micchācārā is an impossibility for a woman?

santa100
Posts: 3139
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by santa100 » Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:46 am

Pondera wrote:Sorry pal; those are my opinions based on the sutta. Not gunna delve into literature to prove a point as obvious as the one I’m making. You call it homophobia, but the sutta clearly states eg. men are most attracted to women and eg. women are most attracted to men.
Then apparently you've read the sutta wrong for there's nothing obvious about your statement below. You're not gonna delve into literature simply because there's no literature that could support your astounding claim:
Pondera wrote:even queer men and women find the opposite sex more attractive despite their choice in life style (which goes against every grain of truth that people believe today regarding gender, choice and sexuality).
I strongly believe the above statement has all the smell of a bigoted homophobic mind. And even if it wasn't the case, at the very least, you have shut the door in the LGBTQ's face and prevented the beautiful AN 1.1-10 teaching from reaching out to other communities.
Last edited by santa100 on Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Captivates the Mind of a Man

Post by Pondera » Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:52 am

Dhammanando wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:24 am
Pondera wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:17 pm
Yes, I do expect the Buddha to exhaustively list each and every persuasion if it is applicable. This sutta is very straightforward - it deals with men obsessing over women and women obsessing over men. No mention of children, beasts, or dead people. THAT was entirely invented by your dissatisfaction with the sutta. It is simply not in there.
When the third precept is expounded in the suttas it is done by listing the classes of women with whom a man should not have sexual relations. Not only is there no discussion of what observance of the precept would mean for men of non-heterosexual orientation, there isn't even anything said about how a heterosexual woman should observe the precept. Would you conclude from this that kāmesu micchācārā is an impossibility for a woman?
I’ll just be straightforward here. I looked up the Pali words italicized and my answer is “No. I would not conclude that wrongful sexual relations are impossible for a woman - even if such matters are not expounded upon by the Buddha.”
Four simple meditations on earth, water, fire, and wind - leading to tranquility and pleasure, equanimity and peacehttps://drive.google.com/file/d/1G3qI6G ... sp=sharing

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bundokji, hermitwin, Majestic-12 [Bot], SarathW, Volovsky, Yahoo [Bot] and 100 guests