Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
D1W1
Posts: 428
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 5:52 am

Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by D1W1 » Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:40 pm

Hi all,

If a man has sexual relationship with women who are protected by mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, relative, he is breaking the third precept. How about a man who is protected by his parents, brother, etc. having sex with a woman who is not (so) protected, is the man breaching the third precept? Thanks

dharmacorps
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by dharmacorps » Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:31 pm

Hard to say without more context. Was it in a relationship or more illicit one night stand type thing?

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by lyndon taylor » Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:13 pm

i think the main focus of the precept is in protecting children that are still living with their family, a 25 year old male living with his parents should not be breaking the precept, like wise a 25 year old female living with her parents, IMHO
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

User avatar
LG2V
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:40 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by LG2V » Tue Jan 30, 2018 10:43 pm

I think so. It's generally meant to protect minors or people who are under the support of their parents, who disapprove of such relations. I suppose that one's parents should have a say in one's sex life if they are one's financial support, since children are a natural consequence of (unprotected) sex, and quickly become an additional financial burden. Also, the other issues with minors apply as well.

I think that this applies to parents who dislike their children having sex in general, but also financially supportive parents who approve of certain types of relationships but not others, such as gay and/or interracial dating, or an obnoxious person in particular.
Here are some excellent sites for giving free Dana (Click-Based Donation):
http://freerice.comhttp://greatergood.com/www.ripple.orgwww.thenonprofits.com

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by DooDoot » Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:26 am

D1W1 wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:40 pm
If a man has sexual relationship with women who are protected by mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, relative, he is breaking the third precept. How about a man who is protected by his parents, brother, etc. having sex with a woman who is not (so) protected, is the man breaching the third precept? Thanks
In my opinion, the precept was provided in a cultural & social context, where, as stated in DN 31 & AN 4.55, parents generally arranged the marriage of their children; while their children lived at home.
In five ways, young householder, the parents thus ministered to as the East by their children, show their compassion:
(i) they restrain them from evil,
(ii) they encourage them to do good,
(iii) they train them for a profession,
(iv) they arrange a suitable marriage,
(v) at the proper time they hand over their inheritance to them.

DN 31
Nakula's father said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since Nakula's mother as a young girl was brought to me [to be my wife] when I was just a young boy...."

And Nakula's mother said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since I as a young girl was brought to Nakula's father [to be his wife] when he was just a young boy...

AN 4.55
One day the king asked some wise people, "What shall I do to make my son happy? He seems depressed and sad always." They answered, "Now your son is sixteen years old, why not find him a beautiful girl to marry?"

Life of the Buddha
Also, as said in SN 37.3; the girl left her parents home & lived in the home, family &/or clan of the boy.
The Blessed One addressed the monks from there: “Monks, these five unpleasant things are exceptional to women and are not shared by men. What five?

1. The woman even when young goes to the man's family separated from her relations.

2. Again monks, the woman has a season [menstruation].

3. Again monks, the woman conceives [child & endures pregnancy].

4. Again, monks, the woman gives birth.

5. Again monks, the woman has to attend on the man.

Monks, these are the five unpleasant things exceptional for women, not shared by men.

SN 37.3
So, at a later time, while still young [29 years old], a black-haired young man endowed with the blessings of youth in the first stage of life — and while my parents, unwilling, were crying with tears streaming down their faces — I shaved off my hair & beard, put on the ochre robe and went forth from the home life into homelessness.

MN 26
Understanding Ven. Ratthapala's acquiesence, his father went to his house and, having the floor coated with fresh cow dung, had a great heap of gold & silver made, two great heaps made — one of gold, one of silver — so large that a man standing on the near side could not see a man standing on the far side, just as a man standing on the far side could not see a man standing on the near. Hiding them behind screens, he set out a seat between them, surrounded by a curtain. Addressing Ven. Ratthapala's former wives, he said to them, "Come, daughters-in-law. Adorn yourself in the ornaments that our son, Ratthapala, used to find dear & appealing.

MN 82
In addition, the precept concludes: "This is how one is made pure in three ways by bodily action."

Therefore, if the topic question was spoken in the cultural & social context of the Buddha's time, it would probably be asking: "If a young man from good family has sex with a prostitute, outcast or vagrant, is the young man made pure?".

User avatar
LG2V
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:40 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by LG2V » Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:56 am

DooDoot wrote:
Wed Jan 31, 2018 10:26 am
In my opinion, the precept was provided in a cultural & social context, where, as stated in DN 31 & AN 4.55, parents generally arranged the marriage of their children; while their children lived at home.
In five ways, young householder, the parents thus ministered to as the East by their children, show their compassion:
(i) they restrain them from evil,
(ii) they encourage them to do good,
(iii) they train them for a profession,
(iv) they arrange a suitable marriage,
(v) at the proper time they hand over their inheritance to them.

DN 31
Nakula's father said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since Nakula's mother as a young girl was brought to me [to be my wife] when I was just a young boy...."

And Nakula's mother said to the Blessed One: "Lord, ever since I as a young girl was brought to Nakula's father [to be his wife] when he was just a young boy...

AN 4.55
One day the king asked some wise people, "What shall I do to make my son happy? He seems depressed and sad always." They answered, "Now your son is sixteen years old, why not find him a beautiful girl to marry?"

Life of the Buddha
Also, as said in SN 37.3; the girl left her parents home & lived in the home, family &/or clan of the boy.
The Blessed One addressed the monks from there: “Monks, these five unpleasant things are exceptional to women and are not shared by men. What five?

1. The woman even when young goes to the man's family separated from her relations.

2. Again monks, the woman has a season [menstruation].

3. Again monks, the woman conceives [child & endures pregnancy].

4. Again, monks, the woman gives birth.

5. Again monks, the woman has to attend on the man.

Monks, these are the five unpleasant things exceptional for women, not shared by men.

SN 37.3
So, at a later time, while still young [29 years old], a black-haired young man endowed with the blessings of youth in the first stage of life — and while my parents, unwilling, were crying with tears streaming down their faces — I shaved off my hair & beard, put on the ochre robe and went forth from the home life into homelessness.

MN 26
Understanding Ven. Ratthapala's acquiesence, his father went to his house and, having the floor coated with fresh cow dung, had a great heap of gold & silver made, two great heaps made — one of gold, one of silver — so large that a man standing on the near side could not see a man standing on the far side, just as a man standing on the far side could not see a man standing on the near. Hiding them behind screens, he set out a seat between them, surrounded by a curtain. Addressing Ven. Ratthapala's former wives, he said to them, "Come, daughters-in-law. Adorn yourself in the ornaments that our son, Ratthapala, used to find dear & appealing.

MN 82
In addition, the precept concludes: "This is how one is made pure in three ways by bodily action."

Therefore, if the topic question was spoken in the cultural & social context of the Buddha's time, it would probably be asking: "If a young man from good family has sex with a prostitute, outcast or vagrant, is the young man made pure?".
Good post. I think that prostitution is acceptable as long as it is allowed by the laws of that region.
Here are some excellent sites for giving free Dana (Click-Based Donation):
http://freerice.comhttp://greatergood.com/www.ripple.orgwww.thenonprofits.com

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by lyndon taylor » Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:42 am

If you think the third precept gives you the right to visit prostitutes, I think you're missing the point of sexual misconduct IMHO.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

justindesilva
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by justindesilva » Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:13 am

lyndon taylor wrote:
Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:42 am
If you think the third precept gives you the right to visit prostitutes, I think you're missing the point of sexual misconduct IMHO.
Well , Parabava sutta explains that sexual misconduct degrades life of a person (economically and socially)with the explanation of sexual misconducts as;
being seen among whores and other,s wives.
A person past his youth marrying a wife in teens and sleeping not with her being jealous of her. ( I here presume the age difference
been a hindrance to sexual desires , the man tries to satisfy himself with other women)
A person , who places in authority a woman to drink & squander. ( This is usually seen among men who use drugs and liquor to imbalance
the morals of women by drunkenness)
All the above facts are sexual misconducts while such people always mislead women for their uses in sexual activities.
In fact as a Boy scout during my schooling days , I read in the book Scouting for Boys that Scouts should not even look at somebody's wife
with unnecessary desires.
In fact it is my personnel view that sex is a gift given to ordinary beings ( not only humans) so that the beings are replaced as all beings
perish by nature of impermanence and the earth needs beings replaced for manifestation of energy.
However Agganna sutta explains that humans began to over enjoy the sexual desires which created their own sufferings to increase.
The other point being that sex (Kamaccanda) is a hindrance to meditative practices of those who desire marga phala needs to adhere at least
to the 3rd precept to keep sexual desires in control.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by DooDoot » Thu Feb 01, 2018 11:25 am

justindesilva wrote:
Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:13 am

Parabava Sutta
Thank you. I never read this before.

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by lyndon taylor » Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:26 pm

I don't see how a reasonable Buddhist cannot consider seeing prostitutes as a violation of the sexual misconduct precept.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

User avatar
LG2V
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:40 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by LG2V » Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:07 am

justindesilva wrote:
Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:13 am

Well , Parabava sutta explains that sexual misconduct degrades life of a person (economically and socially)with the explanation of sexual misconducts as;
being seen among whores and other,s wives.
A person past his youth marrying a wife in teens and sleeping not with her being jealous of her. ( I here presume the age difference
been a hindrance to sexual desires , the man tries to satisfy himself with other women)
A person , who places in authority a woman to drink & squander. ( This is usually seen among men who use drugs and liquor to imbalance
the morals of women by drunkenness)
All the above facts are sexual misconducts while such people always mislead women for their uses in sexual activities.
In fact as a Boy scout during my schooling days , I read in the book Scouting for Boys that Scouts should not even look at somebody's wife
with unnecessary desires.
In fact it is my personnel view that sex is a gift given to ordinary beings ( not only humans) so that the beings are replaced as all beings
perish by nature of impermanence and the earth needs beings replaced for manifestation of energy.
However Agganna sutta explains that humans began to over enjoy the sexual desires which created their own sufferings to increase.
The other point being that sex (Kamaccanda) is a hindrance to meditative practices of those who desire marga phala needs to adhere at least
to the 3rd precept to keep sexual desires in control.
If I recall, this sutta refers to worldly downfall, i.e. loss of wealth. It does not necessarily mean the same as ethical kamma which leads to the lower realms, although many of the activities here will do both. For example, sleeping often and gambling are both listed. Neither of these break the five precepts, but nonetheless are not activities conducive to wealth. The same goes for prostitution. After all, it costs money.
lyndon taylor wrote:
Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:26 pm
I don't see how a reasonable Buddhist cannot consider seeing prostitutes as a violation of the sexual misconduct precept.
In my opinion, prostitution is generally consensual sex between two adults, for an agreed upon fee. There's nothing terribly unethical about that. I think that the only case in which it would violate the third precept would be if local laws forbade it.

Many women are not hurt by prostitution at all. In fact, it can often be quite the opposite. It's one of the few industries where someone can start with no training or experience, no prior education, and make six figures, or his/her country's equivalent, each year.
Here are some excellent sites for giving free Dana (Click-Based Donation):
http://freerice.comhttp://greatergood.com/www.ripple.orgwww.thenonprofits.com

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by lyndon taylor » Fri Feb 02, 2018 8:04 am

Men who patronize prostitutes are disgusting, I really find it very hard to believe the Buddha would have anything positive to say about prostitution, hardly a victimless crime, most prostitutes are drug addicts in horribly abusive relationships with their pimps, not to mention child prostitution and trafficking, the happy hooker is really a myth. Prostitutes are in horrible positions in society, supporting that kind of business is just sick IMHO. I'm all for criminalizing the Johns, not the prostitutes.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

D1W1
Posts: 428
Joined: Sat May 30, 2015 5:52 am

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by D1W1 » Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:29 am

Thanks all for the reply.
He is given over to misconduct in sexual desires: he has intercourse with such (women) as are protected by the mother, father, (mother and father), brother, sister, relatives, as have a husband, as entail a penalty, and also with those that are garlanded in token of betrothal.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nymo.html

As we can see, women are the object of transgressions, not men. A man is still protected by parents, goes to the woman and having intercourse with her (not in the list of "prohibited women"), since the object of transgression does not exist, how can we say the man breaking the third precept?

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:18 am

D1W1 wrote:
Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:29 am
As we can see, women are the object of transgressions, not men.
It appears that way. The suttas say "unchasity is the taint in a woman" (Dhp 242; AN 8.15) and condemn the abduction of women for sexual exploitation (DN 16). Obviously, the suttas are concerned about preventing the defilement, degradation & harm of women and the preservation of family lineages; as found historically in India.
D1W1 wrote:
Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:29 am
A man is still protected by parents
Where is this written in the suttas? It appears the sutta emphasise the protection of the sexuality of women, as found in most religions & traditional cultures. The so-called "sexual liberation" of women is only around 50 to 60 years old. You seem to be judging the Buddhist teachings based on 60 years of world history instead of 3,000 years of world history.
D1W1 wrote:
Fri Feb 02, 2018 10:29 am
goes to the woman and having intercourse with her (not in the list of "prohibited women"), since the object of transgression does not exist, how can we say the man breaking the third precept?
As I suggested, there might be a cultural context you might be overlooking.

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: Is this considered a breach of the third precept?

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Sat Feb 03, 2018 6:45 pm

he is encouraging her to break the precept. which is also wrong
um, i think since since the buddha is speaking to monks usually the discourse is about a woman that's why u might interpret things to be kind of misogynistic.
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bundokji, Wizard in the Forest and 7 guests