Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
Post Reply
User avatar
Alīno
Posts: 701
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:24 pm

Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by Alīno »

Good morning !
I would like to know, what man or woman is considered as under protection ?

I have a concrete example , if woman is no more with a father of her child, no no more sleeps in the same bed, if officially separated from him, but still living under the same roof. Is this woman concidered under protection ?

What do you think ?

:anjali:
Ajahn Nanadassano (before ordaining) : Venerable Ajahn, what is the bigest error that buddhist do in their practice?
Ajahn Jayasaro : They stop practicing ...
TRobinson465
Posts: 1782
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by TRobinson465 »

Nwad wrote: Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:57 am Good morning !
I would like to know, what man or woman is considered as under protection ?

I have a concrete example , if woman is no more with a father of her child, no no more sleeps in the same bed, if officially separated from him, but still living under the same roof. Is this woman concidered under protection ?

What do you think ?

:anjali:
I would argue with a "possibly" no. A woman who is officially seperated from a prevoius partner doesn't seem like she would have any protection from that partner.

Although I think its best to look at it at her previous partner's POV. If he considers it cheating and would be harmed by this action it would probably count. If he has truly let go and would genuinely entail no suffering from this exchange than it probably doesnt count as under protection. I say this as a fellow unenlightened person tho, i dont think im right about everything. If you want to be totally safe about not accumulating any bad kamma I'd say just stick to the old school recipe of marrying her first.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by SarathW »

I think woman under protection in today's terms could be women under the age of consent. (say 18 years old)
However, this may include any women who depend on someone else such as disabled women, women in prison, women do not have a shelter etc.
The common sense and the certain tribal laws to be applied.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by Kim OHara »

Nwad wrote: Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:57 am Good morning !
I would like to know, what man or woman is considered as under protection ?

I have a concrete example , if woman is no more with a father of her child, no no more sleeps in the same bed, if officially separated from him, but still living under the same roof. Is this woman concidered under protection ?

What do you think ?

:anjali:
I think you should go back to the principles underlying the precept and see how they should most sensibly be applied in your own society.
This site - https://www.urbandharma.org/udharma2/5precepts.html - does that quite well. It says -
Extramarital sex

This is a rather complex issue involving ramifications in emotional, social, and moral fields. The problem is a cause for concern in modern times, especially in the West where materialism has for so long been the philosophy of life.

The third moral precept advises against all forms of sexual misconduct, which include rape, adultery, promiscuity, paraphilia, and sexual perversions. Actually, the Buddhist commentary emphasizes adultery more than anything else, but if we take into account the purpose and intention of the precept, it is clear that the precept is intended to cover all improper behavior with regard to sex. The broadest interpretation even purports to mean abstention from the misuse of the senses. The expression "misuse of the senses" is somewhat vague. It could refer to any morally unwholesome action committed under the influence of sensual desire or to the inability to control one's own senses. In any case there is no doubt that the third precept aims at promoting, among other things, proper sexual behavior and a sense of social decency in a human civilization where monogamy is commonly practiced and self-restraint is a cherished moral value.

For one reason or another, many young people in love are not able to enter into married life as early as they wish. While marriage is still some distance in the future, or even an uncertain quantity, these people enter into relationships, of which sex forms a significant part. This happens not only among adults, who must legally answer to their own conduct, but also among teenagers who are still immature, emotionally unstable, and tend to act in irresponsible ways. Peer pressure and altered moral values are an important contributing factor to the escalation of the problem. The trend toward extramarital sex has become so common that it is now virtually taken for granted. Contubernal arrangements are becoming increasingly popular, and marriage is relegated to a place of insignificance, jeopardizing in the process the sanctity of family life.

In the context of these developments, the third precept becomes all the more relevant and meaningful. Unlike killing, which certain circumstances seem to warrant, there is hardly any plausible excuse for sexual promiscuity, except human weaknesses and inability to restrain the sexual urge. However, there is a distinction between sexual promiscuity and sexual relationship based on mutual trust and commitment, even if the latter were a relationship between two single adults. Thus one may begin to practice the third precept by resolving not to be involved in sexual activities without an earnest intention and serious commitment of both parties. This means that sex should not be consummated merely for the sake of sexuality, but should be performed with full understanding within the people involved and with mutual responsibility for its consequences. A certain level of maturity and emotional stability is necessary to ensure a healthy and productive sexual relationship between two partners. With the realization that there is a better and more noble path to follow than promiscuity, one may see the wisdom of self-restraint and the benefit of establishing a more lasting and meaningful relationship which, rather than impeding one's spiritual progress, may enhance it.
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by DooDoot »

Nwad wrote: Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:57 amWhat do you think ?
I think we should not really be having heedless sexual interactions with others that generally unknowingly lead to suffering &/or addictive enslaving behaviours. In other words, it appears the man and the woman is under the protection of our personal mindfulness & wisdom:
O Bhikkhus. Once upon a time, a bamboo-acrobat set up his pole and called to his pupil, saying, 'Come, my lad, climb the pole and stand on my shoulders', and the pupil did as he was bidden. Then the bamboo-acrobat said to his pupil, 'Now, my lad, you look after me well and I'll look after you. By watching and protecting each other in this way, we will show off our skills, get a good fee, and come down safe from the bamboo pole.'

"At these words, the pupil said to the acrobat, 'Master, it can't be done like that. You look after yourself, Master, and I will look after myself. If we both watch and protect ourselves then we will be able to show off our skills, get a good fee, and come down safe from the bamboo pole.'

"The Blessed One said, 'That was the correct way of practice in that case. In the same way as the pupil spoke to his master, Bhikkhus, when thinking, 'I will protect myself' you must practise satipatthana (be mindful), and when thinking, 'I will protect others' you must also practise satipatthana.'

"O Bhikkhus, protecting oneself, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself. And how does one, in protecting oneself, protect others? By earnest practice, cultivation and development (of satipatthana). In this way, by protecting oneself, one protects others. And how does one, in protecting others, protect oneself? By forbearance, by non-violence, by possessing a heart of metta and compassion. In this way, by protecting others, one protects oneself.

"'I shall protect myself,' with this intention, Bhikkhus, satipatthana should be practised.

"'I shall protect others,' with this intention, Bhikkhus, satipatthana should be practised.

"Protecting oneself, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself."

[S.V.168-169]
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Alīno
Posts: 701
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:24 pm

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by Alīno »

Thank you all for replies !:)

Actually for me, instinctively , it seems like adultery... Because they share the same roof, they have a young children together.
Perhaps it's non respectuous toward to the child more then to the ex-husbend ?
Ajahn Nanadassano (before ordaining) : Venerable Ajahn, what is the bigest error that buddhist do in their practice?
Ajahn Jayasaro : They stop practicing ...
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by dharmacorps »

Besides the guidance the suttas give us, you could review in your mind whether having sex with this woman would be viewed as illicit in any way. Some prefer the translation of the 3rd precept as abstaining from illicit sex.
budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by budo »

I would say it's the woman's virginity was under the father's protection, hence why chastity belts were used all over the world, and dowries paid to insure husbands took over the protector/provider role. In many cultures if a woman lost her virginity before marriage then she was kicked out of the house and would join a brothel.

Keep in mind all of these customs came after the agricultural revolution which led to the rise of private property rights, as agricultural revolution means farming on land and thus the creation of exclusion laws which are the first form of private property rights. Insuring virginity is insuring monogamy which insures that the children will belong to the man (and will not be a bastard child who could betray the father), which in turn will insure that the child will work on the land and for the parents, inherit their private property (farm land), and take care of them in old age. Children were free labour and important for survival both in work and for taking care of aging parents. This is why in first and second world countries you'll still see grandparents living with their kids rather than in a retirement home.

If it wasn't for female virginity at the time, there would be no safeguards to monogamy, no family unit, no safeguards to private property and being taken care of in old age, inheritance of property, etc..

All these religions came after the agricultural revolution, hence they have private property rights as their main laws/rules like "Thou shalt not steal", "do not take what's not given", etc.. followed by "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife". Private Property rights and sex/reproduction go hand in hand.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by chownah »

budo wrote: Sat Nov 17, 2018 10:26 pm I would say it's the woman's virginity was under the father's protection, hence why chastity belts were used all over the world, and dowries paid to insure husbands took over the protector/provider role. In many cultures if a woman lost her virginity before marriage then she was kicked out of the house and would join a brothel.

Keep in mind all of these customs came after the agricultural revolution which led to the rise of private property rights, as agricultural revolution means farming on land and thus the creation of exclusion laws which are the first form of private property rights. Insuring virginity is insuring monogamy which insures that the children will belong to the man (and will not be a bastard child who could betray the father), which in turn will insure that the child will work on the land and for the parents, inherit their private property (farm land), and take care of them in old age. Children were free labour and important for survival both in work and for taking care of aging parents. This is why in first and second world countries you'll still see grandparents living with their kids rather than in a retirement home.

If it wasn't for female virginity at the time, there would be no safeguards to monogamy, no family unit, no safeguards to private property and being taken care of in old age, inheritance of property, etc..

All these religions came after the agricultural revolution, hence they have private property rights as their main laws/rules like "Thou shalt not steal", "do not take what's not given", etc.. followed by "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife". Private Property rights and sex/reproduction go hand in hand.
I think that your post implies that before the "agricultural revolution" humans were not monogamous. I have heard that monogamy resulted from its evolutionary advantage for successful rearing of offspring made difficult by the long gestation period and the several years after birth in which a child is helpless.....a monogamous bond gave better protection and a more secure food supply during reproduction. This all arose before agriculture I think.

chownah
User avatar
Manopubbangama
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2018 4:17 pm
Location: Pennsylvania Route 969 *Europe*

Re: Adultery precept: who is man/woman under protection?

Post by Manopubbangama »

I don't think there is such a thing as a "man under protection."

Women need protection from men because women are physically weaker then men and men are sexually aggressive, especially towards the females of out-group tribal entities.

Womens' virginity has almost always been valued as an asset, and if the family guarded the female until marriage, it would be a primitive insurance policy that the woman was still a virgin.

We may mock these values, but with dying birthrates, high rates of divorce and record unhappiness of females in modern society, not to mention the amount of rape in countries like Sweden, its easy to understand why people without 24+ years of indoctrination happily veer towards these views.

Buddhism is primarily a religion of monks, but while we see in the Pali Canon the Buddha contradicting the racist self-deluded Brahmins who are let astray by their own vanity, he never contradicts or interferes with the family-values system of traditional morality that existed at the time, especially of the ksatriya Nepalese aristocracy, from which he came forth.
Post Reply