Dukkhanirodha wrote:
sensual pleasures cannot coexist with actual progress towards wisdom
Wisdom is the detached awareness and discernment of sensual pleasure (among other things). So obviously sensual pleasure is able to coexist with wisdom.
The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, the uninstructed ordinary person feels
pleasant feelings, painful feelings, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings...
Such does the instructed Noble Disciple also feel. What then is the difference,
the variation, and the distinction between the instructed Noble Disciple and the
uninstructed ordinary person ???
When feeling a pleasant feeling, he (the uninstructed ordinary person) feels it as if attached to it and as
the owner being involved in it.... This, bhikkhus, is called an uninstructed
ordinary person who is attached & clings...
When feeling a pleasant feeling, he (the instructed Noble Disciple) feels it as if detached, remote & alien....
This, bhikkhus, is called a Noble Disciple,... http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/II/Bo ... eeling.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
David N. Snyder wrote:You do not need to permanently abstain from sex, but certainly for the meditation session. One cannot enter jhana unless the five hindrances are put at bay, at least temporarily and for the duration of the meditation session.
I'm glad this topic came up. I've been listening to some talks by Ayya Khema, who puts a lot of emphasis on the jhanas, and she urges her (lay) followers to practice at least twice a day -- a morning session and an evening one. Which made me wonder about the logistics of integrating this into ordinary married life. Dinner...followed by jhana...and then maybe a movie on HBO and later a romp in the sack?
DorjePhurba wrote:Recently someone suggested that a meditator must abstain from sex in order to gain jhanic concentration. I've been reading a lot about jhana lately and have not come across anyone suggesting that. Could anyone shed some light and explain whether the Buddha ever said this?
Its half correct. In a retreat setting, abstain from sex is a must, of course. But for someone who has a daily job and life, its not possible to abstain completely, in this case, sex is discourage but not necessary forbidden.
David N. Snyder wrote:You do not need to permanently abstain from sex, but certainly for the meditation session. One cannot enter jhana unless the five hindrances are put at bay, at least temporarily and for the duration of the meditation session.
I'm glad this topic came up. I've been listening to some talks by Ayya Khema, who puts a lot of emphasis on the jhanas, and she urges her (lay) followers to practice at least twice a day -- a morning session and an evening one. Which made me wonder about the logistics of integrating this into ordinary married life. Dinner...followed by jhana...and then maybe a movie on HBO and later a romp in the sack?
Is this really feasible?
Depends. Attaining jhana is not in and of itself a sign of holiness or spiritual advancement or whatever expression one wishes. It may be a sign of discipline or good merit from past lives. With the lower level jhanas, sex is not out of question, and here we are not talking about compulsive or obsessive sexual behavior. Going up the ladder, however, sex does come across as crude in comparison and one can get stuck in the senuality of jhanas. Again, jhana still does not mean insight nor advancement on the path. Jhana is a tool that needs to be used properly.
>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Dukkhanirodha wrote:
sensual pleasures cannot coexist with actual progress towards wisdom
Wisdom is the detached awareness and discernment of sensual pleasure (among other things). So obviously sensual pleasure is able to coexist with wisdom.
I should rephrase my statement to give a better grasp of what I meant:
The quest for sensual pleasures cannot coexist with actual progress towards wisdom
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli
DorjePhurba wrote:Recently someone suggested that a meditator must abstain from sex in order to gain jhanic concentration. I've been reading a lot about jhana lately and have not come across anyone suggesting that. Could anyone shed some light and explain whether the Buddha ever said this?
Its half correct. In a retreat setting, abstain from sex is a must, of course. But for someone who has a daily job and life, its not possible to abstain completely, in this case, sex is discourage but not necessary forbidden.
why would it be impossible?
No one says it is forbidden or it is not. It is not compatible with attainment of jhanas
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli
The desire for sex is not compatible with the jhanas in the same way that the desire for a new tv or a bowl of ice cream isn't. What makes sex more special than any other physical pleasure or desire? It -is- one that can be a little more potent, but even so, it is not necessarily as potent of a distraction for everyone, and is not what matters weather or not it disturbs meditation-time? I don't see any reason why " Dinner...followed by jhana...and then maybe a movie on HBO and later a romp in the sack?" is unfeasible, provided that the meditator is able to properly drop all strings of sensuality when they sit down to meditate.
The desire for sex is not compatible with the jhanas in the same way that the desire for a new tv or a bowl of ice cream isn't. What makes sex more special than any other physical pleasure or desire? It -is- one that can be a little more potent, but even so, it is not necessarily as potent of a distraction for everyone, and is not what matters weather or not it disturbs meditation-time? I don't see any reason why " Dinner...followed by jhana...and then maybe a movie on HBO and later a romp in the sack?" is unfeasible, provided that the meditator is able to properly drop all strings of sensuality when they sit down to meditate.
You know all of this from direct experience?
>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Yes, though not that exact situation, I don't find sexual activity any more of a hindrance than any other pleasure. Personally I find no correlation between that and the frequency of good meditations, provided that is promptly dropped and does not show up during meditation. I make no claim of fact, but this is my opinion based off of what I've experienced.
But I would not argue against the fact that someone who abstains from sex, as well as other unnecessary pleasures, will probably do better in meditation than the one who doesn't. I'm sure they would, since sensual desires in general are further from their minds.
Kenshou wrote:Yes, though not that exact situation, I don't find sexual activity any more of a hindrance than any other pleasure. Personally I find no correlation between that and the frequency of good meditations, provided that is promptly dropped and does not show up during meditation. I make no claim of fact, but this is my opinion based off of what I've experienced.
But I would not argue against the fact that someone who abstains from sex, as well as other unnecessary pleasures, will probably do better in meditation than the one who doesn't. I'm sure they would, since sensual desires in general are further from their minds.
Broadly, speaking from my own experience, we do not disagree.
>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723