Having sex not for procreation

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
Post Reply
luigiman
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:22 am

Having sex not for procreation

Post by luigiman »

This has probably been asked many times before, I’ve tried searching but I haven’t gotten a clear answer.

Does having sex not for procreation (condom, pulling out before ejaculation) violate any precep?
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 9518
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by DooDoot »

The precept is about who you have sex with rather than how or for what reason you have sex.
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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10721
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by Ceisiwr »

luigiman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:01 am This has probably been asked many times before, I’ve tried searching but I haven’t gotten a clear answer.

Does having sex not for procreation (condom, pulling out before ejaculation) violate any precep?
No. That’s very much an abrahamic and Mahāyāna teaching (not sure about the various traditions of Hinduism or Sikhism). That being said, as far as I can tell having one night stands is a violation. As DooDoot said it’s about who you have sex with, so as to minimise harm (bad kamma) in yourself and others. So, no cheating, sex with children, sex with someone else’s partner and so on. If you are to have sex it should be within a loving and committed relationship, married or not, with a consenting adult who isn’t already in a relationship/married. Within that relationship it’s not a violation to use condoms, or to engage in non-procreative sex or foreplay. The Buddha didn’t micromanage laymen’s sex lives like that.

However, some forms of contraception can cause the death of a fertilised egg. This would be a violation of the first precept, as the Buddha was against abortion.

Metta

:)
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
dharmacorps
Posts: 1367
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by dharmacorps »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:58 pm

No. That’s very much an abrahamic and Mahāyāna teaching (not sure about the various traditions of Hinduism or Sikhism).
This is very much so the case. There is no distinction I can remember in the suttas whatsoever of sex for procreation vs recreational sex. Procreative sex good/non-procreative sex bad-- seems like a distinctly Abrahamic thing (actually an obsession really).
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 4016
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by confusedlayman »

DooDoot wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:33 am The precept is about who you have sex with rather than how or for what reason you have sex.
what about dolls? or toys?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 4016
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by confusedlayman »

luigiman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:01 am This has probably been asked many times before, I’ve tried searching but I haven’t gotten a clear answer.

Does having sex not for procreation (condom, pulling out before ejaculation) violate any precep?
have sex for having babies so ur generation continues. all other types dont recommend. celibecy if u really apply wisdom easy.
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10721
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by Ceisiwr »

Greetings confusedlayman,
have sex for having babies so ur generation continues. all other types dont recommend.
That isn’t the Buddha’s teaching.

Metta

:)
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10721
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by Ceisiwr »

confusedlayman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:42 pm
DooDoot wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:33 am The precept is about who you have sex with rather than how or for what reason you have sex.
what about dolls? or toys?
That’s basically masturbation, which isn’t against the 3rd precept for laymen or women.

Metta

:)
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 4016
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by confusedlayman »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:55 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:42 pm
DooDoot wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 11:33 am The precept is about who you have sex with rather than how or for what reason you have sex.
what about dolls? or toys?
That’s basically masturbation, which isn’t against the 3rd precept for laymen or women.

Metta

:)
but still based on wrong view. people with wrong view has only hell and animal realm. what u say of that?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10721
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by Ceisiwr »

confusedlayman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:06 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:55 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:42 pm

what about dolls? or toys?
That’s basically masturbation, which isn’t against the 3rd precept for laymen or women.

Metta

:)
but still based on wrong view. people with wrong view has only hell and animal realm. what u say of that?
If it lead directly to hell the Buddha would have warned against it. Masturbation in of itself isn’t wholesome kamma, but it can be mixed kamma if it’s mutual maturation with a partner. Likewise other types of foreplay, or anal sex.

Metta

:)
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 4016
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by confusedlayman »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:31 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:06 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:55 pm

That’s basically masturbation, which isn’t against the 3rd precept for laymen or women.

Metta

:)
but still based on wrong view. people with wrong view has only hell and animal realm. what u say of that?
If it lead directly to hell the Buddha would have warned against it. Masturbation in of itself isn’t wholesome kamma, but it can be mixed kamma if it’s mutual maturation with a partner. Likewise other types of foreplay, or anal sex.

Metta

:)
u are right. I masturbrate yet i am progression in dhamma but now i am working on breath meditation and next month on contemplastion of feeling. i think if i do that even masterbrate will decrease and go in to history...
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
2600htz
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by 2600htz »

Hi:

1)There are many sets of precepts: you have the 5 precepts, the 8 precepts, the 10 precepts, 227 precepts, etc.

2)You probably are talking about the 5 precepts, in that case, no, it does not count as sexual misconduct. But when you take 8 precepts or more yes, because one is not having sex.

3)The precepts are a protection against the most popular ways people fall into despair, not against every way people fall into despair. For example: You can torture people and still be able to follow the 5 precepts.

Regards.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 10721
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Having sex not for procreation

Post by Ceisiwr »

2600htz
3)The precepts are a protection against the most popular ways people fall into despair, not against every way people fall into despair. For example: You can torture people and still be able to follow the 5 precepts.

Regards.
People don’t just follow the 5 precepts and that’s it. They also adopt kamma, teachings on the 4 directions etc.

Metta

:)
Paññaṃ nappamajjeyya, saccamanurakkheyya, cāgamanubrūheyya, santimeva so sikkheyyā’ti
“One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, cultivate relinquishment and train for peace.”

Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta
Post Reply