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?
Having sex not for procreation
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
-
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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).
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: Having sex not for procreation
what about dolls? or toys?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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...
Re: Having sex not for procreation
Greetings confusedlayman,
Metta
That isn’t the Buddha’s teaching.have sex for having babies so ur generation continues. all other types dont recommend.
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Having sex not for procreation
That’s basically masturbation, which isn’t against the 3rd precept for laymen or women.
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: Having sex not for procreation
but still based on wrong view. people with wrong view has only hell and animal realm. what u say of that?Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:55 pmThat’s basically masturbation, which isn’t against the 3rd precept for laymen or women.
Metta
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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.confusedlayman wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:06 pmbut still based on wrong view. people with wrong view has only hell and animal realm. what u say of that?
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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...Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:31 pmIf 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.confusedlayman wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:06 pmbut still based on wrong view. people with wrong view has only hell and animal realm. what u say of that?
Metta
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
Re: Having sex not for procreation
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.
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.
Re: Having sex not for procreation
2600htz
Metta
People don’t just follow the 5 precepts and that’s it. They also adopt kamma, teachings on the 4 directions etc.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.
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”