Stefos wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 31, 2017 7:56 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:42 am
Modern 'family values' did not exist in the Buddha's time, because people did not conceive of the nuclear family the way we do, fairly obviously. Neither did the silly 'sex postivity' one currently finds on the other end of the spectrum.
One can understand that, of course, "modern family values" which are joke by the way due to a LOT of issues with people and their images of the perfect man, woman, child, family, etc.
I asked for Textual sources sir.
Can you provide any for your particular stance please?
I didn't mention a particular stance, other than that the Buddha (obviously) had little to say about modern sexual politics or ideas. I don't really feel like pulling anything up from access to insight because I'm on a mobile device.
Obviously though, if you are looking for Pali sources it is a mostly very dim view of sensual pursuits period, promiscuity would certainly fall under that, but the approach is so different from modern moralizing about it that there is no comparison really. That, and the fact advice on sex for celibate renunciation is obviously it's own deal.
The Buddha In Pali sources takes a negative view of household life period, that ain't no 'family' values.
Mahayana sources are all over the map...so exactly what kind of 'source' are you looking for?
Shore up your own ability to steer the conversation and be specific before complaining about not having sources etc.
"it must be coming from the mouthy mastermind of raunchy rapper, Johnny Dangerous”