Sexuality, Marriage, Promiscuity and the Dharma

[Simon E.]

I hope he remembered all their anniversaries.

[Malcolm]

Buddha for sure supported traditional marriage. For one he himself only took one wife...

No, the Buddha had at least two wives, and according to some sources, three; as well as many mistresses. The Lalitavistara reports he had a wife named Gopa, who was his head wife:

Then indeed, in order to conform to worldly conventions, the Bodhisattva dwelt among 84,000 women and showed himself to partake of the amorous games with pleasure. Among the 84,000 women, the Śākya girl Gopā was consecrated as the foremost wife.

"Traditional" marriage exists in many forms: polygamy, polyandry, monogamy, and everything in between.

It is often said to be Yasodhara. Who was third wife? Gopa was not Rahula's mom, right?

Gopa was the principle wife, Yaśodharā was the mother of Rahula, and Mrigajā was the third wife. There are other sūtras that mention six wives.

The point of this exercise of course is to dispel the notion that the Buddha advocated the "traditional family" based on Western monogamous values.

[Yavana]

Just to add a bit more here, the Abhiniṣkramaṇa-sūtra states that the Buddha had three main wives, Gopa, Yaśodharā, and Mrigajā, as well as 60,000 other wives, that is to say, 20,000 wives as the retinue for the three main wives. Buddha's palace was literally crawling with wives.

This must be why he was so knowledgeable regarding women!

[DGA]

Hi everyone,

I have a multi-faceted question to ask re. sex & the Dharma:

Is sexually moving from one "partner" (bizarre word meaning nothing to me) to another ethical per the Dharma?
I understand about consenting adults, MY being aware of the act, the consequences, etc.
Is this not being promiscuous even if there is a large gap of time between sexual partners?

Also, What place does marriage and a commitment have? Please cite sources if you quote texts.

Thank you,
Stefos

I haven't used it myself, but I've heard positive reports from those who use Bumble. Evidently it helps people get laid.

[Ricky]

There is an elephant in the room..or possibly a panda.

A conflation of Christian ethical stances with Dharma produces problems, but less obviously perhaps, so does a conflation of Confucianism and Dharma.

Let's address the buck deer, then. Pretending that the Buddha would have approved of modern sexual mores or that he didn't preach anything resembling our concept of "family values" to householders is just one more illusion. Not that I'm one to talk. My dedication to Dharma, among other factors, has left me a serial monogamist—but I only have to keep the Diamond Precept.



Just replace the phrase "high school" with the word "college." I'm not going to fool myself, or try to convince others, into thinking this is Brahma conduct, though.

These days, even married women are on the prowl for "new experiences." That's one kind of demon's mouth I steer clear of.

[justsit]

... I've heard positive reports from those who use Bumble. Evidently it helps people get laid.

Only Cishets. Bummer.

[Simon E.]

I notice that the panda was neatly sidestepped...but that's ok.

[Grigoris]

Let's get back to the topic please people.

Thanks!

[Yavana]

The point of this exercise of course is to dispel the notion that the Buddha advocated the "traditional family" based on Western monogamous values.

Okay then, Mahanatma, how should we then live?

[Malcolm]

The point of this exercise of course is to dispel the notion that the Buddha advocated the "traditional family" based on Western monogamous values.

Okay then, Mahanatma, how should we then live?

However you like, as long as it does not harm others.

[Yavana]

The point of this exercise of course is to dispel the notion that the Buddha advocated the "traditional family" based on Western monogamous values.

Okay then, Mahanatma, how should we then live?

However you like, as long as it does not harm others.

It's not so easy as to just passively avoid doing harm, though, is it? We all have obligations and debts of gratitude to take care of in this life—to the Buddha, to society, our nations, our ancestors, and our children. We can't just avoid this world as laypeople—maybe not even as monastics.

[Stefos]

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?

Thank you,
Stefos

[Stefos]

The point of this exercise of course is to dispel the notion that the Buddha advocated the "traditional family" based on Western monogamous values.

Okay then, Mahanatma, how should we then live?

However you like, as long as it does not harm others.

Define "harm others" according to the Sutras please.....I

[Stefos]

No, the Buddha had at least two wives, and according to some sources, three; as well as many mistresses. The Lalitavistara reports he had a wife named Gopa, who was his head wife:

Then indeed, in order to conform to worldly conventions, the Bodhisattva dwelt among 84,000 women and showed himself to partake of the amorous games with pleasure. Among the 84,000 women, the Śākya girl Gopā was consecrated as the foremost wife.

"Traditional" marriage exists in many forms: polygamy, polyandry, monogamy, and everything in between.

It is often said to be Yasodhara. Who was third wife? Gopa was not Rahula's mom, right?

Gopa was the principle wife, Yaśodharā was the mother of Rahula, and Mrigajā was the third wife. There are other sūtras that mention six wives.

The point of this exercise of course is to dispel the notion that the Buddha advocated the "traditional family" based on Western monogamous values.

The Lord Buddha's wives died Malcolm........He was running a concurrent "wife brothel."

You should describe the entire story and the historical context of the Lord Buddha's multiple-wife having.

Stefos

[Stefos]

No thanks, there are enough moralizers who want to deny others their autonomy in Dharma already. We don't have to like others sexual choices, but having 'urgency' about another person's (consensual ) sex life, and offering unsolicited advice is just asinine behavior, period.

I think that there needs to be Sutra support behind your statement sir/ma'am and I clearly asked for that earlier and I see none.

What I mean by "urgency" is that follows of Buddha Dharma, not "modern Buddhism," come to a consensus about what is right action
insofar as sexuality is concerned.

As I stated to Malcolm, Define "hurting others" in the context of sexuality.

Finally, I never "offered unsolicited advise" I merely said........There should be an urgency to define sexual (proper) morality here.

Stefos

[Malcolm]

The Lord Buddha's wives died Malcolm........He was running a concurrent "wife brothel."

Really, you have a sūtra citation for this?

[DGA]

... I've heard positive reports from those who use Bumble. Evidently it helps people get laid.

Only Cishets. Bummer.

Really? That's discouraging. I regret bringing it up.

I was trying to make a larger point, though:

contemporary definitions of "promiscuity" are about as relevant to Dharma practice as contemporary definitions of "traditional marriage" viz. sexuality. It's not helpful to get hung up on this stuff. It seems more helpful, instead, to enjoy life and bring pleasure to others.

[KathyLauren]

I think to discuss this topic meaningfully, you need an idea of frequency. Serial monogamy where one changes partners every month would generally be considered as promiscuous, whereas serial monogamy where one changes partners two or three times in a lifetime would generally not.

Om mani padme hum
Kathy

[Malcolm]

In reality, the Buddha said almost nothing about family life. He said absolutely nothing about monogamy, promiscuity, and so on. Why? These things belong to worldly social customs and really have nothing do with Dharma.

[Johnny Dangerous]

No thanks, there are enough moralizers who want to deny others their autonomy in Dharma already. We don't have to like others sexual choices, but having 'urgency' about another person's (consensual ) sex life, and offering unsolicited advice is just asinine behavior, period.

I think that there needs to be Sutra support behind your statement sir/ma'am and I clearly asked for that earlier and I see none.

What I mean by "urgency" is that follows of Buddha Dharma, not "modern Buddhism," come to a consensus about what is right action
insofar as sexuality is concerned.

As I stated to Malcolm, Define "hurting others" in the context of sexuality.

Finally, I never "offered unsolicited advise" I merely said........There should be an urgency to define sexual (proper) morality here.

Stefos

Naw I'll say what I want without needing to follow your specifications, thanks, not here to make you happy or play into whatever little diatribe you are setting up for. Your OP didn't demand sources, and too bad even if it did, not your call as long as replies are within the ToS.