What? So killing can be done with a mind that does not come from strong aversion but cheating on your spouse or causing another person to cheat on their spouse can only be caused by strong sexual desire?Könchok Thrinley wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:16 amWhile killing somebody or stealing can be imagined being done for the benefit of others and even the victim, I kinda doubt there is any such scenario with rape, or any of the sorts. It is because cheating, rape, etc are caused by a strong sexual desire and by definition there is no space for thinking of how it influence others.TrimePema wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:30 am It was said sex crimes are by definition not done with bodhichitta motivation. but as you said they are actions of body, so they can be either virtuous or not virtuous depending on motivation.
what makes a sex crime different from other actions of body such that they are by definition not done with bodhichitta motivation?
The case with killing and stealing is different, just look at Robin Hood, or the story of the merchant from the sutras. There are no such stories with sexual misconduct anywhere.
My question is about this underlying assumption. What is it that makes negative sexual actions ALWAYS, absolutely, caused by a strong sexual desire?
You might not realize this, but you begged the question with your answer.
I don't think you are right about that. The Buddhas emanated as a copy of Rudra and had sex with his consort in order to give birth to an emanation that could subjugate Rudra.
This is from Patrul Rinpoche's Nine Considerations:
If something would benefit lower beings such as animals but harm higher ones such as humans, do not act for the benefit of the lower. Even if an action would harm some animals, if it would benefit humans and the like, then act for the humans’ benefit. The same principle applies with regard to ordinary people and practitioners of Dharma, and among practitioners, with regard to shravakas and bodhisattvas.
3. Consideration of the number of beings
If many beings would be helped and few harmed, you should act to benefit the many. But if many would be harmed and few helped, do not act. If the numbers and the help and harm would be equal, by relying on teachings of skilful methods of protection from harm, you will succeed in helping.
4. Consideration of this and future lives
If it would benefit others in both this life and those to come, you should act to benefit them, by all means. Whenever it would benefit neither life, you should not act. If it would help in this life but harm in future ones, do not act. Even if it would harm in this life, if it would help in the next, being skilful with methods to protect this life from harm you should act to benefit the next.
Let's do a thought experiment:
With these criteria in mind, which are just the first 4, we can imagine a scenario like this:
There are a large number of Dharma practitioners who need to develop pure vision, as a result they have broken samayas and as a result of that they reside in Vajra Hell and cannot develop pure vision any more at all regarding their teacher
The teacher of those Dharma practitioners sees that there are also other Dharma practitioners who have potential to have very fruitful practice in this lifetime, but not if they are influenced by samaya breakers, but for some reason, these students with potential and without broken samayas are dead-set on being students of said teacher
But the teacher knows the students will only have fruitful practice in this lifetime if they are not influenced by the community's samaya breaking practitioners, so the teacher decides to commit an act that will drive them all away while also displaying to those with broken samayas some kind of lesson about impermanence and precious human birth and the rarity of the teacher and the path and leisures and so on
Now, there are also some students who are attracted to the teacher and mistakenly relate to him on a sexual level and competitive level instead of with pure vision, but unfortunately they do not realize this.
So the teacher decides the best course of action is to: 1) cause the high potential students to find new teachers who do not have students with broken samaya that will influence them. doing this will have a great benefit for innumerable beings because one of those students will become a Buddha in a short number of lifetimes as a result of practicing well in this lifetime 2) break the habits of the students who relate to the teacher sexually and without pure vision by pointing out to them that they are lacking pure vision
so he therefore decides to commit sexual misconduct and essentially get ex-communicated by his own students.
In doing so, he causes the high potential students to realize that the other students have broken samaya, because of how they criticize their teacher, and so those high potential students leave. In the process of doing so, they develop true pure vision and as a result find their teacher who has pure students. Those without pure vision now realize they dont have pure vision, but cannot generate pure vision regarding their teacher because they're in vajra hell. However, due to this, they will have the opportunity to meet some other teachers who will tell them what their teacher did was wrong, and they will begin to see this new teacher as a Buddha because this teacher hasn't done the "naughty thing". So then, since they developed pure vision, they will actually be lifted out of vajra hell.
Totally hypothetical. I don't think that's what happened with Sogyal or SMR. I'm just saying as a thought experiment... in this scenario, committing this sexual misconduct would technically be more beneficial than not doing it.