November 30, 2018 at 10:16 am #20525
A man and a woman live together but they are not married; the man is a buddhist sympathizer, globally speaking one can say that he’s a controlled person : he has no vices, eats moderatly,rarely drinks alcohol, he’s kind and avoids to do all kind of evil however now and then he pays for sex…it’s an habit coming from his past (before his actual relationship) that he still didn’t get rid off.
Which kind of kammic outcomes might arise from such behavior?
November 30, 2018 at 2:35 pm #20556
Sexual MISCONDUCT is an akusala kamma. That could make one eligible to be born in the apayas.
But having sex is not an akusala kamma. Sex becomes an akusala kamma if it is harmful to the other person(s), i.e., if it is a child, someone else’s partner, etc.
One can have cravings for sex or any other “legitimate” sense pleasures and still can become a Sotapanna.
– One needs to abstain from sex (or any other sense pleasure) to attain the Anagami stage:
November 30, 2018 at 3:29 pm #20560
“someone’s else partner” : are you referring to the female partner of the individual that is paying for sex with other women (streetwoman) ?
November 30, 2018 at 4:10 pm #20563
No. There I was referring to having sex with a person who either is married or is engaged.
The bottom line is whether it will disrupt another relationship.
In dealing with any akusala that is a baseline criterion. If the action harms others, that is bad.
November 30, 2018 at 5:33 pm #20564
“If the action harms others, that is bad.”
Well in my story the only person (in principle…) who may be harmed is the female partner of the guy who is attending the streetwoman – if she finds out about her partner behavior. But supposing that she’ll never find out– then the kammic outcomes for him would be lighter…?
Sorry if I’m insisting but i’m glimpsing certain kammic subtleties which might be interesting to clarify , also because one can find the same subtleties in other situations.
For instance i suspect that the state of mind of the individual before, whilst and after the deed might have some importance in terms of kamma vipaka.For instance: the more he’ll feel unsettled about his deed worse will be the kammic outcomes?
Thank you i’ll stop my quest now and I hope i didn’t disturb someone. Sorry if i did. But on the other hand one shouldn’t do like the ostrich…
November 30, 2018 at 8:47 pm #20566
Let me see whether I get this right.
Case 1: Man (M) lives with woman (W). Out of an old bad habit, M likes to have sex with a prostitute (P) and he pays P for sex. W is not aware of this.
– M is doing an akusala kamma because he can potentially hurt W, if she finds out. Whether W finds out or not, M KNOWS that he is doing something wrong.
Let us consider an imaginary case 2: M having an affair with another married woman (W1). In that case, M could potentially hurt both M and W1’s spouse.
So, the only difference between case 1 and case 2 is that in case 2, he will be doubling up on akusala kamma.
– Just because one has not been caught DOES NOT mean one is not doing a bad kamma. M already knows that M is doing a bad kamma.
You asked: “For instance: the more he’ll feel unsettled about his deed worse will be the kammic outcomes?”
– Yes. M is generating lot of bad vaci sankhara and that adds to bad kamma. Kamma is not just bodily action. Speech and conscious thoughts also contribute.
I emphasize this all the time: One should contemplate on the possible bad consequences of one’s actions: in this case hurting W, and hurting himself too (due to possible breakup with W and associated mental suffering). That will provide incentive to break such bad habits.
December 1, 2018 at 4:45 am #20568
You got it right. Once more: thanks.
December 1, 2018 at 7:40 am #20570y notParticipant
“the more he’ll feel unsettled about his deed worse will be the kammic outcomes?”
This is so. Yet, if he is feeling unsettled, is that not an indication that there already is remorse hidden somewhere? – lying underneath, below the conscious level. And will not the possible kammic outcomes be still worse if he has an altogether wrong view about what is moral – i.e if he feels ‘settled’ in performing the deed, and does it with joy?
I am writing only for the sake of Yeos, so that he may get a fuller answer. I myself will ask no more questions. Contemplating on the possible outcomes of my actions on myself and on others will do for me.
Metta to all
December 1, 2018 at 1:26 pm #20583
“don’t do to others that which you wouldn’t like that others do unto you”
The above is known as having been said by the Christ but it seems that Gautama Buddha also said something similar?
@Lal: “Those with “really covered minds” or moha will have no remorse even. So, indeed it is good that M “feels unsettled”.” This reminds me christian morals…remorse,redemption and salvation.
But of course there is a fondamental difference : in puredhamma underlying remorse,redemption and salvation there is an effort towards the understanding and integration of profound truths; whilst in christianity the major motivation is not to displease a god which will punish you by putting you in hell – the christian apayas made of fire ! And at the right moment that i’m writing the latter it suddenly comes to my mind…:
“The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning, also whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, that too is burning. Burning with what? Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion. I say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs.”
Does the Tipitaka in Sinhala confirms this translation ?
December 1, 2018 at 9:01 pm #20591
Yeos said: “comes to my mind…:
“The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning,..”
The sutta is Adittapariyaya Sutta (SN 35.28):
The sutta is not about a real fire. Most English translations do not provide the real message embedded in the sutta. It is about the “fires in the mind” due to hate, greed, and ignorance.
This “burning up” is called “tāpa” in Pali, and is due to greed, hate, and ignorance. “Ātāpi” means the opposite, “cooling down via getting rid of those defilements”. This is what is meant by “ātāpi sampajānō” in the Satipattana sutta; see, “Mahā Satipatthāna Sutta“.
- When someone can get to the “ātāpi sampajānō” state, one feels calm and “cooled down”; see, “Kāyānupassanā – The Section on Habits (Sampajānapabba)“.
December 1, 2018 at 9:29 pm #20593
I know that the Sutta it’s not about a real fire – it couldn’t be.
I was simply making an analogy, kind of, meaning that christian hell based upon fire rather exists in our plane because of lobha-moha-dosa.
Thanks for Kāyānupassanā link.
December 1, 2018 at 9:06 am #20575
y not said: “Yet, if he is feeling unsettled, is that not an indication that there already is remorse hidden somewhere? – lying underneath, below the conscious level. And will not the possible kammic outcomes be still worse if he has an altogether wrong view about what is moral – i.e if he feels ‘settled’ in performing the deed, and does it with joy?”
That is very true. Those with “really covered minds” or moha will have no remorse even. So, indeed it is good that M “feels unsettled”.
In fact, when one starts on Satipatthana, one may realize that one just did something wrong after-the-fact. But that is still good. Then one makes a determination to “catch it early” next time. That is how one makes progress.
But the point is that it is not enough just to realize that one is doing something wrong. One MUST act on it and at least get the bad habit reduced gradually. Just keep thinking about it is bad.
December 1, 2018 at 10:47 am #20579y notParticipant
In my mind sprang this contrast:
(I have been reflecting on it since my last post):
1) the case of fishermen and hunters, on the one side
2) the case of a man who HAS to step on a cockroach because his wife has gone hysterical at the sight of it, on the other.
In the first case the fishing and hunting is done with moral wrong view, is done with joy and unprompted.
In the second case,the action of the man is done even if he has right moral view (he is compelled), is thus done very reluctantly and is prompted.
Clearly there is much more kammic weight in the first case than in the second.
Thank you Lal
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.