- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 3 days ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
I saw Lal post that comment in the following thread:
I’m just wondering a few thing from that comment:
1. Can that comment be backed up in the Pali Canon? Just because one does not get bad kamma for multiple wives does not mean it is not immoral. It is almost universally accepted that polygamy is an uncivilized and unusual behavior. It is basically legalized cheating on one’s spouse which is highly immoral. It is totally Stone Age behavior very backwards with no regard for one’s spouse. Total disregard and disrespect and inhumane behavior. Just because a spouse agrees to allow multiple wives does not make it right either. You do not do that to your spouse. Another example is that incest is not karmically a penalty but the Buddha admonished it. Just because it is not a penalty karmically DOES NOT mean it is not IMMORAL : the Buddha said of incest “what does it mean of family of mother of son” or something like that regarding incest which is not karmically a penalty.
2. The Buddha is a symbol of morality and knows more than anyone right from wrong. Thus how could it be that he defined morality based on societal acceptance?
3. I highly disagree that the Buddha defined morality based on societal acceptance. I will prove it backed up by Pali Canon. Morality is scientific in Buddhism. In fact that is one of the definitions of the Dhamma just as Dharma in Hinduism means morality or what is right vs what is wrong and righteousness and virtue. Morality is not based on societal acceptance- this is getting into American political correct speech which is highly rooted in immorality. In certain societies beheading is legal thus does it mean that is moral? No it does not. Some societies take part in cannibalism- does that mean it is not immoral? It is highly immoral. Immorality is defilements. It is scientific. Not societal acceptance. When we abstain from immorality our minds become clearer and gain pathway for insight or enlightenment and wisdom.
We must have right view on immoral behavior like polygamy which is very backwards and antithesis to a civilized society.
-
Hello upekkha! For those who don’t know her, upekkha used to post regularly a few years ago.
Following is my comment on that thread (upekkha referred to):
“It is not about kusala and akusala kamma.
- For a puthujjana to start comprehending Buddha’s teachings, they must first live a “moral life,” where the base level of “morality” is to abide by society’s standards. That is the only “morality” they know. The key point is to have a calm mind to start understanding Buddha Dhamma.
- When a puthujjana engages in an action not approved by society, their minds become agitated, which is not conducive to learning. Thus, if society approves having multiple wives, they don’t need to worry about having multiple wives.
- If the Buddha had started changing societal norms, that would have taken most of his lifetime. Of course, once one becomes serious about attaining Nibbana, it may be better not to have a single wife (i.e., to become a bhikkhu).
- In that context, even keeping slaves was accepted by society at the time of the Buddha. While the Buddha did not consent to that practice (obviously an immoral practice by any standards), he did not try to change it, which would have taken most of his time.
One’s moral values will change as one advances on the Path, but this change cannot be forced in some cases.”
______
I just revised the highlighted sentence to make things a bit more clear.
- Of course, the Buddha would not encourage polygamy or slavery. But those were standard practices in that region in those days.
- As I mentioned above, If the Buddha had started changing societal norms, that would have taken most of his lifetime.
Upekkha asked: “1. Can that comment be backed up in the Pali Canon?”
- Yes. Visaka was a wealthy woman who attained the Sotapanna stage at age seven. She had slaves. Anathapindika was another wealthy Sotapanna who had slaves.
- King Bimbisara was a Sotapanna, too. He had a harem with many women (as was the practice those days.)
- It is hard for us to believe, but those were standard practices.
- There were also instances when the Buddha asked some slaves to become bhikkhus because he saw they could attain magga pahala. No one got in the way in such cases.
Upekkha asked: “2. The Buddha is a symbol of morality and knows more than anyone right from wrong. Thus how could it be that he defined morality based on societal acceptance?”
- The practice of polygamy or keeping slaves is not moral, according to the Buddha.
- But if he started changing societal practices, that would have taken most of his time.
- Instead, people changed their practices over time, even though this probably happened long after the Buddha. Some kings, for example, gave up their harems to become bhikkhus. Rather than forcing morality, teaching how to be moral is better.
Upekkha wrote: “3. I highly disagree that the Buddha defined morality based on societal acceptance.”
- I agree with you. He never defined morality that way, and that should be clear to anyone familiar with Buddha’s teachings.
-
I think it’s ignorant to think that. You say it comes from the Stone Age what defines the Stone Age?? You are putting on Western glasses to judge entire cultures, this is not correct. Polygamy in some societies is a sign of protection. Sometimes a widowed woman chooses to become involved in a polygamous couple to benefit from social and financial security. I will take the example of African societies. The vast majority of men who practice polygamy are wealthy landowners who have the means to provide for several wives and children. Polygamy is a sign of wealth, strength and independence. My grandfather was a polygamist because he had several agricultural properties and could take care of many people. However, at the end of his life, he told his daughter, who is my mother, not to get involved in a polygamous couple and that it is better to have a normal couple. However, saying that people who practice polygamy are immoral is not correct. Are you saying that King Bimbisāra, who is a sotāpanna, and the Bodhisatta were immoral and savage people?? You say this is contrary to a “civilized” society. Tell me what does a civilized society bring that is sustainable and stable in terms of Dhamma?? Does a civilized society produce more ariyas or, on the contrary,, encourage people to get stuck in Kāma loka and end up in apayas?
The society of Lord Buddha will be seen as primitive by materialists today, but, in terms of spiritual levels, it is heaven and earth. The real primitives are found in the apayas. Yet, people these days act like apaya beings to enjoy sensual pleasures. If a primitive society means being without worldly laws and technologies but, being surrounded by ariyas, I will give anything to live there.
-
What I understand Morality and Immorality is that if any thought,speech or action creates Suffering, it’s immoral.
Any action that reduces the suffering without increasing it anywhere else , is moral.
For example If someone commits rape , that person would be feeling pleasure but would be imparting suffering on the other person. Immoral act with lobha
If someone gives something to eat to a poor hungry beggar, it would increase Metta in the givers mind and also reduce hunger/suffering in the other person’s body and mind. Moral act with Alobha
Having multiple partners has a higher tendency of increasing Kama raga in a Puthujana’s mind. That person would be convinced that this is ultimate happiness and must be pursued. That’s for sure.
Let’s take one simple example.
Our Ancestors didn’t have any internet, their lives were very normal and calming as compared to our lives. No pornography, no social media addiction, no drugs , no unnecessary disputes because no strong hate as no strong kama raga, generally.
But an average modern day teenager suffers from such addictions. Why? Because an Ignorant mind is trapped when presented with limitless options for sensuality. But this doesn’t mean that everyone is trapped in this.
Strong minded and wise people use this technology for their benefit and for others benefit.
But the tendency has increased enormously to suffer because of such things.
When the North Korean Soldiers were deployed in Russia few months back, they all got addicted to pornography! They had never seen such a thing before but their ignorant minds instantly got attached to this thing. Weren’t they okay before? No one’s okay, a puthujana would be trapped in this some day when the Asava And Anusuya get triggered.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
It all depends on the minds wisdom level, it’s possible that a sotappana can become a pornstar and have sex with multiple partners, but his mind would know for sure that this is not happiness rather an illusion. It’s a trap. That’s why his mindset won’t go so low that he would be born a preta or an animal. Many pornstars with time especially males, get so into that act that they even do such scenes that are so disgusting, for example drinking saliva of multiple women mixed together !This is the least one. I know about many things that I can’t even mention here. Isn’t that a Preta Gati?
If that person would have been a normal guy with a normal life , his mind may have not went to this level.
It’s all about understanding the truth.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
Yes. What Yash wrote makes sense.
However, I don’t think the following can happen: “..It’s possible that a Sotapanna can become a pornstar and have sex with multiple partners, ..”
- The mindset of a Sotapanna is unlikely to make that happen.
______
Regarding the issue of Visaka keeping “slaves.” Those are probably more like “servants.” When thinking of slaves, one may get the idea of “forced labor.” I don’t believe a Sotapanna is capable of that.
- For example, when I grew up in Sri Lanka, it was common to have servants in the house. We had a couple, and I remember playing with one my age. They were sent to school and treated nicely. Those were mostly children from poor families who could not provide even food for them; the parents voluntarily asked my parents to take care of them. It was not “forced labor.”
- These are complex issues that must be considered based on the specific situation.
- There was also a “slave woman” (Kujjuttara, I believe) who became a Sotapanna and taught Dhamma to others. Thus, she was obviously free to listen to the Buddha’s discourses.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
I like Sir Lal’s answer. Sri Lankan and Asian society, in general, is very different from the West. People often forget to put themselves in the context of the times and society. It is certain that from a Western point of view having servants is intolerable. The answer is that Western society practiced savage and primitive slavery. People were castrated and beaten with whips. Slaves were not allowed to educate themselves. In the time of Lord Buddha servants had much greater freedom and could go and listen to sermons on the Dhamma.
I call servants because the masters did not have the right of life or death over them. Unlike in the United States in the 19th century where killing your slave was normal. It was even immoral in the time of Lord Buddha to beat one’s servant. Of course, practices like human sacrifice and forced marriages are immoral and destructive practices! Hunting and fishing are immoral practices and yet it is practiced and encouraged today. It is impossible to find stable and lasting happiness in conditioned phenomena. As long as we do not become ariyas, we will be primitive. A puthujunas can be the most modern man in the world and be reborn as an animal and much worse. This is the true primitive spirit. An ariya can dress in bark skin (Think of Venerable Arahant Bahiya) and achieve the arahant stage.
This suttas shows that beating his servants is a bad things in the society of Lord Buddha.
What is it, ma’am?’
‘Kiṁ, ayye’ti?
‘You’re getting up even later in the day—what’s up with you, wench?’
‘Kiṁ, je, divā uṭṭhāsī’ti?
‘Nothing, ma’am.’
‘Na khvayye, kiñcī’ti.
‘Oh, so nothing’s up, you naughty maid, but you get up even later in the day!’ Angry and upset, she grabbed a door-pin and hit Kāḷī on the head, cracking it open.
‘No vata re kiñci, pāpi dāsi, divā uṭṭhāsī’ti kupitā anattamanā aggaḷasūciṁ gahetvā sīse pahāraṁ adāsi, sīsaṁ vobhindi.
Then Kāḷī, with blood pouring from her cracked skull, denounced her mistress to the neighbors,
Atha kho, bhikkhave, kāḷī dāsī bhinnena sīsena lohitena galantena paṭivissakānaṁ ujjhāpesi:
‘See, ladies, what the sweet one did!
‘passathayye, soratāya kammaṁ;
See what the even-tempered one did! See what the calm one did!
passathayye, nivātāya kammaṁ, passathayye, upasantāya kammaṁ.
How on earth can she grab a door-pin and hit her only maid on the head, cracking it open, just for getting up late?’ Arthaśāstra 3.13.9 says that inflicting punishment (daṇḍapreṣaṇam; cf. Pali daṇḍāpesuṁ at Bi Ss 1:1.38) on a slave is a crime for which a master incurs a fine equivalent to the cost of the slave.
Kathañhi nāma ekadāsikāya divā uṭṭhāsīti kupitā anattamanā aggaḷasūciṁ gahetvā sīse pahāraṁ dassati, sīsaṁ vobhindissatī’ti.
Then after some time the housewife Vedehikā got this bad reputation:
Atha kho, bhikkhave, vedehikāya gahapatāniyā aparena samayena evaṁ pāpako kittisaddo abbhuggacchi:
‘The housewife Vedehikā is fierce, ill-tempered, and not calm at all.’ No blame is given to Kāḷī for her deliberate provocation.
‘caṇḍī vedehikā gahapatānī, anivātā vedehikā gahapatānī, anupasantā vedehikā gahapatānī’ti.
See this also :
- Here is an excellent short sermon of Venerable Waharaka Thero.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.