“You Can’t Watch Pornos in the Monastery”: Tibetan Tantra, Imagined Pleasure, and the Virtuality of Desire

[maybay]

Another interesting point for me in this thread:

maybay wrote: I think the Russian temperament that results in Aleppo is very closely linked to their perception of sexuality, as received through orthodox Christian monasticism.

maybay, would you elaborate a bit on this statement ?

Certainly in my childhood in a Soviet Union controlled country there was no Christian activity and no monasticism (communist era 1905 till 1990).

And before that,....how did Russian perception of sexuality, as received through orthodox Christian monasticism, look like ? I would like to know more about it.

Starets Zosima always seemed quite Buddha-like to me in Dostoevsky`s Karamasow tale.
A very positive figure.

Manju

Monasticism continued throughtout the communist era although it was severely repressed. But my point was about the energy that has continued over centuries since the desert fathers in Egypt. The monastic vision is a totalitarian vision. All through reading, or rather listening to Hannah Arendts Origins, I was reminded of the similarity. That energy cultivated through the centuries has not disappeared merely because the institutions changed form. Whereas in Western Europe we saw the gradual erosion of monastic life in form and spirit, in the east it survived and morphed into the repressive governments that reject out of hand the ideal of a liberal 'container', which is the only feasible basis for modern capitalist enterprise. It is quite incredible to watch the monasteries now as they struggle to provide a total vision for monastics, and how they somehow manage to chant on despite all the hiccups. But I think what makes a Tibetan monastery so much more resilient than a Russian orthodox is in the doctrine. The great innovation of Mahayana was to make the text and associated rituals the basis of monastic life. So rather than isolated meditation/contemplation, the physical walls and grounds. The same goes for Tantric sadhanas. In the conception of Tantric practice a monastery is rather a celestial palace. The self-imposed vision becomes the container. That lay people might not share that vision, ie that they perceive hypocrisy, is not a problem for Mahayana monastics per se, whereas in Christian or Theravadin in would be unequivocally, since their vision is historical/realist. But back to your question, when it comes to what to do with rising desires the orthodox Christian approach has always been suppression. In Russia that injunction became government policy so that everyone was effectively living in a monastery. And again, that energy hasn't disappeared. It finds new channels of expression on the Internet, or in the orthodox revival we are seeing.

[Grigoris]

yet we suppose to follow his steps the best we can

The Buddha did not actively seek out these experiences, he happened upon them and they lead to his renunciation of worldly life. people here are saying we should actively seek out porn to raise our desire (like mine needs any help) and then deal with these at a spiritual level. Seems to me that most here would just deal with it by having a good hard pull. Not that there is anything wrong with that per se, but it certainly does not sound like something from the Vinaya or the Bodhisattvacarya.

[muni]

Except that we are not Siddartha, so seeing these things, more often than not, has the opposite effect on us of what it had on the Buddha

And these effects goes into karma with again their effects. Or are we closing our eyes?
Of course children in the monastery are also going to school/ are also getting general education and must be informed appropriately. Outside the monastery is there in the street a cyber café available as well.

The Buddha did not actively seek out these experiences

[treehuggingoctopus]

can I just drop a bomb?

you know some Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves? and they are described as dakinis taking form of prostitute. Can you just for a second imagine that porn stars may be dakini too or daka for that matter?

I'm really wondering is this Catholic sub-forum here? haha

Catholic South is generally very liberal when it comes to sex. And quite a few protestant denominations make conservative Catholics pale by comparison.

So the true question before us is what distinguishes erotica (non-violent sexual entertainment conveyed through images and writing) from pornography (violence against women and children perpetrated through images and writing).

Fair enough, assuming one accepts your working definitions of porn and erotica. (One might. One might not. Looking at you, Wittgenstein.) It is true that if the thread's title were "You Can't Watch Violence against Women and Children Perpetrated through Images and Writing" everybody would be in agreement.

[Karinos]

The Buddha did not actively seek out these experiences, he happened upon them and they lead to his renunciation of worldly life.

I believe story says he had feeling "something is not quite right" and he asked to be taken outside the palace, so yes he was seeking the truth until he found one. We are talking of course about hinayana version of Buddha life story.

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

I'm sorry but I really think that people are making a mountain out of a mole hill. How does someone else's watching of porn and/or having sex impact on your own practice. I honestly feel that a lot of people that claim to be religious have a real hang up about sex and would probably do much better facing their own demons rather than worry about what other people are doing.
This thread is now 9 pages long I wonder if it was about stealing or lying how many people would be interested.

OBVIOUSLY YOU'VE NEVER BEEN IN A LONG TERM COMMITTED RELATIONSHIP.
WHEN YOUR PARTNER CHEATS ON YOU...THAT'S SEXUAL ABUSE.
LOOKING AT PORN BEHIND YOUR PARTNERS BACK IS DEVIOUS & BETRAYAL.
SEEING PROSTITUTES BEHIND YOUR PARTNERS BACK IS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
SEX ADDICT'S ARE CRONIC LIARS TOO.
ALL TABOO'S IN BUDDHIST ETHICS.

I HAVE NO HANG UPS ABOUT SEX ...ONLY WHEN IT'S MISUSED & ABUSED & CAUSES OTHERS TO SUFFER..
AS MILLIONS OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND BROKEN RELATIONSHIPS AND MARRIAGES HAVE...

HOW HAS IT AFFECTED MY PRACTICE ?
I SUFFERED SO MUCH I DISCOVERED I HAD A INTUITION THAT WAS TRYING TO TELL ME SOMETHING....
I SUFFERED SO MUCH I TRANSFORMED THIS SHIT INTO BLISS
I SUFFERED SO MUCH I WANT TO END THIS SUFFERING FOR THE SAKE OF OTHERS SUFFERING

Sorry to rain on your parade but I've been married for 16 years (long term enough for you). We've got 4 kids ranging in age from 24 down to 7.
If you really feel that you need to know more about me just ask. Trying to guess is really foolish and if I feel it's none of your business I'll let you know that too.
I'm sorry for your suffering but a certain amount of it is probably caused by your attachment.
Unfortunately I can't advise you on how to avoid attachment in a relationship as I'm sure that I wouldn't be a ray of sunshine to be around if I was in your position but I do think (and admittedly don't know) that if it wasn't porn and hookers that broke up your relationship it would have just been something else like gambling or drugs.
Good luck and best wishes.

P.S. This thread is about some monks watching a porn movie. It's not about married men running around on their wives.

OK...sorry about my first accusation...i think women are more affected by their partners addiction to porn. Being a woman, you feel your partner is cheating, even though it's just watching...it goes deeper than that...it's fantasy, and the psychological desire to fantasize having other women....then it leads to masterbation...getting stimulated sexually by another, other than your partner....to women (some women), it hurts a lot. I believe in fidelity, and being in a monogamous relationship. Men are not wired like women for monogamy. Men see it as no big deal...because they are wired to spread their seed to as many woman as possible...so it is natural for them to be over-sexed.

Anyways...i feel sorry for those monks watching stupid fake porn-sex. If they really want to get a thrill or learn how to visualize better, they could watch loving couples having sex...people that love and respect each other, they also make explicit videos for those with higher standards and a real appreciation for the art of love-making....instead of watching zombies frak .

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

can I just drop a bomb?

you know some Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves? and they are described as dakinis taking form of prostitute. Can you just for a second imagine that porn stars may be dakini too or daka for that matter?

I'm really wondering is this Catholic sub-forum here? haha

These Mahasiddhas probably were single, and didn't do this to betray their partner. I have more of a problem with the betrayal and deceit, than with the actual profession of being a prostitute. When men in committed relationships cross that line it is abhorrent, and sexual misconduct.

[Grigoris]

The Buddha did not actively seek out these experiences, he happened upon them and they lead to his renunciation of worldly life.

I believe story says he had feeling "something is not quite right" and he asked to be taken outside the palace, so yes he was seeking the truth until he found one. We are talking of course about hinayana version of Buddha life story.

Yeah, whatever...

[Malcolm]

you know some Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves? and they are described as dakinis taking form of prostitute. Can you just for a second imagine that porn start can be dakini too or daka for that matter?

The reason that Darikpa, a prince, was ordered by his teacher Luipa to serve a courtesan (not really the same as a prostitute, and did not necessarily involve sex work) was to cut his pride.

This brings up another issue: the extent to which, in the West in particular, Vajrayāna tropes such as "Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves" serve male fantasies since women's voices in these scenarios are entirely absent, apart from narratives entirely written by men which generally portray women as treacherous and dangerous to the project of yoga, as in the tale of Ghantapāda:

There was a wicked whore in Pataliputra who told Devapala that she would be able to corrupt Ghantapa and ruin him. This vile woman had a virtuous and unspoiled virgin daughter who was commanded to seduce the yogin. As Ghantapa would meditate the young girl would bow and circumambulate him, begging for the opportunity to serve him and be his patron. He resisted but the girl was persistent. Ghantapa eventually moved to a small hut for the monsoon season and although the maiden followed him; he requested that his food only be brought by male servants.

For two weeks, only men tended to the yogin but on the fifteenth day the young woman told them to stay back and she went herself. When Ghantapa asked her to leave she complained that there were rain clouds in the sky and that she should wait until they pass. Once the clouds had passed it was getting dark and she cried saying that if she were to leave at night bandits would kill her. He told her that she had to sleep outside but as it got colder during the night she moved into the hut. Saying she was cold, she got closer and closer until eventually their bodies touched and thus the two came together in tantric union.

http://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=332

Here, we have a "wicked whore" (how do we know she was wicked? What is her story?) who has a "virtuous and unspoiled virgin daughter," (at this point, we really are in a patriarchal Catholic universe where the virginity of women has "moral," and thus economic value). We have the celibate yogin, who resists this delectable young women, until, out of his kindness, he lets her stay the night because he fears for her safety. "Naturally," he is unable to resist her charms, but manages in the story to foil the plot of the "vile woman" to subvert him with the erotic power of her "virtuous and unspoiled virgin daughter." And of course, story portrays Ghantapāda as a sexual naif who takes no responsibility for his own arousal, shifting it onto the dangerous Other.

Certainly, as I note above, the manuals for selecting female consorts differ very little from the descriptions of different kinds of women found in erotic manuals like the Kama Sūtra. But what are notably absent in such manuals are the graphic descriptions of men appropriate for each of these kinds of women, described as padminis, conches, and so on based on descriptions of women's breasts, vaginas, teeth, lips, eyes, and vaginas. At least the Kama Sūtra contains descriptions of types of men, their body types, the size of their penises and the kind of women for which those penises are best suited. Corresponding descriptions of male phenotypes and their genitalia are conspicuously absent from manuals which describe such women. Present however is the strong recommendation to inflame passion through the standard Indian tropes of kissing, pinching, biting, and so on, as well as "erotic conversation (aka "talk dirty to me")" and use of visual erotica as preliminaries for karmamudra practice. Monks and single men, of course, who wished to engage in these practice, needed to use a different kind of "consort," i.e. their hands, while visualizing an imagined consort and imagining these behaviors (you may think I am kidding, but I am not.)

Indeed, we really have to understand these stories as patriarchal accounts which obscure womens' stories, which render them as dangerous, which fundamentally serve male fantasies through the way patriarchal society fetishizes women (virginity vs. prostitution; celibacy vs. being sexual active; treacherous women vs. honorable men and so on).

[muni]

The Buddha did not actively seek out these experiences, he happened upon them and they lead to his renunciation of worldly life.

I believe story says he had feeling "something is not quite right" and he asked to be taken outside the palace, so yes he was seeking the truth until he found one.

Yes, but I am wondering how many are there looking to porno with the intention to find the truth. Or the intention to know the truth of suffering, and how it arises, how it cease and the path of cessation?

_/\_

[Karinos]

These Mahasiddhas probably were single, and didn't do this to betray their partner. I have more of a problem with the betrayal and deceit, than with the actual profession of being a prostitute. When men in committed relationships cross that line it is abhorrent, and sexual misconduct.

I think the problem with feeling of betrayal comes unfortunately from personal attachment and wrong understanding of relationship. I believe that in Christian part of the world we understand marriage as commitment of two souls blessed by God "for ever" but relationship or marriage should be understood as a journey of two equal best friends who help each other and stay together as long as it benefits both of them. We don't own anyone, nobody own's us. We will separate latest at the time of death. Maybe we will separate earlier. We stuck in samsara, we all struggle with 5 poisons and ego = nobody is perfect, we make mistake. It's like being in hospital, we are all sick and want to get better. Nobody should make issues about someone who got more sick today ... and rather support them and understand that we are all in it. That's what people do in hospital for each other. Not sure if I'm clear enough. Issues are not out there, issues are in our minds and are caused by disturbing emotions

[Karinos]

Indeed, we really have to understand these stories as patriarchal accounts which obscure women stories, which render them as dangerous, which fundamentally serve male fantasies through the way patriarchal society fetishes women (virginity vs. prostitution; celibacy vs. being sexual active; treacherous women vs. honorable men and so on).

you are very right

[DGA]

Well...in some Muslim countries they chop your hands off if you steal (and that prevents a lot of crimes)....maybe the sex organ being chopped off would be a better solution then.

There is no evidence that such measures actually prevent any crime at all. They are, instead, crimes in themselves. Remember--we're Buddhists here.

I get that you've had a hard time with a relationship with someone whose conduct hurt you.

Who is responsible for that conduct?

And who is responsible for your reaction to it?

[DGA]

you know some Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves? and they are described as dakinis taking form of prostitute. Can you just for a second imagine that porn start can be dakini too or daka for that matter?

The reason that Darikpa, a prince, was ordered by his teacher Luipa to serve a courtesan (not really the same as a prostitute, and did not necessarily involve sex work) was to cut his pride.

This brings up another issue: the extent to which, in the West in particular, Vajrayāna tropes such as "Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves" serve male fantasies since women's voices in these scenarios are entirely absent, apart from narratives entirely written by men which generally portray women as treacherous and dangerous to the project of yoga, as in the tale of Ghantapāda:

There was a wicked whore in Pataliputra who told Devapala that she would be able to corrupt Ghantapa and ruin him. This vile woman had a virtuous and unspoiled virgin daughter who was commanded to seduce the yogin. As Ghantapa would meditate the young girl would bow and circumambulate him, begging for the opportunity to serve him and be his patron. He resisted but the girl was persistent. Ghantapa eventually moved to a small hut for the monsoon season and although the maiden followed him; he requested that his food only be brought by male servants.

For two weeks, only men tended to the yogin but on the fifteenth day the young woman told them to stay back and she went herself. When Ghantapa asked her to leave she complained that there were rain clouds in the sky and that she should wait until they pass. Once the clouds had passed it was getting dark and she cried saying that if she were to leave at night bandits would kill her. He told her that she had to sleep outside but as it got colder during the night she moved into the hut. Saying she was cold, she got closer and closer until eventually their bodies touched and thus the two came together in tantric union.

http://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=332

Here, we have a "wicked whore" (how do we know she was wicked? What is her story?) who has a "virtuous and unspoiled virgin daughter," (at this point, we really are in a patriarchal Catholic universe where the virginity of women has "moral," and thus economic value). We have the celibate yogin, who resists this delectable young women, until, out of his kindness, he lets her stay the night because he fears for her safety. "Naturally," he is unable to resist her charms, but manages in the story to foil the plot of the "vile woman" to subvert him with the erotic power of her "virtuous and unspoiled virgin daughter." And of course, story portrays Ghantapāda as a sexual naif who takes no responsibility for his own arousal, shifting it onto the dangerous Other.

Certainly, as I note above, the manuals for selecting female consorts differ very little from the descriptions of different kinds of women found in erotic manuals like the Kama Sūtra. But what are notably absent in such manuals are the graphic descriptions of men appropriate for each of these kinds of women, described as padminis, conches, and so on based on descriptions of women's breasts, vaginas, teeth, lips, eyes, and vaginas. At least the Kama Sūtra contains descriptions of types of men, their body types, the size of their penises and the kind of women for which those penises are best suited. Corresponding descriptions of male phenotypes and their genitalia are conspicuously absent from manuals which describe such women. Present however is the strong recommendation to inflame passion through the standard Indian tropes of kissing, pinching, biting, and so on, as well as "erotic conversation (aka "talk dirty to me")" and use of visual erotica as preliminaries for karmamudra practice. Monks and single men, of course, who wished to engage in these practice, needed to use a different kind of "consort," i.e. their hands, while visualizing an imagined consort and imagining these behaviors (you may think I am kidding, but I am not.)

Indeed, we really have to understand these stories as patriarchal accounts which obscure womens' stories, which render them as dangerous, which fundamentally serve male fantasies through the way patriarchal society fetishizes women (virginity vs. prostitution; celibacy vs. being sexual active; treacherous women vs. honorable men and so on).

[maybay]

This brings up another issue: the extent to which, in the West in particular, Vajrayāna tropes such as "Mahasiddhas had prostitute consorts or some were prostitutes themselves" serve male fantasies

One these days we should really chat about that other male fantasy, patricide.

Certainly, as I note above, the manuals for selecting female consorts differ very little from the descriptions of different kinds of women found in erotic manuals like the Kama Sūtra. But what are notably absent in such manuals are the graphic descriptions of men appropriate for each of these kinds of women, described as padminis, conches, and so on based on descriptions of women's breasts, vaginas, teeth, lips, eyes, and vaginas. At least the Kama Sūtra contains descriptions of types of men, their body types, the size of their penises and the kind of women for which those penises are best suited. Corresponding descriptions of male phenotypes and their genitalia are conspicuously absent from manuals which describe such women.

There's a project for ya

Indeed, we really have to understand these stories as patriarchal accounts which obscure womens' stories, which render them as dangerous, which fundamentally serve male fantasies through the way patriarchal society fetishizes women (virginity vs. prostitution; celibacy vs. being sexual active; treacherous women vs. honorable men and so on).

I thought you didn't need stories?

[Malcolm]

I thought you didn't need stories?

Not these kind.

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

I think the problem with feeling of betrayal comes unfortunately from personal attachment and wrong understanding of relationship.

No way...I am NOT attached to him ! I'M not even married, nor do i ever want to marry him. It's purely sexual misconduct when you betray your partner.
On top of that all the psychological abuse...you have NO idea. Thinking you are in a monogamous relationship, and finding out he is screwing hookers left & right is not a matter of I should just let him do whatever he does and not be concerned....YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW THE SUBTLE BODY RESPONDS TO ALL THESE OTHER BODIES HES BEEN WITH....my intuition was making me have dreams through the years of hIM BEING with prostitutes...but i paid no attention to those dreams....

It's deceit, lying and manipulation and exposing you to life threatening disease.

Why even be in a relationship when all you do is screw around with other women ? It's wrong & deceitful. It's UN-BUDDHIST. IT'S SEXUAL MISCONDUCT.
IT'S LYING. IT'S STEALING. IT'S WRONG PROFESSION.

Are you in a open relationship ? I'm not and never will be. Those that cheat and infect their partners with the subtle energy of others ....hundreds or thousands of deceitful people....you have no idea the damage it can do....everything is energy...all those people screwing around with strangers, then your partner coming home and having sex with you...is giving you all that energy of sexual misconduct of all the other people ....it has a direct effect on your subtle body...it makes you very sick...poisoned by their lust and filth...

It's exactly like having HIV and intensionally infecting your partner....not caring...selfish....
Don't tell me i have a problem with attachment. You have no idea of what fidelity or commitment is. Buddha recommend monogamy. Being attached to one person, expecting fidelity is not attachment...it''s being MORAL.

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

Husband and Wife
According to Buddhist teaching, in a marriage, the husband can expect the following qualities from his wife:

— love
— attentiveness
— family obligations
— faithfulness
— child-care
— thrift
— the provision of meals
— to calm him down when he is upset
— sweetness in everything
In return, the wife's expectation from husband is:

— tenderness
— courtesy
— sociability
— security
— fairness
— loyalty
— honesty
— good companionship
— moral support
Apart from these emotional and sensual aspects, the couple will have to take care of day-to-day living conditions, family budget and social obligations. Thus, mutual consultations between the husband and wife on all family problems would help to create an atmosphere of trust and understanding in resolving whatever issues that may arise.

The Buddha's Advice to a Couple
I. THE WIFE

In advising women about their role in married life, the Buddha appreciated that the peace and harmony of a home rested largely on a woman. His advice was realistic and practical when he explained a good number of day-to-day characteristics which a woman should or should not cultivate. On diverse occasions, the Buddha counseled that a wife should:

a) not harbor evil thoughts against her husband;
b) not be cruel, harsh or domineering;
c) not be spendthrift but should be economical and live within her means;
d) guard and save her husband's hard-earned earnings and property;
e) always be attentive and chaste in mind and action;
f) be faithful and harbor no thought of any adulterous acts;
g) be refined in speech and polite in action;
h) be kind, industrious and hardworking;
i) be thoughtful and compassionate towards her husband, and her attitude should equate that of a mother's love and concern for the protection of her only son;
j) be modest and respectful;
k) be cool, calm and understanding — serving not only as a wife but also as a friend and advisor when the need arises.
In the days of the Buddha, other religious teachers also spoke on the duties and obligations of a wife towards her husband — stressing particularly on the duty of a wife bearing an off-spring for the husband, rendering faithful service and providing conjugal happiness.

Some communities are very particular about having a son in the family. They believe that a son is necessary to perform their funeral rites so that their after-life will be a good one. The failure to get a son from the first wife, gives a man the liberty to have another wife in order to get a son. Buddhism does not support this belief.

According to what the Buddha taught about the law of Karma, one is responsible for one's own action and its consequences. Whether a son or a daughter is born is determined not by a father or mother but the karma of the child. And the well-being of a father or grandfather does not depend upon the action of the son or grandson. Each is responsible for his own actions. So, it is wrong for men to blame their wives or for a man to feel inadequate when a son is not born. Such Enlightened Teachings help to correct the views of many people and naturally reduce the anxiety of women who are unable to produce sons to perform the "rites of the ancestors."

Although the duties of a wife towards the husband were laid down in the Confucian code of discipline, it did not stress the duties and obligations of the husband towards the wife. In the Sigalovada Sutta, however, the Buddha clearly mentioned the duties of a husband towards the wife and vice versa.

II. THE HUSBAND

The Buddha, in reply to a householder as to how a husband should minister to his wife declared that the husband should always honor and respect his wife, by being faithful to her, by giving her the requisite authority to manage domestic affairs and by giving her befitting ornaments. This advice, given over twenty five centuries ago, still stands good for today.

Knowing the psychology of the man who tends to consider himself superior, the Buddha made a remarkable change and uplifted the status of a woman by a simple suggestion that a husband should honor and respect his wife. A husband should be faithful to his wife, which means that a husband should fulfill and maintain his marital obligations to his wife thus sustaining the confidence in the marital relationship in every sense of the word. The husband, being a bread-winner, would invariably stay away from home, hence he should entrust the domestic or household duties to the wife who should be considered as the keeper and the distributor of the property and the home economic-administrator. The provision of befitting ornaments to the wife should be symbolic of the husband's love, care and attention showered on the wife. This symbolic practice has been carried out from time immemorial in Buddhist communities. Unfortunately it is in danger of dying out because of the influence of modern civilization.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... riage.html

[Karinos]

@ Kunga Lhadzom
It's not my job to tell you what's wrong or not in your thinking. I wrote what I believe in previous post. I wish you good luck in your practice and I believe if you continue good practice in few years you will be laughing from your own posts written here now.

[maybay]

I thought you didn't need stories?

Not these kind.

Using is needing, and you use them.