[Buddha-l] Re: Rational or mythological Buddhism and WesternBuddhist lay practice

[Mikael Aktor]

Richard P. Hayes wrote:

>On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 19:19 +0200, Mikael Aktor wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The only legitimate reason to take up the life of a religious
>>mendicant is renunciation, which implies the endeavor to conquer
>>sensual desire. 
>>    
>>
>
>As long as you make it clear that you are speaking about the perceptions
>of mainstream Magadhan society in the sixth century b.c.e., what you say
>is true. If, however, you go on to say that the perceptions of those
>people at that time are universally true, then what you say is false. As
>I have tried to show in a variety of ways, the Buddha did not agree with
>the views of mainstream Magadhan society on this issue
>

I haven't the Vinaya text at hand here, but this is Harvey's interpretation:

"In the monastic discipline, a monk's intentional emission of semen is 
an offence entailing a formal meeting of the Sangha, i.e. its levet of 
seriousness is just short of that requiring expulsion for a monk, with 
the Buddha explaining that the act is related to the very attachment, 
fetters and grasping that the Dhamma aims to transcend. [ref. to Vin. 
3.111-12.] Given that sexual intercourse entails expulsion for a monk or 
nun, it is not surprising that masturbation is an offence, too, if not 
quite so serious. [Peter Harvey, _An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics_, 
p.73-74].

What does the text at Vin.3.111-12 read?

I have no intention or reason to project some kind of Victorian moral to 
ancient Buddhist, monastic rules. A silly idea. But I think it is 
important to understand what exactly (or as exactly we are able to 
decide) is the monastic lifestyle implied by these rules.

mikael

-- 
Mikael Aktor
University of Southern Denmark