Thailand to ban gays from monkhood

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Mar 27, 2015 6:48 AM GMT
    Thailand to ban gays from monkhood

    'Sexually deviant' monks could face up to a month in jail

    - See more at: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/thailand-ban-gays-monkhood260315
  • starboard5

    Posts: 969

    Mar 27, 2015 12:51 PM GMT
    This is ridiculous. The patimokkha, the 227 rules governing the behavior of full ordained monks, clearly defines all forms of sexual misconduct for monks and how they should be graded and addressed. There's no discrimination between gay or straight as far as I can recall; misconduct is misconduct. Basically, it's intentionally seeking out sexual stimulation for the purpose of having an orgasm. Doesn't matter if the object is a man, woman, dog, piece of cloth....

    As a sidebar, it's important to understand why this is considered misconduct. It's not because sex is inherently bad. It's because sexual desire is a "hindrance" to bhavana, (mental) development, particularly meditation practice. It distracts and sidetracks. Monks are full time, professional spiritual practioniers; the training rules are more intense.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2015 4:17 PM GMT
    And in Indiana I can be bared service at a restaurant
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2015 4:44 PM GMT
    starboard5 saidThis is ridiculous. The patimokkha, the 227 rules governing the behavior of full ordained monks, clearly defines all forms of sexual misconduct for monks and how they should be graded and addressed. There's no discrimination between gay or straight as far as I can recall; misconduct is misconduct. Basically, it's intentionally seeking out sexual stimulation for the purpose of having an orgasm.


    Even that's sort of bullshit (not on your part but of the code) because...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patimokkha_in_Theravada_Buddhism
    1.Discharge of semen or getting someone to discharge your semen, except while dreaming


    ...when in lucid dreaming, dreaming consciously, some dreamers indulge sex with dream characters. So that in Theravada--which is the school of Buddhism practiced in Thailand--would be an exemption? Bullshit.

    And not that dream yoga, as far as I'm aware, is a particular practice of Theravada as it is in Mahayana, but certainly a person working on being mindful in any school of Buddhism would tend towards becoming more conscious not only when the body is awake but in their sleep as well. That seems pretty obvious.

    So not only then could a monk partake in sex consciously with dream characters without breaking their own code--sounds like a hypocrisy to me--but of the very few physical body parts we can control from within a dream, by controlling our dream body or merely by will, happens to be eye movement and the dick, thus the wet dream which the code sought to exempt. So that's bullshit.

    And especially bullshit because in lucid dreaming which is utilized in the dream yoga of the Mahayana schools, the wet dream would be at least as if not more so consciously--the latter more likely of the two--engaged than when the physical body is awake.

    So if the one is precept then how not the other, except that no one can really control you from the inside, but only by outward expression, revealing the hideous nature of religion. The religious aspect is not about bringing someone into a state of awareness--that, people can do on their own--but about bringing others under control.

    It's bullshit.

    To the topic at hand, from what little I've read (as there seems little yet publicly said on the subject), this seems the doing of the military junta, maybe at the behest of some homophobic monk. For now I'm reading it like that California asshole lawyer's proposal to deny us life, this to deny supposed enlightenment. We'll see how it plays out.
  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    Mar 28, 2015 12:18 AM GMT
    I thought most of them were gay. The one I dated was.
  • starboard5

    Posts: 969

    Mar 28, 2015 4:33 AM GMT
    theantijock said
    starboard5 saidThis is ridiculous. The patimokkha, the 227 rules governing the behavior of full ordained monks, clearly defines all forms of sexual misconduct for monks and how they should be graded and addressed. There's no discrimination between gay or straight as far as I can recall; misconduct is misconduct. Basically, it's intentionally seeking out sexual stimulation for the purpose of having an orgasm.


    Even that's sort of bullshit (not on your part but of the code) because...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patimokkha_in_Theravada_Buddhism
    1.Discharge of semen or getting someone to discharge your semen, except while dreaming


    ...when in lucid dreaming, dreaming consciously, some dreamers indulge sex with dream characters. So that in Theravada--which is the school of Buddhism practiced in Thailand--would be an exemption? Bullshit.

    And not that dream yoga, as far as I'm aware, is a particular practice of Theravada as it is in Mahayana, but certainly a person working on being mindful in any school of Buddhism would tend towards becoming more conscious not only when the body is awake but in their sleep as well. That seems pretty obvious.

    So not only then could a monk partake in sex consciously with dream characters without breaking their own code--sounds like a hypocrisy to me--but of the very few physical body parts we can control from within a dream, by controlling our dream body or merely by will, happens to be eye movement and the dick, thus the wet dream which the code sought to exempt. So that's bullshit.

    And especially bullshit because in lucid dreaming which is utilized in the dream yoga of the Mahayana schools, the wet dream would be at least as if not more so consciously--the latter more likely of the two--engaged than when the physical body is awake.

    So if the one is precept then how not the other, except that no one can really control you from the inside, but only by outward expression, revealing the hideous nature of religion. The religious aspect is not about bringing someone into a state of awareness--that, people can do on their own--but about bringing others under control.

    It's bullshit.

    To the topic at hand, from what little I've read (as there seems little yet publicly said on the subject), this seems the doing of the military junta, maybe at the behest of some homophobic monk. For now I'm reading it like that California asshole lawyer's proposal to deny us life, this to deny supposed enlightenment. We'll see how it plays out.



    I'm ignorant of the practices of dream yoga, but from your description, I would say it would be a violation of the monastic code if a monk during lucid dreaming, engaged in sexual activity. Everything hinges on conscious intention.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2015 5:32 AM GMT
    starboard5 saidI'm ignorant of the practices of dream yoga, but from your description, I would say it would be a violation of the monastic code if a monk during lucid dreaming, engaged in sexual activity. Everything hinges on conscious intention.


    I am very practiced though I don't get into a lot of dogmatic stuff. But certainly I have studied much of even that as background, as philosophy and also because much of the atiyoga of Mahayana wherein you'd find dream yoga practices involve also the unavoidable dogmatic stuff. So I read a lot as metaphor. The Tibetan Book of the Dead, for instance, read as metaphor is brilliant: while read as dogma is psychotic.

    Also I'm quite sure there's more that I haven't read--by far as I mostly enjoy learning though my own explorations of consciousness--than what I have. So in that there might be such dissuasion but to my memory from what I have read just about the only practice "forbidden" in dream yoga is entering what's known as the clear light of death. And even then, the dreamer (or in dogmatic terms, a yogi, I suppose) is said to have then died by "the kiss of God" as it were.

    Practically speaking, it would be difficult for even the monks to make such rules if only because most simply don't get there. My cousin was not just a monk but an officer at one time at Tassajara and he doesn't reach anywhere near my meditations. The Dali Lama has said he is not expert at dream yoga as well. It's those who do who are they exploring there. Tough to make rules for the wild west of the mind.

    I get where you are intuitively coming from and what you've said does flow logically but this case might be counter intuitive for any number of reasons: one being that the sex is not physical during a dream, even if a wet dream might be lucid (conscious) as well as vivid and might even connect to the physical body (leaving a wet spot), but especially because one of the purposes of the practice of dream yoga is recognizing illusion.

    Outside of self-immolation yer not really supposed to set yourself on fire in waking life, but in dream yoga you need to be able to find wood, light a fire, and have a seat on that, knowing the fire won't burn. Similarly, sex in a dream would not have the attachments which the monk might fear developing and so avoids physical sex. So the reasoning governing thinking when awake probably has some application but might not directly apply to dreaming and might even inhibit progress which might otherwise be made there, though certainly people get lost in distraction even then in the clear light of dreaming.