Twentieth Virtual Symposium on “Cravings/Addictions/Obsessions”: The Swinging Buddhist - a Blog Post by humorlife

Blogs > humorlife > Confessions of a Lifestyle Man

4929 posts
6/4/2016 10:04 pm

Twentieth Virtual Symposium on “Cravings/Addictions/Obsessions”: The Swinging Buddhist

This blog entry is part of the twentieth virtual symposium, an informal collection of bloggers who – purely for the hell of it – voted for a single topic (“Cravings/Addictions/Obsessions”) and agreed, on or about June 5, to post their interpretations of that topic. A continually updated list of participants can be found here: Participants List For the Twentieth Virtual Symposium CravingsAddictionsObsessions

The Devil, it is said, is capable of quoting Scripture for his own purpose. But what to make of a religious tradition which does not embrace demonic personifications of the profane… yet whose adherents raise the question of whether or not swinging is within the realm of permissible behavior?

“Buddhism’s ‘Sexual Misconduct’ Defined,” a post on the Wisdom Quarterly: American Buddhist Journal blog, does not directly address swinging, although readers did in the comment section. The post itself does talk about craving being a barrier to achieving a noble life.

To quote the authors, “Sexual misconduct or ‘wrong sensual indulgence” is karmically harmful behavior…. This is because craving arises, and one habitually tries to satisfy it in an ultimately unsatisfactory manner.”

Two questions immediately jump out: First, what exactly is sexual misconduct? And second, does simply abstaining from an activity eliminate the craving?

First question first. For the most part, the post notes that “‘sexual misconduct’ has been hastily defined … based on Judeo-Christian thinking as “fornication and adultery.” But the Buddha did not teach that householders should abstain from sex, nor did he proclaim that they should engage in sex only in the context of marriage as many Christian sects teach.

“It is mistaken and off-putting to confuse the Puritanical teachings of other religions with the ethical universals taught by the Buddha.

“Consenting individuals … are free to engage in and enjoy sex without being admonished. What is important is that in so doing they are neither being harmed nor causing harm to others.”

Rock the bed, you beautiful-bellied bastard! As for the second question – the one about whether not indulging in pleasure eliminates the – ahem – craving, addiction, or obsession… in the comments section, poster Russell notes “…sexual misconduct doesn't include things such as Polyamory or Swinging, so long as both partners in the marriage and happy with it and everyone is consenting.

“Misconduct happens when lies are told or bullying happens. So you can go to a Swingers party with your partner, you can both have multiple sexual partners and Sexual Misconduct will not happen”

Heh. So it seems the path to Buddhist enlightenment is that if one must be a slut, one should be an ethical slut, right? Works for me.

But it didn’t apparently work for a few anonymous posters. Here’s a sampling of their arguments:

“Having multiple sexual partners would lead one to overdevelopment of the sensual self. If the goal of Buddhism is to eliminate craving, we can see where sex would be a problem. One does not stop craving sex by having it.

“[One’s] desire would have to be rather high if one is seeking out other partners for sexual pleasure. Fetishes and sexual practices come from a need to feel ‘more’ sexual excitement, more pleasure. Thus orgies and many other sexual activities fall into the realm of earthly lust. Committing these activities keeps one tied down in kama.”

Editor’s note: Don’t confuse kama with karma. Kama refers to the pleasures of the senses. Think Kama Sutra.

Back to the naysayers: Write another anonymous arguer: “[W]hile technically an orgy with consenting parties wouldn’t be sexual misconduct you must ask yourself.... is this action creating craving? Does this action come from craving?”

Well, you know what they say – “Never provoke a bodhisattva to rage.” Okay, virtually nobody says that – bodhisattvas are enlightened people who, despite reaching nirvana through study, choose not to do so to serve as earthy examples to others. They’re generally pretty chill folks. But a few of these enlightened folks weighed in with pro-swinging views. To quote yet another anonymous poster (with his or her grammar left intact):

“Swinging and polyamory are against ‘the Way’? Bullshit. They're just things people do that yr uncomfortable with, so therefore ‘those’ people have too much desire, they couldn't be as ‘enlightened’ as you, surely not.....

“The idea that orgiastic sex and spirituality are mutually exclusive is almost laughable when you consider that there are respectable spiritual traditions that make it an integral part of their ritual and worship, even within Buddhism, although usually in symbolic form.

“You say that such a lifestyle is indicative of extreme craving, but thats just judgement. Swingers are just being open and honest with their partners and the world about their sexuality. This is likely to lead to REDUCED suffering. Who's doing more to overcome their egoic desires, the renunciate who swears off all sex to meditate for years, or the orgiast who overcomes jealousy and monogamy to please their partner? Yr just pissed that someone may be having group sex and realizing the Infinite at the same time, while you spent 20 years in a cave.”

The last word on the blog went to Stay True, who is indeed a True Believer:

“People assume that multiple partners = more attachment/more craving, but I have experienced the opposite... Craving/Posessiveness/Attachment is common in monogamous relationships… Neither swinging nor not swinging is the way... Attachment to either is probably not going to serve”.

In short, if you meet the Buddha on the road, blow him. Provided he reciprocates, of course…

Stop in, read, and offer comments at my "swinging as seen in the media" blog, "Confessions of a Lifestyle Man" humorlife, which is also the home of the monthly virtual symposium. New post: The Virtual Symposium Returns Lets Pick A Topic

kzoopair 73M/71F

25831 posts
6/4/2016 10:27 pm

You've written this post for me. Even if you didn't.

The Buddha taught "all things on moderation". And of course, moderation is subjective, and open to debate. One man's excess is another man's moderation.

In an interesting non sequitur, I met a guy years ago who was trying to sell Jesus to me. He had pamphlets. I told him I was a Buddhist, and figured that would shut him up. Of course I figured wrong. Only a silver bullet or a wooden stake shuts those fuckers up. Garlic will only slow them down, and I had a ham sandwich that day. He said to me: "Well, I'd rather believe what Jesus says than some fat sucker." You know I'm not making this up, because you can't make this shit up. Nobody could be that dumb, right? I told him to work on his sales pitch and come back in a couple of years.

Become a member now and get a free tote bag.