|
Sorin
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: January 08, 2012, 03:49:03 AM » |
|
INTERVIEW
WIE: In the course of planning for this interview we were joking that if we could actually interview the Buddha himself that would be ideal, but that speaking with you about what the Buddha taught would be the next best thing.
Bhante Gunaratana (BG): I wish we all could meet Buddha and ask him these questions!
WIE: One fact that most everyone who is interested in Buddhism these days is aware of is that the Buddha was a monk who founded a monastic tradition; and of course it is this very tradition that you yourself have devoted so much time and energy to bringing to the West. Why did the Buddha put so much emphasis on celibacy? Why did he feel it was so important?
BG: Because those who want to attain liberation from dukkha, from suffering, have to observe certain principles. In fact, for those who want to live a monastic life, celibacy is mandatory. Because if they are engaged in all kinds of sexual activities, then they are no different from laypeople, who are engrossed in various types of problems related to sex. Also, those who are interested in monastic life want to live a very simple life-which is what all monastic traditions are set up for-because in the final analysis, it is only when we get rid of our greed, lust and craving that we can liberate ourselves from suffering. You see, if our intention is to get rid of suffering, then we have to get rid of the cause of suffering, and lust is definitely the cause of suffering. So those who want to live the monastic life have to get rid of that so that they can live a life that does not nourish the root of craving.
WIE: Would it be fair to say then that if someone was not living a monastic life, if they were a layperson, it would be much more difficult, or perhaps even impossible, for them to do that?
BG: Even laypeople have to live a disciplined life; they have to exercise a certain restraint. And that's why for laypeople there are the precepts to observe; but ordinary laypeople are not supposed to observe celibacy. Laypeople can attain certain stages of enlightenment-what we call "stream-enterer" and "once-returner"-before they have realized for themselves that there are inherent difficulties and problems involved in sexual activities. And laypeople can attain even the third stage of sainthood, which is called the "never-returner" stage. But soon after they attain that stage they themselves will decide from their own experience, from their own understanding, that involvement in sexuality is going to block the progress of their spiritual practice, and when they realize this they will voluntarily give up sexual activities. So you see, celibacy is not something that can be imposed upon us by force or command.
WIE: Could you go into a little more detail about why it is that sex itself has to be transcended in order for one to progress on the spiritual path?
BG: Because as long as you are in it, your mind will be cluttered, clouded and confused and you will get involved in jealousy, fear, hatred, tension and so forth-all the worries that arise from lust. Therefore if you want to be liberated from all of that, you first haveto get rid of lust. Actually, some people don't like the phrase "get rid of"; some people prefer words like "transcending" or "transforming." "Surely," they say, "we can transform 'lust' into 'nonlust'!"
WIE: What is the distinction between "transcending" and "getting rid of"?
BG: Some terms are a little closer to the real meaning, and others are what you call euphemistic terms, rather than very strong negative terms. These people like to say "transcending" or "transforming" rather than "getting rid of" because they need sugarcoated words that make them feel better.
WIE: But what we're actually talking about is getting rid of lust?
BG: Right. But when you say, "Get rid of it," it's so strong, so negative, that people wonder, "How can I get rid of anything?" So if you say, "Let us transform it into something else," then they can relate to it.
WIE: In the Buddha's teachings on sexuality, was sex considered inherently negative?
BG: Buddha taught that as long as one is engaged in sexual activity, one would not be interested in practicing spiritual life; these two just don't go together. But when he gave his gradual enlightenment teaching, he also said that the sensation of lust, of sexuality, has pleasure. He did not deny the pleasure. It has pleasure. But then, you see, that very pleasure turns into displeasure, and gradually, slowly, as the initial fever of lust wears out, people begin to fight. Because out of lust arises fear; out of lust arises greed; out of lust arises jealousy, anger, hatred, confusion and fighting; all these negative things arise from lust. And therefore these negative things are inherent in lust.
And if we want to see this, you know, we don't have to look any further than our own society. Just open your eyes and look around. How many millions of people are fighting? And it is only based on their lust and greed-husbands, wives; boyfriends, girlfriends; boyfriends, boyfriends; girlfriends, girlfriends-and so on, you see? Whether you are heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, it doesn't matter. As long as you are in it, it is inevitable that you will have these problems-fighting, disappointment, anger, hatred, killing-all these are involved. Therefore, because he saw the inherent problem in sexuality, Buddha said that it is better to control and discipline our senses in order to have a calm and peaceful life. But one has to do this gradually, slowly, only through understanding and not abruptly. It cannot be forced. It has to be done gradually and with deep understanding. If people do not understand this and try to stop it all of a sudden, they will get more frustration, more fear and so forth. And therefore in his gradual teaching, he said that first there is the pleasure in sexual activities, and then there are the disadvantages, then there are the problems. And only when you see the problems, only then do you begin to realize that these disadvantages, this negativity, are inherent in sexuality-they are intrinsic. These troubles, these problems, are intrinsic to lust.
WIE: Especially nowadays, that would be considered a very radical view.
BG: Oh, surely. But you know, it is only when people turn away from these things, it is only when they stay away from this kind of teaching and are gone in time and space a million miles away, that when they turn back and look at the root of their problem it appears to be radical. They have turned their backs for so long, gone so far away in time and space, that when they look back they think, "Oh boy, how can I get rid of this now? I've gone so far and I'm so deeply involved in it." Therefore this appears to them to be radical. Surely it is radical!
WIE: I found myself thinking, as you were speaking, that because you spent very little time on the pleasure of sex and so much more on all the disadvantages, many people-
BG: Yes! For that little pleasure, a lot of pain, right?
WIE: Definitely.
BG: But you're right. People don't want to think about that. People always want to hear what they like to hear. But we don't want to say that! Whether the people like it or not, we want to tell the truth. And we shouldn't be afraid of telling the truth. Whether the world will accept it or not . . . now that's a different issue. What can we do?
WIE: When we were looking for a quote from the Buddha about his feelings with regard to sexuality, we came across this passage, from The Life of the Buddha: "Misguided man, it were better for you (as one gone forth) that your member should enter the mouth of a hideous, venomous viper or cobra than that it should enter a woman. It were better for you that your member should enter a pit of coals burning, blazing and glowing than that it should enter a woman. Why is that? For the former reason you would risk death or deadly suffering, but you would not, on the dissolution of the body after death, reappear in a state of privation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell." Now I think one gets a pretty clear impression from this how the Buddha felt about sex. But as you know, in the West today there are many variations of Buddhism being taught and practiced, and many Western Buddhist practitioners seem to disagree with the Buddha's assertion that lust-which as you said earlier he viewed as a manifestation of craving-must by definition be transcended in order to achieve enlightenment. In addition, the liberal climate in contemporary American society as a whole tends to regard sexuality as a very good, a very healthy, and a very natural expression of our humanity-and not only our humanity, but our spirituality. What do you think the Buddha would have to say about this?
BG: Before I say anything I want to add a little footnote to that translation. You know that when Buddha talked about celibacy he was not talking only about the celibacy of a man, but the celibacy of a woman also. So when he said, for example, that it is better to swallow a red-hot iron ball than to engage in sexual activity, that goes for women, too. We have to make that clear; otherwise women will get upset. They might think that Buddha hated women and that that is why he wanted to keep men away from women and asked men to observe celibacy. But if a woman wants to observe celibacy, then by the same token she should keep away from men. That's the first point I want to make clear. The second point is that living a household life, having a spouse and so forth-Buddha did not condemn that; a healthy sexual family life is permitted for laypeople, even though, as I said, this can never lead to full enlightenment.
But to answer your question: Not only in contemporary society, but also in Buddha's time, there were people who believed that sexuality is something holy, something noble, something sacred, something miraculous. So this is not only a modern, twentieth century social phenomenon. The mentality of people has always been the same from time immemorial, up to now, and into the future. There are always some people who think that through sexuality they can attain liberation, and that is what we call a distorted perception, distorted thinking.
WIE: This "distorted perception," as you call it, seems to be particularly prevalent nowadays, perennial though it may be. I'm referring to the increasingly popular notion that sexuality in and of itself, if it's pursued to the end, would be the very expression of enlightenment-and that because sexuality is the road to liberation, if you avoid it in any way, then you don't really have any hope of reaching the final goal. If possible I'd like to get a very clear indication of how the Buddha would have responded to that point of view.
BG: I am quite familiar with that. He said - and I am translating from Pali: "No matter what you may do or attain - you may live in a cave, in a solitary place, and you may have learned entire sutras; you may be a very erudite speaker; you may even practice morality and so forth and so on-no matter what else you do, until you get rid of your lust, your hatred, your ignorance, you will never attain enlightenment." This is the Buddha's teaching. So the more you engage in sexual activities the deeper you go in your lust, the deeper you get in your confusion, and the deeper you get in your jealousy. When a person, whether male or female, wants to get involved in sexual activities with so many different persons at the same time, then by the same token there are so many different ways that that person will suffer: from jealousy, fear, tension, worry. This is a very unhealthy, very unhealthy life. If somebody thinks of having sexual activities with all kinds of people in all different manners all the time, then that person would be dead very soon as a result of such unhealthy behavior. Now of course you have to understand at the same time that moderate, wise, healthy sexual activity is permissible. But all attaining enlightenment through sexuality means is: you go and engage in sexual activities until you die! And you will be dead before you reach that enlightenment!
|
