5

Is it possible that Buddhist practice could cause a lack of interest or even repulsion of sex? Lately I have tried to have sex a few times and I felt uninterested and repulsed by it. I was so repulsed that I couldn't even function down there. It feels so pointless to go through this entire ritual which takes so much energy and time for this tiny moment of pleasure which feels like a sneeze. It all seems so disgusting, the smells, the fluids etc. It's all rather filthy and I feel like my entire aura is dirty after. I still have the desirous thoughts that lead me to seek it out but when I do it just doesn't happen. Is this a symptom of meditation practice?

4

Meditation can make the mind more sensitive to coarse/unrefined things however becoming accustomed to refined experiences of love or intimacy can also result in loveless sex feeling pointless & coarse.

Buddhism (example, the Piyavagga) refers to different levels or degrees of love, which accord with the natural purpose of love, which is to evolve from craving, to lust, to attachment, to affection, to endearment and finally to self-sacrifice (caga) & metta-karuna (friendship & compassion).

For example, the self-seeking lust of a teenager is different to the self-sacrificing love of a mother, as described in the Metta Sutta, as follows:

Even as a mother protects with her life Her child, her only child, so with a boundless heart Should one cherish all living beings...

In your previous question, you referred to a 17 year "intimate" relationship, which came to an end. Often, random sexual acts feel pointless after intimate love is known because sex itself is something the developed human grows/evolves out of, in favour of intimacy & friendship.

It is like becoming accustomed to eating good food. If one is forced to eat bad food, the bad food is not enjoyable. Similarly, random sex after the ending of an intimate relationship can be unenjoyable because life evolves forwards or upwards rather than falls backwards, which is described in MN 75:

Suppose, Māgandiya, a householder or a householder’s son was rich, with great wealth and property, and being provided and endowed with the five cords of sensual pleasure, he might enjoy himself with forms cognizable by the eye…with sounds cognizable by the ear…with odours cognizable by the nose…with flavours cognizable by the tongue…with tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for, desired, agreeable, and likeable, connected with sensual desire and provocative of lust. Having conducted himself well in body, speech, and mind, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he might reappear in a happy destination, in the heavenly world in the retinue of the gods of the Thirty-three; and there, surrounded by a group of nymphs in the Nandana Grove, he would enjoy himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasure. Suppose he saw a householder or a householder’s son enjoying himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of human sensual pleasure. What do you think, Māgandiya? Would that young god surrounded by the group of nymphs in the Nandana Grove, enjoying himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasure, envy the householder or the householder’s son for the five cords of human sensual pleasure or would he be enticed by human sensual pleasures?

“No, Master Gotama. Why not? Because divine sensual pleasures are more excellent and sublime than human sensual pleasures.”

  • 2
    That's the first time I've seen this doctrine about the "natural purpose" and evolution of love. – ChrisW Oct 16 '17 at 10:04
  • 3
    Its my own theory rather than officially Buddhist but this is how life works. Young people are driven by lust, then grow in attachment, have children, then learn to sacrifice & be compassionate. Many doctrines refers to different grades of love, It isn't rocket science. – Dhammadhatu Oct 16 '17 at 11:56
  • Mods are censoring comments - lame. How are people supposed to have an honest open conversation when our comments are deleted. I see nothing wrong with anyhting I have said. – Arturia Oct 17 '17 at 21:46
  • I vaguely recall your comment, here, but then it was deleted. To answer your comment, I recall I posted elsewhere that in the Pali suttas another person sharing mutual (non-sexual) qualities is considered a suitable partner. Therefore, per the suttas, having sex before committing to a relationship is not considered necessary. I acknowledge this might be different in gay relationships because hetero relationships were traditionally planned in advance around family & children thus this is a shared mutual quality that goes beyond merely two people. Childless relationships can have less mutuality. – Dhammadhatu Oct 18 '17 at 10:10
2

It sounds like it's a symptom of meditation practice, but at the same time it sounds like an intermediate stage on the path to full understanding. You have understood that sense-pleasures are a distraction from what's real and that even the notion that they're "good" and should be sought is just an optional thought in your head, not a law of nature, but this has led you to develop an aversion to the sense perceptions that come with intimate contact and now you're attached to that aversion and the concept that these perceptions feel "bad". You have only replaced the attachment to pleasure with an attachment to displeasure. :)

Try to continue down the path and see all physical sensations as just physical sensations, not "good", not "bad", not compelling you to always reflexively or compulsively seek them, not compelling you to always run away from them, just physical things that are happening in an interaction of human bodies.

On the other hand, go deeper into what makes you want a relationship in the first place. Is it to get some sense-pleasures from some physical interactions or is it to love and be loved? If you discover you have some deeper motive than simple physical pleasure then you should be able to use that motive to color all your physical interactions with that person, and get to where you see all sense-perceptions that you create together as manifestations of what, fundamentally, has brought and keeps the two of you together. (This should also help in getting you past the roadblock you were talking about that is everyone's expectation that you "put out" right from the start - if you're clear on why, deeply, fundamentally, you want to be with that person, and keep that deeper reason at the forefront of your mind through all interactions, all physical sensations you get with them - even during "too early" intercourse - should become as acceptable or "positive" as that original motive itself.)

[Note: "not good, not bad" is a non-dualist teaching, specific to Mahayana, Zen, Advaita Vedanta, Daoism and the like. Adepts of Theravadist traditions may disagree with this framing.]

  • Yes. 'Higher' love can admit 'lower' things as unavoidable. If you garden, your hands will get dirty. One can still love the garden and its development. Your answer is well said. – user2341 Oct 17 '17 at 14:32
  • Well thanks for the advise but I can't be myself here and leave honest comments because I get moderated. – Arturia Oct 17 '17 at 21:51
2

I would argue that, logically, some meditators -- who are not necessarily affiliated with Buddhism -- still have sex and do not live a celibate life. Therefore, meditation in itself is unlikely to cause disgust as you describe.

However, some things must be kept in mind. There are different types of meditation, leading to different results. Contemplating the impurities of the body, for example, might cause what you describe.

Within Buddhism, sexuality isn't immoral, but rather leads to subsequent suffering. This is because of the nature of attachment, especially such gross types of attachment as sexual desire. The Dalai Lama has claimed sexuality is always a source of suffering.

Since you speak of auras, I suspect you are into spirituality which may not necessarily subscribe to Buddhism. Buddhism itself allows sexuality, as long as it isn't sexual misconduct. I imagine your feelings of disgust arise from conditions distinct from meditation, and if this is the case, then the answer requires considerations beyond what is currently available to me.

Hope you'll figure out this situation,

Eggman.

1

Have you, during Buddhist/medidation practice, contemplated sex and realized that you're repulsed by it, disgusted by it, aura dirty when doing it? Or has Buddhist/medidation practice lead you to contemplation of sex and realization that you're repulsed by it, disgusted by it, aura dirty when doing it?

If yes, then your repulsion is a symptom of Buddhist/meditation practice.

If no, then your repulsion can be a symptom of something else. This doesn't mean that it can't be from Buddhist/meditation practice. It still can be from Buddhist/meditation practice, but it can also be a symptom of something else, completely unrelated to Buddhist/meditation practice.

  • My first reaction was that it sounded like depression. – user2341 Oct 17 '17 at 14:29
0

Yes, because sex is five strands of sensuality, that the buddha called that it is the first of 3 very big suffering, mahādukkhandha, in mahādukkhakkhandhaSutta.

The lack of interest in five strands of sensuality, is require, before the practitioner will begin both of concentration meditation and insight meditation.

  • @Bonn...I think, beside the monks, there are very few lay followers who aren't trapped in sensuality. Do you think it's right for people who are still trapped in sensuality to at list do Samatha meditation? – user10552 Oct 16 '17 at 7:38
  • I am a layman. So, I never denied lay people to do concentration meditation. It is just your idea. Moreover, don't try to protect the laymen by spoil them. There are very few lay man who can attains lokiya-jhāna, too. Why? Recite mahādukkhakkhandhaSutta, the answer is inside that sutta. – Bonn Oct 16 '17 at 9:49
  • I'm not trying to protect anyone I was just trying to understand what you mean by "required"... Anyways, thanks. – user10552 Oct 16 '17 at 11:17
  • My english is very terrible. I'm so sorry, too. I trying to improve it. – Bonn Oct 16 '17 at 11:41
0

It is indeed the case that, if a person were to contemplate on the decomposition of the human body after death, he or she would develop a temporary disinterest in sex, but not necessarily a repulsion towards sex. Indeed, the cemetery contemplations can (but not necessarily) result in a blissful experience of full samadhi. It is a serious misconception of Buddhist celibacy to assume that it involves or requires a repulsion of sex. On YouTube, the Dalai Lama talks about how attractive he finds beautiful women. I suggest that, while the practice of some forms of Buddhist meditation can result in a temporary disinterest in sex, it would result in a repulsion towards sex only if the repulsion was already present to some degree. I therefore suggest that there are karmic reasons for your repulsion of sex. If this is the case, then there is much benefit in gaining insight into the karmic-formation (sankhara) involved, just as it is beneficial to gain insight into any karmic-formation. (Gaining insight into any sankhara is always liberating.) It is important to know that the only purpose of developing disinterest (and not repulsion) is to prepare for upacara samadhi, an objective, calm, undistracted, and focused state of mind that is conducive to psychological insight (which, in turn, is required to overcome suffering and, eventually, achieve Enlightenment). There is also a profound difference between casual sex and sex in a deeply loving relationship. Finding casual sex to be repulsive is a consideration profoundly different from finding loving sex to be repulsive. The fact that you are talking about interpersonal sex as a “ritual” indicates to me that you are experiencing a repulsion of sex that is not related to Buddhist meditation but to a childhood experience of physical, emotional, and/or sexual abuse that should be discussed with a psychotherapist rather than Buddhist teacher.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.