Four Zen monks were meditating in a monastery. All of a sudden the prayer flag on the roof started flapping. The younger monk came out of his meditation and said: "Flag is flapping" A more experienced monk said: "Wind is flapping" A third monk who had been there for more than 20 years said: "Mind is flapping." The fourth monk who was the eldest said, visibly annoyed: "Mouths are flapping!"
Is there a Buddhist perspective on this? Me and my lady friend are sort of doing it. Well, more she is, I'm happy with just her honestly. But I was wondering, does it represent non-attachment or just being greedy or? All thoughts appreciated.
posted by DA @ Friday, February 24, 2006
8 comments
8 Comments:
I think Thich Nhat Hanh once commented on this, comparing it to eating and painting at the same time, or something like that. Neither is honored to the extent it deserves, and the result is dissatisfaction with both activities.
When Suzuki Roshi, one the big boys of zen, was asked what the proper attitude towards sexual relations should be, he replied:
"Ah, SEX.........BIG problem!"
(Pregnant pause.)
"NO SEX.........BIG problem!"
The question seems to stem from confusing sex, infatuation ("romance") and genuine intimacy.
When you inquire about the "Buddhist" perspective, which "Buddhist" perspective are you speaking of? Tibetian? Indian? Chinese? Japanese? Each culture infused the Buddha's teachings with its own "flavor" and thus there is "one" Buddhism. And then, within each culture, different masters interpreted the teachings in their own, idiosyncratic ways. You can probably find some justification for this lifestyle in some "Buddhist" writings.
I would rather question this desire: seeking support from some "outside" authority (Buddhist or otherwise) on what is "right behavior." Instead of being a "sheeple" blindly walking like a lemming, folloing da others, why not stand on your own two feet and determine what is so for YOU and your partner? For one particular bodymind mechanism, such behavior might indicated greed or attachment. For another, it might signify an openness and lack of grasping. I think we each need to discover these things for ourselves, not basing our beliefs on what others have said. Look closely at your self, in both thought and non-thought, to determine what works for you, regardless of what "Buddhism" says.
Well, considering I have a pretty long history of arguing with Buddhists (especially Brad and hsi fans here) and am not myself a Buddhist, I suppose you COULD say I'm just looking for advice, not for authority.
But thank you for talking down to me, it's always a pleasure being condescended :-)
K'vitsh ~
I think "da" was referring to some of my comments ("Instead of being a "sheeple" blindly walking like a lemming, folloing da others, why not stand on your own two feet and determine what is so for YOU and your partner?").
And they were ill-spoken.
And mean-spirited.
I'm not denying or retracting the content of what I wrote. I am acknowledging, however, that the manner in which it was communicated was...insensitive.
I apologize to DA and the group at large.
I don't know about a Buddhist perspective, but there's one good book on the subject I'd recommend: "The Ethical Slut." Sorry, can't remember the author, but search on Amazon or B&N and you should see it.
From personal experience, I'd add that polyamorous relationships are VERY difficult to sustain. It's hard enough to find two people who can live together. Finding three is close to impossible, though the dynamics of such a relationship can teach you a lot about yourself, not all of it flattering. Good luck.
eotd: no harm, no foul. I appreciate the apology though.
Memory serves, I've actually been just as impolite to Jules, Brad, Ryunin, and probably others :-)
"though the dynamics of such a relationship can teach you a lot about yourself, not all of it flattering."
So Polyamory is kinda like Zazen!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home