Skip to main content

sex, drugs, rock and roll: 'viveka' is not 'seclusion'


This is the TITWOW Syndrome : TITWOW = Translators Irritatingly Translate With One Word 


I explore the meaning and translation of the term in detail here:

4👑☸ → EBpedia📚 → viveka  

citing the suttas that most clearly show viveka can not be (just) seclusion,

but more along the lines of wisdom, discernment, discrimination, judgment, 

just as the sanskrit dictionary definition states (which doesn't even list 'seclusion' as an option!)


sex, drugs, rock and roll

Here I want to explore 'viveka' in the context of first jhāna's relation to Kāma (sensuality),

and show why 'viveka' can not be (unqualified) seclusion.


Suppose you're the parents of two teenage kids, one boy, one girl, who just hit the puberty age, where hormones are running wild and they're exposed to all kinds of temptations and dangers involving sex, drugs, rock and roll.


The right way to train your kids, is with 'viveka'.

But which viveka? Here are three kinds of viveka, as interpreted by Buddhist translators of first jhāna.


1. 'viveka' = 'seclusion' from five cords of sensual pleasures 

99% of translators seem to go with this option.

So following this strategy, the way you, as parents would protect your teenage kids, are to 'seclude' them from sex, drugs, rock and roll.

You don't allow them to have a boy friend or girl friend until they graduate college.

You don't allow them to wear provocative clothing.

You don't allow them to spend any time alone with someone of the opposite sex.

You don't allow them to watch any sensual media, movies, music, etc.

You don't allow them to talk to or associate with any friends who are into sex, drugs, rock and roll, etc.

You get the idea.

You seclude them from bad influences, and any possible link to contact with bad things.

 

2. 'viveka' = 'discernment', understanding the nature of the five cords of sensual pleasures 


Keren Arbel translates that way (see viveka 10 – misc.).

Unlike the parents of #1, the parents of #2  realize if they just they 'seclude' their kids in a protective bubble devoid of sex, drugs, rock and roll, but don't teach their kids why those elements are dangerous,  it's unlikely the kids are going to suddenly figure out the dangers themselves.

What's more likely to happen, is the kids are going to become even more intensely interested in sex, drugs, rock and roll, disobey their parents, and embrace the very dangers their parents wish them to avoid. 
What a thrill, to do the taboo.


(to be continued...)






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha
Post a Comment
Read more

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a
Post a Comment
Read more

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex
Post a Comment
Read more