Husband has sexual activity with other woman with the consent of wife

Upvote:-4

I marked this question down because it is Dhammically illogical and appears to attempt to justify sexual promiscuity with Dhammic principles. If a man had moral Dhammic commitment to stay with his injured wife then why would the same moral man have uncommitted sex with another woman (unless the woman was a prostitute)? The question makes no sense at all. I think the only way to phrase this question properly is: "Husband has sexual activity with a prostitute with the consent of wife". There is one explicit sutta that literally condemns having sex with prostitutes (although I can't remember it).

For those with a superstitious bent about karma & rebirth, it is obviously due to the man's past karma he has this wife & thus his duty is to look after her faithfully. Possibly in a past life, the man was a sexual abuser of women, such as a pimp or p**nography producer, therefore in this life he must look after this woman or otherwise have rebirth in the most severe hell. My guess it is the man's last chance at a 'human birth' before the earth opens up & swallows him into hell of fire.

Upvote:-2

It breaks the third precept whether or not there was wife's consent. Sexual misconduct include engaging sexual activities with multiple women...

Upvote:1

This is the third precept in Pāḷi:

kāmesu micchācārā veramaṇī-sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi

  • kāmesu is a locative (“in”) form of the word kāma and means “sexual desire”
  • micchācārā consists of micchā, which means “wrong”, and ācārā, which is an ablative (“from”) form of ācāra and means “way of behaving”
  • veramaṇī-sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi means “I undertake the precept of abstaining”

All the precept says is that one has to abstain from behaving badly in the matter of sexual lust. This is a pretty vague statement that depends on one's culture, and Buddhists from different cultures would surely disagree about what it exactly means.

That said, even a traditional Buddhist society could accept polyandry, so we can expect that most Buddhists would also accept the situation you describe, which can be classified as a form of polygamy.

Upvote:5

It does not break the third precept if the husband has the wife's willful(not forced) consent. It's somewhat similar to kings having more than one queen.

Having said that, there is no such thing as a "biological need" regarding sexual pleasures. Water is a biological need, air is a biological need, food is a biological need as you cannot survive without them. You do not need sex to live.

More post

Search Posts

Related post