I don’t get it… who are you hurting? How many people in history have refused to bear children because masturbation was preferable? I can’t think of any reason any church would be against it, other than, “it feels good”.
Some of them date from before we knew how conception worked. There was an idea that the sperm, all by itself, was something that could grow into a human being if it found itself in a woman’s uterus. If you believed that, you could think masturbation (or anything other than vaginal sex) was a form of murder. The human egg and its role in conception wasn’t discovered until the nineteenth century.
A lot of our religions also date back to a time when overpopulation was not a problem. Remember, the world’s population didn’t really start taking off until the 19th century. It’s beneficial to pretty much any religion to have more followers.
I don’t know about all religions, but in Judeo-Christianity, it seems to arise from interpretation (or maybe misinterpretation) of a passage in Genesis. Onan “spilled his seed” (withdrew before ejaculation) instead of impregnating his dead brother’s wife, as he was supposed to do. God punished him, we’re told, by death. Scholars have debated for eons about whether this passage has had to do more with masturbation or just disobedience, but the non-procreational-sex proponents have dominated.
In any case, sex that produces progeny means more members for whatever the religion is. That factors in, too.
I see what you both are saying, but masturbation never prevented anyone from bearing offspring who was capable of doing so.
Because most religions generally limit sex: who you can have sex with, how often, in what way.
It’s because sex is a powerful drive that most people have, so by putting up all kinds of taboos around it, people will transgress (sin) and then feel guilty. Or they will spend a lot of energy on trying to keep from transgression.
Both ways the people will be too occupied to bother with other things, so that keeps them docile.
Masturbation is esp. powerful in that regard - most teenagers do it, so if it’s forbidden, there’s heaps of guilt to go around. Add in that this sin can only be forgiven under certain circumstances = power leverage.
It, like every other activity, has opportunity costs. If you’re masturbating right now, you’re not having sex that could result in a child. You’re not doing anything to advance the cause of your religion in the world. A lot of religions frown on activities they consider a waste of time. If you think wasting time on non-productive activities is bad, then activities that are enjoyable but non-productive are something to be discouraged.
Probably for the same reason they’re generally against watching pr0n instead of going to a dance with your best girl, and the same reason if you have a choice between buying a cool new video game or buying a tennis racket and calling up your friend to challenge him to a match, they’ll strongly urge the latter.
Religion in general has seen itself as society’s superego, in loco parentis to its adherents. It’s job is to urge you to stop lazing about, to get out of bed, to look for a job, to say please and thank you, to be respectful to your elders, to share your toys with your brothers and sisters, marry sincerely, work hard, and put your shoulder as often as possible to the wheel o’ civilization so it keeps turning 'round.
Which is to say, life is divided into activities of consumption and production. Eating a great meal, buying a Ferrari, beating “Call of Duty : Special Ops,” or beating your meat to a hot model stripping are all acts of consumption. You enjoy what other people labor to produce. Cooking a great meal, fixing the fuel pump on a Ferrari, designing the graphics for “Call of Duty,” or learning to please a woman in bed are all acts of production. Your labor produces goods for others. Religions generally assume that your own drives will keep you consuming as much as any sane person could want, and that the real place you need help from outside is to commit yourselt to enough acts of production to keep the whole creaky social shebang going. Hence their focus.
Where you go wrong, I think, is in assuming that a religion sets itself up as a complete master plan for life, sort of a giant operating system that specifies and controls your every choice – and that, therefore, should specify just what fraction of your sexual activity should be other-centered intercourse, and how much can be self-centered onanism.
That may be the cartoon version of religion, in which it leaves no room at all for individual liberty. But all practical, successful religions see themsevles as more senior advisor, mentor and proxy judge (meaning they do not claim to judge you themselves, but only to convey to you in words you understand what the Real Judge thinks of you.) They necessarily take into account what already exists in your motivations, intentions, nature, et cetera, and where necessary form themselves into a counterweight. Think of “Render unto Caesar,” eh? They don’t usually add subtlety to their counter-pressure because (1) it isn’t necessary, and (2) it muddies up the clarity of the message, which is a problem for the less bright, and (3) encourages hair-splitting among the overly bright.
To put it crudely: the practical priest does not think the young male needs encourage to masturbate, or needs to be told the minimal level necessary to keep the ducts open. He figures the young male needs encouragement to not spend all of his time whacking off to pr0n from the Internet, and to go out and take he longer, harder route (so to speak) of courting a girl.
Or to put it another way: you’ll note that the Fifth Commandment is “Thou shalt not kill.” Plain, unmistakable, to the point. Even a moron gets it. But, gosh, you might say, is that not unreasonable? Shouldn’t it say “Thou shalt not kill – except unless some blackheart bugger is threatening to kill you and rape your wife, but only if he has a weapon or is actually inside your house, except in some cases (like the police are more than an hour away) it would be OK on your front porch, too – oh, and if you’re like a sworn police officer, and you happen to know the guy is on the lam from a triple-murder charge in Connecticut, you could shoot to klll, provided you shouted a warning to stop first, which contained at least the following language…”
Adults understand that their are subtleties, gray areas, that reasonable men can disagree at the boundaries. But they also understand that the general plain simple statement – DO NOT kill people, it’s BAD – is a useful glue holding society together. In the same sense, the philosophy has been that a simple statement lacking the accepted and understood subtleties – stop beating off and expend your sexual energies forming liasons with girls, the way God (Allah, et cetera) meant – is generall helpful.
Shame.
Most people would feel embarrassed about masturbating in front of friends and family (everyone else: please share anecdotes). And religions are great for giving grand justifications for primitive instincts and feelings.
At this point you may argue: “But I’d be ashamed to have sex in front of friends and family”. And I’d say: that’s partly why sex is almost always considered part of religion’s remit.
Though ironically, because of the significance of actual intercourse, few religions just outright call it sinful in all contexts.
Can we have a cite that “most religions” are opposed to it? I know that most Christian sects, if they say anything at all about it, are opposed, but I honestly have no idea what the Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or Shinto view towards masturbation is.
Shinto is all for it, since when guys do it they’re “Turning Japanese”.
Many religions have a puritan tendency - the guys who set the “thou shalt not…” rules feel that if it feels good, it must be sinful. This probably is an extension of the fact that many sins ARE fun, and especially fun for the perpetrator. However, sins like gluttony, or nonconsensual sex, or adultery can be very disruptive to the proper functioning of society.
The ancient Greeks had the tennet IIRC about “everything in moderation”. Many religious reformers do not harken to this message, but instead take the attitude, ban everything, and you will definitely ban the bad things. You can see this tendency where protestant reformers banned church decoration as leading to idolatry, distracting from the glory of God, etc. Moslems ban the depiction of people or animals that might lead to idolatry rather than true faith. Many sects feel dancing, music, getting drunk and similar “good times” are the devils’ work, since they lead to even more misbehaviour.
Of course, what could be worse than something that makes you feel real good, takes you away from hard work, and makes you think about doing even more, evil, things? Conveniently too, all teenage boys do it so it’s something that you can berate them for to make them feel guilty. Nothing encourages piety and puts a damper on a good mood like guilt.
Dude, you just scared the crap outa me.:eek:
Judaism: Forbidden.
Islam: Forbidden.
Hinduism: Not specifically forbidden, but there are better things you could be doing with your time.
Buddhism: Not forbidden as long as you are not harming another.
************Shinto: Encouraged as an alternative to marital infidelity. *MOD NOTE. This link NSFW.
It never prevented anyone, but it certainly made the single life a lot more palatable.
In societies where the single life is not palatable, kids get married and have kids sooner. And if you want to expand your religion kids are better than converts.
Not Safe For Work!!
I can only speak for Christianity, as I’m unfamiliar with other religions’ stances. The best explanation I’ve heard places the prohibition under “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. The broad definition of “adultery” is “sexual activity with any person who is not your legal spouse”. Thus, any sexual activity outside of marriage — premarital sex, homosexual sex, incest, bestiality, etc.* — falls under the categorical umbrella of “adultery”. Masturbation is included because you’re essentially having sex with yourself, and obviously you are not your spouse. I’m personally in agreement with the Jewish opinion (as I understand it) that the story of Onan has nothing to do with masturbation and everything to do with disobeying the law regarding fathering a child on your brother’s widow.
- The “Ten Commandments” are the “general”. All the other Old Testament laws, as far as I can tell, are the “specifics”, simply taking “Thou shalt/shalt not X” and spelling out what qualifies as “X”. It’s one reason why I’ve never understood the obsession some Christians have with homosexuality. It isn’t really given any more emphasis in the Old Testament law than any other kind of non-married sex — in fact, I think the OT law spends a lot more time defining incest than homosexuality, yet you don’t see whole “churches” publicly campaigning against it.
I wonder if this an urban legend of sorts-I find it hard to believe that people never noticed or remarked upon any matrilineal resemblances in someone’s children.
I can’t speak for all religions, but in (Orthodox) Judaism, the attitude is that the creation of life is a G-dly act and to intentionally waste one of components is a disrespect for the holiness inherent in that potential.
It’s a breeding strategy from the old days: generally you wanted to procreate as much as possible, since people were dying left and right (and infant mortality was very high). Masturbation is a waste of perfectly good sperm, from that point of view.