The art of erotic deconstruction
This image from an EIZO medical imaging “pinup” calendar reminds me of an ancient Buddhist deconstructive technique that aims to remind us of impermanence and to lessen sexual craving.
Here’s a late example from Shantideva’s Bodhicaryavatara:
She … on embracing whom you experienced the highest bliss;
She is nothing but bones … why do you not willingly cuddle them and feel bliss?
This next one’s older. It’s by Rajadatta, who was a monk at the time of the Buddha. This is him describing how he became Enlightened:
I, a monk, gone to the charnel ground, saw a woman cast away, discarded there in the cemetery. Though some were disgusted, seeing her — dead, evil — lust appeared, as if I were blind to the oozings. In less time than it takes for rice to cook, I got out of that place. Mindful, alert, I sat down to one side. Then apt attention arose in me, the drawbacks appeared, disenchantment stood at an even keel: With that, my heart was released. See the Dhamma’s true rightness! The three knowledges have been attained; the Awakened One’s bidding, done.
It might strike you that visualizing someone of the opposite sex (I’m sure nuns did the same kind of deconstructive reflections) as a collection of bones is dehumanizing, but actually it’s the opposite. When we see someone primarily as an object for our gratification, we’re not really seeing them as a human being at all. When we bear in mind their mortality we’re able to step away from our grasping attitude and create a space in which compassion can develop.
The pin-up above is very clever. It takes a model in a classic erotic pose, but for me at least the photographic medium makes it impossible to find the woman arousing. I find myself longing to have sexual longing, and at the same time I find myself thinking the whole business of lust is rather ridiculous. Which is what Shantideva was trying to point out. Rajadatta was, I think, also baffled, and even frightened, by his sexual arousal at the sight of a corpse, which isn’t — in any real sense — a human being.
You can see the whole range of “pinups” here.
8 Responses to “The art of erotic deconstruction”
Leave your comment below
About this entry
You’re currently reading “The art of erotic deconstruction,” an entry on Bodhipaksa's blog, bodhi tree swaying
Published: Jun 22 2010
V. thought provoking, from ‘erotic’ x-ray to Shantideva to objectification and mortality, then back to the pin-up, which is a rather surrealistic image. Blimey.
Thank you very much, my mind has been, stretched/bewildered/confused.
With metta,
Nicola
Thanks! I aim to baffle
I remember reading the “advice” of a Muslim scholar who was trying to help sexually frustrated youth from committing carnal sins by pointing out that women are disgusting because they answer the call of nature (his description was more graphic, but I don’t appreciate his approach).
If that approach was to work, imagine the influence it would have on married couples and their sex life.
Just because skeletons aren’t sexy, does that mean we shouldn’t view women as being sexy?
I think it’s important to consider context and the appropriate degree of awareness suitable in any situation. For example, I wouldn’t smack another human being and say: “Hey! What’s the big deal? We’re only atoms!”
While that may be true, it’s not a suitable angle to view the situation by.
It’s better to understand sexual arousal and the proper, decent role it can play in our lives rather than undermine it with out-of-context observations.
Having said all that, I’m currently studying the Alexander Technique and finding the human skeleton to be extremely beautiful.
Hi again, Haider.
You ask, “Just because skeletons aren’t sexy, does that mean we shouldn’t view women as being sexy?”
If we find women sexy, then we find women sexy. I was trying to make the point in my little piece, probably with insufficient clarity, that the practice of contemplating the impermanence of the people (or even things) we’re attracted to can help us to see them more clearly. My desire (to take a pertinent but straightforward example) for a shiny, pristine iPad is altered when I consider that in a couple of years the device will be scuffed, scratched, dented, and looking old-fashioned compared to more up-to-date models. That helps me to decide whether I really want an iPad, or whether I’m simply attracted to novelty.
Similarly, contemplating a woman’s mortality helps me to clarify whether I am attracted to her as a person, or just as a sex-object — that is, we don’t see her at all, but see simply an opportunity for self-gratification. Rajadatta’s experience is interesting, because he found that the sight of a woman’s naked curves was erotic, even though there was in fact no woman there — just the mortal remains of what had been a woman. I guess that led him to reflect deeply about the nature of his attraction to women.
My wife is one day going to be very old and wrinkled. If I wasn’t able to see past her present physical attractiveness and to see her, then at some stage I would end up causing both of us a lot of suffering.
It’s not just a question of seeing the impermanent physical reality of the other person, but of recognizing that she is a feeling being, which I think takes care of your “we’re only atoms” point.
I’d see all of this as being, in fact part of the process of “understanding physical arousal” that you talk about, and part of the project of seeing sex in its proper role in our life — neither repressing our sexual desire nor being controlled by it, but putting it in the context of human frailty and of genuinely affectionate human relationships.
Not recognizing that my wife is a human being, with her own thoughts, feelings, interests and ambitions means that I’m narrowing my vision to the point where I’m not taking into account all the facts that I need to take into consideration to make sensible decisions.
But I prefer to recognize these things and make the most of our youth right now than bring into my awareness that, in a few years from now, she’ll be frail and ugly (don’t tell her I said this
). It helps me appreciate our youth, rather than be disappointed by it.
I’ll be happy to buy an iPad right now, even if it’ll be useless in a year’s time. But I don’t find a use for it right now, so I don’t feel the need to buy it.
Some facts can be useful in helping us adjust our outlook. There’s no doubt about that. Personally, I’d rather not think about my wife’s internal mechanisms and physiological needs when I embrace her.
Yeah, there’s a time and place for thinking about your wife’s physiology!
But as far as impermanence goes, you might want to take a look at Eric D. Miller, “Imagining loss and mortality salience: Consequences for romantic-relationship satisfaction.” Social Behavior And Personality Journal 31, no. 2 (2003): 167–180.
Miller asked people to imagine the death of their partner they reported that they felt more positive about their relationships and less troubled by their significant others’ annoying quirks. Other research has shown that an awareness of the shortness of time we have enhances our appreciation of the present moment. So it may well be worthwhile to contemplate your honey’s mortality.
Oh, I do contemplate her mortality, and it does make me realize how pointless some arguments are.
However, my contemplation doesn’t involve a rotting corpse.
Neither do I. It’s a rather extreme practice.