

Hm, I wonder the context for these words. Was Buddha not into women at all?
I mean, monks in general aren’t supposed to be. I guess he could have changed that doctrine, since it was his religion, but he didn’t, and who knows if it would have caught on the same.
sexual desire (kama) is one of the 5 sins (or vices to be exact translate). in indic religions, 5 vices are kama (sexual desire), krodh(anger), lobh(greed), moh(love/attachments), and ahenkar (pride). moh is a bit more complex, because prem (also love) is a good thing, consider relations which bind you with love to be moh, which liberate you to be prem. there is no equivalent for gluttony or sloth or envy from the western 7, rest match.
I do not know much about buddhism, but from my surrounding understanding, i guess it follows the same logic. either budhha considered female interaction kama, or in some case it might be moh. it could also be prem, but i guess you can not have prem with someone you just met (or moh for that matter), so it is very likely just kama. and to attain enlightment, one must overcome these 5 vices, and i guess budhha did.
sounds like my man was dissociating hard




