Why is tickling considered sinful in Buddhism
It's not generally considered sinful, but monks are not allowed to tickle each other. The canonical explanation is that one time a few monks literally tickled another monk to death, so the Buddha banned monks from tickling each other.If you ever have a question about why some weird rule exists in Buddhism, just read the Vinaya, and literally all the rules have a story about why they exist.
Same reason you have to leave when Muhammad stops talking to you when you are visiting him.Religious rules are to relieve the insecurities of those on top.
Because it's sexual assault. Humans are ticklish, because of our erogenous zones. So tickling is intrinsically linked to Eros. Have you ever tickled a child? Yeah, that's technically pedophilia.
>>18109643>Humans are ticklish, because of our erogenous zones.Thought it was our pain receptors and tickling is seen as a pain response>So tickling is intrinsically linked to Eros.Pretty sure the Greeks are just freaks.
>>18109643TFW I will never get to witness all the times tickling was used as a torture method throughout history.
>>18109643>>18109658I never understood what was so sexual about tickling, the most ticklish places are the stomach/neck/armpits/kneepits/feet. These arent sexual places (ignoring the deranged footfags)
>>18109733Those places are all quite erogenous, are you dumb. Having someone touch any of those places is very intimate
>>18109733Well, turns out they actually are. How do you adjust your worldview now that you have new information?
>>18109738How do you explain the kneepits then? No sane person gets aroused from kneepits.
>>18109760I do. They're cute and vulnerable. Not even a fetish of mine or anything. They're just pleasing to look at and fun to tease
>>18109557>Go to Buddhistland>Gets your pickle tickled for a nickle>The person you hired goes to fucking HellNice religion there, NOT!
>>18109762You are sick in the head. Bet you have a foot fetish too
>>18109768What's wrong with appreciating the human body
>>18109779Nothing, its the erogenous label thats the problem. Next you are going to tell me that the eyes are an erogenous zone because people find beauty in them. Perhaps hair too?
>>18109788I don't see the problem in deriving an erotic charge from anything involving one's lover. Certain glances can make you feel aroused. I'm not sure whether you are annoyed about people finding these things sexually appealing in any context, or just the label of sexual being applied to different body parts/functions!!!
>>18109557Its a monastic rule because of an incident where one monk was ticking another and this nearly killed the monk due to it making him faint/out of breathe. The monastic rule was created there because they wanted to establish an order to conduct right livelihood in that environment. Its not a "sin" or even banned for lay people. Its just a rules of conduct in a professional environment.
>>18109791Erogenous zones are about touch. Unless you grab the photons from the eye glances midair and starting rubbing them till she cums, its not an erogenous zoneAt the rate you are going, cars are going to start having erogenous zones
>>18109804Sure. So what's the problem with all those other places being erogenous zones. You can turn a girl on like crazy touching them
>>18109813The armpits? The vast majority would be too squeamish to get turned on unless they specifically had a tickle fetish
>>18109828Girls will let you tickle torture them to death if they like you
>>18109733>touching someone and having them writhe and wriggle from the sensation isn't sexual Boy howdy anon Let me tell you about cuddling. Turns out, when people lay next to each other and put each other's hands on each other, the way they squirm and sigh or wiggle to adjust their position can be intensely erotic. Tickling is similar but has a more BDSM slant because you are inflicting it on someone.
>>18109733feetchads own you, tranny
>>18109658did I just get a new fetish
