User:So47009/沙盒

世界各地的宗教對自慰的看法差異很大。一些宗教認為它對靈性是有害的；一些則與此相反，認為它不會對靈性構成損害；亦有宗教對自慰採用情境道德的觀點。後來這些宗教中亦出現了一種全新的看法： 如果自慰的目的是用作在性事上自控，或是健全的自我探索的一部分 ，那麼就會接受之；但若是實行者的動機不純或成癮， 則不會接受。

亞伯拉罕諸教

聖經學

傳統上，俄南的聖經故事（創世紀38章）是用以譴責自慰的依據，但這個故事中所寫的只是性交中斷， 而不是自慰。聖經中沒有明確指出自慰是有罪的。

俄南受到譴責的原因在於一種前科學（prescientific）的思想：認為人的兒女本身就容纳在精子中，如同植物容纳在種子中一樣

伊洛娜·N·拉什科夫（Ilona.N Rashkow）指出：「在希伯來聖經中，自慰會否當作一種『消極的』性活動仍是不能確定的。」 瓊斯（Jones）等人引述詹姆斯·約翰遜關於自慰的聖經觀點：「它把孤獨的性經驗，無論是夢遺還是自慰，看成一種純粹的象征性衛生問題，而不是道德問題。」他們説道：「約翰遜認為利未記第15章16-18節為自慰定下调子，第16節和第17節指出一個曾射精的人應該洗身，且直到黃昏以前也應視為不潔，第18節繼續指出若男人和女人有過性交，此規則亦同樣適用。此一片段肯定意味著男性個體發生了如第16節和第17節所説的『獨自射精』，此一片段指的可能是遺精而不是自慰，但它並未明確指出。約翰遜認為這段利未記的段落對於如何看待獨自一人的性經歷是重要的，無論是遺精還是自慰，都應只視為一種純粹的象征性衛生問題，而不是道德問題。這段經文亦沒把獨自的性經歷跟性交差異對待。由於今天的基督徒普遍認為舊約儀式法不再有效，故此該位著者指出從聖經的角度而言，自慰本身不是一個在道德上值得關心的問題，亦不是一種純粹的象征性衛生問題。」

T·J·雷（T.J Wray）曾對聖經實際上如何描述自慰作出解釋：「《利未记》中就著性禁忌所提出的列表連『自慰』一詞也沒有提到。」 她繼而討論創世紀第38章和利未記第15章，並得出結論：「這些都不代表《聖經》明確譴責自慰。」

卡爾·L·杰杰（Carl L.Jech）則說道：「聖經中從來沒有提到自慰。」 M.K. 馬蘭（M.K Malan）和韋恩·布洛（Vern Bullough）指出 「聖經中沒有一處明確提及或譴責自慰……在聖經或摩門教之書中，都沒提過自慰。」

根據《牛津神學、性和性別手冊》（The Oxford Handbook of Theology, Sexuality, and Gender），一些學者認為馬太福音第5章第29-30節、第18章第6-9節和馬可福音第9章第42-48節中所選用的「手」一詞可能代表着自慰，如同在《米書拿》 (m. Nid. 2.1)中所使用的一樣。關於那些聖經段落，《牛津聖經和性別研究百科全書》（The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Gender Studies）則引用了將·戴明（Will Deming）的看法：「當中所提到的眼睛、手和腳的罪惡可能來自傳統的警告套话，反對視姦（眼睛）、自慰（手）和通姦（腳；它是希伯來語對生殖器的委婉稱呼）。」 除了眼睛，戴明認為「手在情慾中發揮了一項主要的作用，由自慰便可見。」

基督教

目前為止，羅馬天主教和東正教仍視自慰為一種罪惡

早期教會

希臘埃及裔教父克萊曼特（150－約215年）在他的《導師基督》（Paedagogus）中寫到：

因為它的意義在於讓人類傳宗接代，種子不是拿來讓人枉然地射出去，亦不是拿來作損害之用， 更加不是拿來浪費的

像拉吉·巴拉以及凯思琳·库尼（Kathryn M. Kueny）般的學者認為，克萊曼特的聲明包括性交中斷和自慰，這些行為會「損害自然。」根據Kueny的說法，「使用殺精劑」也包括在內。約翰·G·揚格認為克萊曼特在他的《導師基督》中提到自慰，以及「陽剛的女性和柔弱的男性」，並指出違反自然的意思是「為了繁殖以外的目的而行使性行為。」

埃及靈智派拜占庭式教堂神父兼教會聖師撒拉米的伊皮法纽（310/320–403年），在他的《药库》中指出：

他們行使了生殖器行為，卻不能懷上孩子。他們这樣做並不是為了生產後代，而是為了滿足情慾，這樣的人究竟是否堕落？

約翰·T·諾南說道伊皮法纽所描述的諾斯底派把「非享樂性行為」視為他們宗教的核心。伊皮法纽認為享樂性行為皆是「魔鬼所行的儀式」，包括但不限於性交中斷、自慰和同性性行為 。東方正統教會的聖徒聖謝諾（348-466年）把自慰視為性的「不端行為」 和「徹頭徹尾的性非法活動」。

羅伯特·貝克（Robert Baker）相信教會聖師兼拉丁裔教父希波的奥古斯丁（354–430年）將自慰視為一種罪惡。像梅丽·E.威斯納 - 漢克斯和卡莉·丹尼爾 - 休斯（Carly Daniel-Hughes）般的學者認為奥古斯丁譴責所有與生育此一意義相違背的性活動，包括同性性行為和自慰。基於《羅馬書》第一章，卡莉（Carly）亦認為奧古斯丁也把互相撫慰視為「違反自然的性行為」 。另一位教會聖師兼拉丁裔教父圣依西多禄，把自慰視為一種「柔弱的」習慣，雖然早期的懺悔者並不特別同意他。 依西多禄在《詞源》中指出自慰是一位男性侮辱「他的性功能」的一種手段。

然而，對此抱有異議的天主教道德神學家查爾斯·科蘭宣稱「教會的神父在自慰此一簡單問題上基本說不出話來。」 亞瑟J.米爾克（Arthur J. Mielke）指出詹姆斯·布倫戴奇的觀點是：「自古以來，性幻想此一議題對基督教著者而言並不重要，直到4-5世紀修道院崛起之時。」然而布倫戴奇在他的書中指出，那些著者沒有「對這事十分重視……[他們]很少關注自慰和同性戀」 。

喬瓦尼·卡普利的觀點跟詹姆斯·F·基南的一樣，認為修道士社區發展之時，他們的性生活受到當時的兩個神學家約翰·卡西安（365–433年）以及亚尔勒之该撒留（470–543年）的調查，他們倆評論了「孤獨」的「罪惡」。卡普利聲稱「他們所關注的只是要求修道士保持貞節的發誓，而不是自慰。修道士的承諾使自慰成了非法行為，但它本身不被認為是罪惡。」基南補充說：「事實上，正如卡普利、路易斯·克蘭普頓和布倫戴奇所言，在卡西安以前，不論自慰由誰進行，都不算是性犯罪。」

但是布倫戴奇（Brundage）在他的著作中寫道：「卡西安認為自慰和遺精是性道德的核心問題，並對它們十分關注……卡西安認為遺精是一項非常重要的問題，因為它是有欲望的一種表現；如果修道士沒有克服它，那麼便会危及其宗教生活，並使他得不到救贖。」卡西安曾用「污穢」（immunditia，如同歌羅西書3章5節的用法）一詞代指自慰和遺精，明顯地將自慰視為其不可接受的「性釋放」方法。 卡西安在《论共同生活之制度》（De institutis coenobiorum）中特別強調道：「淫亂之罪包括自慰和性幻想。」布倫戴奇指出亚尔勒的觀點跟卡西安如出一轍。布道In his Sermons, Caesarius considers "any sexual longing, to say nothing of deliberate self-stimulation, a serious sin and placed it on an even footing with adultery or excessive indulgence in sex by married persons". According to Simon Lienyueh Wei, as cited by some scholars, John Cassian and Augustine of Hippo hold that it is a sin if the emission is the outcome of "a lustful encounter or pleasurable recollection"; otherwise, it is seen as "a physical function".

Mark W. Elliott says that Pope Gregory I (c. 540 – 604)—commonly known as Gregory the Great, a Latin Church Father and Doctor of the Church—treats Leviticus 15, which discusses ritual defilement, as "providing rules for all in the church community by relating emission to that of sexual intercourse rather than the previous monastic 'nocturnal emission' interpretation. ... He does, however, specify that nocturnal emissions—if caused by natural superfluity or sickness—are unproblematic for holiness, but where there is consent (i.e., masturbation) they are problematic." Making a parallel between women's menstruation and "the involuntary loss of semen", Gregory declares that "natural superfluities" do not prevent both laity and clergy to participate in the Eucharist.

Canon 8 of the Synod of the Grove of Victory from the 6th century imposes penances for "he who [has relations] between the thighs, [three] years. However, if by one's own hand or the hand of another, two years." Those acts refer to "mutual masturbation" and "femoral fornication". Another earliest set of rules which also prescribes penances for masturbation are Excerpts from the Book of St. David and Canons of John the Faster. Later, many early penitentials, such as Penitential of Finnian, Penitential of Columban, Penitential of Cummean, Paenitentiale Theodori, Paenitentiale Bedae, and the two "synods of Saint Patrick", impose penances with different levels of severity for masturbation (alone or in company) to monastics and laity.

Eastern Orthodoxy

The Eastern Orthodox Church or Orthodox Christian Church views sexuality as a gift from God that finds its fulfillment in the marital relationship, and therefore the misuse of the gift of human sexuality is sinful. Because the act of masturbation is self-directed, and by its nature is incapable of expressing love and concern for another person, it is viewed as a distortion of the use of the gift of sexuality. This is especially apparent when masturbation becomes an addiction. In the least, the practice of self-pleasure is viewed as not honoring the purpose of God's gift of sexuality.

The sexual sins of fornication, adultery and masturbation, as well as hatred, jealousy, drunkenness and other sins are considered to be sins of the heart as much as the body. It is thought that turning away from sexual sin is turning away from self-indulgence for the purpose of self gratification. Instead of turning to the desires of the flesh, the Orthodox Christian turns to the Holy Spirit, whose fruit is believed to be love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

東方正教

東方正教認為自慰仍是一種罪惡，因為「上帝沒有設計出這種令人感到性愉悅的方法。」

Roman Catholicism

In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church teaches:

By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action." "The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose." For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved." To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

Although "it is said that psychology and sociology show that [masturbation] is a normal phenomenon of sexual development, especially among the young," this does not change the fact that it "is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act" and "that, whatever the motive for acting this way, the deliberate use of the sexual faculty outside normal conjugal relations essentially contradicts the finality of the faculty. For it lacks the sexual relationship called for by the moral order, namely the relationship which realizes 'the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love.'"

This is because the deliberate use of the sexual faculty outside of marriage is, according to the teaching of the Church, contrary to its primary purpose of procreation and unification of the husband and wife within the sacrament of marriage. In addition, the Church teaches that all other sexual activity—including masturbation, homosexual acts, acts of sodomy, all sex outside of or before marriage (fornication), and the use of any form of contraception or birth control—is gravely disordered, as it frustrates the natural order, purpose, and ends of sexuality. To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

Catholic academic Giovanni Cappelli undertook a study "concerning the problem of masturbation during the first millennium. Among his conclusions are: (1) Nowhere in the Old Testament or in the New is there an explicit confrontation with the issue of masturbation. (2) Cappelli does not find in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers any mention of masturbation. (3) The first explicit references to masturbation are found in the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic "penitential" of the sixth century where the subject is treated in a practical and juridical way. (4) It would be wrong, however, to interpret the silence of the Fathers about masturbation as a tacit approval of it, or as a virtual indifference." James A. Brundage offers a differing view on the fourth point. He believes that neither pagan nor early Christian writers had paid much attention to these matters because they "apparently considered them trivial"

It is known that, prior to the sixth century, the Church's teachings on masturbation and many other moral issues were incoherent. Catholic researchers such as Bernard Hoose and Mark Jordan have found that claims to a continuous teaching by the Church on matters of sexuality, life and death and crime and punishment are "simply not true". Not only was there "inconsistency, contradiction and even incoherence" in the Church's doctrines but the researchers' work has led to the insight that the tradition itself is "not the truth guarantor of any particular teaching."

The Roman Catholic view of masturbation developed after Cassian's condemnation of the vow-breaking monks, only taking stable form in the sixth century.

Throughout the rest of the first millennium, Cappelli argues that "church concern about masturbation often was relatively insignificant."

After the turn of the millennium, more theologians began to condemn masturbation in an increasingly strident manner. St. Peter Damian, in his Book of Gomorrah addressed to Pope St. Leo IX, wrote that masturbation is the lowest grade of homosexual sin. Left unchecked, it can "ascend by grades" to "fondling each other’s male parts" (mutual masturbation), which can lead one to "fornicate between the thighs" (femoral intercourse) "or even in the rear" (anal intercourse).

St. Thomas Aquinas, the most prominent Doctor of the Roman Catholic Church, writes that masturbation is an "unnatural vice," which is a species of lust like bestiality, sodomy, and pederasty, and that "by procuring pollution [i.e., ejaculation apart from intercourse], without any copulation, for the sake of venereal pleasure … pertains to the sin of 'uncleanness' which some call 'effeminacy' [Latin: mollitiem, lit. 'softness, unmanliness']."

In the late medieval period, Jean Gerson wrote a confessional manual called On the Confession of Masturbation. According to researcher Chloe Taylor, this manual tells clerics to "insist that (male) penitents admit to the sin of masturbation, which... was deemed... [by this time to be an] even more serious sin than raping a nun, incest, or abducting and raping virgins and wives however more common and indeed universal (among males) a sin it was assumed to be, judging from the incredulity with which deniers of masturbation were instructed to be met..."

Taylor goes on to note that "Medieval theologians recognized that by inquiring in... suggestive detail, and with... leading questions, they ran the risk of teaching sinful behaviors to penitents who had not previously been aware of the full range of sexual possibilities available to them. They deduced, however that it was worth teaching a few young penitents how to masturbate in order to save the greater number who were already masturbating without confessing to it." She notes that, according to Gerson's book, "Even once the penitent has admitted his sin the priest is not to be satisfied, and is to ask for further details... Particularly remarkable are the instructions that the priest feign a certain casualness, and that he address the confessant with a disarming affection, calling him “friend” and pretending that masturbation is neither sinful nor shameful in order to make the penitent admit to it, insinuating that he can relate to the penitent's acts—“Friend, I well believe it”—only to then backtrack and condemn the act as sinful and shameful after all."

The laity did not undertake regular confession at this time but, "For those such as the ordained and the scrupulous who did undergo frequent and rigorous confessional examination, the obligation to confess in circumstances such as Gerson describes for even the most routine and private of sins such as masturbation came to cause anxiety... Early medieval penance was only for grave sins, but now the most mundane of sins could be given excruciating attention."

Brundage notes that medieval "penitentials occasionally mentioned female autoeroticism... They treated female masturbation in much the same way as the male act, although they were more censorious of female sexual play that involved dildos and other mechanical aids than they were of male use of mechanical devices in masturbation."

Talking about the dissident Catholic theologian Charles Curran, James J. Walter and Timothy E. O'Connell said that "as long ago as 1968, Curran used the idea [of fundamental option ] as a way to make sense of the fact that the Catholic tradition has long held that masturbation is an objectively serious misuse of human sexuality even though statistical evidence suggests that the overwhelming majority of human persons — including many whose behavior otherwise suggests a generous and loving approach to life — engage in this behavior. What shall we make of this paradox?... Curran suggests that for various reasons the assertion that masturbation involves "objectively grave matter" is not convincing. In this regard, his argument is about the objective character of the action and not the nature of the moral person." Later, Curran stated in his works: "Generally speaking I believe masturbation is wrong since it fails to integrate sexuality into the service of love. Masturbation indicates a failure at a total integration of sexuality in the person. This wrongness is not always grave; in fact, more times it is not. ... Catholic educators should openly teach that masturbation is not always a grave matter and most times, especially for adolescents, is not that important. ... However, the teacher should not leave the adolescent with the impression that there is absolutely nothing wrong with masturbation." In 1986, Curran was banned to teach Catholic theology by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, because of his teachings on "contraception, sterilization, masturbation, divorce, and homosexuality".

A study commissioned by the Catholic Theological Society of America in 1972 but not approved by it when published in 1977, showed that a number of dissident Catholic theologians have come to hold that an act of masturbation should not be judged as an objective moral evil, but assessed within the life context of the person involved. Others, among them John Wijngaards, maintain that masturbation is often no sin at all, and hardly ever a serious one. A statement on the John Wijngaards Catholic Research Centre website asserts that "It seems more helpful to consider masturbation as morally neutral."

Reaction to the 1977 study showed that the dissent was not unanimous.

Protestantism

Protestant reformers such Martin Luther and John Calvin condemn masturbation in their works. Luther sees masturbation as a sin more terrible than heterosexual rape since such rape is considered to be "in accordance with nature", while masturbation is "unnatural". He also views masturbation and coitus interruptus the same act as killing children before they have a chance to be born, therefore, for him, masturbation is basically the same as abortion. Luther argues that marital act is a way to avoid the sin of masturbation: "Nature never lets up ... we are all driven to the secret sin. To say it crudely but honestly, if it doesn't go into a woman, it goes into your shirt."

John Wesley, founder of Methodism, considers masturbation as an unacceptable way to release "sexual tension". Like his contemporaries, he believed that many people had become badly sick which even lead to death because of "habitual masturbation". He argued that "nervous disorders, even madness, could be caused by another form of bodily excess – masturbation." He writes his Thoughts on the Sin of Onan (1767), which was reproduced as A Word to Whom it May Concern on 1779, as an attempt to censor a work by Samuel-Auguste Tissot. In that writing, Wesley warns about "the dangers of self pollution", the bad physical and mental effects of masturbation, writes many such cases along with the treatment recommendations.

信義宗

德国信义会 （EKD）認為自慰並不是罪惡。

美國福音路德教會亦指出自慰不是一件有罪的行為。

較為保守的路德會密蘇里總會轄下的神學與教會關係委員會則說「觀察在婚姻中以相愛和承諾為前提下的性行為有助於我們評估這種行為。「長期性的」自慰並不符合創造者的意圖。我們這份禮物——即我們的性慾，應在相愛和婚姻的承諾下，以伴侶作為它的接受者。」

瑞典信義會則認為自慰不是罪惡，牧師經常在青少年的圣事課中為其如此解答這個問題。

芬蘭福音信義會同樣對自慰抱有正面觀點，指出它是一種安全的性行為，且能減少單身人士在外面滥交的渴求。

澳大利亞非教派基督教青少年性教育網站「Boys Under Attack」亦認為自慰不是一種罪惡，且指出其不會上癮，只要不在自慰的同時觀看色情作品，以及不跟其他人一同進行就行。該網站亦提到了信義會對自慰的觀點。

Calvinism

Calvinists are renowned for their moral rigor and strict adherence to Biblical standards of morality. Indeed, "Churches fashioned in the Calvinist tradition have typically set extremely high standard of behavior."

In Switzerland, the Calvinist theologians Michel Cornuz, Carolina Costa and Jean-Charles Bichet all say that masturbation is not a sin, provided that the use of pornography is not involved.

Likewise, the most prominent Calvinist church in France, L'Oratoire du Louvre in Paris, also believes that masturbation is not sinful, provided that the act is not done in a spirit of rebellion against God and provided that it does not become addictive.

In a 1991 report on human sexuality, the Presbyterian Church (USA) stated that "churches need to repudiate historically damaging attitudes toward masturbation and replace them with positive affirmations of the role of masturbation in human sexuality."

Calvinists however oppose "sexual touching" (including mutual masturbation) between unmarried parties, even if they are engaged to each other, considering this a form of fornication.

Citing 1 Corinthians 7:3-4, Reformed author Jay E. Adams argues that "masturbation is clearly wrong since it constitutes a perversion of the sexual act".

循道宗

聯合循道宗對自慰並没有任何官方立場。

澳洲聯合教會則認為「自慰是兒童和青少年性探索和發展的重要組成部分。不應受到污名對待。」

Anglicanism

The Church of England does not take a view on masturbation. Many Anglican books on sex and marriage advocate masturbation.

The conservative Anglican Diocese of Sydney believes that masturbation "can help us find sexual release when we cannot control our desire nor satisfy it through a marital relationship and in this sense it can be helpful." However, the Diocese notes that it can become associated with sin if it leads to either the consumption of pornography or to looking lustfully at people in real life in order to fuel fantasies. They warn that either of these can, in turn, suck someone into a cycle that cannot be controlled. (The 1998 Lambeth Conference's Resolution I.10 says that the use of pornography is sinful and includes it in a list of the forms of sexual activity inherently contrary to the Christian way of life. Masturbation itself is not mentioned in the resolution at all, either in positive or negative terms.)

On his letter to Mr. Masson dated 6 March 1956, C.S. Lewis writes: "For me the real evil of masturbation would be that it takes an appetite which, in lawful use, leads the individual out of himself to complete (and correct) his own personality in that of another (and finally in children and even grandchildren) and turns it back; sends the man back into the prison of himself, there to keep a harem of imaginary brides. ... Masturbation involves this abuse of imagination in erotic matters (which I think bad in itself) and thereby encourages a similar abuse of it in all spheres. After all, almost the main work of life is to come out of our selves, out of the little dark prison we are all born in. Masturbation is to be avoided as all things are to be avoided which retard this process. The danger is that of coming to love the prison."

Evangelicalism

In the 1940s Evangelical sex advice books advised against masturbation, considering it a very serious sin, but such warnings have disappeared from such books during the 1960s, "because evangelicals who noticed that the Bible said nothing directly about masturbation believed that they had made a mistake to proscribe it." Also, they considered that masturbating is preferable to falling into "sex and drugs and rock 'n' roll".

James Dobson stated: "Christian people have different opinions about how God views this act. Unfortunately, I can't speak directly for God on this subject, since His Holy Word, the Bible, is silent on this point." He also stated: "The Bible says nothing about masturbation, so we don't really know what God thinks about it. My opinion is that He doesn't make a big issue of it."

Others make a distinction between masturbation and sexual fantasy. Richard D. Dobbins proposes that it is permissible for teenagers to fantasize about their future spouse during masturbation.

Garry H. Strauss, a psychologist counseling the students at Biola University wrote that there is no mention of masturbation in the Bible, therefore masturbation is permissible, but pornography and sexual fantasies are not permissible.

Two Evangelical scholars, Alex W. Kwee and David C. Hooper, addressed the issue in an academic paper. They note that "The Bible presents no clear theological ethic on masturbation... Of the many aspects of human sexuality that we address in our work, masturbation ranks as the most misunderstood for the lack of open, rational dialogue about this topic within the Christian community... Within evangelical frameworks of sexual ethics... there has never been a well-defined theological ethic of masturbation, in contrast to the ethics of pre-marital sex, marriage, and divorce that are worked out from foundational Christian anthropological assertions about gender, sexuality, and their relationship to the imago Dei... Masturbation falls thus within the proverbial grey area of evangelical sexual ethics."

They go on to note that "we find that the questions that Christian young people ask about masturbation can be reduced to two essential queries. Christian youth want to know whether masturbation is “right or wrong” (i.e., what is the “correct” moral stance to take based on what the Bible says?), and whether masturbation is “normal” (i.e., what can we say about the psychological dimensions of masturbation?)"

Answering the first question, they note that "The Bible does not directly address masturbation, leaving Christians to articulate a moral stance from various scriptures that in our view cannot support a deontological prohibition of masturbation... Today the general consensus in the Christian community is that Genesis 38:6-10 is irrelevant to masturbation. Modern readers of course understand Onan’s act not as masturbation but as coitus interuptus. The technical designation of the act, however, is unimportant compared to the ethical violations manifesting through the act. The interpretive context for Genesis 38:6-10 is found in the ancient Israelite law (Deuteronomy 25:5-10)... Whatever his reasons for not consummating intercourse, Onan was punished for violating a specific Hebrew law and for failing in his covenantal duty to his deceased brother. Onan was judged for undisclosed but probably exploitative intentions... and certainly for his callous repudiation of his traditional obligations of familial care and responsibility."

They state also that "Our... objection to using Matthew 5:27-30 as a basis for the blanket condemnation of masturbation is that such an interpretation can only be supported by de-contextualizing this passage from Jesus’ overall message... [and]... proper contextual interpretation of Leviticus 15:16-18 would therefore support the view that masturbation in and of itself is morally neutral."

They note that "There is a moral difference between masturbation done in the presence of pornography or the phone sex service (inherently selfish and exploitative mediums), and masturbation as the sexual expression of a fuller yearning for connectedness, i.e., connectedness that is not primarily sexual", concluding that "Scripture does not directly address masturbation, giving rise to guilt-inducing misconceptions about a behavior that is extremely salient to unmarried college-aged Christian men whose value system leads them to eschew pre-marital sex".

The Evangelical scholar, Judith K. Balswick, in her book, Authentic Human Sexuality: An Integrated Christian Approach, argues that "Masturbation can be a healthy, enjoyable way for a person without a sexual partner to experience sexual gratification."

Another Evangelical writer, James B. Nelson, notes in his book, Embodiment: An Approach to Sexuality and Christian Theology, that "The physiological intensity typical in masturbatory orgasm frequently surpasses that of intercourse, and relational fantasies usually accompany the act in compensation for the absence of the partner", implying this is a gift from God for those who lack a spouse.

Finally, in the book, Singles Ask: Answers to Questions about Relationships and Sexuality, by Howard Ivan Smith, the Fullerton Evangelical theologian Archibald Hart is quoted as saying that, "I do not believe that masturbation itself is morally wrong, or... sinful."

Pentecostalism

A Church of Christ in Tulsa, United States, has also taken the view that "Masturbation is not mentioned in the Bible and isn’t the same thing as sexual immorality. The historical church has had difficulty explaining this practice, but there is no good reason to lump it with sexual immorality and heap guilt on single people in particular... For most males and females, masturbation is a natural part of self exploration. However, masturbation can program us to think sex can be done alone. Coupled with pornography, we get two steps away from married sexual love... The warning is for masturbation not to become an obsession that impacts your conscience, future sex life, and leads you into fantasizing with pornography."

A Swedish Pentecostal pastor, Christian Mölk, also says that the Bible does not explicitly mention masturbation as a sin. He notes that Onan's sin was about failing to do his duty under the Levirate law mentioned in Deu 25:5-6. Under this law it was "the closest brother's duty to ensure that his family survived by marrying the widow. When Onan "spilled his seed on the earth," it means that he refused to get a seed to his brother and instead utilized his brother's widow for his own sexual pleasure." He goes on to note that another text which is sometimes invoked is Matthew 5:27-30. Here, he says, Jesus is simply warning that it is not only wrong to cheat in one's action but also that it is wrong to cheat in one's heart. Therefore a person should not look with lustful intent at someone else's wife. He says these texts are not about masturbation and that the Bible does not explicitly mention that masturbation is a sin.

The Texan Pentecostal pastor and church founder, Tom Brown, has written on the subject of "Is Masturbation a Sin?", stating that "Masturbation has been around for a long time, and since God does not clearly condemn it, I would not be too bothered with it, either. Masturbation is practiced far more than adultery or fornication, yet God is practically silent on the issue. This ought to tell you that God is not overly concerned with it... However, let me caution you against addiction to masturbation. Just like most things, masturbation can turn into an addiction... Paul said, "'Everything is permissible for me'—but I will not be mastered by anything" (1 Cor 6:12). This includes masturbation. Also, you should never use pornography to masturbate... Concerning single people, I have no advice other than a prohibition [on] pornography..."

He goes on to note, "If a believer uses masturbation to alleviate sexual temptation, that's far better than actually being tempted to commit fornication or adultery. I would rather have a man masturbate than go to a prostitute... Another thought, if masturbation is sinful, then you would expect there to be bad health consequences to it, such as found in adultery, homosexuality, and fornication (diseases for one thing). Instead, research has found that masturbation serves to release sexual tension..."

Quakers

In 1960 the British Friends Home Service, published a pamphlet on marriage that was read and approved on both sides of the Atlantic that stated that "Masturbation as a child is healthy, but not as an adult." However, four years later, in 1964, the Quaker physician, Dr. Mary Calderone, argued for the emerging view that masturbation was a normal useful means for "relieving natural tension in a healthy and satisfying way."

More recently, Quakers, while formulating a testimony on sexual intimacy, have noted that "one possibility for a testimony of intimacy is a pronatalist position that is focused on the imperative to have children. This is a long-standing position of the Roman Catholic Church and a teaching that has considerable sway among many Protestant Evangelicals... In this teaching, [the] main purpose [of sex] is procreation... In this pronatalism, masturbation is... wrong, as is contraception, but there are no clear scriptural texts against these practices. Their prohibition is taken to follow from the central teaching that the purpose of sex is the creation of legitimate offspring... For several reasons, Friends are likely to feel uncomfortable with this pronatalist framing of the morality of intimate relationships. For many Friends, the most serious objection of all... would be pronatalism’s steadfast focus on increasing the population. With seven billion human beings alive today on planet Earth, further population increase should hardly be the predominant emphasis informing relationships of intimacy. Yet the central warp thread of this teaching is the urgency of procreation..."

Mennonites

A 2011 article in Canadian Mennonite magazine notes that Anabaptists have always historically had a sex-negative attitude but goes on to state that "Masturbation is one of the most common sexual experiences across the spectrums of age, culture, partnered and single life situations, and genders... Finding pleasure in our own God-given bodies can be good... [but] if it draws someone away from God, then for God’s sake, don’t do it. But we ought to release the stranglehold of guilt formerly associated with the practice of self-pleasuring." (The article also argues that Anabaptists should commit themselves to avoiding pornography for a wide variety of reasons).

伊斯蘭教

遜尼派伊斯蘭教之內對於是否容許人們自慰有著不同的觀點。什叶派認为自慰就像像婚外性關係般，一樣会防礙人們於礼拜中集中精神。什叶派伊玛目同樣將自慰視為哈拉姆。 但另外三個伊瑪目則認為「人們只可在『避免通奸』的原因下自慰」。

猶太教

主条目：Judaism and masturbation

Maimonides stated that the Tanakh does not explicitly prohibit masturbation. On the matter of masturbation, the biblical story of Onan is traditionally interpreted by Jews to be about the emitting sperm outside of vagina and condemnation thereof, applying this story to masturbation, although the Tanakh does not explicitly state that Onan was masturbating. By virtue of Onan, traditional Judaism condemns male masturbation.

Leviticus discusses a ritual defilement relating to emission of sperm. The traditional rabbinical interpretation of Leviticus 15 was that it applies to all sperm flows, including sperm flows due to masturbation.

But [in P] the ejaculation of semen results in only a one-day impurity that requires laundering and ablutions (15:16-18), regardless of whether the act takes place during (legitimate) intercourse or by the self, deliberately (masturbation) or accidentally (nocturnal emission).

——Jacob Milgrom，Leviticus 17-22, pp. 1567-1568, apud Robert A. J. Gagnon, "A critique of Jacob Milgrom's views on Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13"

"Milgrom acknowledges that the rabbis condemned masturbation... Nevertheless, “it is their enactment, not that of Scripture.”"

Other sects

耶和華見證人

耶和華見證人認為自慰是一種「不潔淨的」習慣並會促使人們「精神腐化」。

Mormonism

Spencer W. Kimball, the twelfth president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), urged Latter-day Saints to abandon the habit before going on a mission, receiving the priesthood, or attending the temple. He taught that masturbation indicated "slavery to the flesh, not the mastery of it and the growth toward godhood which is the object of our mortal life". As a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Kimball stated: "Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of His Church regardless of what may have been said by others whose 'norms' are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice". In 1980, as president of the church, Kimball repeated this counsel, described masturbation as "self abuse", and added: "Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the sin of homosexuality." He also stated about masturbation: “Let no one rationalize their sins on the excuse that a particular sin of his is not mentioned nor forbidden in scripture”.

In a 1976 sermon entitled "To Young Men Only", apostle Boyd K. Packer compared the male reproductive system to a "little factory" and counseled adolescent boys to avoid "tamper[ing] with that factory" through masturbation; he also offered advice on how a man could break a masturbation habit. Packer's sermon was printed as a pamphlet and is distributed by the LDS Church.

In 2014, general authority Tad R. Callister wrote, "The Lord condemns self-abuse. Self-abuse is the act of stimulating the procreative power of one’s own body."

Seventh Day Adventists

参见：Criticism of Ellen G. White § Writings on masturbation

Ellen G. White, one of the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, in the mid-19th century said she had spiritual visions from God that gave her guidance on the Christian life. She warned against overly-stimulating foods, sex, and masturbation, which she referred to as "solitary vice." She warned her followers of her visions of disfigured humans and the consequences of masturbation not only destroying one's life, but preventing access to Heaven when Jesus comes in the first resurrection. She said that masturbation was the cause of many sicknesses in adults from cancer to lung disease. White even stated that masturbation claimed many sinners' lives prematurely. She believed that one's diet had a direct correlation with one's urge to masturbate. She said that a healthy diet consisting of fruits, vegetables, wheat breads, and water would lead to a diminished urge to masturbate and thus would lead to a healthier and more fulfilling life. To ultimately produce a guide for future generations she said solitary vice was the cause of hereditary insanity, cancer, and other deadly diseases; clearly appealing to parents to protect their children by not engaging in solitary vice.

United Church of God

The United Church of God teaches that "The United Church of God believes that sexual love is the supreme expression of love between a husband and wife and that only this use of the sexual organs glorifies or reflects God’s design and purpose." The church also says that, according to 1 Corinthians 6:16,18, any sexual activity outside of marriage is severely punished and, according to Matthew 5:27-30 in the church's view, sexual thoughts alone are enough for a person to be guilty of such sin. The church encourages its members to "guard and control their thoughts, as well as their actions."

Buddhism

参见：Buddhist ethics、karma、Taṇhā和Vinaya

The most used formulation of Buddhist ethics are the Five Precepts. These precepts take the form of voluntary personal undertakings, not divine mandate or instruction. The third precept is "to refrain from committing sexual misconduct". However, what defines "sexual misconduct" is vague and often debatable, and different schools of Buddhism have different interpretations.

Buddhism was advanced by Gautama Buddha as a method by which human beings could end dukkha (suffering) and escape samsara (cyclic existence). Normally this entails practicing meditation and following the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path as a way to subdue the passions which, along with the skandhas, cause suffering and rebirth. Masturbation (Pali: sukkavissaṭṭhi) can be viewed as problematic for a person who wishes to attain the highest goal of enlightenment and liberation from samsara.

An article from Beliefnet and Brian Schell, a writer for DailyBuddhism.com, both suggest that masturbation is essentially harmless for a layperson, at least outside the realm of karma Shravasti Dhammika, a Theravadin monk, cites the Vinaya Pitaka in his online "Guide to Buddhism A to Z", stating the following:

Masturbation (sukkavissaṭṭhi) is the act of stimulating one’s own sexual organs (sambādha) to the stage of orgasm (adhikavega). In the Kāma Sūtra male masturbation is called "seizing the lion" (siṃhākāranta). Some people during the Buddha’s time believed that masturbation could have a therapeutic effect on the mind and the body (Vin. III, 109), although the Buddha disagreed with this. According to the Vinaya, it is an offence of some seriousness for monks or nuns to masturbate (Vin. III, 111) although the Buddha gave no guidance on this matter to lay people. However, Buddhism could agree with contemporary medical opinion that masturbation is a normal expression of the sexual drive and is physically and psychologically harmless, as long as it does not become a preoccupation or a substitute for ordinary sexual relations. Guilt and self-disgust about masturbating is certainly more harmful than masturbation itself.

The emphasis on chastity in Buddhism is much more so for bhikkhus and bhikkhunis (renunciates), who vow to follow the rules of the Vinaya. Not only are monastics celibate, but they also take more and stricter vows in order to conquer their desires. In the Theravadin tradition, masturbation is stressed as being more harmful for upāsakas and upāsikās who practice the Eight Precepts on Uposatha days, leading a more ascetic lifestyle that does not allow for masturbation.

There are also references in the Upāsakaśīla sūtra: "If sex is practised under the inappropriate times (times not allowed by precepts), [at] inappropriate place[s] (places not allowed by precepts), with non-female[s], with virgin[s], with a married wife, if sex relates to self-body, it is known as sexual misconduct."

Taoism

Some teachers and practitioners of Traditional Chinese medicine, Taoist meditative and martial arts say that masturbation can cause a lowered energy level in men. They say that ejaculation in this way reduces "origin qi" from dantian, the energy center located in the lower abdomen. Some maintain that sex with a partner does not do this because the partners replenish each other's qi. Some practitioners therefore say that males should not practice martial arts for at least 48 hours after masturbation while others prescribe up to six months, because the loss of Origin Qi does not allow new qi to be created for this kind of time.

Some Taoists strongly discouraged female masturbation. Women were encouraged to practice massaging techniques upon themselves, but were also instructed to avoid thinking sexual thoughts if experiencing a feeling of pleasure. Otherwise, the woman's "labia will open wide and the sexual secretions will flow." If this happened, the woman would lose part of her life force, and this could bring illness and shortened life.

Wicca

Wicca, like other religions, has adherents with a spectrum of views ranging from conservative to liberal. Wicca is generally undogmatic, and nothing in Wiccan philosophy prohibits masturbation. On the contrary, Wiccan ethics, summed up in the Wiccan Rede "An it harm none, do as thou wilt", are interpreted by many as endorsing responsible sexual activity of all varieties. This is reinforced in the Charge of the Goddess, a key piece of Wiccan literature, in which the Goddess says, "all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals".

Zoroastrianism

The Zoroastrian holy book Avesta, with its stress on physical cleanliness, lists voluntary masturbation among the unpardonable sins that one can commit. Verses 26-28 of Fargard VIII, Section V of the Vendidad state

O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! If a man involuntarily emits his seed, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Eight hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, eight hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana.'

O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! If a man voluntarily emits his seed, what is the penalty for it? What is the atonement for it? What is the cleansing from it?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'For that deed there is nothing that can pay, nothing that can atone, nothing that can cleanse from it; it is a trespass for which there is no atonement, for ever and ever.'

When is it so?

'It is so, if the sinner be a professor of the law of Mazda, or one who has been taught in it. But if he be not a professor of the law of Mazda, nor one who has been taught in it, then this law of Mazda takes his sin from him, if he confesses it and resolves never to commit again such forbidden deeds.

參考書目

• Wile, Douglas. The Art of the Bedchamber: The Chinese Sexual Yoga Classics including Women’s Solo Meditation Texts. Albany: State University of New York, 1992.
• Numbers, Ronald L, "Sex, Science, and Salvation: The Sexual Advice of Ellen G. White and John Harvey Kellogg," in Right Living: An Anglo-American Tradition of Self-Help Medicine and Hygiene ed. Charles Rosenberg, 2003.

參見

• 贞操