user533: I used orgasm as an example because it is usually the strongest sensation one can feel due to everything involved and all the chemistry released in the body.
Also, I would say that sexual activity and drinking are probably the two biggest challenges one has to overcome when following the 8 precepts for weeks or months.
So, can one feel it without attachments?!

user295: To experience an orgasm you need some form of active arousal. If arousal is involved you are attached and goes against the precept. 
If it is from other causes like bed wetting then it may be OK as long as you don't fantasise. If there is fantasy then again there is attachment.
Main thing to remember is sensation is involuntary sometimes but seeking sensations is not without attachments, and seeking sensations can be very subtle. 

user854: Does the Buddhist breathe?
Does the Buddhist drink water?
Does the Buddhist eat food?
Does the Buddhist exercise?
If all of these needs can be met without attachment, why should sex be any different?
Sex can be entirely to meet one's biological urges, the way we eat and drink and exercise. I'm not saying it is easy to do so, but it seems to me that clearly the possibility exists.

user855: No. All healthy humans are biologically addicted to dopamine. "The brain includes several distinct dopamine systems, one of which plays a major role in reward-motivated behavior. Most types of reward increase the level of dopamine in the brain, and a variety of addictive drugs increase dopamine neuronal activity."
Dopamine is the hormone that makes you feel good. If you can orgasm without it feeling good then, yes. You can never feel anything good without attachment. Humans are hardwired to like dope just as they do sugar and for the same reason; need. The need to procreate the species and the need to consume calories.

user43: I have experienced ejaculation without it feeling "pleasant". When ejaculation does not feel pleasant, it feels more like semi-painful spasms. There is no attachment to this experience.
It is not that ejaculation has changed, or even that the experience changed. It is my perspective that has changed. If you look at pleasant sensation very very very carefully, then you will see it as is -- and it will loose it's luster.
The same with pain, if you look at it really close, you will see it as information. No pain, just information.
As Buddha taught, we must learn to see pleasant in non-pleasant and non-pleasant in pleasant. When we can arbitrarily control our evaluation of sensory experience, then we are free from it.

user18: Ostensibly, yes, I can't imagine why it wouldn't be technically possible for the body to trigger an orgasm without any kind of mental attachment. Of course, it may be that there is some necessary mental trigger involved, but I doubt that is true. 
In the vinaya there are several cases that seem to suggest involuntary (physical) sexual arousal involving heat and motion; it seems reasonable to suggest that certain conditions could result in an involuntary ejaculation. 
Simpler would be the case where one was intending to bring about an orgasm but then suddenly became mindful, only to find that it was too late (the point being that any attachment created would be in relation to the prior stimulation, not the orgasm itself).
Either way, it is important to clarify that intentionally bringing about an orgasm for the purpose of pleasure invariably leads to the cultivation of attachment.
Incidentally, IIRC, this is one of the issues that led to a split in the sangha, though I can't remember which one. One group thought that the fact that arahants can still experience orgasms meant that they were still not free from defilements; the other claimed that the orgasms were just physical processes with no mental counterpart.

533: <p>I used orgasm as an example because it is usually the strongest sensation one can feel due to everything involved and all the chemistry released in the body.</p>

<p>Also, I would say that sexual activity and drinking are probably the two biggest challenges one has to overcome when following the 8 precepts for weeks or months.</p>

<p>So, can one feel it without attachments?!</p>
 295: <p>To experience an orgasm you need some form of active arousal. If arousal is involved you are attached and goes against the precept. </p>

<p>If it is from other causes like bed wetting then it may be OK as long as you don't fantasise. If there is fantasy then again there is attachment.</p>

<p>Main thing to remember is sensation is involuntary sometimes but seeking sensations is not without attachments, and seeking sensations can be very subtle. </p>
 854: <p>Does the Buddhist breathe?
Does the Buddhist drink water?
Does the Buddhist eat food?
Does the Buddhist exercise?</p>

<p>If all of these needs can be met without attachment, why should sex be any different?</p>

<p>Sex can be entirely to meet one's biological urges, the way we eat and drink and exercise. I'm not saying it is easy to do so, but it seems to me that clearly the possibility exists.</p>
 855: <p>No. All healthy humans are biologically addicted to dopamine. &quot;The brain includes several distinct <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine" rel="nofollow noreferrer">dopamine</a> systems, one of which plays a major role in reward-motivated behavior. Most types of reward increase the level of dopamine in the brain, and a variety of addictive drugs increase dopamine neuronal activity.&quot;</p>
<p>Dopamine is the hormone that makes you feel good. If you can orgasm without it feeling good then, yes. You can never feel anything good without attachment. Humans are hardwired to like dope just as they do sugar and for the same reason; need. The need to procreate the species and the need to consume calories.</p>
 43: <p>I have experienced ejaculation without it feeling "pleasant". When ejaculation does not feel pleasant, it feels more like semi-painful spasms. There is no attachment to this experience.</p>

<p>It is not that ejaculation has changed, or even that the experience changed. It is my <em>perspective</em> that has changed. If you look at pleasant sensation very very <em>very</em> carefully, then you will see it <em>as is</em> -- and it will loose it's luster.</p>

<p>The same with pain, if you look at it really close, you will see it as <strong>information</strong>. No pain, just information.</p>

<p>As Buddha taught, we must learn to see pleasant in non-pleasant and non-pleasant in pleasant. When we can arbitrarily control our evaluation of sensory experience, then we are free from it.</p>
 18: <p>Ostensibly, yes, I can't imagine why it wouldn't be technically possible for the body to trigger an orgasm without any kind of mental attachment. Of course, it may be that there is some necessary mental trigger involved, but I doubt that is true. </p>

<p>In the vinaya there are several cases that seem to suggest involuntary (physical) sexual arousal involving heat and motion; it seems reasonable to suggest that certain conditions could result in an involuntary ejaculation. </p>

<p>Simpler would be the case where one was intending to bring about an orgasm but then suddenly became mindful, only to find that it was too late (the point being that any attachment created would be in relation to the prior stimulation, not the orgasm itself).</p>

<p>Either way, it is important to clarify that <em>intentionally</em> bringing about an orgasm for the purpose of pleasure invariably leads to the cultivation of attachment.</p>

<p>Incidentally, IIRC, this is one of the issues that led to a split in the sangha, though I can't remember which one. One group thought that the fact that arahants can still experience orgasms meant that they were still not free from defilements; the other claimed that the orgasms were just physical processes with no mental counterpart.</p>
