No inherent sensual pleasure

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby hermitwin » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:47 am

i believe in dhammapada,
sensual pleasure is described as licking honey off a sharp blade.
hermitwin
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:35 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby BlackBird » Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:44 am

Prasadachitta wrote:
BlackBird wrote: If there were no sentient beings present in the world there would be no sense pleasure.


Hi Blackbird,

This is not really directed at you....


I wonder if it even makes sense to use the expression "world" in relation to the absence of any sentience.

Just a thought.

Prasadachitta


Not a bad thought, if ever I saw one.
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta
User avatar
BlackBird
 
Posts: 1860
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby Spiny Norman » Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:42 am

danieLion wrote:
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "There are these three feelings. Which three? A feeling of pleasure, a feeling of pain, a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. A feeling of pleasure should be seen as stressful. A feeling of pain should be seen as an arrow. A feeling of neither pleasure nor pain should be seen as inconstant. When a monk has seen a feeling of pleasure as stressful, a feeling of pain as an arrow, and a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain as inconstant, then he is called a monk who is noble, who has seen rightly, who has cut off craving, destroyed the fetters, and who — from the right breaking-through of conceit — has put an end to suffering & stress."



Useful quote, though does the repeated use of "should be seen" suggest strategy rather than definition? In other words the strategy being recommended here is to approach pleasant feeling with caution, because the experience of pleasant feeling leads to grasping and therefore to stress. Similarly neutral feeling should be seen as inconstant because it will invariably tip over into either pleasant or unpleasant feeling.
User avatar
Spiny Norman
 
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: With the cockney chimney-sweeps in Mary Poppins

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby Spiny Norman » Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:43 am

hermitwin wrote:i believe in dhammapada,
sensual pleasure is described as licking honey off a sharp blade.


Presumably because it leads to grasping and therefore suffering?
User avatar
Spiny Norman
 
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: With the cockney chimney-sweeps in Mary Poppins

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby kirk5a » Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:08 pm

porpoise wrote:In other words the strategy being recommended here is to approach pleasant feeling with caution, because the experience of pleasant feeling leads to grasping and therefore to stress.

I'd say further than "caution" - more along the lines of weariness, disenchantment, even disgust - "nibbida"
Good explanation here:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el277.html
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
kirk5a
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby Buckwheat » Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:14 pm

Alex123 wrote:Hello all,

Lets say you want to eat the cake, when you eat it - you experience pleasure. But when you stop eating it, the pleasure stops and eventually you back where you started from. If one tries to eat one cake after another cake, then very soon what was sources of pleasure will feel painful. If cake was trully the cause of pleasure, why does it turn into unpleasant feeling when indulged excessively?

One can feel thirsty (dukkha-vedanā) and then when one drinks the water, one feels good feeling. But if one keeps drinking glass after glass after glass, it will feel uncomfortable and can even lead to death.

Sitting and resting can feel great after a long and tiring walk (which is painful). But try to sit for many hours. It will feel uncomfortable. Here also we have a case where something when indulged excessively long becomes uncomfortable.

Maybe there are no inherent pleasures in the world, just more or less dukkha. The relief of greater dukkha feels pleasant, but only for short amount of time and only in comparison with greater dukkha.

What is your opinion?

That's a pretty accurate description. To add to it: Timing and balance are important. When tired, rest. When rested, do something. When hungry or thirsty, fulfill that drive in moderation, not indulgence. When these things cause pleasure, allow that pleasure to rejuvenate your system, but also see the pleasure as not-stable, not-satisfying, and not-mine.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby danieLion » Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:29 am

porpoise wrote:
danieLion wrote:
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "There are these three feelings. Which three? A feeling of pleasure, a feeling of pain, a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. A feeling of pleasure should be seen as stressful. A feeling of pain should be seen as an arrow. A feeling of neither pleasure nor pain should be seen as inconstant. When a monk has seen a feeling of pleasure as stressful, a feeling of pain as an arrow, and a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain as inconstant, then he is called a monk who is noble, who has seen rightly, who has cut off craving, destroyed the fetters, and who — from the right breaking-through of conceit — has put an end to suffering & stress."



Useful quote, though does the repeated use of "should be seen" suggest strategy rather than definition? In other words the strategy being recommended here is to approach pleasant feeling with caution, because the experience of pleasant feeling leads to grasping and therefore to stress. Similarly neutral feeling should be seen as inconstant because it will invariably tip over into either pleasant or unpleasant feeling.
Definition or strategy? Hmmm, IDK. I was just thinking they were perceptions (sanna) but ATI seems to be down right now so I can't check the Pali. :thinking:
danieLion
 
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby convivium » Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:29 am

we should all be asking, "what does maha boowa have to say about this?"
One should not overlook oneself, for this is a happy world, peaceful and worth living in, full of fun and joy. But further than this, for those who want to work at making happiness within the Heart rather than other kinds of happiness, they should put forth their full effort and exertion, gradually working towards their aim. Then the subtle type of happiness will arise.

http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/boowafnd.php
Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php
User avatar
convivium
 
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 7:13 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby pegembara » Wed Mar 27, 2013 3:19 am

Alex123 wrote:Hello all,

Lets say you want to eat the cake, when you eat it - you experience pleasure. But when you stop eating it, the pleasure stops and eventually you back where you started from. If one tries to eat one cake after another cake, then very soon what was sources of pleasure will feel painful. If cake was trully the cause of pleasure, why does it turn into unpleasant feeling when indulged excessively?

One can feel thirsty (dukkha-vedanā) and then when one drinks the water, one feels good feeling. But if one keeps drinking glass after glass after glass, it will feel uncomfortable and can even lead to death.

Sitting and resting can feel great after a long and tiring walk (which is painful). But try to sit for many hours. It will feel uncomfortable. Here also we have a case where something when indulged excessively long becomes uncomfortable.

Maybe there are no inherent pleasures in the world, just more or less dukkha. The relief of greater dukkha feels pleasant, but only for short amount of time and only in comparison with greater dukkha.

What is your opinion?


If only we can live without food and water. If only we can sit or lie down without having to go to the toilet. If only we can walk without feeling tired. If only we don't need to sleep. If only we don't have to wake up. If only we don't need to breathe. If only we can remain young and healthy forever.

With birth as condition .........
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
pegembara
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby convivium » Wed Mar 27, 2013 3:32 am

Mundane Order
Ignorance (avijja)
Kamma formations (sankhara)
Consciousness (viññana)
Mentality-materiality (namarupa)
Sixfold sense base (salayatana)
Contact (phassa)
Feeling (vedana)
Craving (tanha)
Clinging (upadana)
Existence (bhava)
Birth (jati)
Suffering (dukkha)
Transcendental Order
Faith (saddha)
Joy (pamojja)
Rapture (piti)
Tranquillity (passaddhi)
Happiness (sukha)
Concentration (samadhi)
Knowledge and vision of things as they are (yathabhutañanadassana)
Disenchantment (nibbida)
Dispassion (viraga)
Emancipation (vimutti)
Knowledge of destruction of the cankers (asavakkhaye ñana)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el277.html
Just keep breathing in and out like this. Don't be interested in anything else. It doesn't matter even if someone is standing on their head with their ass in the air. Don't pay it any attention. Just stay with the in-breath and the out-breath. Concentrate your awareness on the breath. Just keep doing it. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Just_Do_It_1_2.php
User avatar
convivium
 
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 7:13 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby Buckwheat » Wed Mar 27, 2013 4:08 am

pegembara wrote:If only we can live without food and water. If only we can sit or lie down without having to go to the toilet. If only we can walk without feeling tired. If only we don't need to sleep. If only we don't have to wake up. If only we don't need to breathe. If only we can remain young and healthy forever.

With birth as condition .........


You sound envious of granite. ;)
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby Spiny Norman » Wed Mar 27, 2013 2:33 pm

kirk5a wrote:
porpoise wrote:In other words the strategy being recommended here is to approach pleasant feeling with caution, because the experience of pleasant feeling leads to grasping and therefore to stress.

I'd say further than "caution" - more along the lines of weariness, disenchantment, even disgust - "nibbida"


I don't disagree, but I think caution is more like a strategy for practice, whereas disenchantment is more like a result of practice.
User avatar
Spiny Norman
 
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: With the cockney chimney-sweeps in Mary Poppins

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby ground » Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:47 am

Alex123 wrote:Hello all,

Lets say you want to eat the cake, when you eat it - you experience pleasure. But when you stop eating it, the pleasure stops and eventually you back where you started from. If one tries to eat one cake after another cake, then very soon what was sources of pleasure will feel painful. If cake was trully the cause of pleasure, why does it turn into unpleasant feeling when indulged excessively?

One can feel thirsty (dukkha-vedanā) and then when one drinks the water, one feels good feeling. But if one keeps drinking glass after glass after glass, it will feel uncomfortable and can even lead to death.

Sitting and resting can feel great after a long and tiring walk (which is painful). But try to sit for many hours. It will feel uncomfortable. Here also we have a case where something when indulged excessively long becomes uncomfortable.

Maybe there are no inherent pleasures in the world, just more or less dukkha. The relief of greater dukkha feels pleasant, but only for short amount of time and only in comparison with greater dukkha.

What is your opinion?


Let the source of your pleasures change. :sage:
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby waimengwan » Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:34 am

We are never satisfied, if we eat something it satisfy us until the next hunger pangs come, so we are continuously needing to eat food to be satisfied. So one of my dharma teacher told us that we just reducing our suffering it is not actually pleasure. And this applies to things like sex or sleep etc. We have to do it continuously. That is the nature of our the human existence, hence realising that should help us to develop renunciation towards such an existence.
User avatar
waimengwan
 
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 2:22 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby rahul3bds » Sat Apr 13, 2013 8:49 am

Alex123 wrote:Hello all,

Lets say you want to eat the cake, when you eat it - you experience pleasure. But when you stop eating it, the pleasure stops and eventually you back where you started from. If one tries to eat one cake after another cake, then very soon what was sources of pleasure will feel painful. If cake was trully the cause of pleasure, why does it turn into unpleasant feeling when indulged excessively?

One can feel thirsty (dukkha-vedanā) and then when one drinks the water, one feels good feeling. But if one keeps drinking glass after glass after glass, it will feel uncomfortable and can even lead to death.

Sitting and resting can feel great after a long and tiring walk (which is painful). But try to sit for many hours. It will feel uncomfortable. Here also we have a case where something when indulged excessively long becomes uncomfortable.

Maybe there are no inherent pleasures in the world, just more or less dukkha. The relief of greater dukkha feels pleasant, but only for short amount of time and only in comparison with greater dukkha.

What is your opinion?


which reminds me of "Puttamansa Sutta"

"And how is physical food to be regarded? Suppose a couple, husband & wife, taking meager provisions, were to travel through a desert. With them would be their only baby son, dear & appealing. Then the meager provisions of the couple going through the desert would be used up & depleted while there was still a stretch of the desert yet to be crossed. The thought would occur to them, 'Our meager provisions are used up & depleted while there is still a stretch of this desert yet to be crossed. What if we were to kill this only baby son of ours, dear & appealing, and make dried meat & jerky. That way — chewing on the flesh of our son — at least the two of us would make it through this desert. Otherwise, all three of us would perish.' So they would kill their only baby son, loved & endearing, and make dried meat & jerky. Chewing on the flesh of their son, they would make it through the desert. While eating the flesh of their only son, they would beat their breasts, [crying,] 'Where have you gone, our only baby son? Where have you gone, our only baby son?' Now what do you think, monks: Would that couple eat that food playfully or for intoxication, or for putting on bulk, or for beautification?"


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
rahul3bds
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:31 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby binocular » Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:34 pm

Alex123 wrote:Lets say you want to eat the cake, when you eat it - you experience pleasure. But when you stop eating it, the pleasure stops and eventually you back where you started from. If one tries to eat one cake after another cake, then very soon what was sources of pleasure will feel painful. If cake was trully the cause of pleasure, why does it turn into unpleasant feeling when indulged excessively?


A casual observation would suggest that this is because the circumstances of consumption have changed.

One thing is to eat a piece of cake when you first feel like it.
It's something quite different to eat a piece of cake when you already have several pieces of cake in your stomach.

In the first set of circumstances, eating the cake can be pleasurable; in the second set, it usually isn't.


Maybe there are no inherent pleasures in the world, just more or less dukkha.


Or maybe our bodies-minds are not made to experience pleasure in ways that we tend to assume they should.
binocular
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Postby Timpan » Sun Apr 14, 2013 5:29 am

waimengwan wrote:We are never satisfied, if we eat something it satisfy us until the next hunger pangs come, so we are continuously needing to eat food to be satisfied. So one of my dharma teacher told us that we just reducing our suffering it is not actually pleasure. And this applies to things like sex or sleep etc. We have to do it continuously. That is the nature of our the human existence, hence realising that should help us to develop renunciation towards such an existence.


This is how i also see it, all attachment leads to suffering and and to seek happiness in sources that are under the condition of change "anicca" is not real happiness but conditioned happiness that will not sustain.
User avatar
Timpan
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 3:04 am
Location: sweden

Previous

Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 5 guests