No inherent sensual pleasure

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Sylvester »

Coyote wrote:But pleasure is still Dukkha.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"Magandiya, suppose that there was a leper covered with sores and infections, devoured by worms, picking the scabs off the openings of his wounds with his nails, cauterizing his body over a pit of glowing embers. His friends, companions, & relatives would take him to a doctor. The doctor would concoct medicine for him, and thanks to the medicine he would be cured of his leprosy: well & happy, free, master of himself, going wherever he liked. Then suppose two strong men, having grabbed him with their arms, were to drag him to a pit of glowing embers. What do you think? Wouldn't he twist his body this way & that?"

"Yes, master Gotama. Why is that? The fire is painful to the touch, very hot & scorching."

"Now what do you think, Magandiya? Is the fire painful to the touch, very hot & scorching, only now, or was it also that way before?"

"Both now & before is it painful to the touch, very hot & scorching, master Gotama. It's just that when the man was a leper covered with sores and infections, devoured by worms, picking the scabs off the openings of his wounds with his nails, his faculties were impaired, which was why, even though the fire was actually painful to the touch, he had the skewed perception of 'pleasant.'"

"In the same way, Magandiya, sensual pleasures in the past were painful to the touch, very hot & scorching; sensual pleasures in the future will be painful to the touch, very hot & scorching; sensual pleasures at present are painful to the touch, very hot & scorching; but when beings are not free from passion for sensual pleasures — devoured by sensual craving, burning with sensual fever — their faculties are impaired, which is why, even though sensual pleasures are actually painful to the touch, they have the skewed perception of 'pleasant.'

I think we need to be very, very careful when relying on the above, which is given only as an excerpt in ATI.

What is said -
In the same way, Magandiya, sensual pleasures in the past were painful to the touch, very hot & scorching; sensual pleasures in the future will be painful to the touch, very hot & scorching; sensual pleasures at present are painful to the touch, very hot & scorching; but when beings are not free from passion for sensual pleasures — devoured by sensual craving, burning with sensual fever — their faculties are impaired, which is why, even though sensual pleasures are actually painful to the touch, they have the skewed perception of 'pleasant.'
comes from the Pali -
Evameva kho māgandiya atītampi addhānaṃ kāmā dukkhasamphassā ceva mahābhitāpā ca mahāpariḷāhā ca. Anāgatampi addhānaṃ kāmā dukkhasamphassā ceva mahābhitāpā ca mahāpariḷāhā ca, etarahipi paccuppannaṃ addhānaṃ kāmā dukkhasamphassā ceva mahābhitāpā ca mahāpariḷāhā ca. Ime ca māgandiya sattā kāmesu avītarāgā kāmataṇhāhi khajjamānā kāmapariḷāhena pariḍayhamānā upahatindriyā dukkhasamphassesveva1 kāmesu sukhamiti viparītasaññaṃ paccalatthuṃ.
What Ven T (and BB in the MLDB) translate as "sensual pleasures" is the Pali term kāmā. The big issue here (as with the perennial Jhana debate of what kāmā means) is this -

does kāmā mean pleasurable objects cognisable by the 5 senses, or does it mean every kind of object cognisable by the 5 senses?

To me, the answer is clear. The kāmā refers to the latter, while the former is denoted by the term pañca kāmaguṇā. For example, the distinction is drawn here -
Taṃ kiṃ maññasi māgandiya: api nu te diṭṭho vā suto vā rājā vā rājamahāmatto vā pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappito samaṅgībhūto paricārayamāno kāmataṇhaṃ appahāya kāmapariḷāhaṃ appaṭivinodetvā vigatapipāso ajjhattaṃ vūpasantacitto vihāsi vā, viharati vā, viharissati vāti. No hidaṃ bho gotama.

What do you think, Magandiya? Have you ever seen or heard of a king or a king’s minister enjoying himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of sensual pleasure who, without abandoning craving for sensual pleasures, without removing fever for sensual pleasures, was able to abide free from thirst, with a mind inwardly at peace, or who is able or who will be able to so abide?” - “No, Master Gotama
An even more stark example is given about the hypothetical, contrasting divine pleasures with human sense objects -
Seyyathāpi māgandiya gahapati vā gahapatiputto vā aḍḍho mahaddhano mahābhogo pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappito samaṅgībhūto paricāreyya. Cakkhuviññeyyehi rūpehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi. Sotaviñañeyyehi saddehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi ghānaviññeyyehi gandhehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi. Jivhāviññeyyehi rasehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi. Kāyaviññeyyehi phoṭṭhabbehi iṭṭhehi kantehi manāpehi piyarūpehi kāmūpasaṃhitehi rajanīyehi.

So kāyena sucaritaṃ caritvā vācāya sucaritaṃ caritvā manasā sucaritaṃ caritvā kāyassa bhedā parammaraṇā sugatiṃ saggaṃ lokaṃ upapajjeyya devānaṃ tāvatiṃsānaṃ sahavyataṃ. So tattha nandane vane accharāsaṅghaparivuto dibbehi pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappito samaṅgīto paricāreyya. So passeyya gahapatiṃ vā gahapatiputtaṃ vā pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappitaṃ samaṅgībhūtaṃ paricārayamānaṃ. Taṃ kiṃ maññasi māgandiya, api nu so devaputto nandane vane accharāsaṅghaparivuto dibbehi pañcahi kāmaguṇehi samappito samaṅgībhūto paricārayamāno amussa gahapatissa vā gahapatiputtassa vā piheyya mānusakānaṃ vā pañcannaṃ kāmaguṇānaṃ, mānusakehi vā kāmehi āvaṭṭeyyāti.

No hidaṃ bho gotama, taṃ kissa hetu: mānusakehi bho gotama kāmehi dibbā kāmā abhikkantatarā paṇītatarā cāti.

Suppose, Magandiya, a householder or a householder’s son was rich, with great wealth and property, and being provided and endowed with the five cords of sensual pleasure, he might enjoy himself with forms cognizable by the eye …
with sounds cognizable by the ear … with odours cognizable by the nose … with flavours cognizable by the tongue … with tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for, desired, agreeable, and likeable, connected with sensual desire and provocative of lust.

Having conducted himself well in body, speech, and mind, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he might reappear in a happy destination, in the heavenly world in the retinue of the gods of the Thirty-three; and there, surrounded by a group of nymphs in the Nandana Grove, he would enjoy himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasure. Suppose he saw a householder or a householder’s son enjoying himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of [human] sensual pleasure. What do you think, Magandiya? Would that young god surrounded by the group of nymphs in the Nandana Grove, enjoying himself, provided and endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasure, envy the householder or the householder’s son for the five cords of human sensual pleasure or would he return to human sensual pleasures?”
“No, Master Gotama. Why not? Because heavenly sensual pleasures are more excellent and sublime than human sensual pleasures.”
As will be obvious from the above, the Buddha is essentially saying that a devaputta endowed with the five cords of divine sensual pleasures (dibba pañca kāmaguṇā) would have no interest in the five cords of human sensual pleasures (mānusakā pañca kāmaguṇā), let alone human kāmā (mānusakā kāmā), ie the 5 sense object.

As such, I don't think MN 75 can be cited as authority that one misperceives a kāmaguṇa as pleasurable. What this sutta suggests is that the misperception occurs in relation to kāmā (ie the sense objects).

I'm also curious why the discussion has drifted from the "innateness" of hedonic tone to the question of affective tone. I thought the former was the OP's query?
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Spiny Norman »

Alex123 wrote: So I think it is matter of contrast. Less pain feels like pleasure compared to greater pain.
Yes, I'd agree that pleasant feeling and unpleasant feeling are relative rather than being absolute.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Spiny Norman »

Samma wrote:“Sensing a feeling of pleasure, [the arahant] senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, he senses it disjoined from it. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress” — SN 36:6
Passages like this do seem to support the idea that it's not pleasant feeling in and of itself that's the problem - rather that it's our relationship with it.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by danieLion »

Prasadachitta wrote:
LonesomeYogurt wrote:I think it should be clarified that there is a great difference between pleasure and delight. Arahants experiences pleasure but they do not delight in it. What Alex is saying is very true when it comes to delight but not necessarily with pleasure.
Hi LY,

This got me thinking about the word "delight". I don't know what the Pali word is but....

Delight has a few meanings one of which is simply to recognize the pleasure in some experience. I expect that the Buddha does this.

Another meaning is to be amused by an experience. In this case it makes sense to me that the Buddha has no interest in the amusement of pleasure. Pleasure does not occupy the Buddha. It does not keep him busy. The Buddha is "in a sense" fully amused by Nibbana. he is "amused" in the sense that it provides interesting occupation. The Buddha knows and teaches Nibbana and is entertained by nothing else.

Its a nice thought.

Prasadachitta
Here we find the Buddha enjoying and delighting in things technically not nibbana and encouraging others to do the same.
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Two trains of thought often occur to the Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened: the thought of safety & that of seclusion.

"The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in non-ill will. To him — enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will — this thought often occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, whether weak or firm.'

"The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in seclusion. To him — enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion — this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is unskillful is abandoned.'

"Thus, monks, you too should live enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will. To you — enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will — this thought will often occur: 'By this activity we harm no one at all, whether weak or firm.'

"You too should live enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion. To you — enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion — this thought will often occur: 'What is unskillful? What is not yet abandoned? What are we abandoning?'"

To the Tathagata, awakened, who endured what is hard to endure, two thoughts occur: safety the first thought mentioned; seclusion the second declared. The dispeller of darkness, free of fermentation, the great seer who has gone beyond, reached attainment, gained mastery, crossed over the poisons; who's released in the ending of craving: that sage bears his last body, has shaken off Mara, I tell you, has gone beyond aging. As one standing on a rocky crag would see the people all around below, so the wise, with the all-around eye, having scaled the tower made of Dhamma, having crossed over sorrow, gaze on those overwhelmed with sorrow, conquered by aging & death.
Itivuttaka 31
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Prasadachitta »

danieLion wrote:Here we find the Buddha enjoying and delighting and encouraging others to do the same.


Like I said he enjoys NIbbanna. He delights in Nibanna. He encourages others to do the same and he delights when when they do.

Metta

Prasadachitta
things technically not nibbana
Technical definitions are of marginal interest to me.
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by danieLion »

Prasadachitta wrote:
danieLion wrote:Here we find the Buddha enjoying and delighting and encouraging others to do the same.


Like I said he enjoys NIbbanna. He delights in Nibanna. He encourages others to do the same and he delights when when they do.

Metta

Prasadachitta
things technically not nibbana
Technical definitions are of marginal interest to me.
Metta and seclusion are not marginal in the Buddha's estimation.
User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by BlackBird »

The misconception here I believe relates to an objectification of that which is experienced - Of something that is wholly subjective. Vedana only exists in so far as there is salayatana, vinnana and it is only felt as mine as long as there is avijja. These things are not in the world as such. If there were no sentient beings present in the world there would be no sense pleasure.
"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

Path Press - Ñāṇavīra Thera Dhamma Page - Ajahn Nyanamoli's Dhamma talks
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Prasadachitta »

danieLion wrote: Metta and seclusion are not marginal in the Buddha's estimation.
Quite pertinent to Nibbanna.
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Prasadachitta »

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
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by danieLion »

On the perceptions pertinent to vedana.
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."

Whoever sees
pleasure as stress,
sees pain as an arrow,
sees peaceful neither-pleasure-nor-pain
as inconstant:
he is a monk
who's seen rightly.
From that he is there set free.
A master of direct knowing,
at peace,
he is a sage
gone beyond bonds.

Itivuttaka 47
hermitwin
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:35 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by hermitwin »

i believe in dhammapada,
sensual pleasure is described as licking honey off a sharp blade.
User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by BlackBird »

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

Path Press - Ñāṇavīra Thera Dhamma Page - Ajahn Nyanamoli's Dhamma talks
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Spiny Norman »

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.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10154
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by Spiny Norman »

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?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: No inherent sensual pleasure

Post by kirk5a »

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
Post Reply