Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
SilaSamadhi
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:58 pm

Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by SilaSamadhi »

The Buddha taught that sensations (Vedanā) are pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral.

The pleasant or unpleasant quality of sensations is the basis for the development of, respectively, desire or aversion.

Thus these pleasantness and unpleasantness qualities play a central role in Buddhist thought, as the primary causes for two of the three Root Poisons (Kleshas).

Is there any teaching about why these qualities exist? Why living beings find certain qualities pleasant or unpleasant?

As an initial observation: different beings and individuals vary in their assignment of pleasantness/unpleasantness to different sensations. For example, many animals shun certain highly sugary foods, while many humans enjoy them, and yet some humans find their extreme sweetness repulsive. This variation suggests karma is involved.
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by Jack19990101 »

There are 7 bodily feelings are non vipaka and can be painful even for arahants - Buddha listed them out in a chapter in SN.
But as for mental ones, i would say they are from past, best to my contemplation.
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by SarathW »

The only thing I can think of this is due to Niyama Dhamma.
Kamma, Citta, Utu,Biju,Dhamma.
https://www.learnreligions.com/the-five-niyamas-449741
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
SilaSamadhi
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:58 pm

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by SilaSamadhi »

SarathW wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:24 pm The only thing I can think of this is due to Niyama Dhamma.
Kamma, Citta, Utu,Biju,Dhamma.
https://www.learnreligions.com/the-five-niyamas-449741
Thanks! What is the basis for the teaching of the Niyamas in Buddhist thought? Its Wikipedia entry mostly refers to Yogic Hinduist teachings, and it the only mention of it in Buddhism much later commentary from 5th to 13th centuries CE.

I read the article you linked and parts of it don't sound right according to my understanding of Buddhist thought:
So, from a Buddhist perspective, natural disasters such as earthquakes are not caused by karma.
That doesn't seem right. Being affected by natural disasters seems very much like it could be the result of karma. In fact, if you take the argument about "Utu Niyama" to an its logical conclusion, then very few things are due to karma, since everything affected by mechanical laws of nature (most phenomena around us) is due to this Utu Niyama, Bija Niyama, or Citta Niyama, and so categorically not karma.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by DooDoot »

SilaSamadhi wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:28 pm The pleasant or unpleasant quality of sensations is the basis for the development of, respectively, desire or aversion.

Thus these pleasantness and unpleasantness qualities play a central role in Buddhist thought, as the primary causes for two of the three Root Poisons (Kleshas).
The Teachings say Arahants have feelings and what is to be abandoned is desire & aversion.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 21240
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by SarathW »

I read the article you linked and parts of it don't sound right according to my understanding of Buddhist thought:
Agree.
I wanted to give you some information to start your investigation as I could not find the source of this teaching.
What I can recall is Niyama Dhamma is a part of Abhidhamma even though you find them in the Sutta as well.
I hope somebody may chip in here.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by mjaviem »

SilaSamadhi wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:28 pm The Buddha taught that sensations (Vedanā) are pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral.

The pleasant or unpleasant quality of sensations is the basis for the development of, respectively, desire or aversion.

Thus these pleasantness and unpleasantness qualities play a central role in Buddhist thought, as the primary causes for two of the three Root Poisons (Kleshas).

Is there any teaching about why these qualities exist? Why living beings find certain qualities pleasant or unpleasant?

...
I think living beings find certain qualities pleasant or unpleasant because they experience them with passion or resistance. I doubt pleasantness/unpleasantness are in the nature of things.
MN 44 Thanissaro wrote:...
“Now, lady, how many kinds of feeling are there?”

“These three kinds of feeling: pleasant feeling, painful feeling, & neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling.”

“What is pleasant feeling? What is painful feeling? What is neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?”

“Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as pleasant & gratifying is pleasant feeling. Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as painful & hurting is painful feeling. Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as neither gratifying nor hurting is neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling.”

“In what way is pleasant feeling pleasant, lady, and in what way painful?”

“Pleasant feeling is pleasant in remaining, & painful in changing, friend Visākha. Painful feeling is painful in remaining & pleasant in changing. Neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling is pleasant in occurring together with knowledge, and painful in occurring without knowledge.”

“What obsession gets obsessed with pleasant feeling? What obsession gets obsessed painful feeling? What obsession gets obsessed with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?”

“Passion-obsession gets obsessed with pleasant feeling. Resistance-obsession gets obsessed with painful feeling. Ignorance-obsession gets obsessed with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling.”

“Does passion-obsession get obsessed with all pleasant feeling? Does resistance-obsession get obsessed with all painful feeling? Does ignorance-obsession get obsessed with all neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?”

“No.…”

“But what is to be abandoned with regard to pleasant feeling? What is to be abandoned with regard to painful feeling? What is to be abandoned with regard to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?”

“Passion-obsession is to be abandoned with regard to pleasant feeling. Resistance-obsession is to be abandoned with regard to painful feeling. Ignorance-obsession is to be abandoned with regard to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling.”

“Is passion-obsession to be abandoned with regard to all pleasant feeling? Is resistance-obsession to be abandoned with regard to all painful feeling? Is ignorance-obsession to be abandoned with regard to all neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?”

“No .… There is the case where a monk—quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities—enters & remains in the first jhāna: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With that he abandons passion. No passion-obsession gets obsessed there.4 There is the case where a monk considers, ‘O when will I enter & remain in the dimension that those who are noble now enter & remain in?’ And as he thus nurses this yearning for the unexcelled liberations, there arises within him sorrow based on that yearning. With that he abandons resistance. No resistance-obsession gets obsessed there.5 There is the case where a monk, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain—as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress—enters & remains in the fourth jhāna: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. With that he abandons ignorance. No ignorance-obsession gets obsessed there.”6

“Now what, lady, lies on the other side of pleasant feeling?”

“Passion lies on the other side of pleasant feeling.”

“And what lies on the other side of painful feeling?”

“Resistance lies on the other side of painful feeling.”


“What lies on the other side of neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?”

“Ignorance lies on the other side of neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling.”

...
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
Alino
Posts: 650
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:15 pm
Contact:

Re: Why are some sensations naturally pleasant or unpleasant?

Post by Alino »

In order to understand it we need to investigate our feeling. Often while eating or experiencing something pleasant or unpleasant I ask myself - what exactly the quality that feel pleasant here? What exactly the quality that feel unpleasant?

In most of the cases pleasantness is felt in:
>"harmony of form" - sphere is pleasant to eye, chaotic form is unpleasant; smouth face is pleasant, distorted face is unpleasant; rythmic sound is pleasant, chaotic is unpleasant; ...
>"intecity" - day light is pleasant, watching directly on the sun is unpleasant; sound of the nature is pleasant, death metal roars are unpleasant; massage is pleasant, bullet going though our body is unpleasant; softness is pleasant, firmness is unpleasant; genteleness is pleasant, roughness is unpleasant; ...

I suppose that sex is pleasant to us because it ressemble many "pleasant" qualities as warmth, softness, gentleness, harmonious form, human voice etc. That's why we seek for it.

Generally all what is supporting our being is felt pleasant. All what is destroying our being is felt unpleasant.

Also one story of investigation:
Once I'm driving à car and took a sweet.
Then I asked myself- why I took it if I'm not hungry?
Because it's pleasant.
What exactly is pleasant in it?
Smoothness on the tongue is pleasant.
What is quality of smoothness?
Smoothness is while there is no grasping?
What is quality of grasping?
Grasping is born out of imperfections on the surface...
What is the cause for imperfection?
Degradation is the cause for Imperfection.
What is the cause for degradation?
Impermanence is the cause for degradation.
What is the cause for impermanence?
Conditioned nature is the cause for impermanence...
We don't live Samsara, Samsara is living us...

"Form, feelings, perceptions, formations, consciousness - don't care about us, we don't exist for them"
sunnat
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:08 am

Post by sunnat »

'Generally all what is supporting our being is felt pleasant. All what is destroying our being is felt unpleasant.' - this is good, I think. Perhaps also like this: 'supporting the self identity is feeling called pleasant...etc.' It conforms with a theory of the somewhat strange phenomena of the masochist that likes pain. An observation in a prison where prisoner goads guards into beating him because when child the only affirmation received from parents was beating so a sense of self value is inextricably linked to pain.
Alino
Posts: 650
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:15 pm
Contact:

Re:

Post by Alino »

sunnat wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 4:58 am 'Generally all what is supporting our being is felt pleasant. All what is destroying our being is felt unpleasant.' - this is good, I think. Perhaps also like this: 'supporting the self identity is feeling called pleasant...etc.' It conforms with a theory of the somewhat strange phenomena of the masochist that likes pain. An observation in a prison where prisoner goads guards into beating him because when child the only affirmation received from parents was beating so a sense of self value is inextricably linked to pain.
Indeed🙏😑

It means also that something unpleasant on bodily level can be felt as pleasant on mental level and vice versa..
We don't live Samsara, Samsara is living us...

"Form, feelings, perceptions, formations, consciousness - don't care about us, we don't exist for them"
Post Reply