Suffering pleasure

[Bundokji]

I like the idea that suffering is essentially passive, and how it therefore might also include pleasure.

This is an interesting idea. Death is the ultimate passivity, hence described as suffering. However, when we dig deeper, there is a positive in being at the receiving end. Many people would delight in having someone else deciding on their behalf. In the world, we have sadism and masochism, and if one is essentially suffering, then the other wont exist or be justified.

[Zenny]

My interpretation, although I haven't read the pali yet: Pleasure is [nearly] the same as pain. Both arise, both cease, both are and or lead to stress. Also, both are perceptions. Pain is a perception. Perception is an arrow. Classifying into good or bad, appealing or unappealing, pleasure or pain, leads to stress. There is [nearly] no difference between pleasure and pain at the end of the path--as with in descriptions of the so-called fourth jhana, where both pleasure and pain are abandoned. Then, if you do that [and maybe some more], then there is nirvana.

See my above post to Alino.
Injurious pain and healthy pleasure are totally different.
And flourishing as a human involves knowing and applying this difference!

It's a complicated topic, all depends on one's view

Not view as in views (judgements, opinions), but view as in the way you "see reality", the way you perceive, whether you have vision/knowledge (vijja) or you don't (avijja), or if something in between (on the path to vijja)

worldly =/= on the path
on the path =/= off the path

And yet you still eat and avoid pain and have desires.

[Zenny]

Nirvana is a state of being,a feeling. Is that dukkha as well?

Nibbana is not a feeling. It's described as a pleasure metaphorically, not literally. For example, the pleasure one would get by leaving screaming children, which is removing something from experience. It also isn't a state of being either.

That's still a feeling. Pleasure or relief from stress is still a feeling.

[Zenny]

My interpretation, although I haven't read the pali yet: Pleasure is [nearly] the same as pain. Both arise, both cease, both are and or lead to stress. Also, both are perceptions. Pain is a perception. Perception is an arrow. Classifying into good or bad, appealing or unappealing, pleasure or pain, leads to stress. There is [nearly] no difference between pleasure and pain at the end of the path--as with in descriptions of the so-called fourth jhana, where both pleasure and pain are abandoned. Then, if you do that [and maybe some more], then there is nirvana.

See my above post to Alino.
Injurious pain and healthy pleasure are totally different.
And flourishing as a human involves knowing and applying this difference!

It's a complicated topic, all depends on one's view

Not view as in views (judgements, opinions), but view as in the way you "see reality", the way you perceive, whether you have vision/knowledge (vijja) or you don't (avijja), or if something in between (on the path to vijja)

worldly =/= on the path
on the path =/= off the path

Regardless of your view you still eat,avoid pain and desire good things.

[Zenny]

Nirvana is a state of being,a feeling. Is that dukkha as well?

Nibbana is not a feeling. It's described as a pleasure metaphorically, not literally. For example, the pleasure one would get by leaving screaming children, which is removing something from experience. It also isn't a state of being either.

Relief from suffering is a feeling.

[Sam Vara]

I like the idea that suffering is essentially passive, and how it therefore might also include pleasure.

This is an interesting idea. Death is the ultimate passivity, hence described as suffering. However, when we dig deeper, there is a positive in being at the receiving end. Many people would delight in having someone else deciding on their behalf. In the world, we have sadism and masochism, and if one is essentially suffering, then the other wont exist or be justified.

Yes, good point. Possibly the key here is the aspect of "association with the disliked...and separation from the wanted" which appears in the pericope defining suffering. Loss of agency is sometimes pleasant, but our pain and pleasure are hard-wired at a deeper level. If someone (or something) always decided on our behalf, it would lose its piquancy.

[un8-]

Nirvana is a state of being,a feeling. Is that dukkha as well?

Nibbana is not a feeling. It's described as a pleasure metaphorically, not literally. For example, the pleasure one would get by leaving screaming children, which is removing something from experience. It also isn't a state of being either.

That's still a feeling. Pleasure or relief from stress is still a feeling.

Not according to Buddhism, in Buddhism there are 3 feelings, painful, pleasurable and neutral, and they must be born of sensory contact. So in Buddhism, the dissipation of a feeling is not a feeling. So the dissipation of pain is not a feeling, but the ceasing of a feeling.

Nibbana is therefore not a feeling, but the non-arising of mental feeling, so in the context of seeing every conditioned thing as stressful, the non-arising of things is seen as pleasurable even though there is no actual pleasurable feeling arising, since an actual pleasurable feeling arising is still seen as stressful since it arises, and all conditioned (arising and ceasing) things are seen as stressful.

[Mr. Seek]

See my above post to Alino.
Injurious pain and healthy pleasure are totally different.
And flourishing as a human involves knowing and applying this difference!

It's a complicated topic, all depends on one's view

Not view as in views (judgements, opinions), but view as in the way you "see reality", the way you perceive, whether you have vision/knowledge (vijja) or you don't (avijja), or if something in between (on the path to vijja)

worldly =/= on the path
on the path =/= off the path

And yet you still eat and avoid pain and have desires.

I don't
The body does, conditions do
There is no me or mine on the transcendal level
It's a product of objectification, classification, perception

At least thats what a realized person would say, i think

Hey stuff is complicated, i dont pretend to understand it

[Zenny]

It's a complicated topic, all depends on one's view

Not view as in views (judgements, opinions), but view as in the way you "see reality", the way you perceive, whether you have vision/knowledge (vijja) or you don't (avijja), or if something in between (on the path to vijja)

worldly =/= on the path
on the path =/= off the path

And yet you still eat and avoid pain and have desires.

I don't
The body does, conditions do
There is no me or mine on the transcendal level
It's a product of objectification, classification, perception

At least thats what a realized person would say, i think

Hey stuff is complicated, i dont pretend to understand it

A material body does nothing in its own. That's common sense.
It's not complicated. If you don't understand how can you explain or follow it?

[Zenny]

Nibbana is not a feeling. It's described as a pleasure metaphorically, not literally. For example, the pleasure one would get by leaving screaming children, which is removing something from experience. It also isn't a state of being either.

That's still a feeling. Pleasure or relief from stress is still a feeling.

Not according to Buddhism, in Buddhism there are 3 feelings, painful, pleasurable and neutral, and they must be born of sensory contact. So in Buddhism, the dissipation of a feeling is not a feeling. So the dissipation of pain is not a feeling, but the ceasing of a feeling.

Nibbana is therefore not a feeling, but the non-arising of mental feeling, so in the context of seeing every conditioned thing as stressful, the non-arising of things is seen as pleasurable even though there is no actual pleasurable feeling arising, since an actual pleasurable feeling arising is still seen as stressful since it arises, and all conditioned (arising and ceasing) things are seen as stressful.

So you feel pleasure with no actual pleasurable feelings rising?
So is there anything perceived? Just constant pleasure?
Completely incoherent,and impossible as well.
You are describing a kind of catatonic numb state. But even in that state their will be feelings and fluctuations.

[Sam Vara]

Nibbana is not a feeling. It's described as a pleasure metaphorically, not literally. For example, the pleasure one would get by leaving screaming children, which is removing something from experience. It also isn't a state of being either.

That's still a feeling. Pleasure or relief from stress is still a feeling.

Not according to Buddhism, in Buddhism there are 3 feelings, painful, pleasurable and neutral, and they must be born of sensory contact. So in Buddhism, the dissipation of a feeling is not a feeling. So the dissipation of pain is not a feeling, but the ceasing of a feeling.

Nibbana is therefore not a feeling, but the non-arising of mental feeling, so in the context of seeing every conditioned thing as stressful, the non-arising of things is seen as pleasurable even though there is no actual pleasurable feeling arising, since an actual pleasurable feeling arising is still seen as stressful since it arises, and all conditioned (arising and ceasing) things are seen as stressful.

That's beautifully expressed, un8-.

[Zenny]

That's still a feeling. Pleasure or relief from stress is still a feeling.

Not according to Buddhism, in Buddhism there are 3 feelings, painful, pleasurable and neutral, and they must be born of sensory contact. So in Buddhism, the dissipation of a feeling is not a feeling. So the dissipation of pain is not a feeling, but the ceasing of a feeling.

Nibbana is therefore not a feeling, but the non-arising of mental feeling, so in the context of seeing every conditioned thing as stressful, the non-arising of things is seen as pleasurable even though there is no actual pleasurable feeling arising, since an actual pleasurable feeling arising is still seen as stressful since it arises, and all conditioned (arising and ceasing) things are seen as stressful.

That's beautifully expressed, un8-.

It makes no sense,and there are no examples of this phenomenon in the world.

[un8-]

That's beautifully expressed, un8-.

Thank you

[un8-]

So you feel pleasure with no actual pleasurable feelings rising?
So is there anything perceived? Just constant pleasure?
Completely incoherent,and impossible as well.
You are describing a kind of catatonic numb state. But even in that state their will be feelings and fluctuations.

You feel relief, like you said, hence the suttas say "what's done is done, there is no more becoming" as well as they describe overcoming the 5 Hindrance like curing a disease, escaping bandits or prison, paying off a debt, etc..

Pain and Pleasure is relative, so perhaps one only runs towards pleasure to suppress the pain. Even boredom is mental pain, so people need pleasure to suppress it.

As he is touched by that painful feeling, he is resistant. Any resistance-obsession with regard to that painful feeling obsesses him. Touched by that painful feeling, he delights in sensual pleasure. Why is that? Because the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person does not discern any escape from painful feeling aside from sensual pleasure.

People go on vacations because their life and work is stressful, they need a break.. The same principal applies..

So when you remove the final cause, you have no reason to escape to sensual pleasures.

When I saw contention as the sole outcome, aversion increased in me; but then I saw an arrow [3] here, difficult to see, set in the heart. Pierced by it, one runs in every direction, but having pulled it out one does not run nor does one sink.

The Buddha removed the subtle arrow that causes pain and leads to discontent and makes people chase/run after sensual desires.

[Mr. Seek]

And yet you still eat and avoid pain and have desires.

I don't
The body does, conditions do
There is no me or mine on the transcendal level
It's a product of objectification, classification, perception

At least thats what a realized person would say, i think

Hey stuff is complicated, i dont pretend to understand it

A material body does nothing in its own. That's common sense.
It's not complicated. If you don't understand how can you explain or follow it?

Bro i dont know the details. just sit down and forget about everything you ever read, seen, thought, sensed, or heard.