Why did the Buddha say "Sensuality" to be an Assumption? | Hillside Hermitage скачать в хорошем качестве

Why did the Buddha say "Sensuality" to be an Assumption? | Hillside Hermitage

The only way to overcome sensual desire is to fully understand that its nature is not the physical gratification, but a gratification of the mental delight. Delight that is dependent upon your ASSUMPTION. Reflection: Would you be acting towards satisfying the arisen sense desire if there was no desire-to-be-satisfied ENDURING first? Is that firstly enduring unsatisfied desire felt pleasantly or unpleasantly? Being always unpleasant, would you be able to seek its gratification for any reason other than PRIMARILY trying to get rid of that firstly arisen unpleasantness? (Which means ANY other reason for engaging with that desire would be SECONDARY and WITHIN the attempt of getting-rid-of-enduring-unpleasantness) If the assumption of getting-rid-of-unpleasantness is uprooted, would you be able to act toward satisfaction of the desire that is now not there and not felt unpleasantly? If there is no getting-rid-of-unpleasantness on the root level of your current action towards any of the six sense objects, there are no "underlying tendencies" or "hidden inclinations" (Pali term "anusaya") underlying your actions. The pleasure of sensual gratification IS the pain of sensual desire. How? Lesser pain will be felt pleasantly from the point of view of the greater pain. Greater pain DETERMINES the lesser pain as pleasant (i.e. more desirable). As the Buddha himself described it in Majjhima Nikaya 75 "Magandiya Sutta": "Suppose there was a person affected by leprosy, with sores and blisters on their limbs. Being devoured by worms, scratching with their nails at the opening of their wounds, they’re cauterizing their body over a pit of glowing coals. The more they scratch their wounds and cauterize their body, the more their wounds become foul, stinking, and infected. But still, they derive a DEGREE OF PLEASURE and gratification from the itchiness of their wounds. In the same way, I see other sentient beings who are not free from sensual pleasures being consumed by the craving for sensual pleasures, burning with passion for sensual pleasures, indulging in sensual pleasures. The more they indulge in sensual pleasures, the more their craving for sensual pleasures grows, and the more they burn with passion for sensual pleasures. But still, they derive a degree of pleasure and gratification from the five kinds of sensual stimulation..." Same Sutta: “That fire is painful now and it was also painful previously." i.e. Engaging with sensual objects is painful now, and always has been. "That person was affected by leprosy, with sores and blisters on their limbs. Being devoured by worms, scratching with their nails at the opening of their wounds, their sense faculties were impaired. So even though the fire was actually painful to touch, they had a distorted perception that it was pleasant.” The distorted perception of painful fire as being pleasant was because of the greater pain of unsatisfied-desire that is the fire's CONTEXT (the leper wouldn't come to fire in the first place, if he were not affected by the painful disease). So the ONLY PRIMAL reason for one following the direction of distorted perception (i.e. going after the sense-objects) is because of the enduring underlying pain and one's gratuitous attitude of getting-rid-of-it. If the leper would not carelessly go for the burning fire to alleviate his disease pains, he'd come to see that the skin can only heal IF he stops scratching and burning it. As the sutta continues: “In the same way, sensual pleasures of the past, future, and present are painful to touch, fiercely burning and scorching. These sentient beings who are not free from sensual pleasures—being consumed by craving for sensual pleasures, burning with passion for sensual pleasures—have impaired sense faculties. So even though sensual pleasures are actually painful to touch, they have a distorted perception that they are pleasant." Thus, one's sensual pleasures are not in or because of the sense objects, but instead, they are directly dependent upon one's own attitude of not-wanting-pain that underlies them. The attitude that implicitly tries to get rid of any unpleasantness as soon as it is manifested and feels justified in doing so. And that's nothing other than one's own ASSUMPTION that sensuality is pleasure (fire and embers) OUTSIDE (escape from) of this painfully enduring desire (leprosy). ----------------------------------------------------------- If you wish to gift your support to life at the Hillside you would be very welcome to do so by donating at: http://www.hillsidehermitage.org/supp... For other forms of Dhamma Teachings see: http://www.hillsidehermitage.org/teac... For the Buddhist Phenomenology essays see: http://www.hillsidehermitage.org/teac...