Pain and pleasure

[shortindiangirl]

A friend was writing about pain and pleasure. Apparently Buddha said, "Whether touched by pleasure or pain, the wise show no change of temper". As I understood my friend's thoughts, denying pleasure was helpful in avoiding pain. Particularly as applicable to human relationships

Comments

Look at it again.. a bit differently!

[sandykins]

Buddha said, "Whether touched by pleasure or pain, the wise show no change of temper".

Pain and pleasure are parts of life and to deny them is to deny life.

The Buddha never said 'deny pain'. The Buddha only tells us to 'develop' equanimity to pain and pleasure. In the meditation practices, the sole purpose is to actually observe your pain and pleasure and develop equanimity to it. Aversion or craving are the root causes of pain and pleasure. If you can understand that and check that, it will hack at the root of pain and pleasure!

If you look back at your own experiences, I'm sure you've already developed some form of equanimity. The things that hurt you in your childhood, must surely not affect you as much now. (A few things might, but on the whole, it must be fewer things).

I'm not sure if you get the drift. I dont want to sound preachy. But this approach to pain and pleasure made a lot of sense to me. Of course, easier said than done! :-)

Re: Look at it again.. a bit differently!

[shortindiangirl]

"No change in temper". NO change ? Perhaps what he really meant was "Equal change in temper" ? But the statement on my friend's blog wasn't made that way. It's about no change. That means no reaction to either. This is very very different to saying equanimity. To have equal reactions to both. I have equal reactions to both, I feel them both intensely. But I would interpret that Buddha indeed intended for people to deny both pain and pleasure equally. Perhaps I've gotten it wrong - please help me understand if so. I think this because of his other teachings. Desire may be the root cause of all suffering, but the next step of giving up desire as the main method to ending suffering, now, that I have issues with. Yes, there's an eight fold path, and each of those eight do not preach the denial if anything. But I had NOT previously understood Buddhism to be about developing equanimity to desire - but to deny it altogether

[thaths]

Pain and pleasure are parts of life and to deny them is to deny life. To me living is about emoting and feeling. It's not that pain and pleasure must both cause no change in me. But that pain and pleasure should cause equal change in me.IMO, Buddha's message is not about denying pleasure or pain. It is about being mindful of our reaction to the pleasure or pain one is and is likely to be experiencing. Think of it as a filter through which our reactions are passed. The Buddha pointed out to us that most of us tend to dislike pain and avoid it and tend to love pleasure and gravitate towards it. His view is that in some cases, we are not really reacting to actual pain/pleasure now but perceived pain/pleasure to be accrued from our actions in the future. And this perceived pain/pleasure tends to affect our actions. He wants us to be mindful of when the pain/pleasure is happening now and when we are running away from/towards a pain/pleasure to come

[shortindiangirl]

Makes sense. However, if this is true, then my post has little to do with Buddha's message. It is purely intended as a discussion about reactions to pain and pleasure. I thought that Buddha preached the ending of suffering through denying oneself desires and attachments. What you are saying suggests that he preached greater awareness of one's actions and feelings, without prescribing a particular action or sequence of responses.

The reading begins...

[sandykins]

yes... thaths has put it more aptly!

Mindfulness is the central point of most Buddhist teachings and meditation practices.

[thaths]

I thought that Buddha preached the ending of suffering through denying oneself desires and attachments.

There are certain schools of Buddhism which do preach denial. My view is that these schools exist from a cross-fertilization of the Buddhist thought that it is possible to end Suffering and the Asian prediliction to asceticism.

IMO, Buddha recommends the Middle Path and Equanimity. Denial is an extreme and hardly a Middle Path.

What you are saying suggests that he preached greater awareness of one's actions and feelings, without prescribing a particular action or sequence of responses.Correct. However I must stress that this is *my* view. It may not be what your neighborhood Buddhist temple's view. Just like Christianity has its denominations and Hinduism has its Vaishnavites, Shaivaites, Kali worshippers, etc., Buddhism has its versions. I am talking about a version of Buddhism that I personally find appealing and useful to me. As with any literature more than 2000 years old, it is left to us as individuals to figure out what

[ohari]

I am compelled to quote William Goldman's Dread Pirate Roberts here when I say "Life is Pain...Anyone who says differently is selling something". One cannot avoid all pain and still live. Fear of pain, certainly, is to be avoided (as is all fear, and all desire, for the Buddhist), but pain itself cannot be

[shortindiangirl]

One step further, in accordance with the Buddha - do not take actions solely on the basis of avoiding pain. Meaning to say that while pain can be a consideration, it should not be the guiding force to the actions we take.

[ohari]

I suppose you could say that. Thaths seems to describe Buddhism the way I understand it. Like he says, there are versions fo Buddhism that are fairly extreme and perhaps very deviant from the original teachings. In fact, the idea that Buddha preached denial, and the idea that Buddhism is fatalistic/pessimistic are two VERY common ideas, even among scholars (mostly of western history and religion, including Will Durant). In my opinion, denial of pain only serves to reinforce the very negative behaviors and perceptions that bring the pain on in the first place. This, the Buddha totally got. Which is why he said to be mindful of each moment's experiences though the body and the mind and to not confuse this moment's experiences with perceptions and memories from the past that would not only cloud the reality of this moment (and thereby impacting our ability to make choices and act wisely) but also create yet another layer of memories (called "sankhara", or just another imprint of fired brain cells if you prefer) that will have the ability

[ohari]

To clarify, the Buddha did say all life is suffering but he also said it doesn't have to be. Life can be of constant happiness, joy and love with the cessation of conditioned responses in sentient beings. No denial or renunciation involved.

Also, the primary cause of suffering is not desire, craving, attachment, sloth or any of the other barriers to happiness. It is ignorance. Ignorance of the true characteristics of all things. Chief among which is impermanance.

[deponti]

Still digesting all that has been said...hmm.....did I introspect like this when I was at this age? If I did, was I so articulate about it?...hmm....

[djpekky]

Nicely pit, Kev.

I am not too sure if you can control expectations with people, tho. I think it depends on the degree and the nature of the connections. Sometimes expectations come on their own.

Peace!

Pekky

[shortindiangirl]

Interesting difference between friends and acquaintances. It is more complex for me, but I don't have time right now to figure it out and articulate it. Would like to come back to this though