The world we live in is so hedonistic and materialistic that many Buddhist teachers neglect to talk about restraint; focusing almost entirely on mindfulness and compassion.
Sooo helpful because I've had little consistent instruction and, until recently, not sutta based. Also, from my perspective, your approach is more direct than any other I've found.
"Pleasant feeling should be seen as suffering. Painful feeling should be seen as a dart. Neutral feeling should be seen as impermanent." Samyutta Nikaya :36.5
19:46 - "Develop the mind that cannot be pressured by the possibility of sensuality, in other words, develop the mind that will always able to quickly instantaneously, simultaneously discern sensual arisen thought as pain"
I don't personally know anyone who would actually pursue a particular goal for the sake of taking pleasure in it. Most people I know seem to me like they are pursuing particular goals for the sake of enjoying social inclusion because of the pursuit of those goals, but not because of the goals themselves. For example, there are those who drink coffee not because they would enjoy the coffee, but because they enjoy the social inclusion based on the conviction "Drinking coffee is what makes someone normal." When I was growing up, drinking coffee was a social norm, and drinking coffee was a kind of social proof of one's normalcy. I noticed people drank coffee whether they liked it or not; some even openly expressed dislike, but continued drinking it. Or women who wear high heels because it's the norm for women to do so. And so on: the pursuit of particular foods, sex, art, hobbies -- all for the sake of complying with social norms, not for the sake of actually enjoying those things (one is supposed to pursue those things regardless whether one likes them or not).So in these cases, the pleasure actually being pursued is the pleasure of social inclusion or the pleasure of being considered "normal" (or at least the assumption of such inclusion or normalcy); but it appears to be a social taboo to say (or think) so directly, openly. I suppose modern materialist, hedonist people with a strong sense of individuality and self-confidence, and who are not concerned with social norms, pursue pleasures more directly. So the Buddha's analysis of pleasure and pain is something they can easily relate to. But not so much older people from more "old-fashioned" societies where there is a lot of emphasis on social conformity.
What is said in this video still applies though, just on another level: What happens if you don't conform? You might feel like an outsider and feel the pressure to conform to society; thus, engaging in those "normal" activities (drinking coffee) is not done with the intention to feel the pleasure of socializing, but to avoid the unpleasantness of being the outsider. Which begs the question: Is it actually the socializing that is pleasant, or is it the relief of the pain felt as an outsider that then appears to be pleasant? So in other words, the situation that you described is exactly what the video explained, you just have to look at the pleasure of socializing instead of the pleasure of the coffee/whatever itself.
"When the bird of your soul departs from the cage of your flesh, this dream will have evaporated, and you will be left alone with your deeds, and what you thought was pleasure was actually hell, and what thought was suffering was really paradise"- Islamic proverb.
So, pressure is the pain from that possble/potential desire. Taking part in that desire temporarily relieves and redirects/misdirects the pain/pressure to the external direction. Giving supposed relief/pleasure from that desire. However that felt pressure will show up as another desire later to pull me, unless I maintain periphery awareness of craving/desire. A psychiatrist would look at the individual situation as a symptom and try to understand each individual pressure as it's own psychosis, but the Buddha wouldn't see a need to pschologize each individual example, but offer a blanket pressure=pain to each and every situation regardless of the content. And the content is not important, just that pressure is there. Is that correct? The handling of this would need to be subtle, I imagine as upon the recognition of it being present, I would need to ensure I don't create an aversion to it by willing it away?
Thank you for these videos, I am a catholic and they help greatly. When I practice seeing the pain in sensuality the pressure goes away. With habitual seeing of this pain will I abandon sensuality ?
Bhante, Wouldn't enduring the pain instead of chasing the sensual object create an aversion to the sensual object? Same coin, different sides. Or said in a other way, how not to fall prey of aversion when practising self-restraint from sensual objects? Thank you.
You don't fall prey when aversion manifests, you fall prey when you act out of it. So extend your practice of sense restraint also to not-acting-out-of-aversion. Endure it, just like you'd endure the sensual pull.
The world we live in is so hedonistic and materialistic that many Buddhist teachers neglect to talk about restraint; focusing almost entirely on mindfulness and compassion.
Sooo helpful because I've had little consistent instruction and, until recently, not sutta based. Also, from my perspective, your approach is more direct than any other I've found.
"Pleasant feeling should be seen as suffering. Painful feeling should be seen as a dart. Neutral feeling should be seen as impermanent."
Samyutta Nikaya :36.5
what all this mean??????
I started practicing this very diligently and I started getting into jhanas. Thank you🙏
19:46 - "Develop the mind that cannot be pressured by the possibility of sensuality, in other words, develop the mind that will always able to quickly instantaneously, simultaneously discern sensual arisen thought as pain"
Sadhu. Sadhu. Sadhu. 🙏
I don't personally know anyone who would actually pursue a particular goal for the sake of taking pleasure in it. Most people I know seem to me like they are pursuing particular goals for the sake of enjoying social inclusion because of the pursuit of those goals, but not because of the goals themselves. For example, there are those who drink coffee not because they would enjoy the coffee, but because they enjoy the social inclusion based on the conviction "Drinking coffee is what makes someone normal." When I was growing up, drinking coffee was a social norm, and drinking coffee was a kind of social proof of one's normalcy. I noticed people drank coffee whether they liked it or not; some even openly expressed dislike, but continued drinking it. Or women who wear high heels because it's the norm for women to do so. And so on: the pursuit of particular foods, sex, art, hobbies -- all for the sake of complying with social norms, not for the sake of actually enjoying those things (one is supposed to pursue those things regardless whether one likes them or not).So in these cases, the pleasure actually being pursued is the pleasure of social inclusion or the pleasure of being considered "normal" (or at least the assumption of such inclusion or normalcy); but it appears to be a social taboo to say (or think) so directly, openly.
I suppose modern materialist, hedonist people with a strong sense of individuality and self-confidence, and who are not concerned with social norms, pursue pleasures more directly. So the Buddha's analysis of pleasure and pain is something they can easily relate to. But not so much older people from more "old-fashioned" societies where there is a lot of emphasis on social conformity.
What is said in this video still applies though, just on another level: What happens if you don't conform? You might feel like an outsider and feel the pressure to conform to society; thus, engaging in those "normal" activities (drinking coffee) is not done with the intention to feel the pleasure of socializing, but to avoid the unpleasantness of being the outsider. Which begs the question: Is it actually the socializing that is pleasant, or is it the relief of the pain felt as an outsider that then appears to be pleasant?
So in other words, the situation that you described is exactly what the video explained, you just have to look at the pleasure of socializing instead of the pleasure of the coffee/whatever itself.
assāda, ādīnavā, nissaraṇa - thank you, Bhante!
🙏
"When the bird of your soul departs from the cage of your flesh, this dream will have evaporated, and you will be left alone with your deeds, and what you thought was pleasure was actually hell, and what thought was suffering was really paradise"-
Islamic proverb.
This is so insightful, Ajahn! Thank you so much for explaining it so well! Much metta to you!
Sensual desire > pressure > unpleasant feeling
Well, took me one year to see all three of them finally. 😅
So, pressure is the pain from that possble/potential desire. Taking part in that desire temporarily relieves and redirects/misdirects the pain/pressure to the external direction. Giving supposed relief/pleasure from that desire. However that felt pressure will show up as another desire later to pull me, unless I maintain periphery awareness of craving/desire.
A psychiatrist would look at the individual situation as a symptom and try to understand each individual pressure as it's own psychosis, but the Buddha wouldn't see a need to pschologize each individual example, but offer a blanket pressure=pain to each and every situation regardless of the content. And the content is not important, just that pressure is there. Is that correct?
The handling of this would need to be subtle, I imagine as upon the recognition of it being present, I would need to ensure I don't create an aversion to it by willing it away?
Thank you for these videos, I am a catholic and they help greatly. When I practice seeing the pain in sensuality the pressure goes away. With habitual seeing of this pain will I abandon sensuality ?
With habitual seeing of that pain AND with abstaining from habitual actions towards sensuality when the pain or sensuality are not visibly present.
Bhante,
Wouldn't enduring the pain instead of chasing the sensual object create an aversion to the sensual object? Same coin, different sides.
Or said in a other way, how not to fall prey of aversion when practising self-restraint from sensual objects?
Thank you.
You don't fall prey when aversion manifests, you fall prey when you act out of it. So extend your practice of sense restraint also to not-acting-out-of-aversion. Endure it, just like you'd endure the sensual pull.