[Paybeskf]

Greetings


I was recently reflecting upon greed, hatred and delusion when something struck me. These seem to be directly related to, and possibly are discussing, the three feelings, pleasurable, painful and neutral



Greed is wanting, so following pleasure


Hatred is aversion, so following aversion


Now the third one, netural feelings, I did have trouble with. Why would ignorance of netural feelings be important?



There is a sutta that touches upon this


"In the case of pleasant feelings, O monks, the underlying tendency[8] to lust should be given up; in the case of painful feelings, the underlying tendency to resistance (aversion) should be given up; in the case of neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings, the underlying tendency to ignorance should be given up.

"If a monk has given up the tendency to lust in regard to pleasant feeling, the tendency to resistance in regard to painful feelings, and the tendency to ignorance in regard to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings, then he is called one who is free of (unwholesome) tendencies, one who has the right outlook. He has cut off craving, severed the fetters (to future existence), and through the full penetration of conceit,[9] he has made an end of suffering."

If one feels joy, but knows not feeling's nature,
bent towards greed, he will not find deliverance.
If one feels pain, but knows not feeling's nature,
bent toward hate, he will not find deliverance.

And even neutral feeling which as peaceful
the Lord of Wisdom has proclaimed,
if, in attachment, he should cling to it,
he will not be free from the round of ill.

And having done so, in this very life
will be free from cankers, free from taints.

Mature in knowledge, firm in Dhamma's ways,
when once his life-span ends, his body breaks,
all measure and concept he has transcended.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....003.nypo.html




So I would say that neutral feeling could be the peace that is there when there is no wanting or averting


This can be found in Right Mindfulness, in full awareness. So if one is fully aware, then one has no ignorance to neutral feeling, no greed for a pleasurable feeling and no aversion to a painful feeling and one has wisdom and so, no ignorance, no greed and no hatred


Or it could be that when one is ignorant of neutral feeling, one doesnt reconise it and so will be more likely to start seeking a pleasurable feeling, yet when one knows neutral feelings, one does not avert or attach to them and just watches them rise and fall

Not sure if I explained it properly, bit hard to put into words


Any thoughts on why non-ignorance in relation to neutral feelings is important and also on any connection to the three kilesas

[Niobaralegra]

I also found this


Pleasant feeling is pleasant when present; it is painful when changing.

Painful feeling is painful when present; it is pleasant when changing.

Neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling is pleasant if one understands it; it is painful if there is no understanding.

Majjhima Nikaya No. 44; Cula-vedalla Sutta

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/a...l303.html#disc



Continued text (access to insight translation)



"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 Visakha. 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 with 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 withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, 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 jhana: 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." [7]

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

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

"What lies on the other side of ignorance?"

"Clear knowing lies on the other side of ignorance."

"What lies on the other side of clear knowing?"

"Release lies on the other side of clear knowing."

"What lies on the other side of release?"

"Unbinding lies on the other side of release."

"What lies on the other side of Unbinding?"

"You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life gains a footing in Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end. If you wish, go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of these things. Whatever he says, that's how you should remember it." So perhaps it is refering to boredom and the way it can lead to aversion and then pleasure seeking

[TOOGUEITEME]

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

"Passion lies on the other side of pleasant feeling."


[so we react to pleasant feeling, that means we create sankhara (kamma formation) for us to continue samsara]




"And what lies on the other side of painful feeling?"

"Resistance lies on the other side of painful feeling."


[again we react to the painful feeling and create sankhara and continue samsara]




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

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


[here because of our ignorance we let go of the moment without wisdom and that moment (neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling) will come back to us again during our samsara journey]




"What lies on the other side of ignorance?"

"Clear knowing lies on the other side of ignorance."

"What lies on the other side of clear knowing?"

"Release lies on the other side of clear knowing."

"What lies on the other side of release?"

"Unbinding lies on the other side of release."


[unbinding means nirvana, vimutti, no more samsara journey again]




"What lies on the other side of Unbinding?"

"You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life gains a footing in Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end. If you wish, go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of these things. Whatever he says, that's how you should remember it."


[when it is the END, that is it. The End.]



So perhaps it is refering to boredom and the way it can lead to aversion and then pleasure seeking

[No, it is referring that is the End of samsara and end of suffering]

[CO2490pL]

Hi Craig

Also MN 148

What is being discussed here is a core teaching of the Buddha

In AN 3.61, the Buddha said he teaches four things:

1. the six elements
2. the six sense spheres
3. the eighteen spheres of mental exploration or contemplation (which is knowing 3 x feelings @ 6 x sense contact)
4. for those who feel, the Four Noble Truths

All suttas (MN 37, MN 38, MN 148, etc) are about observing feeling (with mindfulness & wisdom) so craving, attachment, etc, does not occur.

Nibbana with residue remaining is the arahant free from greed, hatred & delusion but whose mind still feels pleasure & pain

To understand from pleasant feeling comes greed; from unpleasant feeling comes anger; from neither feeling comes delusion, is basic Dhamma


Kind regards

[Wetekemieluth]

Thanks element, however I have trouble understanding why one needs to understand neutral feeling

[sydramySweame]

however I have trouble understanding why one needs to understand neutral feeling

I think I am having this same trouble.

from neither feeling comes delusion,

I can recall a greedy state of mind from a pleasent feeling and an angry state of mind from an unpleasant feeling and I understand that this states of mind are because of an ignorant state of mind. But, how can a neutral feeling become in delusion?

[moohassinny]

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

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


[here because of our ignorance we let go of the moment without wisdom and that moment (neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling) will come back to us again during our samsara journey]

Hi Upekka,

I am trying to understand this quote... can you elaborate it more?

"Clear knowing lies on the other side of ignorance."

What happens when Clear Knowing is present as a mental condition. Do we let go the moment but with wisdom and that moment will never come back to us?

[fd8IIys2]

4. for those who feel, the Four Noble Truths

Nibbana with residue remaining is the arahant free from greed, hatred & delusion but whose mind still feels pleasure & pain

Hello Element,

This quotes made me think that an arahant has mastered the Four Noble Truths but there is still some kind of "residue" that is about the feeling without clinging to them. In this way, mastering the Four Noble Truths is not enough?

[AdipexAdipex]

And even neutral feeling which as peaceful
the Lord of Wisdom has proclaimed,
if, in attachment, he should cling to it,
he will not be free from the round of ill.

Continuing in my tradition of pasting in quotes, "The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference." -Elie Wiesel

The opposite of metta doesn't have to be hatred or aversion. Apathy is fully destructive enough both to the person who feels it and the one receiving it. At least, this is what came to me in response to the question of why neutral feelings might be a roadblock.

[paypaltoegold1]

Thanks element, however I have trouble understanding why one needs to understand neutral feeling

Hi

The third kind of feeling is not always 'neutral'. Only a few suttas refer to upeka or equanimity as the third feeling.

In general, the third kind of feeling is neither-pleasant-nor-unpleasant feeling. It conditions confusion & delusion.

For example, we see a small green man walking upside on our ceiling.

This experience is neither pleasant nor painful but it results in feeling. We stand there looking at the small green man wondering: "What is that? What's going on? Where did it come from? Will it harm me?"

This feeling has conditioned confusion, curiosity, fear, etc, to arise, which are forms of delusion or ignorance.

With metta

[JJoon077]

And even neutral feeling which as peaceful
the Lord of Wisdom has proclaimed,
if, in attachment, he should cling to it,
he will not be free from the round of ill.

And having done so, in this very life
will be free from cankers, free from taints.

Hi Craig

You have chosen a good example above. Here, the feeling is neutral or equanimous & the craving which arises is delusion leading to attachment or regarding that feeling as "mine", as in, "I feel peaceful".

With metta

Nick

[Poohoppesmase]

This quotes made me think that an arahant has mastered the Four Noble Truths but there is still some kind of "residue" that is about the feeling without clinging to them. In this way, mastering the Four Noble Truths is not enough?

Hello Kaarine

I personally find the term 'residue or fuel remaining' descriptively remote. The Pali is upādisesa. When I look up the Pali dictionary, which is very difficult to follow, I cannot find much difference between the terms upādi and upadhi. Both terms appear to be related to upādāna, which can mean 'burdensome'. Upādāna of course is attachment & dukkha. The term 'sesa' means 'remaining' or 'left'.

Feelings can have a kind of 'burdensome' or 'impinging' quality, such as when the Buddha was old:
...when the Blessed One had entered upon the rainy season, there arose in him a severe illness, and sharp and deadly pains came upon him. And the Blessed One endured them mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed. In the Puttamansa Sutta, the Buddha provides to following striking similie for sense contact & feelings:
"And how, O monks, should the nutriment sense-impression be considered? Suppose, O monks, there is a skinned cow that stands close to a wall, then the creatures living in the wall will nibble at the cow; and if the skinned cow stands near a tree, then the creatures living in the tree will nibble at it; if it stands in the water, the creatures living in the water will nibble at it; if it stands in the open air, the creatures living in the air will nibble at it. Wherever that skinned cow stands, the creatures living there will nibble at it.

"In that manner, I say, O monks, should the nutriment sense-impression be considered. If the nutriment sense-impression is comprehended, the three kinds of feeling are thereby comprehended. And if the three kinds of feeling are comprehended, there is, I say, no further work left to do for the noble disciple. So to give you my opinion to your question, there is no alternative to the Four Noble Truths because mindfulness & wisdom can only serve as an antidote for craving & attachment. Mindfulness & wisdom cannot stop feeling because feeling (vedana khanda) is related to the nervous system. Where as craving & attachment are related to sankhara khanda or the fabricating mind. Craving & attachment are related to volition whereas as feeling is related to the autonomic nervous system.

About the two kinds of Nibbana, my opinion is contrary to most Buddhist views on the matter. Such as with yourself, the impression I gain is most Buddhists regard Nibbana without fuel remaining as something higher than Nibbana with fuel remaining.

My opinion, which is purely speculative, is that in the Buddha's time, most seekers were searching for a Nibbana without fuel remaining. They were seeking the most sublime states of mental stillness, such as the spheres of nothingness, spheres of neither perception nor non perception and the cessation of perception & feeling.

However, in declaring the Four Noble Truths, which state Nibbana is the cessation of craving & attachment, the Buddha declared the end of suffering is not the cessation of feeling. In other words, he declared the best Nibbana we can achieve must include Nibbana with fuel remaining. There will still remain some vedana (feeling) or sensory impingement.

So the Buddha declared there are two kinds of Nibbana. In my opinion, his special or unique contribution was declaring a Nibbana with impingement remaining because most seekers, such as yourself, imagine Nibbana to be a state free of all impingement or disturbance.

With metta



He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the effluent of sensuality... the effluent of becoming... the effluent of ignorance, are not present. And there is only this modicum of disturbance: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.'

So this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, pure — superior & unsurpassed.

Ananda, whatever contemplatives and priests who in the past entered & remained in an emptiness that was pure, superior & unsurpassed, they all entered & remained in this very same emptiness that is pure, superior & unsurpassed. Whatever contemplatives and priests who in the future will enter & remain in an emptiness that will be pure, superior & unsurpassed, they all will enter & remain in this very same emptiness that is pure, superior & unsurpassed. Whatever contemplatives and priests who at present enter & remain in an emptiness that is pure, superior & unsurpassed, they all enter & remain in this very same emptiness that is pure, superior & unsurpassed.

Cula-suññata Sutta: The Lesser Discourse on Emptiness

[pprropeciaaa]

"What is that? What's going on? Where did it come from? Will it harm me?"

This feeling has conditioned confusion, curiosity, fear, etc, to arise, which are forms of delusion or ignorance.

But has not the capability of such a feeling, when used rationally, led to all the discoveries man has made improve his life - i,e, there are benefits to such feelings as well?

[Thomas12400]

Originally Posted by Element "What is that? What's going on? Where did it come from? Will it harm me?"

This feeling has conditioned confusion, curiosity, fear, etc, to arise, which are forms of delusion or ignorance.

But has not the capability of such a feeling, when used rationally, led to all the discoveries man has made improve his life - i,e, there are benefits to such feelings as well? Isn't it only the last question from Element that relates to feelings? (Will it harm me?). I think the other questions lead to insight.

[Immerymopay]

But has not the capability of such a feeling, when used rationally, led to all the discoveries man has made improve his life - i,e, there are benefits to such feelings as well?

This is a topic I think about a lot. Many discoveries to "improve" human life have been made; but is the human race as a whole happier as a result? My impression is, we are not, not in the slightest. Over the course of my own life, many such discoveries have been made, but the human race as a whole seems no happier than they seemed at earlier points in my life. Nor do people from earlier times in history seem to have been more or less happy, as a whole, than those who are now alive. We seem to find endless cause for discontent, to the point of extreme hatred and violence.

I think this is because it is human nature to be discontent with the status quo, to find fault (fault-finding mind is a basic human characteristic - the kind of stories the media give us are testament to that: "bad" news far outweighs "good" news in popularity). If we measure "improvement" by overall increase in happiness, then nothing the human race has ever done, discovered, or achieved is an improvement ... apart from the Dhamma, which alone correctly addresses the causes of human happiness.

To consider the "improvement"-oriented activities of the human race irrelevant to happiness is a radical departure from normal thinking - and just the kind I had always been looking for, even from when I was a young child. Why was I looking for it? Because of a general, powerful, inchoate, underlying feeling that grew and grew in me, that the entire human race was completely and utterly on the wrong track, thinking that their activities led to "improvements".

Am I arrogant much (rhetorical question)?





Edited by D to create paragraphs

[Preegovesem]

Am I arrogant much

No, I don't look at your statement as arrogance - it is feeling you have and, I think, one that is consistent with the history of mankind. If you trust the Amercian media to accurately portray the mood of people, (nearly) everyone seems to be miserable(maybe I'm exaggerating a bit here).

On the other hand, the progress in the science, engineering, etc, seems to me to make life easier for most - not all, given the state of some very poor countries.

To me, the deeper question is: what is "happiness" - how do we define it so that we can decide if we are there? I can't come up with a good definition - it can't be "whatever makes you feel good" for then being on uppers 24 hours a day would consist of happiness for some people. If we accept that the definition is different for each person then the concept/word has essentially no meaning whatever - it is an arbitrary label with no primary content.

In Buddhism, one can speak of equanimity with the assumption that we are all using the word in a way that communicates a notion we hold in common. I don't think "happiness" shares the sort of well-formed property.

Is happiness something we are born with? Is a perception of life as good or bad, in some ways, a genetic property or is it always a learned "feeling" - is a baby born with a "blank slate" or is the tendency to view life one way or the other already there in some form?

Here is one way of looking at happiness that I've encountered in my reading that seems on target at my present level of understanding of life: "The task of ethics is to define man's proper code of values and thus to give him the means of achieving happiness". That is, happiness results from living an ethical life - which seems to me to interface nicely with some of Buddahs teachings.

Just some rambling thoughts - maybe not directly related to Buddhism but, to me, not unrelated either.

[frkksptn]

But has not the capability of such a feeling, when used rationally, led to all the discoveries man has made improve his life - i,e, there are benefits to such feelings as well?

Hello Plogsties

Buddha-Dhamma has no issues with feeling. It has declared feelings are not suffering. From feelings comes the various kinds of craving. Craving is that which can be problematic.

But to give you my opinion on your question, yes, I agree.

It is our feelings of discomfort that led to all the discoveries man has made improve his life.

With metta

[krek-sikUp]

However, in declaring the Four Noble Truths, which state Nibbana is the cessation of craving & attachment, the Buddha declared the end of suffering is not the cessation of feeling. In other words, he declared the best Nibbana we can achieve must include Nibbana with fuel remaining. There will still remain some vedana (feeling) or sensory impingement.

Yes and this was the kind of Nibbana I had in mind before I read the quote you posted about the Four Noble Truths when you stated "for those who feel". That statement caught my attention because it gave me the impression that the Four Noble Truths were not enough. Also the Soto Zen tradition I follow is deeply commited with this particular teaching as the way to awakening.

So the Buddha declared there are two kinds of Nibbana. In my opinion, his special or unique contribution was declaring a Nibbana with impingement remaining

Let me see if I have understood this. From what you have told I can see at first that the Buddha had in mind two kinds of nibbanas, but the kind he recognizes as feasible is the one with impingenment. The other, the one without impingenments, is not considered as such and second, it seems for me that the nibbana with no impingments is a derivation of the Mahayana tradition where nibbana is a state free of all impingements. Is this right?

because most seekers, such as yourself, imagine Nibbana to be a state free of all impingement or disturbance.

Did I give you this impression? Maybe I have been deluded about such nibbana and I was not aware. Now, with the Puttamansa Sutta I have undestood a little better the bussines of the teachings and a confirmation of what is meant by nibbana.

And again Element,

Thanks for helping!

[masterboyz]

Buddha-Dhamma has no issues with feeling. It has declared feelings are not suffering. From feelings comes the various kinds of craving. Craving is that which can be problematic.

Thanks Element, this is a very helpfull observation to keep in mind.

It is our feelings of discomfort that led to all the discoveries man has made improve his life.

I can tell about this. As the discomfort goes away with the practice of the Buddha Dhamma the "urgency" to seek for comfort decreases while the feeling of peacefulness grows.