Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
sentinel
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by sentinel » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:06 am

It seems both translation on third jhana not the same on spiritual pleasure or pleasure not of flesh . Anyone ?



And what is spiritual pleasure?
Katamañca, bhikkhave, nirāmisaṃ sukhaṃ

And with the fading away of rapture, they enter and remain in the third absorption, where they meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, personally experiencing the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’

https://suttacentral.net/sn36.31/en/sujato


###############################

And what is pleasure not of the flesh? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' This is called pleasure not of the flesh.


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Last edited by sentinel on Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
:coffee:

frank k
Posts: 569
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by frank k » Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:11 pm

the pali words in question that qualify the pleasure, are nira-misa, and sa-misa. Literally, misa is 'flesh', so the translation, 'not of the flesh' is correct, but the meaning is referring to sensual pleasures derived from the 5 cords of sensual pleasures, in contrast to the first jhana (and all right jhanas) which are pleasure based on renunciation, completely different than 5 cords of sensual pleasures (such as food, sex, drugs, rock and roll).

B. Sujato's translation of the four jhanas is complete rubbish. Don't rely on them. B. Bodhi usually translates that term as 'spiritual' pleasure, which avoids the ambiguity that you're dealing with.

sentinel wrote:
Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:06 am
It seems both translation on third jhana not the same on spiritual pleasure or pleasure not of flesh . Anyone ?




And with the fading away of rapture, they enter and remain in the third absorption, where they meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, personally experiencing the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’

https://suttacentral.net/sn36.31/en/sujato


###############################

And what is pleasure not of the flesh? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' This is called pleasure not of the flesh.


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages

sentinel
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by sentinel » Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:07 pm

Hi Frank ,

It appears that Thanissaro Bhikkhu
translate it as pleasure not of the flesh !
Or are you missing something ?
It is sujato translate it as spiritual pleasure !
Whereas B.Bodhi translate as spiritual happiness .

https://suttacentral.net/sn36.31/en/sujato

And what is spiritual pleasure?

And with the fading away of rapture, they enter and remain in the third absorption, where they meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, personally experiencing the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’
frank k wrote:
Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:11 pm
the pali words in question that qualify the pleasure, are nira-misa, and sa-misa. Literally, misa is 'flesh', so the translation, 'not of the flesh' is correct, but the meaning is referring to sensual pleasures derived from the 5 cords of sensual pleasures, in contrast to the first jhana (and all right jhanas) which are pleasure based on renunciation, completely different than 5 cords of sensual pleasures (such as food, sex, drugs, rock and roll).

B. Sujato's translation of the four jhanas is complete rubbish. Don't rely on them. B. Bodhi usually translates that term as 'spiritual' pleasure, which avoids the ambiguity that you're dealing with.
###################################
https://suttacentral.net/sn36.31/en/bodhi

And what, bhikkhus, is spiritual happiness? Here, bhikkhus, secluded from sensual pleasures … a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhana … the second jhana…. With the fading away as well of rapture, he dwells equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, he experiences happiness with the body; he enters and dwells in the third jhana of which the noble ones declare: ‘He is equanimous, mindful, one who dwells happily.’ This is called spiritual happiness.


##################################


Please take note :

Another thing is according to B.Bodhi & Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation , in the third jhana they described it as Senses Pleasure with the Body !?
Look like a contradiction here !



###############################

By Thanissaro Bhikkhu

And what is pleasure not of the flesh? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' This is called pleasure not of the flesh.


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
:coffee:

frank k
Posts: 569
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by frank k » Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:14 pm

Ok, it's B. Thanissaro who translates it literally as 'pleasure not of the flesh.'
This is a similar situation to parimukha, which has both a literal spatial meaning of 'in front' and a figurative meaning of 'making it the main priority'.

'pleasure not of the flesh' may seem contradictory with third jhana formula's 'he experiences pleasure(sukha) with the body', if you take the translation too literally. But the sutta passage you cited is clearly giving a specific well defined context. It's defining not of the flesh pleasure as the 5kg kāma-guna (sensuality-strings), 5 strings of sensual pleasure, i.e. visible forms cognizable by the eye that are pleasing, induce desire and lust, desirable sounds, odors, flavors, etc. The physical pleasure of the jhanas is not based on lust, or desire on those 5 cords, they arise from deep pacification of physical body and mind based on renunciation and skillful Dharma thoughts such as brahmavihara, etc.
sentinel wrote:
Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:07 pm
Hi Frank ,

It appears that Thanissaro Bhikkhu
translate it as pleasure not of the flesh !
Or are you missing something ?
It is sujato translate it as spiritual pleasure !
Whereas B.Bodhi translate as spiritual happiness .

https://suttacentral.net/sn36.31/en/sujato

And what is spiritual pleasure?

And with the fading away of rapture, they enter and remain in the third absorption, where they meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, personally experiencing the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’
frank k wrote:
Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:11 pm
the pali words in question that qualify the pleasure, are nira-misa, and sa-misa. Literally, misa is 'flesh', so the translation, 'not of the flesh' is correct, but the meaning is referring to sensual pleasures derived from the 5 cords of sensual pleasures, in contrast to the first jhana (and all right jhanas) which are pleasure based on renunciation, completely different than 5 cords of sensual pleasures (such as food, sex, drugs, rock and roll).

B. Sujato's translation of the four jhanas is complete rubbish. Don't rely on them. B. Bodhi usually translates that term as 'spiritual' pleasure, which avoids the ambiguity that you're dealing with.
###################################
https://suttacentral.net/sn36.31/en/bodhi

And what, bhikkhus, is spiritual happiness? Here, bhikkhus, secluded from sensual pleasures … a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhana … the second jhana…. With the fading away as well of rapture, he dwells equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, he experiences happiness with the body; he enters and dwells in the third jhana of which the noble ones declare: ‘He is equanimous, mindful, one who dwells happily.’ This is called spiritual happiness.


##################################


Please take note :

Another thing is according to B.Bodhi & Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation , in the third jhana they described it as Senses Pleasure with the Body !?
Look like a contradiction here !



###############################

By Thanissaro Bhikkhu

And what is pleasure not of the flesh? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' This is called pleasure not of the flesh.


https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages

chownah
Posts: 8433
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by chownah » Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:36 pm

frank k wrote:
Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:14 pm
It's defining not of the flesh pleasure as the 5kg kāma-guna (sensuality-strings), 5 strings of sensual pleasure, i.e. visible forms cognizable by the eye that are pleasing, induce desire and lust, desirable sounds, odors, flavors, etc.
I think you meant to say " It's defining of the flesh pleasure.....etc.".....and that you accidently put in the "not".
not chownah (doh!)

chownah
Posts: 8433
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by chownah » Tue Oct 08, 2019 2:00 am

Sentinel,
About: "Spiritual" pleasure or pleasure "of the flesh"?

In the english language there is a biblical ("biblical" means "from the bible" which is the christian scripture) quote; jesus said "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." This is no doubt the origin of the idea for english speakers that defines the relationship between things of the "spirit" and things of the "flesh". My view is that a translation which uses "spiritual" as a description of "not of the flesh" is making a mistake in that the idea "not of the flesh" does not in and of itself point to any other place but merely points away from "the flesh" while "spiritual" points to a more or less specific other place namely the "spirit". I think that pointing to "spirit" is not what the buddha intended because I have never seen the buddha talk about "spirit".....perhaps I have simply not seen him talk about "spirit" and others have seen it....if so I would be very glad to be shown a reference so I can read all about it.
chownah

frank k
Posts: 569
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by frank k » Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:20 pm

chownah wrote:
Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:36 pm
frank k wrote:
Mon Oct 07, 2019 3:14 pm
It's defining not of the flesh pleasure as the 5kg kāma-guna (sensuality-strings), 5 strings of sensual pleasure, i.e. visible forms cognizable by the eye that are pleasing, induce desire and lust, desirable sounds, odors, flavors, etc.
I think you meant to say " It's defining of the flesh pleasure.....etc.".....and that you accidently put in the "not".
not chownah (doh!)
Yes, that was an error in my original response. Thanks for catching it.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages

chownah
Posts: 8433
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by chownah » Thu Oct 10, 2019 5:16 am

Here is a sutta reference which talks about the buddha describing events which led up to his enlightenment. I think it gives strong support to frank k's post which said that it is the source of the pleasure which is the important indicator. The setting is that the buddha had tried all manner of things to end suffering and none of them worked so finally this thought came to him:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
MN 36 PTS: M i 237
Maha-Saccaka Sutta: The Longer Discourse to Saccaka
I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then following on that memory came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities,...
......
So when I had taken solid food and regained strength, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, I entered & remained in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the fading of rapture I remained equanimous, mindful, & alert, and sensed pleasure with the body. I entered & remained in the third jhana, of which the noble ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — I entered & remained in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain.
chownah

sentinel
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by sentinel » Thu Oct 10, 2019 1:51 pm

chownah wrote:
Thu Oct 10, 2019 5:16 am
Here is a sutta reference which talks about the buddha describing events which led up to his enlightenment. I think it gives strong support to frank k's post which said that it is the source of the pleasure which is the important indicator. The setting is that the buddha had tried all manner of things to end suffering and none of them worked so finally this thought came to him:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
MN 36 PTS: M i 237
Maha-Saccaka Sutta: The Longer Discourse to Saccaka
I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then following on that memory came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities,...
......
So when I had taken solid food and regained strength, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, I entered & remained in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the fading of rapture I remained equanimous, mindful, & alert, and sensed pleasure with the body. I entered & remained in the third jhana, of which the noble ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — I entered & remained in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain.
chownah
Hello chownah ,

The above has no direct evidence that it is the path led Buddha to awakening . The most could be said is it constitute partial factor in the development of Buddha trainings . Not even the first and second knowledge , it appears the third knowledge was the critical point of how the Buddha gained enlightenment .
:coffee:

chownah
Posts: 8433
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by chownah » Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:35 pm

sentinel wrote:
Thu Oct 10, 2019 1:51 pm
chownah wrote:
Thu Oct 10, 2019 5:16 am
Here is a sutta reference which talks about the buddha describing events which led up to his enlightenment. I think it gives strong support to frank k's post which said that it is the source of the pleasure which is the important indicator. The setting is that the buddha had tried all manner of things to end suffering and none of them worked so finally this thought came to him:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
MN 36 PTS: M i 237
Maha-Saccaka Sutta: The Longer Discourse to Saccaka
I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then following on that memory came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities,...
......
So when I had taken solid food and regained strength, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, I entered & remained in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the fading of rapture I remained equanimous, mindful, & alert, and sensed pleasure with the body. I entered & remained in the third jhana, of which the noble ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain. With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — I entered & remained in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind or remain.
chownah
Hello chownah ,

The above has no direct evidence that it is the path led Buddha to awakening . The most could be said is it constitute partial factor in the development of Buddha trainings . Not even the first and second knowledge , it appears the third knowledge was the critical point of how the Buddha gained enlightenment .
I don't know why you are saying this to me. I did no say that it is the path that led the buddha to awakening......the idea I was discussing was that this suttas seems to be making the same distinction that frank k was making namely that there seems to be two kinds of pleasure/pleasantness....one comes from the five sensual strands (six sense bases minus the mind) and one "pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities".

With respect to the path to awakening....that is a different matter. Notice that it was the buddha who said "Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then following on that memory came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening." Whether the buddha was right or wrong it seems that this is what he taught.
chownah

sentinel
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Spiritual pleasure or of flesh ?

Post by sentinel » Thu Oct 10, 2019 4:20 pm

chownah wrote:
Thu Oct 10, 2019 2:35 pm

I don't know why you are saying this to me. I did no say that it is the path that led the buddha to awakening......the idea I was discussing was that this suttas seems to be making the same distinction that frank k was making namely that there seems to be two kinds of pleasure/pleasantness....one comes from the five sensual strands (six sense bases minus the mind) and one "pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities".

chownah
Hi chownah , it was my misunderstanding . I apologizes .
:coffee:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: binocular, c7carl, Dan74, Majestic-12 [Bot], Sam Vara and 225 guests