Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

User avatar
ganegaar
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:01 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by ganegaar » Sat Jan 21, 2017 6:20 am

after reading a bit, though still not clear "why" a mind with uppekkha is more potent/powerful than a mind with "somanassa",
for more clarity, I feel we need to re-phrase the OP in following way:

Given the following 8 mind states, which are all rooted in "greed"/"attachement" (lobha), which mind state (from below 8), if arisen in one's mind, has the most "potency", "most power" to cause an "ill-effect", in other words that results in the "worst karma-phala" in future.

1. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
by pleasure, and connected with wrong view,
2. One consciousness, prompted, accompanied by
pleasure, and connected with wrong view,
3. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
by pleasure, and disconnected with wrong view,
4. One consciousness, prompted, accompanied by
pleasure, and disconnected with wrong view,
5. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
29
by indifference, and connected with wrong view,
6. One consciousness, prompted, accompanied by
indifference, and connected with wrong view,
7. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
by indifference, and disconnected with wrong view,
8. One consciousness, prompted, accompanied by
indifference, and disconnected with wrong view,


key to words:
Unprompted - asankharika - NOT influenced by a external factor such as another person., so just arising in ones own mind
prompted - sasankharika. - influenced by a external factor such as another person.
accompanied by pleasure - somanassa sahagatha - with a happy feeling in mind
accompanied by indifference - uppekkha sahagatha - with neither happy nor unhappy feeling in mind, with a neutral feeling in mind.
connected with wrong view - dhitti samprayukta.
disconnected with wrong view - dhitti viprayukta.
Sīlepatiṭṭhāya naro sapañño, cittaṃ paññañca bhāvayaṃ;
Ātāpī nipako bhikkhu, so imaṃ vijaṭaye jaṭanti.

dhamma follower
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by dhamma follower » Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:43 am

ganegaar wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:Bhikkhu Bodhi's note on verse 1 §4 Consciousness Rooted in Greed (lobham3lacittani)— 8
Thus upekkha or equanimous feeling is also called
adukkhamasukha vedana, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.
But upekkha is a quality of mind, (to put in context, consider: Metta, Mudita, Karuna, Upekkha)
Vedana is a sensation felt by a faculty such as skin, eye, ear,..,(To put in context, consider Rupa, Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara, Vinnana).

so, as i understand from above reference, the uppekha quality is associated with neutral feelings, but that does not mean adukhamasukha vedana may always result in the mental quality of Upekkha.,
or am i mistaken here?
Hi Ganegaar,

Upekkha has different meanings:

- It refers to one of the three classes of feeling (vedana): pleasant, un pleasant, neutral feeling, which is what is mentioned in the BB's quote above.
Neutral feeling can accompany cittas of four jati (nature) namely wholesome, unwholesome, resultant (vipaka) and functional (kiriya)
- It refers to one among the 25 beautiful cetasika (sobhana cetasikas), then it has a different name: tatramajjhattata. It accompanies only wholesome cittas
- It refers to one of the four illimited states, or divine abodes (bhramavihara) as you mentioned above, which are the objects of mental development. Upekkha in this case refers to wholesome cittas associated with understanding having the dominant quality of equanimity, which is tatramajjhatata.
- It refers to one of the vipassana nana- stages of insight, sankharupekkha nana - knowledge of equanimity toward all formations. In this case it refers to a high level of panna- understanding.

There might be more but that's all that comes to my mind at the moment.

As for
Vedana is a sensation felt by a faculty such as skin, eye, ear,..,(To put in context, consider Rupa, Vedana, Sanna, Sankhara, Vinnana)
I think that it is an inaccurate understanding of vedana - feeling.

Feeling is mental, it's a nama. It arises with all cittas. When it arises together with bodily consciousness through the body-sense, it's called bodily feeling, but it is always mental. The skin is a conventional idea, not the precise body sense rupa, one of the 6 sense rupas among the 28 of them. It-self can not feel because it is the reality which doesn't experience anything, but it is the base for bodily consciousness to arise together with feeling, which feels the tangible object at that time, it can be pleasant or unpleasant. Similarly, the eye or the ear can not feel, they are the bases for eye-consciousness and ear consciousness to arise, the feeling that arises together with these is always neutral.

For a more complete and clearer understanding, you might want to have a look at the Abhidhamma in daily life by Nina Van Gorkom. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidha ... bhi-00.htm

Best regards,

D.F

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 11889
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by DNS » Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:29 pm

Translating upekkha as indifference is a very bad translation and wrong.

Upekkha is composure, the balanced mind, free from attachment and aversion.

Indifference is the near enemy of upekka. It is NOT upekkha.

See: https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Upekkha
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=4_Brahma_Viharas

Indifference is like thinking or saying "I don't give a damn, let whatever happen; F**k it."

Whereas equanimity (upekkha) is calm, composed, peaceful, letting go, definitely not indifference.

SarathW
Posts: 10358
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:59 am

Whereas equanimity (upekkha) is calm, composed, peaceful, letting go
As per my previous post, Upekkha can be present in immoral consciousness as well.
Hence the word Upekkha to be understood in its context.
Perhaps this is the answer to my question.
Perhaps Upekkha in immoral consciousness means. "I don't give a damn, let whatever happen; F**k it."


https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=21428
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

paul
Posts: 1314
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:27 pm
Location: Vietnam

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by paul » Wed Mar 01, 2017 4:51 am

David N. Snyder wrote:Translating upekkha as indifference is a very bad translation and wrong.
This is not a fault of translation since upekkha is routinely translated as both indifference and equanimity throughout the literature by prominent authors such as Ven. Nyanatiloka, usually with a qualification that one is not to be confused with the other. It is caused by a shortcoming in Pali vocabulary in not having a different word to express the mundane type of equanimity, which has also been called "house-based equanimity" (MN 137) as have the two other feelings of pleasure and pain, as opposed to "renunciation based" pleasure, pain and equanimity. These are identical to feelings of the flesh as opposed to feelings not of the flesh, just different terminology. I think the answer to the OP question is that indifference is a feeling less likely to be identified by mindfulness than pleasure, and is therefore more insidious.

Equanamity has the equanimity of unknowing based on the home life as its near enemy, since both share in ignoring faults and virtues. Such unknowing has been described in the way beginning, "on seeing a visible form with the eye equanimity arises in the foolish infatuated ordinary man, in the untaught ordinary man who has not conquered his limitations, who has not conquered future [kamma] result, who is unperceiving of danger. Such equanimity as this does not surmount the visible object. Such equanamity as this is called equanimity based on the home life" (MN 137, translated Thanissaro Bikkhu), Vism. IX, 101 translated Bikkhu Nanamoli.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests