Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

Post Reply
SarathW
Posts: 8252
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:13 pm

Why indifference is worse than pleasure.
Why is that?
===============================

A Buddhist monk said in a video.
1- Wrong view is worse than disconnected with wrong view
2-Unprompted is worse than prompted
3-indifference is worse than pleasure.

I understand 1 and 2 but not the 3.

==================================
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,
These eight types of consciousness are rooted in
Attachment.
______
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
JeffR
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:54 am
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by JeffR » Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:43 am

I can't be sure, but my short answer based on my own reasoning is that pleasure can be kusala (wholesome), while indifference is always akusala (unwholesome).
Therein what are 'six (types of) disrespect'? One dwells without respect, without deference for the Teacher; one dwells without respect, without deference for the Teaching; one dwells without respect, without deference for the Order; one dwells without respect, without deference for the precepts; one dwells without respect, without deference for heedfulness; one dwells without respect, without deference for hospitality. These are six (types of) disrespect.
:Vibh 945

SarathW
Posts: 8252
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:34 am

What about the Upekkha in Jhana?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
ganegaar
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:01 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by ganegaar » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:06 am

Interesting, may I know the Pali term for "indifference" please? or text in pali that lead to this translation.
Sīlepatiṭṭhāya naro sapañño, cittaṃ paññañca bhāvayaṃ;
Ātāpī nipako bhikkhu, so imaṃ vijaṭaye jaṭanti.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 677
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by Nicolas » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:16 am

The Pali word for "indifference" here is actually "Upekkhā".

User avatar
ganegaar
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:01 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by ganegaar » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:19 am

JeffR wrote: while indifference is always akusala (unwholesome).
But then, according to above "Uppekkha" is always akusala? does not sound right to me.

And "indifference" is a bit strange word to use to translate "uppekha", i feel "equanimity" would give a better meaning though still may not be the exact meaning.
Sīlepatiṭṭhāya naro sapañño, cittaṃ paññañca bhāvayaṃ;
Ātāpī nipako bhikkhu, so imaṃ vijaṭaye jaṭanti.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 15230
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:40 am

I'm not sure exactly what the OP is getting at, but I suspect it's not Upekkha.

In the satipatthana sutta there are three kinds of feeling, pleasant, unpleasant, neither unpleasant or pleasant.
... sukhaṃ vā vedanaṃ vedayamāno ‘sukhaṃ vedanaṃ vedayāmī’ti pajānāti. (1)
Dukkhaṃ vā vedanaṃ vedayamāno ‘dukkhaṃ vedanaṃ vedayāmī’ti pajānāti. (2)
Aduk­kha­ma­su­khaṃ vā vedanaṃ vedayamāno ‘aduk­kha­ma­su­khaṃ vedanaṃ vedayāmī’ti pajānāti. (3)
https://suttacentral.net/pi/mn10/44.124-
has a pleasant feeling they clearly know ‘I have a pleasant feeling’. (1)
When they have a painful feeling they clearly know ‘I have a painful feeling’ . (2)
When they have a neutral feeling they clearly know ‘I have a neutral feeling’ . (3)
https://suttacentral.net/en/mn10/60.18-
Neutral (neither unpleasant or pleasant) is not equanimity (upekkha).

:anjali:
Mike

SarathW
Posts: 8252
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:10 am

Immoral Consciousness _______
§ 4. Tattha katamaü Kàmàvacaraü?
1 Somanassa-sahagataü, diññhigatasampayuttaü,
asaïkhàrikam ekaü,
2. Somanassa-sahagataü, diññhigatasampayuttaü,
sasa¤khàrikam ekaü,
3. Somanassa-sahagataü diññhigatavippayuttaü
asaïkhàrikam ekaü,
4. Somanassa-sahagataü diññhigatavippayuttaü
sasaïkhàrikam ekaü,
5. Upekkhàsahagataü, diññhigatasampayuttaü
asaïkhàrikam ekaü,
6. Upekkhàsahagataü, diññhigatasampayuttaü,
sasaïkhàrikam ekaü,
7. Upekkhàsahagataü, diññhigatavippayuttaü,
asaïkhàrikam ekaü,
8. Upekkhàsahagataü, diññhigatavippayuttaü,
sasaïkhàrikam ekan’ ti.
imàni aññha’pi Lobhasahagatacittàni nàma.

http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/abhidhamma.pdf
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 8252
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:13 am

I'm not sure exactly what the OP is getting at, but I suspect it's not Upekkha.
Each immoral consciousness got different weight.
Upekkha is worse than the Somanassa
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 15230
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:38 am

Bhikkhu Bodhi's note on verse 1 §4 Consciousness Rooted in Greed (lobham3lacittani)— 8
The Abhidhamma describes four cittas rooted in greed that are ac-
companied by joy. The other four cittas in this class are accompanied
by equanimity (upekkhasahagata). The word upekkha is often used in
the Pali texts to signify the lofty spiritual quality of equanimity or impar-
tiality, the state of mind which cannot be swayed by biases and prefer-
ences. Here, however, the word is used simply to mean neutral feeling,
a mental feeling which leans neither towards gladness nor dejection. In
contrast to pleasant and painful feelings, which experience the object in
diametrically opposed ways, upekkh± experiences the object in a neu-
tral manner. Thus upekkha or equanimous feeling is also called
adukkhamasukha vedana, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.
:anjali:
Mike

SarathW
Posts: 8252
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:29 am

Thanks Mike
The question is why indifference is worse than pleasure.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
ganegaar
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:01 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by ganegaar » Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:39 pm

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?
Sīlepatiṭṭhāya naro sapañño, cittaṃ paññañca bhāvayaṃ;
Ātāpī nipako bhikkhu, so imaṃ vijaṭaye jaṭanti.

User avatar
JeffR
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:54 am
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by JeffR » Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:55 pm

ganegaar wrote:
JeffR wrote: while indifference is always akusala (unwholesome).
But then, according to above "Uppekkha" is always akusala? does not sound right to me.

And "indifference" is a bit strange word to use to translate "uppekha", i feel "equanimity" would give a better meaning though still may not be the exact meaning.
I didn't know Uppekkha was being translated as indifference in my reasoning. Agree with your point; from my understanding uppekha (equanimity, harmonious feeling) is kusala, unless uppekha conveys different meanings in differing contexts. I would think that harmonious equanimity is of greater kusala than pleasure (sukkha), so have the same question as the OP. Although in the list of the OP, all examples are with wrong view which explains being rooted in attachment.
Therein what are 'six (types of) disrespect'? One dwells without respect, without deference for the Teacher; one dwells without respect, without deference for the Teaching; one dwells without respect, without deference for the Order; one dwells without respect, without deference for the precepts; one dwells without respect, without deference for heedfulness; one dwells without respect, without deference for hospitality. These are six (types of) disrespect.
:Vibh 945

User avatar
ganegaar
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 8:01 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by ganegaar » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:45 pm

I am reading some reference from Rerukhane Chandrawimala thero, and it states a Uppekha mind is stronger, more "potent" than a Somanassa mind, so I suppose that explains the OP.
Sīlepatiṭṭhāya naro sapañño, cittaṃ paññañca bhāvayaṃ;
Ātāpī nipako bhikkhu, so imaṃ vijaṭaye jaṭanti.

SarathW
Posts: 8252
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Why indifference is worse than pleasure?

Post by SarathW » Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:50 pm

unless uppekha conveys different meanings in differing contexts.


=============
42. Upekkhà—literally, means seeing (ikkhati) impartially
(upa = yuttito). It is viewing an object with a balanced
mind. Atthasàlinã states:—“This is impartiality
(majjhattaü) in connection with the object, and implies a
discriminative knowledge (paricchindanakaü ¤àõaü).”
This explanation applies strictly to Upekkhà found in
Sobhana consciousness accompanied by wisdom. Upekkhà
found in the Akusalas and Ahetukas is just neutral feeling
without the least trace of any discriminative knowledge. In
the Kàmàvacara Sobhanas, too, there may arise that neutral
feeling, as in the case of one hearing the Dhamma without
any pleasurable interest, and also a subtle form of Upekkhà
that views the object with deliberate impartiality and discriminative
knowledge, as in the case of a wise person who
hears the Dhamma with a critical and impartial mind.
Upekkhà of the Jhàna consciousness, in particular, is
of ethical and psychological importance. It certainly is not
the ordinary kind of Upekkhà, generally found in the Akusala
consciousness which comes naturally to an evil-doer.
The Jhàna Upekkhà has been developed by a strong willpower.
Realising that pleasurable feeling is also gross, the
Yogi eliminates it as he did the other three Jhàna factors,
and develops the more subtle and peaceful Upekkhà. On
the attainment of the fifth Jhàna breathing ceases. As he
has transcended both pain and pleasure by will-power, he
is immune to pain too.
This Upekkhà is a highly refined form of the ordinary
tatramajjhattatà, even-mindedness, one of the moral mental
states, latent in all types of Sobhana consciousness.
In the Pàli phrase—Upekkhà satipàrisuddhi—purity
of mindfulness which comes of equanimity—it is the tatramajjhattatà
that is referred to. This is latent in the first four
Jhànas too. In the fifth Jhàna this tatramajjhattatà is singled
out and becomes highly refined. Both neutral feeling
(Upekkhà Vedanà) and equanimity that correspond to the
one Pàli term Upekkhà are found in the fifth Jhàna.
Thus there appear to be four kinds of Upekkhà, viz:—
(1) just neutral feeling, found in the six Akusala Cittas,
(2) sensitive passive neutral feeling (Anubhavana Upekkhà)
found in the eight Ahetuka sense-door consciousness
(dvipa¤ca-vi¤¤àõa)24 (3) intellectual Upekkhà, found mostly
in the two Sobhana Kriyà Cittas, accompanied by knowledge,
and sometimes in the two Sobhana Kusala Cittas,
accompanied by knowledge, (4) ethical Upekkhà, found in
all the Sobhana Cittas, especially in the fifth Jhàna.
Brahmavihàrupekkhà and Saïkhàrupekkhà may be
included in both intellectual and ethical Upekkhà.25
The first is equanimity amidst all vicissitudes of life.
The second is neither attachment õor aversion with respect
to all conditioned things.

Page 72
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/abhidhamma.pdf

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... ty#p270714
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
ganegaar
Posts: 140
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: 350
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: 10927
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
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: 8252
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: 812
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 7 guests