"disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by ground »

Alex123 wrote:As I understand it, nibbidā is not reaction toward the object itself, but toward craving or trying to find ultimate sukha for it.
Yes. That's it. And this meaning of nibbidā shows that there is already insight involved and that there is actually no basis for the potential extremes Ñāṇa mentioned:
Ñāṇa wrote:And the other extreme -- unbalanced asceticism -- can lead to repression, bitterness, misogynistic attitudes, and so on.

Kind regards
pulga
Posts: 1501
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by pulga »

The word itself of course represents an experience, so I suppose its meaning might be determined by an individual's predisposition when achieving enlightenment. For one inclined towards upekkha, "disenchantment" might better convey his disillusionment than "revulsion", but it might be quite the opposite for one inclined towards samvega.

Just a thought.
"Dhammā=Ideas. This is the clue to much of the Buddha's teaching." ~ Ven. Ñanavira, Commonplace Book
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by ground »

Also ... I mean nibbidā is no "one way" in a sense that it directed only towards attachment but it is also towards aversion against an object.

For example:
First one would experience "revulsion" towards the habitual appearance of allure (attachment) in the context of one specific object. If later it might happen that one experiences "revulsion" towards the object as such due to identification of "I" and "mine" with the intent on renunciation then - wise attention assumed - one would experience "revulsion" toward that habitual "I"-making and the aversion it causes.

The causes of attachment and aversion do not inhere in objects but are the manifestations of underlying tendencies. These manifestations are the "right objects" of "revulsion".

Kind regards
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Nyana »

TMingyur wrote:The causes of attachment and aversion do not inhere in objects but are the manifestations of underlying tendencies. These manifestations are the "right objects" of "revulsion".
Yes, it's important to understand that nibbidā is a mature stage of practice. The long term developmental sequence is given in SN 12.23 Upanisa Sutta (and elsewhere):
  • dissatisfaction (dukkha) → faith (saddhā) → gladness (pāmojja) → joy (pīti) → tranquility (passaddhi) → pleasure (sukha) → meditative composure (samādhi) → gnosis & vision of things as they are (yathābhūtañāṇadassana) → disenchantment (nibbidā) → dispassion (virāga) → liberation (vimutti) → gnosis of elimination (khayeñāṇa)
Faith & confidence in the dhamma and a genuine, deeply felt motivation to actually practice arises out of the recognition of dukkha -- that things aren't right with the world. This is a beginning. By the time a noble disciple reaches the point of knowing and seeing things as they really are there has already been considerable integration of skillful mental qualities such as joy, tranquility, meditative composure, and equanimity. These are necessary factors of awakening:
  • mindfulness (sati) → dhamma-investigation (dhammavicaya) → energy (viriya) → joy (pīti) → tranquility (passaddhi) → meditative composure (samādhi) → equanimity (upekkhā)
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Nyana »

Alex123 wrote:Very interesting quote above. As I understand it, nibbidā is not reaction toward the object itself, but toward craving or trying to find ultimate sukha for it.
Craving is just another object.
Alex123 wrote:In that case, I think that revulsion is actually a good word, and it is not dosa.
That's fine.
Alex123 wrote:In Pali canon, I've noticed quite a few places where the Buddha, or Sariputta has felt "aṭṭiyāmi harāyāmi jigucchāmi" . How do you think they are to be translated?
The available translations are fine. The point which I would emphasize is that there has to be balance in our practice. The integral developmental path presented in the suttas includes developing both the cognitive and affective aspects of ourselves in order to confront and begin to skillfully work with the deep seated habitual tendencies which manifest as conflicted emotions. Through the development of clear seeing (vipassanābhāvanā) we begin to work on our self-limiting cognitive barriers. And through the development of calm (samathabhāvanā) we begin to confront and work on our emotional hindrances. These conflicting emotional reactions include aversion and aggression just as much as passion and lust.

All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
Adrien
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:31 pm
Location: France

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Adrien »

Ñāṇa wrote:
  • dissatisfaction (dukkha) → faith (saddhā) → gladness (pāmojja) → joy (pīti) → tranquility (passaddhi) → pleasure (sukha) → meditative composure (samādhi) → gnosis & vision of things as they are (yathābhūtañāṇadassana) → disenchantment (nibbidā) → dispassion (virāga) → liberation (vimutti) → gnosis of elimination (khayeñāṇa)
What's the difference between disenchantment and dispassion ?
Please don't hesitate to correct my english if you feel to
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Nyana »

Adrien wrote:What's the difference between disenchantment and dispassion ?
Disenchantment arises from clearly seeing the futility of worldly concerns and the unreliability of all fabricated phenomena. This leads to dispassion. Thus, dispassion is even more fruitional than disenchantment. Dhammapada 273:
  • The best of dhammas is dispassion.
The experience of dispassion is visceral, deep, and profound. Discernment at this stage of the path is fully present and naked. There is a directness and clarity of understanding which engenders confidence. We become confident that our practice won't be easily shaken by any unexpected bumps on the road. We are able to handle situations which previously created emotional upheavals and moments of uncertainty or hesitation. And when difficult situations do arise we know that we have the necessary insight and skills to work with whatever presents itself.

All the best,

Geoff
User avatar
Adrien
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:31 pm
Location: France

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Adrien »

Thank you, that's very clear.
Please don't hesitate to correct my english if you feel to
User avatar
reflection
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by reflection »

Adrien wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:
  • dissatisfaction (dukkha) → faith (saddhā) → gladness (pāmojja) → joy (pīti) → tranquility (passaddhi) → pleasure (sukha) → meditative composure (samādhi) → gnosis & vision of things as they are (yathābhūtañāṇadassana) → disenchantment (nibbidā) → dispassion (virāga) → liberation (vimutti) → gnosis of elimination (khayeñāṇa)
What's the difference between disenchantment and dispassion ?
Disenchantment/revulsion is a result of seeing things as they are which describes fruit of stream entry and liberation obviously points to arahantship, so dispassion probably points to the stage of non-returner. A non-returner dropped the fetter of sensuality, which is passion for the 5 senses, so dispassion (freedom from passion) seems a right way to describe it.

So revulsion and dispassion are very different things. Revulsion is -in other words- the knowledge of dukkha. The dukkha in the 5 sense world leads one free from it, to dispassion of it. Of course the knowledge of dukkha in all conditioned phenomena then drives one to full enlightenment also.

:namaste:
Reflection
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by chownah »

pulga wrote:The word itself of course represents an experience, so I suppose its meaning might be determined by an individual's predisposition when achieving enlightenment. For one inclined towards upekkha, "disenchantment" might better convey his disillusionment than "revulsion", but it might be quite the opposite for one inclined towards samvega.

Just a thought.
Pulga,
I think its a very good thought!!! The various shades of meaning of the two words perhaps allows more people to feel connection with the concepts they are used to represent and when people feel connected with an idea they are more likely to study it and find value.
chownah
User avatar
Assaji
Posts: 2106
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by Assaji »

Hi,

I wrote about this term in the thread:

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5562" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Best wishes, Dmytro
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by ground »

Thanks Dmytro
Dmytro wrote:Therefore the literal translation would be 'satiety' (having enough of, being 'fed up' with'), or in a more figurative sense 'disgust'.
This makes sense.

Kind regards
rowyourboat
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:29 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by rowyourboat »

mikenz66 wrote:
In the Introduction to his SN translation Bhikkhu Bodhi notes:
Nibbida, in [MN translation] was translated "disenchantment". However, the word or its cognates is sometimes used in ways which suggest that something stronger is intended. Hence I now translate the noun as "revulsion", and the corresponding verb nibbindati as "to experience revulsion". What is intended by this is not a reaction of emotional disgust, accompanied by horror and aversion, but a calm inward turning away from all conditioned existence as comprised in the five aggregates, the six sense bases, and the first noble truth. Revulsion arises from knowledge and vision of things as they really are (yathabhutananadassana), and naturally leads to dispassion (viraga) and liberation (vimutti; on the sequence see SN 12.23 [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .bodh.html]).
Ah now here's a monk with experience. He's not talking about Dhamma Lite -in fact, in this case, it is decidedly heavy.

With metta

Matheesha
With Metta

Karuna
Mudita
& Upekkha
rowyourboat
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:29 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by rowyourboat »

Kim O'Hara wrote:'Repulsion' is a good suggestion, Reflection - thanks.
But I do think the most accurate possible translation is worthwhile. Language isn't perfect but it's the only medium we have, and an inaccurate translation gives rise to a misleading statement in the second language.

:namaste:
Kim
Repulsion is a great translation!

In more common terms it should lead an 'i'm outta here' type feeling towards all fabrications, mental or otherwise. This is 'muncitukamyata nana'. The nanas/insight corresponding to 'revul/repul-sion are bhanga (dissolution), bhaya (fear) aadinava (drawbacks) and nibbida (repulsion) nana or insight knowledge on the 16 insight knowledges scale. Those terms give even more of a meaning to the term nibbida used by the Buddha. :namaste:

With metta

Matheesha
With Metta

Karuna
Mudita
& Upekkha
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: "disenchantment" or "revulsion"?

Post by chownah »

In regards to Bhikku Bodhi's comment:
"What is intended by this is not a reaction of emotional disgust, accompanied by horror and aversion, but a calm inward turning away from all conditioned existence as comprised in the five aggregates, the six sense bases, and the first noble truth."

According to his view on what the meaning should be i.e. "a calm inward turning away from" (which I definitely agree with) I would say that from my linguistic heritage I would without a doubt choose 'disenchanted' and not 'revulsion'...so I guess it shows that perhaps this is a linguistic heritage issue mostly instead of it being an issue of meaning in at least some cases...i.e. different people will choose differently between the two words for the same meaning based on the way they have heard the two words used throughout their lives.
chownah
Post Reply