Reply To: Post On Kāma Guṇa – Origin of Attachment (Tanhā)


– “I want to take the time and make sure to get the facts right as much as possible (e.g., references from the Tipitaka.)” 

I feel the same way, currently I’m motivated regarding this matter and would like to have or come to some kind of a satisfactory answer really for myself and others that interested in this matter. Recently I tried to explain to myself what “Kāma Guṇa” is and then I started to realize what I have understood or believed about “Kāma Guṇa” wasn’t self consistent and felt that my knowledge and understanding about “Kāma Guṇa” had gaps of understanding. I’m really grateful to be able to come across liked minded people like here on Puredhamma where I can utilize and borrow other’s experiences and intelligence / wisdom to help me discern any misunderstandings that I might have in regards to the dhamma and the sharing of dhamma that can help me to further progress on the Noble 8 Fold Path.  

– “I found some suttas that say an Arahant has removed all “Kāma Guṇa” from the mind”. 

Thanks for bringing that up! That really helps. 
I have been investigating into what exactly “Kāma Guṇa” is and currently trying to piece together all the information that I have recently learned from this thread, as well from what I have looked into and contemplated on. There’s a question that I would like to ask for feedback and confirmation to make sure what I’m starting to think and believe about the teaching on “Kāma Guṇa” is in the right direction or is the appropriate understanding. 
(A) My question is, are there any sense objects rūpā, saddā, gandhā, rasā, phoṭṭhabbā “by itself” (without the mind or citta) that can definitely be said to have the “inherent / intrinsic” qualities or characteristics of “iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piyarūpā kāmūpasaṃhitā rajanīyā” or that’s “agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, enticing, and leading to desire?”
From what I have contemplated over and over again for the last 2 days on this questions is that “no” there isn’t any such sense objects “by itself” that has the “inherent / intrinsic” qualities or characteristics of “iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piyarūpā kāmūpasaṃhitā rajanīyā” or “agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, enticing, and leading to desire”.
My believe now is that iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piyarūpā kāmūpasaṃhitā rajanīyā is based on that living being conditions of the body and mind at that time / moment and when one’s gati, anusaya’s, asava’s, kilesa’s makes phassa (contact) with the 5 sense objects. It’s “not” the 5 sense objects “by itself” that is agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, enticing, and leading to desire. It’s one’s gati / kilesa’s that makes 5 sense objects agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, enticing, and leading to desire.
To me, this would fall inline with what Lal and Lang have brought up: “However, as you stated, “Kāma Guṇa” definitely refers to attachment.”
I have been playing around with the name Kāma Guṇa and what I have thought of is qualities or characteristics (guna) leading to Kāma. The qualities or characteristics of cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā iṭṭhā kantā manāpā piyarūpā kāmūpasaṁhitā rajanīyā or from one of the other 4 sense objects leads to Kāma. 
(B) Would it be appropriate to say that Kāma Guṇa is more associated with tanha, while Kāma or kāmā, kāmehi is more associated with upadana? 
“Sights known by the eye that are likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasant, sensual, and arousing. …”
I got this translation of Suttacentral and I find the word “known” in the translation to be quite helpful for myself. When I look up the definition of “known”, I get “used to refer to something or someone that is familiar to or understood by people
How this could be potentially helpful to me is that when I apply the definition for “known”; 
“Sights that are familiar or understood by the eye as likable, desirable, agreeable, pleasant, sensual, and arousing.” 
What this “known as”, “familiar with” or “understood” as likeable desirable, agreeable, pleasant, sensual, and arousing by the eyes” is relating to our kilesa’s or the teaching of Anuseti. 
My understanding of the Buddha dhamma is that us as Buddhist practitioners should “know”, “be familiar with”, “understand” what “Kāma Guṇa is (or when one becomes attached) and that it isn’t something that should be (upadana) liked or desired for. 
Last night, I came across a sutta where it mentions the Noble 8 Fold Path is for giving up Kāma Guṇa.
From the parallel: “The Buddha taught the eightfold path in order to give up the 5 kinds of sensual stimulation
“Imesaṁ kho, uttiya, pañcannaṁ kāmaguṇānaṁ pahānāya ayaṁ ariyo aṭṭhaṅgiko maggo bhāvetabbo”ti.
“This is the noble eightfold path that should be developed to give up these five kinds of sensual stimulation.
1 user thanked author for this post.