[taryal]

Tipitaka says objects do not have any intrinsic quality of attractiveness or repulsiveness. It is the distorted saññā that causes the mind to perceive some sensory inputs as desirable and others as undesirable. The sweetness of sugar and redness of red are not real in the ultimate sense.

The following is a great video by Big Think that addresses this point (start watching from 1:20):

What is not mentioned in the above video is that the implication of this understanding (that our distorted perception provides us a fabricated reality) can be applied to our perception of sensory pleasures. No sensory input is inherently desirable!

At 4:21, the scientist says “Evolution by Natural Selection has shaped us with perception that are designed to keep us alive.” I think this is only partially true. According to Dhamma, our perceptions are built into our physical bodies by kammic energy that led to this existence so that the sensory faculties could be used to seek pleasure, specifically with close contact (samphassa). The unfortunate truth is that when we obliviously surrender to such fabrication, we end up creating causes for future suffering. It is highly unlikely that scientists will ever figure out this part.

 

[y not]

taryal:  at the basic (mundane and utilitarian) level, the sensory faculties are there to help us ward off danger and thus are a means for survival,  It is in-build in both humans and animals, as we can see.  What you say about kammic  energy being its cause  is ,however, also true.  What is mundane still remains valid. But what do we do? We overdo them, we misuse them, we use the sense faculties to create more abhisankara, whether punna or apunna  and both prolong sansara.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

taryal

[taryal]

Good point y not! I am impressed that the neuroscientists in the above video have understood that our sensory faculties only detect our subjective reality according to our perceptions which isn’t a fully accurate depiction of how the world is in the objective sense.

[Lal]

Good points by Taryal and y not. 

1. Yes. Our physical bodies are made to be compatible with our perceptions. We taste honey as sweet, and it is also nutritious. 

• On the other hand, we taste rotten meat to be yucky, and we will also get sick if we eat it. Our bodies are not “compatible” with extracting nutrition from rotten meat.
• On the other hand, pigs like the taste of rotten meat, and their bodies are compatible with extracting nutrition from it.

2. Here is a profound point to consider: Everything in the material world is made of suddhāṭṭhaka, which are the “basic building blocks” according to Buddha Dhamma (sort of like atoms are building blocks according to science, but an atom is made of billions of suddhāṭṭhaka.)

• A suddhāṭṭhaka has eight components: pathavi, āpo, tejo, vāyo and vaṇṇa,  gandha, rasa, oja. 
• Anything in the material world is of all EIGHT components. However, the relative amounts of the eight components vary. For example, a stone is mostly pathavi, but it has all eight components; in a stone, pathavi dominates and all others are at low levels. For example, crocodiles eat mud and are able to extract nutrition from it. 
• The “attracting qualities” (sweetness, pleasing colors, etc)  in our food comes from the four components of vaṇṇa,  gandha, rasa, oja. Specifically, the sweetness in honey comes from rasa.

3. As the post “The Origin of Matter – Suddhāṭṭhaka” explains, the eight components in a suddhāṭṭhaka have origins in the mind (specifically in javana cittas.) The following #9 is extracted from that post:

“9. The mind creates four types of gati (pathavi, āpo, tejo, and vāyo) due to avijjā or ignorance. We like to have possession of things made out of these units because we do not comprehend the “unfruitful nature” of such impermanent things.

• The craving for material things leads to four more gati due to taṇhā. Due to our tendency to think highly (“varnanā karanava” in Sinhala), another gati of “vaṇṇa” is created as different manifestations of the four primary bhūta of pathavi, āpo, tejo, and vāyo. Similarly, three more units of gandha, rasa, and oja are created due to taṇhā. Those correspond to our desire to be in touch with them and be “fooled” (gandha), keep them close (rassa), and re-generate them (oja).
• It will take too much space to explain these in detail, but I hope you get the basic idea. Further information at “Bhūta and Yathābhūta – What Do They Really Mean.” See #5 there, clarifying the transition from “gati” to “bhuta” to “mahā bhūta” stages.”

4. Here is the most profound point: Our physical bodies are not the primary part of us. Instead, it is the “mental body” or the “manomaya kaya” (gandhabba). The main part of the manomaya kaya is a single suddhāṭṭhaka, made of the same eight components. That is the hadaya vatthu, where our thoughts (cittas) arise.

• However, unlike in inert matter like a rock, the hadaya vatthu has all our “human gati” associated with it.
• That is why we are instinctively attracted to the “sweetness of honey,” “sight of a beautiful person,” etc.
• A pig’s hadaya vatthu has all its “pig gati” associated with it.
• P.S. The ” distorted saññā” is associated with the hadaya vatthu!
• This is a deep point, but it could be helpful. 

8 users thanked author for this post.

Waisaka, dosakkhayo, 4jhana, hojan, hojan, Yash RS, taryal, Jittananto

[Author]

Posts