From: abulsari@abo.fi (Abhay Bulsari VT)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: What is pleasure, fun, joy ?
Date: 27 Dec 92 08:09:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.47844
Distribution: world
Organization: Abo Akademi University

In article <1hg6r0INNa2m@sandman.caltech.edu> farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris) writes:
>

>(Just out of curiousity, do you extend different meanings to joy and
>happiness, and if so, could you elaborate on this?)

Yes, in near future. Happiness is a state of mind which occurs under
certain circumstances, and joy under other circumstances. I find joy
also to be baseless, a more or less empty concept.

>There is also another classes of things we find
>pleasurable/unpleasant, based on mental events.

>Again, many of these pleasures are tied to physiology. And how is a
>bitter drink painful, by the way? (As I sip my black coffee here ;)

I think you are missing the point. Pleasure from taste is baseless and
results only from conditioning. There is no innate knowledge, I think,
which makes a sweet taste more pleasat than sour.

>To a certain extent this is true. However, the quality of music is
>also tied in with its ability to evoke certain responses from us, so
>part of the pleasure/distaste of music is intrinsic to us.

The evoking of those responses depend on conditioning. Thus
pleasure derived from music is also baseless. 

>Again, some is mental, some is physiological. Tastes are
>physiological. Smells are physiological. If something smells or tastes
>good or bad, it has to do on some level with the appropriateness to
>your body of taking this substance in.

But there is a connection between the physiological and mental. Some
physiological effects are interpreted by the mind as pleasant, and 
some as unpleasant. This interpretation comes from conditioning of the
mind.

>Suffering is hollow, but not pain. Suffering is a mental state. We
>have no choice in whether or not to feel pain, if circumstances induce
>it. We do have a choice, ultimately, of whether we suffer from this
>pain or not. To make this concrete, let's say I have a headache. No
>matter what I do, the physiological response is there. However, to the
>extent that I dwell mentally on that event, or turn my attention to
>other things, I will or will not suffer.

Matter of definition. The body does not feel the pain (in my
definition); the mind does, and then suffering follows. If the
mind learns to interpret a certain kind of a physiological effect
as pleasure, it becomes pleasant even though it is normally painful.

>This is where Maya comes in. I "know" that all I have to do to be
>happy is to remember to be happy. But somehow I manage to forget this
>a lot. My practice is in part learning not to forget.

I think all that I proposed in this article (on fun, joy and pleasure)
and the previous one (on pain and suffering) point to that Maya. These
concepts are illusory, and we feel them as real because we are
attached to the concepts and take them for granted. 

I will add here that a smaller posting which Moderator Nabil has
put on hold (and says it is not rejected) is on fear and anxiety
and uncertainty. That too tries to point out the emptiness of the
concepts of fear and anxiety. Moderator Nabil does not (correctly)
see any eastern religion in it. 


With regards,

Abhay