Abandoning Of Sensuality Is What Meditation Is

T: This is Majjhima Nikāya 108, called Gopaka Mogallāna. So it’s when Venerable Ānanda was living in the squirrel sanctuary, not long after the Blessed One had attained final nibbāna. The brahmin asks “Master Ānanda, master Gotama was living at Vesāli, in the hall with the peaked roof in the great wood, then I went there and approached the master, and in many ways he gave a talk about meditation. Master Gotama was a meditator, he cultivated meditation, and he praised every type of meditation.” Every type of meditation.

N: He did?

T: He didn’t. “The blessed one did not praise every type of meditation, nor did he condemn every type of meditation.” So the only meditation he praised was the meditation of jhānas, or… being able to be quite secluded from sensual pleasures, one then meditates.

N: Yeah. Meditation is about secluding yourself from sensual pleasures. So understanding the extent of the sensual domain, the depth of sense desire, and surmounting it. And not just in the sense of ‘oh, I don’t have any desire right now, so I’m ready to meditate.’ No, in other Suttas the Buddha would say, a monk would review his mind, like ‘is there a sensual desire in me now?’ No, next question then is, are there things in me now on account of which a future sensual desire can manifest? So you don’t just stop by ‘OK, I don’t have any desire so I’m fine.’ No, ‘OK, I don’t have any particular desire, but am I still liable to desire?’ If things change, if something comes along within my senses, could I guarantee that I will not have sensual desire arising in me, because I abandoned everything that’s a necessary basis for that sensuality? ‘No, I’m not sure.’ Means, there you go, that’s your work. So understanding the extent of your sensual desire, then understanding things on account of which sensual desire arises. So things that you carry here and now, not like ‘when, in the future, sensual desire arises, I’ll deal with it.’ No, the Buddha would say before it’s manifested, you want to discern things in your mind that are there, on account of which future sensual desire will be manifested.

T: What is that, that main thing?

N: Well the main reason for that is the lack of context. Lack of the perspective. Or as the Buddha said, improper, ayoniso manasikāra. There is not a single thing that would bring unarisen sensual desire to arise and the arisen one to increase as improper, or ayoniso mansikāra. Basically, loss of perspective on account of your own existence, situation, that’s the sole reason why sensuality would increase, or arise again. So what would be the main loss of perspective?

T: It’d be paying attention to the sign of the beautiful, isn’t it?

N: See, that type of attention is already the result of you losing the perspective on a more fundamental level. Like, yoniso manasikāra, proper attention, is not like, you’re attending to this, you’re focused on certain things, and then everything else gets excluded. As we discussed before, yoniso manasikāra is basically the root, the origin of whatever you’re attending. So if I’m attending beautiful objects in the world, or if I’m attending ugly objects in the world, yoniso aspect of that manasikāra, of that attention, is my perspective on the whole situation. It’s where my attention is rooted. See, you would be attending to the beautiful signs, for example, because your perspective sends you that way. Your perspective forgets the danger of attending to beautiful. It forgets the peril of sensuality, and then next thing you know you’re attending to beautiful signs, because you forgot, you lost the context.

T: You lost perspective.

N: Exactly. So that’s what yoniso manasikāra is. It’s that fundamental perspective that then directs your attention this way or that way. So that’s why there isn’t such a single thing that could bring sensuality to increase, and non-arisen one to arise, as loss of that perspective on that fundamental level. But see, if you never completely lose perspective on the fact that sensuality is dangerous, not worth engaging in, that the pleasure of renunciation is much greater if you develop it, even doesn’t matter how many sensual objects might come your way. That perspective will keep your attention in check, so you will not be attending carelessly to these aspects that will then take you into sensual desire and sensual acts. And that in itself is already meditation. So when one wants to meditate, that’s what meditation is basically. Developing the strength of your mind that will take you away from sensuality, not maintain you within it, and then make it grow further. And same, we discussed that in a number of talks, people can find them in that jhāna playlist.

Even the first jhāna, the way it’s described, says ‘withdrawn from sensuality, from unwholesome states, you experience joy and pleasure on account of withdrawal’. And then your mind is established in that jhāna. But somehow that got perverted in the course of time, so now what people think is ‘OK, so I’ll just say no temporarily to my desires, do a meditation technique, get this special, super-refined, pleasurable experience, and that’s my jhāna.’ As if like, chasing the pleasure of your focusing is the jhāna practise. Yet the Buddha said that pleasure that people chase on account of jhāna, it’s actually pleasure of renouncing the sensuality, and then jhāna is the result of that. So jhāna follows only later, once you’ve been withdrawn from sensuality through and through, as it says in that Sutta. Knowing the gratification, the escape from it, your liability, abandon the basis that makes you liable to sensuality. Through understanding, through discernment, through not losing the context, because you become more and more familiar with that right perspective. Then you will experience joy on account of being withdrawn, fundamentally, from that from sense domain in general, not this particular sense desire or that. In general, sense desire as a whole. And that’s extremely pleasant, and that pleasure is something that your craving can not take up because you haven’t done it through your action. It’s the result of you withdrawing from all the pleasures you know, the pleasures of sensuality.

So by being withdrawn from pleasures of sensuality, the side-effect of that is pleasure of renunciation. Which is why the Buddha said, you don’t have to fear that pleasure of renunciation. Because it’s not underlined by craving, can not be underlined by craving. And the same said for the jhāna then. So that pleasure of renunciation, if you cultivate, your mind then gets established in the first jhāna. So first is renunciation, understanding sensual domain, pleasure on account of it. That might take, you know, a long time to develop. And then you might have to spend a long time in that pleasure of renunciation, and then to discern thinking and pondering on the level of the first jhāna. So jhāna is even a further symptom. Like, a subsequent symptom that comes on account of you being withdrawn from sensuality and dwelling in that state, as the Buddha would say. Whether you go to the toilet, extend your arm, eat, stand, lay down, walk, you’ll be abiding in that divine state.

T: If I think I can meditate before that, that’s not the meditation…

N: Exactly, you would be meditating within the sensual domain. That’s what the Buddha meant, you would meditating with sensuality. And it’s not incidental, not in that Sutta, in another Sutta that uses the same description of meditating with sensuality, but then it also gives the similes of how you would meditate with sensuality. And each and every simile, what it has in common is, focusing practice. Like, preying upon whatever, like a cat preys upon a mouse.

T: You’re trying to get something.

N: Well that’s the point, so if you are not withdrawn from the sensual domain, on account of which you then experience the pleasure and then jhāna develops, whatever effort you make would be rooted in the sensual domain.

T: In trying to get pleasure.

N: Exactly. Even if you don’t necessarily think about pleasure, in thinking that you can perform things towards the right meditation, as opposed to understand things that will make you withdrawn from them. Like, the whole point of samādhi is viveka from unwholesome, literally. Seclusion from unwholesome states. And you can’t do that on account of your unwholesome states. You can only withdraw yourself by undoing your lack of perspective. So you are within unwholesome because you don’t have perspective on it. You start developing perspective through contemplating unwholesome. The gratification, the danger, the escape in regard to desire. That’s how, not like by focusing on this, and after three seconds I do this, and then I move that, and then I watch this step, and then the fourth step, and then I look at this moment, and then that moment, and then the next moment. That’s you laying out what you’re gonna do, fully within, on account of your sensual desires already. So even the hope of practising the Dhamma is rooted in sensuality, for you. Because you’re going that way of sensual development.

So, the Buddha did not go into specifics of what you would be doing on account of sensuality, he just said that unless you abandon the sensual domain, you will be meditating with sensuality. How? And then he said, like a cat waiting for a mouse. Like a bird waiting for a fish. Focusing, concentrating on one point, when the mouse will show itself, and then I’ll pounce. Then I will get it. Then I will grab that jhāna, and I will have that supreme pleasure of jhāna, and I’ll be an arahant. And, on account of that, you’re even further away from jhāna. Because you’re chasing it as pleasure, failing to see that pleasure is a secondary product of your withdrawal from sensuality. And then the jhāna is a tertiary product of that. Having abandoned sensuality, he experiences joy on account of that withdrawal. And then, in that state of joyous contentment of renunciation, his mind enters and dwells, abides in that state of jhāna. After.

T: You were saying you have to understand what sensuality is, you have to understand sensuality.

N: Yeah. There is no third option by the way. You’re either not understanding sensuality which means you’re meditating with it, and all your efforts revolve around it. Or, you’re making the effort to undo your wrong views in regard to your own desires. By doing so, the nature of those desires will become apparent. Like, what is the true gratification in the desire, what is the true danger, and what is the true escape. That’s the only meditation that the Buddha praised. And that withdrawal from sensuality is synonymous for jhāna. Literally, jhāna is the result of your withdrawal from sensuality. And again, I don’t think it hurts to re-emphasise, when I say ‘withdrawal’ it doesn’t mean like, you shut your door, pull your blinds, and currently you don’t have any desire coming to your senses. Means, internally surmounting it with your mind by understanding it for what it is. Most people are just driven around by their desires because they don’t have a clue, why or how, and to what extent they are controlled by them. So the first thing you need to do is say no to them. And then endure that pain, and then eventually you might be able to understand the nature of it. And that’s what is meant by you surmount it. Because that’s what it describes, that Sutta.

So having not abandoned sensuality, still being liable to sensuality, not knowing the escape from that sensuality, he meditates. And he calls himself a meditator, and so on. So unless you have surmounted, abandoned, understood the escape from sensuality, by the way, not particular sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches. The nature of sense-desire that you are liable to, you’re not liable to any more, that’s your right meditation, and that’s the necessary condition for jhāna. That’s not even jhāna, yet. It’s a precursor, there is no jhāna without it, and practising that will have to result in jhāna. It can not result in anything else. So that’s why, when the Buddha said in other Suttas in more concise ways, when he would describe ‘what is the right meditation’, he would just describe the practice of jhāna. Because it already implies a thorough withdrawal from the sense domain, thorough abandonment of sensual desire. Which probably undoes like eighty-five percent of all the wrong views that people carry are based on their sensuality. Nothing else. Like, sensuality is called a weakener, the hindrances and sensuality, weakening of wisdom. Without sensuality, people would be much quicker to understand the nature of things. Get the right view, be fully liberated. It’s the sensuality that keeps you bound with your own ignorance, through your own choices of binding yourself, basically.

T: And that sensuality, in essence, is the valuing of pleasure.

N: Yeah, we said that in other talks. It’s not like, ‘oh, I have this raging desire’ or something. No no, it’s way, way more general than that. More primordial than that. It’s literally an attitude of you gratuitously maintaining value in experience of pleasure, of any kind. So, you value pleasure for no reason. There is no reason to value pleasure more than pain. Like, why is pleasure valuable? Simply because it’s pleasant. So the pleasure of the pleasure, basically, confuses you into valuing the pleasure as this thing that’s worthy, to develop, to protect, to gain, to increase. So if you don’t value the pleasure, then you would not be subject to that perpetual desire that is then seeking that pleasure as the goal. And you know, again, it can be the pleasure of sexual intercourse, or food, or simply some lovely peaceful music, or a beautiful sunset vista in a cool breeze. If you’re seeking that out, for the sake of pleasure on account of your body, on account of your senses, it’s sensual pleasure. If you don’t seek it out on account of that pleasure of your body, then it’s just agreeable. It’s not the pleasure of sensuality.

So that’s why, yes, you can sit on top of a mountain and admire the view for sensual reasons, or not for sensual reasons if you have abandoned that gratuitous value of pleasure being valuable in itself. Now, certain things, certain acts, must stop. You can not possibly do them without the value of sensuality, such as sexual intercourse. As the Buddha said, that’s impossible to do without already being within the perception of that sensual value. So, engaging in such acts means you’re already implying the gratuitous value of that pleasure in general. Now if you go around living your life, existing, and on the level of that existence pleasure is the value for you, you will then be going left and right, seeking things that will provide you with pleasure. Because you value it. Literally, pleasure is on your mind, so whatever you do is for the sake of experiencing pleasure, because that’s your goal.

T: It’s the most valuable thing.

N: So that value that you carry is before you engage with sense objects. And that’s why you’re liable to the desire toward sense objects, because you actually carry on that lack of perspective. You value pleasure. Valuing the pleasure is the result of the lack of perspective. If you, however, develop perspective on the value of pleasure, you realise that it’s completely not valuable at all. Doesn’t mean ‘oh, now I need to experience pain’. Not at all, that’s the other extreme. Just means, I must remove the value of feeling of pleasure.

T: Because what is valuable?

N: There’s nothing valuable! You just assumed that it is, and you live your whole life according to it.

T: So feeling comes and goes, it’s not mine. So if I value that thing…

N: So if I taste agreeable food, I recognise it as agreeable, but because I don’t have the value of pleasure I will not have desire for more of that. Because it’s the more general context of valuing the pleasure that then determines how much pleasure you get, and that then creates the discrepancy for wanting more. Because that value of pleasure, it’s on one level, and the sense objects and pleasure you get from them, it’s on another. And that’s why desire is insatiable. Because you’re basically looking for it where it isn’t. Your desire is that value of pleasure. That’s why the Buddha said that delight in pleasure, as in, ‘I delight in the prospect of experiencing agreeable sense objects and feelings’, in general, ‘I delight in that prospect’, that’s the gratification of my pleasure. Everything else is secondary. So you eating the cake, or admiring the vista, or chasing down relationships or whatever for the sake of sensual gratification, all that is secondary to you already gratifying your pleasure by allowing that value to control you. By maintaining the value of pleasure in itself. And you realise, what will happen if you stop maintaining the value of pleasure? Does that mean you would go in pain? No it doesn’t. Because, if you ask yourself now, ‘do I value pleasure?’ Like, I’m not engaging with anything sensual.

T: You can drop that value…

N: You can drop it, and then forget about it. And that’s the point. Then you keep reminding yourself, the more you dwell on it the clearer it becomes, and that’s the whole point of understanding. The nature of understanding is, you make the effort to clarify things that need to be understood. So once that perspective becomes thoroughly understood, you can’t drop it. You can’t forget about it, in that sense. But what I’m trying to say is, that now when people would think ‘oh, if I abandon the value of pleasure’ it’s implicitly assumed, ‘oh, that means everything will be painful’. But it isn’t. All you need to do is just ask yourself now, when you are not surrounded by sense objects. You are neither in pain nor in pleasure now, like, things are a bit rough in this jungle but we are used to it, so it doesn’t bother us. But there are no other things of agreeable or pleasant nature inciting either.

So you ask yourself, OK, so in this sort of neutral environment, am I liable to sensuality? As in, if things change, if things become more comfortable, more agreeable, will the sense desire arise in me? If you recognise that it will, means OK, so I still value experiencing pleasure at some point, some time, doesn’t matter. But you realise, that value that exists right here right now, is actually existing on account of this neutral feeling. You’re not engaging with pleasure now, with that reminding you of pleasure, with that then making you want more pleasure. You’re quite withdrawn from pleasure now, yet somehow the mind could still value sensuality, on account of which you have the future sense desire. If there is no value of that pleasure in general, future sense desire can not manifest in you. So why don’t you abandon that value right here right now, on account of this neutral feeling? Consequently, by actually gratuitously maintaining that value of pleasure, this neutral feeling is actually experienced painfully. Because you value pleasure, that’s your threshold, that’s your gratuitous criteria. And that’s why the Buddha said, when you don’t recognise the neutral feeling that’s here, it’s gonna be felt as unpleasant. When you recognise it, it’s gonna be felt as pleasant. And that pleasure, of neutral feeling, is a good type of pleasure. It’s a pleasure you can not crave for. Because see, it’s not rooted in, it’s not determined by this value of sensuality.

T: So, it sounds to me like you drop the value here and now of pleasure. Like, I don’t want that, I don’t need that any more. I don’t value it, it hasn’t given me any lasting anything. It hasn’t given me enough anything that I can resort to, depend on.

N: And then you allow that idea to endure, to persist. You protect it, you cultivate it, you think about it further. Like, see, now you drop it, so if you have then a sensual thought come in your mind…

T: Yeah, but I can remind myself, it’s not valuable. So, if I realise that, if I really realise that, that burden of the value of getting things, ‘I must get comfortable’, it’s gone.

N: Oh yeah, you’ll feel the burden drop. You’ll feel the release.

T: So that release is that neutral feeling. You’re released into peace.

N: Which you always had in front of you, but you were not recognising it. And that’s the whole point. When you have a thought, say, OK, on some physical level you’re restrained, and you recognise ‘I’ll never engage with this any more, it never provides any satisfaction, it’s just burden, further disturbance’. Fine, you’re established within that. But now on a more subtle level, your mind might have a thought or something about sensuality. ‘No, I must not think that!’ No, when that thought arises, include that thought in this context. Don’t forget the context on account of the thought.

So now I have these thoughts, but this new value of devalued sensuality, remains unchanged. So allow thoughts to endure. Sensual thoughts, if they’re manifested, allow them to endure against the backdrop of devalued sensuality, because that’s how you devalue the thoughts as well. But if you forget about the perspective, and go and deal with the thoughts, and get rid of the thoughts, and oppress the thoughts, and not think about the thoughts, etc., they hooked you. You might not go physically and engage with sensuality, but you are revolving around it by fighting the thoughts. No, you just want to not lose that right perspective, yoniso manasikāra, even when whether it’s the physical prospect, verbal prospect, or mental prospect, the devalue of sensuality is the new value, remains maintained and protected. And the longer you maintain it and protect it, the more of anything like the discrepancy caused by sensual desire will burn away, scorch. Like the simile the Buddha gave, the heated up pan. You throw it and instantly the water will evaporate, if it’s really really hot. That’s your pan, the hot pan is that new value of devalued sensuality. So it doesn’t matter what sensual objects come in your sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, thought, it evaporates instantly. Because you don’t stop it to deal, with it you just maintain the context.

T: It’s valueless.

N: Or another simile of eating the food and not catching the bait, like the deer. So how do you not take the food that has the bait? You don’t forget about the bait. You don’t see the bait, but you know the bait and you get to recognise what the bait is, and you don’t eat that food. Which means you go around and eat everything else you want, except the one that would hook you. So, you can then have plenty of actions aimed at ‘oh, I’ll lay down because my back hurts’, as the Buddha would say, or ‘oh, this is an agreeable grove, let us spend some time here’. Like, you know, a puthujjana not free from sensuality, will think ‘oh, well the Buddha has desires’. Not the desires that you think of. Because when you start the practice you’re fully within sensuality. You don’t have a neutral point from which you can see arahant type of desire and puthujjana type of desire. You are the puthujjana type of desire. So all you can do is work your way out from the inside of that desire, and then what you have is not a desire. But yes, your intention can still value avoiding discomfort for example, and it will not be sensual. But if you’re not free from sensuality in that fundamental manner, as the Buddha said, you don’t know the gratification, liability, danger and escape from it, then even the innocent intentions towards agreeable, your dwelling, your sleeping place, your food, will be thoroughly sensual. Because you made it so.

T: So the danger is that value.

N: Exactly, the danger is not like ‘oh, see the danger is if I go out and seek things out and then things can go not the way I want them to’, that’s all the result. The danger is implicit before you engage with it. In the same sense gratification is implicit before you engage with it, in the same sense the escape is implicit before you engage with it.

T: The gratification is the danger.

N: Well, danger is within the gratification, exactly. Gratification is the aspect of the same thing that’s dangerous. Recognising the gratification as the same aspect of the danger is how you get the escape from it. So just that value, just that happiness, that delight as the Buddha would say, on account of valuing the pleasure, that’s the gratification of the pleasure. That’s the extent of it. Now, what is the danger? It’s because of that utterly, virtually almost abstract value. And it’s abstract because first, you never restrained, you never stepped back from the sense objects to get the perspective on them, and then second, you never think about ‘wait, why do I value pleasure?’ Like, why do I move from discomfort into comfort? That’s why sometimes the Buddha would say, well, like they would ask him ‘should you do these ascetic practises?’ He said ‘let those who know that those practises would bring the wholesome to increase, unwholesome to decrease, let them do it.’ And sometimes that means, let me go into adverse enduring of the elements and hardship, because I recognise that as automatically devaluing sensuality. But it’s not a guarantee.

You need to know where the value is, and that this value’s gratuitous, I must basically challenge that value internally. And that does not necessarily mean that everybody can do the same practice externally in terms of ascetic practises and endurance and so on. To some extent yes, but how far you need to take that, that depends on the individual. But the point is, when you recognise that, literally the danger of that value is that you have this value of pleasure. From the level of like, satisfying your curiosity, to the level of pleasure of you know, the wildest unrestrained, music, drugs, alcohol, sexual intercourse, the whole thing, it’s all within the same domain of ‘I value pleasure.’ So you realise, because you choose to value pleasure, you make yourself liable. You seek it out over there, in this wild world that you’re not in control of. Like, people work their hands to the bone just so they can earn, just so they can provide themselves with pleasure. The family, children, spouses, the whole thing, it’s all under the value of ‘I just want pleasure. I can be moderate about it, I can be restrained to some extent, or I can not be so, but fundamentally, either way, I still value pleasure. Because of that, I am liable to the danger of this very dangerous world.’

T: ‘I have confidence in pleasure.’

N: Because see, you would not suffer if things fall and break and snap your arm in half. Like, it would be uncomfortable, but you will not have mental despair and fear on account of that happening to you, if you don’t have any desire towards using that arm for pleasure. But the implicit value of pleasure on that mental level creates the value of the body as your tool toward the pleasure. So if something happens to that the body that prevents you from gaining the pleasure later on, that’s then the real pain. And that’s what the Buddha said, ‘what is dukkha? Not getting what you want is dukkha, and getting what you don’t want is dukkha.’ So, having desire towards this, not having that is dukkha, and having desire against this and having that is dukkha. So, you can’t get rid of things when you want is dukkha, and you can’t get things when you want is dukkha. Like, experience as a whole is dukkha because of that sensual value. So you’re liable to this mass of suffering indirectly, so to speak. Like, your value of sensuality is mental, existential so to speak. Your value of pleasure on account of it, you go along with the society, with what people do, with the values and family and work and earning, all of that, all of that, is within the big domain, the big bubble of valuing pleasure. Comfort, security, all of it, all of it, all of it. And that is very, very uncertain, and you know it’s uncertain, but you lose the perspective on that uncertainty because you value pleasure. Valuing pleasure for gratuitous reasons makes you fundamentally irrational.

T: Removing just that…

N: Exactly, so you don’t need to destroy the world, you just need to remove your value of the pleasure in regard to the world, and then nothing can affect you. You lose your life, you lose your health, ‘meh’. Because there was no endgame to it. But with the value of pleasure, there is always an endgame of more pleasure. So there is nothing for you to suffer on account of, because you don’t value pleasure. Which means you don’t automatically devalue pain. You don’t automatically fear the prospect of pain. You’re indifferent towards it.

And yeah, in the modern world, most people don’t even see how much they depend on gratuitous amounts of comfort. Like soft beds, and duvets, and pillows, and carpets, and socks, and just comfort, comfort, comfort, comfort, comfort. And you wouldn’t even necessarily think of that as sensuality, yet it’s fully, completely within that value. Why do you value comfort? Because you value the pleasure of it. Why do you become irrationally terrified, anxious, at the prospect of sense restraint? At the prospect of physical discomfort for a period of time? You know like, when people, you see like when they go hiking or something. And after like half an hour, fatigue sets in, how cranky they become, and irritable. Just because, nothing has like really bothered you or affected you, you’re not even in that great of a pain. But you’ve just lost the threshold of the comfort you’re used to.

T: Because you’re getting something which you do not value at all. And that’s not enough pleasure. Pain, discomfort. It pushes you against…

N: Well yeah, exactly, exactly. That’s what I mean, you create this gaping hole that can never be fulfilled by valuing that pleasure on the mental level, but the only way you can seek it out is on the level of your senses.

T: Because if you don’t value pleasure when it’s there…

N: There is no discrepancy that you need to fulfill. Because if you don’t value the pleasure that’s not there, means whatever’s there is fine in itself. So in the seen there will just be the seen, in the heard there will just be the heard, and so on. You can literally then continue with the same principle and say, in the felt there will be just the felt. In the perceived there will be just the perceived. There will be no more misconceiving towards the future kind of implications and desires that are rooted in you gratuitously holding on to the value of pleasant. That’s it. And that’s why in that Sutta, when the Buddha gave the simile of those Licchavīs wasn’t it? They were sleeping on the hard beds with wooden blocks as pillows, and for as long as they do that, no other kingdom can conquer them. But in the future, the time will come when they go soft, they will have soft footwear, they will sleep on soft bedding, have soft pillows, they will become fair with soft feet, and hands, skin…

T: Get up after the sun comes up…

N: Yeah, yeah, lazy in getting up. And then, they’ll be overwhelmed by that other kingdom. And then he gave the same comparison to a monk. Monk who sleeps on a wooden pillow, on a hard surface, Māra will have a much harder time finding access in him. A monk who wears very comfortable robes, lives in a comfortable environment, with abundance of food, abundance of comfort, abundance of mattresses, abundance of pillows, abundance of heat, abundance of dry weather, abundance of very very nice things, that are not sensual for layman’s terms, they are just comfortable. You know, sleeping on a pillow is not like raging sensuality, yet because of that, you are liable to raging sensuality. Because the comfort is just a subtle way, as I said, even, the pleasure of curiosity, unless you abandon the value of pleasant, on the level of mind, even that’s sensual.

T: In the domain of sensuality.

N: Yeah yeah, it’s fully within the domain of sensuality.

T: You’re still liable, prey to, sensuality.

N: You are liable, you are liable, yeah.

T: You’re in its feeding grounds. It’s hunting you.

N: So then if the monk that does expose himself to discomfort, not, you know, you don’t need to be stabbing yourself and cutting yourself and torturing yourself, just don’t make all the excess effort towards the comfort, and then you’ll be fine.

T: So valuing pleasure, again, is the entry point into being hunted by sensuality.

N: In a way yes, but not ‘entry point’ as if you were outside and then somehow you make a choice. You are already within it. So, valuing the pleasure is a framework. It’s basically your existence, is already within the value of pleasure. That’s why the kāmabhāva, the being of sensuality, is abandoned.

T: And that’s why it’s so difficult to give up, because that is you.

N: Exactly, your intentions are already the result of that, of that value. Of that lack of perspective. So you need to kind of undo it from the inside. While you’re affected by it, you need to find a way out of it. But it is possible, if you start looking at the right things. Things that the Buddha tells you you should look at. Or what we’ve been saying for the last hour or so. So the point is, you recognise you value pleasure and that is the framework for any experience of pleasant or unpleasant. Which means, through that framework, pleasure will be craved for more. Through that framework, pain will be craved for less. Through that framework, neutral feeling will be basically ignored. And if you abandon that framework, neutral feeling will not be ignored and will be pleasant, and you will not be trying to get rid of the pain, and you will not seek the pleasure. So then, pleasure will arise, in pleasant there will just be the pleasant, in unpleasant there will just be unpleasant, in neutral there will just be neutral.

T: There’s no seeking, trying to get away, there’s no suffering.

N: Yeah, the discrepancy of seeking… see seeking is already a discrepancy. What you have, and what you seek. That’s created by that perpetual maintenance and feeding of, the current, present, here and now, value of pleasure. And that’s what the Buddha meant ‘oh, are there things in me right here right now on account of which future sense desire can manifest?’ As in, is this framework still maintained by me? Am I still valuing the pleasure, however implicitly? And if you see it, by seeing it, you can actually abandon it. ‘Oh, let me devalue it, because it’s not valuable. Let me regard it, just for amusement’s sake, the value of pleasure, let me regard it as dangerous, perilous, painful, resulting in charnel grounds being filled.’ And then, guess what, it is that. And because you’ve been valuing it how it actually is, you get to see it for what it actually is. So initially you took it on faith, that the value of pleasant is very, very dangerous. But if you start applying it, you get to see it, because it actually, factually is so very dangerous. If it weren’t so, the Buddha wouldn’t have said you should abandon it for your own welfare.