The Dhammapada's take on Love and Lust.

TanukisBeard

Upon reading some sutras from the Dhammapada, I came across the following. Again, I'm a newbie, so I may be a little off with the Buddhist terms. However here is the word for word line or sutra:

27. Follow not after vanity, nor after the enjoyment of love and lust. He who is earnest and meditative obtains ample joy.

I would like to have your sincere thought on this. Personally, I am not too sure. I was already aware of the powers of lust and its ability to sway one from reaching concentration, furthermore, I pictured Lust as the main synonym to Māra.
On the other hand, love is something more serene. It can lead one to wonders, but if a scientific approach is taken, surely love is some form of lust (in the animal kingdom). Then again, what about family love, friendly love, pet love, etc?

OneLifeForm

Following the "enjoyment" of any kind of "love" would be problematic.

That would be attachment, grasping at some concept.. "love".. some feeling.

Instead, just being open in the moment love and such can naturally arise. It isn't something that is followed after or squeezed out it is organic, natural, obsession free.

TanukisBeard

Yet how would that be considered love? You define it as; appreciation. Love to me, is selfish and obsessive; yet beautiful in its own way. Lust on the other hand can seem a little more on the primitive side; the compulsive need of dopamine.

The Dhammapada's take on love, seems as that of an ascetic.
I am trying to practice zazen, I won't eagerly seek love, but once it reaches me, I will hold on to it, like a kid hording candy.

Now will my take on love fail my progress with zazen?

lamaramadingdong

Love of and for another is much different that love of and for yourself.

Beej

@TanukisBeard- plabonga, plabonga, plabonga?

TanukisBeard

Love of and for another is much different that love of and for yourself.

I guess I've never experienced that kind of love.
Usually, when I love someone, I benefit from loving that person, I feel good; hence the selfishness.
I can see altruism through symbolism, just not in real life. But again, maybe this beginner; given time and meditation can learn. Right?

Beej

@ TanukisBeard -i meant no disrespect with my nonsensical statement... I thought maybe your screen name was in reference to a Tom Robbin's character in the book Villa Incognito.

TanukisBeard

@ TanukisBeard -i meant no disrespect with my nonsensical statement... I thought maybe your screen name was in reference to a Tom Robbin's character in the book Villa Incognito.

I had never taken offense, but had not replied due to the confusion.
As for my screen name; Tanuki is Japanese for raccoon, a term I learned from the One Piece series.

Beej

It sure is- i highly suggest the book that i mentioned, as well as the thread titled 'Relationship Question', as that may pertain in some part to the original question you asked, here.

Beej

allthough the book's take on relationships may offer little to no help on the matter at hand.

federica

Upon reading some sutras from the Dhammapada,
...

Firstly, the Dhammapada is part of the Tripitaka and was produced in Pali, which would make it a source of /theravsdan literature... so the word would be 'sutta' not 'sutra' which generally refers to Mahayana texts....

Secondly, it is important to know which translation you are referring to as some are, shall we say, *ahem!* more reliable than others.....

this is the same verse as it appears in Accesstoinsight...An extremely reliable and far more accurate source of information....

27. Do not give way to heedlessness. Do not indulge in sensual pleasures. Only the heedful and meditative attain great happiness.

Clearly, the two are at variance....

Ficus_religiosa

Also, to love and to make love is very different.. However, both kinds of love is suffering and clinging. Harsh as it may be, the arahant does not love - he/she has gone beyond such feelings.

(I just came to think, that in a middle-way perspective, love and hate are the poles with compassion in between)

OneLifeForm

When I underlined "following" it was supposed to indicate seeking.

Like instead of my just being pleasant in the present, happy just being, I am following after some hopes for "love" and it is taking me out of this present moment and I am suffering as a result.. therefore do not follow after such things..

that is the way I see it at least.

Songhill

TanukisBeard:

On the other hand, love is something more serene. It can lead one to wonders, but if a scientific approach is taken, surely love is some form of lust (in the animal kingdom). Then again, what about family love, friendly love, pet love, etc?

The translation is good enough, but the main term I think you're interested in is, kāmarati-santhavaṃ, lit., sensual-pleasure (kama) + sexual union (rati)-acquaintance (more at an intimate bond with).

Another trans. is Radhakrishnan's.

Give not yourselves over to sloth or to the intimacy with lust and sensual pleasures. He who meditates (jhâna) with earnestness attains great joy (sukham).

My translation:

Don't pursue carelessness or intimacy with pleasures and lust.
The sincere practitioner of meditation obtains much felicity.

TanukisBeard

Both, federica's and Songhill's translations from alternate sources have changed the initial "sutta". Thank you for those; it changed the whole meaning. If you're wondering about my version; it was The Dhammapada followed by Herman Hesse's Siddhartha. Published by "A New Directions Book".

The actual instance of true love to me is virtuous; which incited the debate in the first place.