Desire vs Craving

betaboy

Buddha said craving (or thirst) is the cause of suffering, not desire. This distinction is important because, otherwise, we may end up shunning everything.

In this world, there are certain things we have to desire (there is no choice); it is the result of having a body. I can't eliminate thirst or hunger. And so on. So desires seem to be normal in that they are part of who we are. It is in our nature to desire good food, shelter, etc.

So my point is, We simply have to make sure desire doesn't become some sort of craving or obsession. But unfortunately, I see people shunning desire itself - which is impossible to do anyway. Giving up desire is like giving up humanity. We can only give up craving - because that is a learned behavior. Desire is not. It is part of who we are.

My conclusion is that we can have healthy desires without becoming obsessed. Feel free to disagree.

Jeffrey

Why not? Why not give up desire? You think it is impossible?

Desire is just a thought. We can give it up. Really. (I say as I drink a glass of wine) haha.

'healthy' desire is also a thought. But it is also kinda true.

Kitchen sink level and also a level to plan life.

Jeffrey

Whatever you do don't think that you are going on untrod territory. There are plenty of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who have been exactly and precisely in the same shoe holes that you are in.

So smile.

Bodhisattvas have all been where you are. Even if your horniest most effed up fantasy.

taiyaki

I agree. We need to have a correct relationship to desires. We have to be dead honest with what we desire and we actually want it. That means its not a desire that someone has given us or a desire out of some fear.

We have to really ask what we want out of this short life. What do we want?

Even the desire to end all desires is a desire. Yet that is the Buddhist praxis.

wangchuey

We have to be careful with desire because its an issue regarding the "self". Of course there are healthy and unhealthy desires, we have to decide which desires to fulfill and which to leave be. Which desires are from the conventional self and which is safe.

Kundo

betaboy said:

Feel free to disagree.

So we can be told again how wrong we are?

Jeffrey

dhammachick said:

betaboy said:

Feel free to disagree.

So we can be told again how wrong we are?

Either someone pulls the rug out from under us or life does

Kundo

Jeffrey said:

Either someone pulls the rug out from under us or life does

I am a skilled rug surfer these days. I just need to work on my bullshit tolerance

how

@betaboy

Desires need not lead to clinging but our own ego/identity largely depends on the matchmaking of those two. Indulging a desire without clinging arising is like betting against the house. Every so often you may have some winning pleasure in the play but the house only exists because of the consistency by which we lose at this game.

While you can have desires without them evolving into craving, describing desires as healthy sounds like an obfuscation of how often they will result in suffering.

betaboy

how said:

@betaboy

Desires need not lead to clinging but our own ego/identity largely depends on the matchmaking of those two. Indulging a desire without clinging arising is like betting against the house. Every so often you may have some winning pleasure in the play but the house only exists because of the consistency by which we lose at this game.

While you can have desires without them evolving into craving, describing desires as healthy sounds like an obfuscation of how often they will result in suffering.

I meant desires which are inevitable .... like desire for good food, clean clothes, etc. Also I enjoyed some fine wine at a meeting a week ago ... enjoyed the taste, every bit of it. But I am not craving it since last week. I don't crave it now either. So this is the balance I am talking about. I am not talking about addiction - I am talking about desiring simple things to enjoy.

Jason

betaboy said:

Buddha said craving (or thirst) is the cause of suffering, not desire. This distinction is important because, otherwise, we may end up shunning everything.

In this world, there are certain things we have to desire (there is no choice); it is the result of having a body. I can't eliminate thirst or hunger. And so on. So desires seem to be normal in that they are part of who we are. It is in our nature to desire good food, shelter, etc.

So my point is, We simply have to make sure desire doesn't become some sort of craving or obsession. But unfortunately, I see people shunning desire itself - which is impossible to do anyway. Giving up desire is like giving up humanity. We can only give up craving - because that is a learned behavior. Desire is not. It is part of who we are.

My conclusion is that we can have healthy desires without becoming obsessed. Feel free to disagree.

As I've mentioned before, I definitely thinks it's important to make a distinction between desire and craving, which, from a Buddhist point of view, are actually two different but closely related aspects of our psychology. Desire (chandha) is a neutral term, and one generally has to have the desire to achieve a goal in order to achieve it, even nibbana (SN 51.15); whereas the Pali word for craving, tahna (literally 'thirst'), is something that's directly tied to suffering.

The second noble truth states that the origination of suffering is "the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming" (SN 56.11). As Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains in Wings to Awakening:

Craving for sensuality, here, means the desire for sensual objects. Craving for becoming means the desire for the formation of states or realms of being that are not currently happening, while craving for non-becoming means the desire for the destruction or halting of any that are. "Passion and delight," here, is apparently a synonym for the "desire and passion" for the five aggregates that constitutes clinging/sustenance [III/H/ii].

It's there, latent in the mind, waiting to exert its influence through mental fabrications by directing or at the very least encouraging the mind to feed upon sensory experiences via the five clinging-aggregates in an unhealthy way (e.g., see SN 12.52). In this, I think it's distinct from biological wants or needs.

When we're hungry, for example, our mind has a tendency to attach itself to the desire for food and create an identity around it, which can then create suffering in a number of ways, e.g., if we don't get what we want; if it doesn't live up to our expectations that we create around the attainment of our goal; if, in our greed, we eat too much and feel sick and lament our physical discomfort; etc. Craving, then, isn't simply our desire to or for X; it's the beginning of a mental chain of events that turns our desires for things into the potential for suffering.

Desire, on the other hand, can be skillful (kusala) or unskillful (akusala) depending on the context. The desire for happiness, especially long-term welfare and happiness, is actually an important part of the Buddhist path. Moreover, desire is listed as one of the four bases of power (iddhipada), which themselves are included in the seven sets of qualities that lead to the end of suffering (MN 103). The four qualities listed in the bases of power are desire, persistence, intent and discrimination. In Wings to Awakening, Thanissaro Bhikkhu points to this passage:

There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion, thinking, 'This desire of mine will be neither overly sluggish nor overly active, neither inwardly restricted nor outwardly scattered.' (Similarly with concentration founded on persistence, intent, and discrimination.)

He goes on to explain that, "This passage shows that the problem lies not in the desire, effort, intent or discrimination, but in the fact that these qualities can be unskillfully applied or improperly tuned to their task." If we take a look at the exchange between Ananda and the brahmin Unnabha in SN 51.15, for example, we can see that the attainment of the goal is indeed achieved through desire, even though paradoxically, the goal is said to be the abandoning of desire. That's because at the end of the path desire, as well as the other three bases of power, subside on their own. As Ananda explains at the end of SN 51.15:

He earlier had the desire for the attainment of arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding desire subsided. He earlier had aroused energy for the attainment of arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding energy subsided. He earlier had made up his mind to attain arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding resolution subsided. He earlier had made an investigation for the attainment of arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding investigation subsided. (Bodhi)

So, in essence, desire can be beneficial in certain contexts, and one shouldn't be worried about the desire to do skillful things. Craving, on the other hand, is something that, by its very nature, conditions suffering through the way it encourages the mind to feed upon sensory experiences and either causes it to intensely cling to pleasant experiences or violently push away unpleasant ones. It may have helped us at some point in our evolution as a species, but now it tends to do more harm than good.