Caucasian skin is peachy and sandy (due to having no pigmentation) while the great man's body in nibbana is, according to the 32 perfections of a great man , "his skin is the color of gold". White skin requires some pigmentation. Currently my journey with white skin represents the Trix rabbit's (1994 commercial) attempt to take his own cereal. All he gets is "silly rabbit Trix are for kids!" And the fact that some saints may have received such a miracle to change their skin color forever makes the pain that much more serious. And what should I do regarding the psychologist? I am visiting one to drain my emotions of this, and that might make my eternity as a yellow man all that much more permanent!

The sutta DN 22 offers an extended description of craving, as follows: > "And where does this craving, when arising, arise? And where, when > dwelling, does it dwell? Whatever seems endearing and agreeable in > terms of the world: that is where this craving, when arising, arises. > That is where, when dwelling, it dwells. "And what seems endearing and agreeable in terms of the world? > > The eye seems endearing and agreeable in terms of the world. That is where > this craving, when arising, arises. That is where, when dwelling, it > dwells. > > "The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect... > > "Forms... Sounds... Smells... Tastes... Tactile sensations... Ideas... > > "Eye-consciousness... Ear-consciousness... Nose-consciousness... > Tongue-consciousness... Body-consciousness... > Intellect-consciousness... > > "Eye-contact... Ear-contact... Nose-contact... Tongue-contact... > Body-contact... Intellect-contact... > > "Feeling born of eye-contact... Feeling born of ear-contact... Feeling > born of nose-contact... Feeling born of tongue-contact... Feeling born > of body-contact... Feeling born of intellect-contact... > > "Perception of forms... Perception of sounds... Perception of > smells... Perception of tastes... Perception of tactile sensations... > Perception of ideas... > > "Intention for forms... Intention for sounds... Intention for > smells... Intention for tastes... Intention for tactile sensations... > Intention for ideas... > > "Craving for forms... Craving for sounds... Craving for smells... > Craving for tastes... Craving for tactile sensations... Craving for > ideas... > > "Thought directed at forms... Thought directed at sounds... Thought > directed at smells... Thought directed at tastes... Thought directed > at tactile sensations... Thought directed at ideas... > > "Evaluation of forms... Evaluation of sounds... Evaluation of > smells... Evaluation of tastes... Evaluation of tactile sensations... > Evaluation of ideas seems endearing and agreeable in terms of the > world. > > That is where this craving, when arising, arises. That is where, when > dwelling, it dwells. > > DN 22 In SN 44.9, there is a discussion with the chronically confused & bewildered wanderer Vaccagotta (more nuancedly translated by Thanissaro and Bhikkhu Bodhi below) as follows: > “Yasmiñca pana, bho gotama, samaye imañca kāyaṁ nikkhipati, satto ca aññataraṁ kāyaṁ anupapanno hoti, imassa pana bhavaṁ gotamo kiṁ upādānasmiṁ paññāpetī”ti? > > “Yasmiṁ kho, vaccha, samaye imañca kāyaṁ nikkhipati, satto ca aññataraṁ kāyaṁ anupapanno hoti, tamahaṁ taṇhūpādānaṁ vadāmi. Taṇhā hissa, vaccha, tasmiṁ samaye upādānaṁ hotī”ti. > > "And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and is not yet > reborn in another body, what do you designate as its sustenance then?" > > "Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time." > > [Thanissaro](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.009.than.html) > > > Bhikkhu Bodhi In SN 44.9, what thing/phenomena exactly is sustained by craving?

I read the following on the internet: > I came from a Christianity ethical background so i originally thought > sexual desire and masturbation was bad, but in reality all that is > "bad" is the desire itself, which could be desire for sex, or desire > for chocolate cake. It is the same thing "kama-tanha" As for alcohol, > same thing, kama-tanha. Though I want to point out the story of > sarakani SN55.24 explaining that even what is seen to most buddhists > as a true downfall, alcohol. It itself is not inherently bad/evil etc. > Kama-tanha is the problem, not the pleasure we can experience from > sex, booze or chocolate cake! Can sensual pleasure be divorced from craving? What do the Pali Suttas say about this?

I was wondering if for example an obsession or craving that someone has for attaining Nirvana would be considered something unwholesome. On one hand it seems to me like it would, since that person would be reinforcing the habit of craving, but on the other hand how else could they actually achieve the goal? Like for example how could they decide to become a monk and devote themselves fully to the practice etc. I don't think the Buddha would have left his palace if he wasn't motivated by *some* sort of craving, at least in the beginning.

During the withdrawal period of a non substance addiction (around 1 to 3 weeks), if someone genuinely wants to leave, there is an inner voice which fears missing out and an insecure empty feeling, which craves for that addictive habit. This is due to the person's previous dependence on that addictive habit. This voice gets stronger when the person is not engaged in tasks, for example, sleep, travelling etc. Does Buddhism offer any solution to these withdrawal pangs, from looking for a fix from that addictive habit? Note, this wanting for a fix is temporary, but if not avoided then the person will feel miserable, empty, insecure and this will serve as an excuse to move to the wrong habit. ***So, does Buddhism provide an easy instant and mindful way to change perspective, on such temporary feeling in the withdrawal period? A way to not be deluded by such thoughts and maintain abstinence.***

Can one elaborate please more on this quote: > "In one who keeps focusing on the allure of clingable phenomena (or: phenomena that offer sustenance = the five aggregates), craving develops. > > "Now, in one who keeps focusing on the drawbacks of clingable phenomena, craving ceases." Upādāna Sutta SN 12.52 (S ii 84) How is this exactly done?

How does craving (taṇhā) manifest with respect to neutral feelings? In Dependent Origination (or dependent co-arising, however you'd like to call it), it is said that Craving (taṇhā) follows on the heels of Feeling (vedanā). Feeling, in general, is of 3 main types: pleasant, unpleasant, neutral. I do see how craving/aversion manifests with respect to both pleasant and unpleasant feeling. But how does it relate to neutral feeling? How is it that I either lust after or try to avoid something that is truly neutral?

Is there such a thing as objectification in Buddhism? Namely, objectification here means treating someone else as an object, or for their appearance. However, it means also many other things, so I'll just leave the question open. Hence: **What does Buddhism say about objectification?**

I am speaking of a state of mild but persistent agitation in which one notices the arising of the habit of (1) sorting through the current collection of unresolved discomforts with the intention of picking one to latch onto, (2) orienting oneself towards the desired sensory experience and (3) re-entering the cycle of greed, hatred and delusion with respect to that desired sensory experience BUT chooses not to re-enter the cycle. I am speaking of a very unusual state in which the cycle of samsara is not entered but neither has the agitation to re-enter it ceased. Kind of like “craving without a target”. Kind of like an inner conflict between (1) a part which wants to relieve the agitation by latching onto a target for craving and (2) a part which wants to find a more skillful means of extinguishing the agitation. Kind of like being in a hinterland between suffering and the end of suffering. I have a vague intuition this state *might* be related to “stream entry” but I am not certain about that. Does this sound similar to anything the Buddha spoke about?

This answer stated that: > Even if you sit in the dark and do nothing, you can still be creating > bad Kamma. It depends on whether you have Samma Sati or not. Whatever > you do can create bad Karma as long as your thoughts are defiled with > craving, aversion and ignorance. So ALL thoughts that are defiled with craving, aversion and ignorance (lobha, dosa, moha) create bad karma? So does it mean when we want something (for example, I want to go to X country for my next vacation), does that thought creates bad karma because such thought is rooted in lobha (craving)?

I have run into a mental trap about desire on the Buddhist path. I know desire is good if it is wholesome, ie say desire for enlightenment and etc. Yet what about a desire for the mastery of a skill such as being a musician or artist, and what about wanting in part that mastery for something as a career? The desire to make a enjoyable living seems ok but is it at odds especially if you want it because there is an aversion to other work that one finds disheartening and unfulfilling? Thank you.

There are two suttas, SN 46.26 about destruction of craving and SN 46.27 about the cessation of craving. I was thinking that destruction of craving is same as cessation of craving but the pali word for each of them is different(destruction of craving - taṇhakkhayāya ;cessation of craving -taṇhānirodhāya) . However I am not clear what difference does it make when we say cessation of craving instead of destruction of craving? In both the cases there should be cessation of suffering. My question is : What is the difference between destruction of craving and cessation of craving?

I've noticed in myself a tendency to pursue situations that cause a certain stress, in a somewhat compulsive way. This is a bit like people who are drawn to people who are bad for them. I have heard Thich Nhat Hanh saying teens drawn to spending all their time on computers feel empty inside. How are such "addictions" conceptualized in Buddhism? In other words, what would be the cause and nature of a behaviour that is bad for one, that depends on a kind of meaninglessness and self-sabotage? Lastly, what would remedy such internal afflictions? Are they forms of a kind of avoidance of suffering?

## As Observer Say I observe **systems** around me --- economics of suffering, arising of crime, even the [Dependent Origination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratītyasamutpāda) --- without craving to maintain, defend, modify, control or destroy the systems. I do have an **inquisitive** mind that intends (not craves) to observe, trace through and understand the systems. I'm a studious person. Am I free of craving? ## As Participant Say I act to reduce suffering according to my understanding of the above-mentioned systems. Can I say I **don't crave but do intend** to better the lives of my wards? That may sound strange, so let me explain my community service. The wards in my community service include elderly, criminals, intoxication substance users, and more. I explain the category of "elderly" because an irony within is more illustrative than straightforward categories like "criminals". Most elderly folks end up alone because of bad choices made when younger. Whether they were bad parents, abusive personalities, or sometimes merely (obsessively?) hardworking due to economic hardship, **their choices were made, and the various systems in life continue to process those choices**. The point of what we do in community service, shocking to many, is that **we don't aim to solve every problem**. We **merely reduce suffering**, and only in rare cases where opportunities present do we **reduce suffering to the point of its elimination**. Perhaps a quick detour into "*Harm Reduction*" can make this illustration more concrete. ## Harm Reduction vs Positive Alternative The [Harm Reduction Model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harm_reduction) could be applied to our work in community service, since we don't turn down anyone who is **not yet ready to take on solutions in life**. At the same time, our country's treasury is so well-managed that the country builds numerous "**Positive Alternatives**" (education, gainful livelihood, etc). (There is no such term as "*Positive Alternatives Model*", sorry for not giving you something to read on this!) It is easily observed that the *Harm Reduction Model* takes a whole lot less resources than the *Positive Alternatives Model*. It is a lot cheaper to distribute *clean needles to drug addicts* than it is to build *entire schools to facilitate gainful employment*. But I don't argue for one model versus the other; it all depends on how much resources we have on hand. Our specific work includes such "*harm reduction*" techniques as provision for social needs (regular visits, chats, counseling), provision for basic physical needs (rations), and so on. ## As Policy Maker The tricky part of all this **non-craving** is how policy makers are often admonished for spending on **lost causes**. Granted, a lot of community service work draws from volunteerism, so spending isn't that big an issue. Unfortunately, even the resource that is volunteerism is also finite (like any other resource in this material plane). Without going into academic discussions on how **Harm Reduction** gives respite from suffering such that there is a window of calm for rational behavior and real solutions, it is clear that **Harm Reduction** reduces (if not removes) suffering. ## Key questions Is a **non-discriminatory intention to alleviate suffering** an unwise action? (We do detain people with dangerous behavior, but we still spend effort and resources to serve even the most hardcore criminals.) (Suffering is indeed a good teacher, but I don't believe it is my duty to mete out suffering. The real world already has a system that dishes out suffering.) Can the intention to alleviate suffering be **volitional without craving**? It's actually difficult to explain why I even bother to alleviate suffering, rather than amass pleasure for myself. The closest I can explain is a Chinese proverb: 物尽其用, 人尽其才. Which brings me to the next key question. Is it wrong to **intend to build up our own faculties without craving to**? Will such intention to amass strength and capabilities be seen as attachment? The above questions come about because of my longstanding (internal?) debate between "*sitting all day long in meditative sessions*" and "*going out to do stuff*". Many temples I visit have large TV screens, in front of which many monks... well... sit in "meditative sessions" all day long; popular media plays on these TV screens. Even long-drawn proper lectures don't interest me (consider how speed reading has higher throughput than video for knowledge transfer). Because of my natural tendency towards "*love and service*", I've been accused of clinging and craving.

From craving, there arises clinging, then from clinging, there arises existence or becoming, and then from becoming, we get the birth of the self-identity or self-habit. But how does craving really cause self-identity or self-habit? How are they connected? Does self-identity or self-habit arise out of a collection of likes and dislikes? How is that so?

The sentences I want to check with you are: 1. Reducing suffering (or eliminating it) is the main goal. 2. The main reason we keep suffering is desire and aversion. 3. We can experience craving to any of the five aggregates (e.g. thoughts) and also to the situation in general (e.g. become a teacher or become enlightened). 4. We have tools to reduce desire and aversion (or promote this reduction in others). E.g. not-self, impermanence and dukkha. Jhana. 5. This tools (3 characteristics, jhana, etc.) are truthful (they are not white lies). 6. This tools lead to a "desinterest" (equanimity) that gives freedom. For example, by seeing pain as impermanent (as lasting briefly or nothing) then there is "desinterest" in it (equanimity to it), and as such there is a freedom to either experience it or not without suffering it. 7. Ultimately it's best to be equanimous even to becoming enlightened (a case of bhava-tanha?), the tools ("the raft" that is abandoned after crossing the river), no-thoughts (aversion to thoughts?), etc. That's it, feel free to make little corrections or flat out tell me there are big mistakes there. Thanks.

1. How do I deal with food cravings or craving in general? According to the four efforts I should replace craving with the disadvantages. Can loving-kindness also work? I feel like concentrating on impermanence and on the disadvantages, in the midst of an emotion, works not as effective. I guess one needs to strengthen one's conviction in both? 2. I read the Buddha saying about guarding the senses -- but I doubt that the Buddha meant not looking, not hearing (etc) at things. While it can be advantageous, I think perceiving them differently is much more important. Can someone answer what "sense-guarding" means, or "not grasping at the beautiful", and how do I do it?

How should I watch sensations in Vipassana? Should I watch from head to toe and then toe to head? Please explain things step by step as I'm new to Vipassana. Thanks in advance!

I noticed that I usually think in a very abstract manner, without images, just words and ideas. When I try intentionally to think visually, only then does lustful or worry-related images pop up. And, only then can I seemingly redirect my attention from these images. **If a person thinks very abstractly, is it possible that cravings or worries don't arise in consciousness? What is going on here?**

After a deep contemplation of why I couldn't move on from a relationship I found that it was because I am not getting admiration from anyone else. Actually, in past she admired me when no one else did. I was in great need of admiration and she showed me that just then. She filled a hole in me that time, made me feel good about myself. Now that we are not together, I am depressed, demotivated and not a man anymore. I am craving that admiration so much. I do not have any contact with any other girl in my life. I also realised why she admired me. But now I'd be foolish to seek the same admiration from someone else while I am not having those qualities that make people admire me anymore. Also she was my first love and soon I had developed sexual interest in her. So, admiration + first love + sexual interest made me feel on top of the world. I was teen back then. Now I can't move on. What do i do?