Beyond the Freud's Pleasure Principle:The Indian Perspective to Pleasure

The present paper focuses on the comparative perspective of the concept of pleasure as described by Sigmund Freud founder of Psychoanalysis and the Indian view. The Psychoanalytic theorists suggest that the reduction of tension by the satisfaction of needs leads to happiness or Pleasure. It is theorized that happiness is because of achievement of goal which leads to satisfaction, so satisfaction is happiness. Humans are pleasure seeking creatures; Freud called this need for satisfaction, the Pleasure Principle which can be defined as the desire for immediate gratification of needs with no regard for consequences. The nature of pleasure as discussed in Indian literature maintains similarity and contrast with the psychoanalytic view. Madhusudana maintains that pleasure and pain are modes of mind (Antahkarnavrtti). Prasastapada (400 A.D.) defines pleasure as an agreeable feeling, pleasure arises from the conjunction of the mind with the self. It brings about an experience of agreeable feelings, inclines the self in its favor and produces its satisfaction .There is no pleasure apart from self it is a quality of the self, it is a subjective feeling and is affected by desirable objects. Vardhamana (1250 A.D.). Pleasureis a subjective experience the same object produces pleasure in one person may not in the other person. It is ultimate end of all our prudential action it is not a means to some other end. According to Samakhya and the Yoga , Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas produce pleasure ,pain and dejection respectively. They are the constituents of the mind . Pleasure is delight it is a mode of mind, and not a quality of the self and a function of sattva.