The thought in the comment from the Dalai Lama, is echoed in the words of Paramahansa Yogananda:

“Thus we see that though the true aim of mankind is the avoidance of pain and the attainment of Bliss, yet owing to a fatal error man, through trying to avoid pain, pursues a deluded something named pleasure, mistaking it for Bliss. That the attainment of Bliss and not pleasure is the universal and highest necessity is indirectly proved by the fact that man is never satisfied with one object of pleasure…..And so he is constantly falling into pain, even though he wishes to avoid it by the adoption of what he deems proper means. Yet an unknown and unsatisfied craving seems ever to remain in his heart.”

Regarding delayed gratification. Perhaps the words in the previous comment were not written clearly (one certainly wasn’t ;^). Of course there can be no wisdom in delayed gratification if it thought of as an end in itself. In such a case, it is just a formalized ritual consisting of bouts of repression. Afterwards the desire is just as likely to be even stronger as a result of the delay.

The intention is not merely to pretend to be good by denial.
The thought is this. If that which prevents gnosis is the ego’s false image that we are separate and disconnected from the universe, then we enhance the experience of separation by clinging to that false image.

It that is taken as true, then is it not worthwhile to observe and examine and alter the ego’s influence? And, will we not discover that the ego desires things and conditions which provide it with the sense of security, affirmation and belonging — relative to the manifest world? (Is it not from the ego’s selfish point of view that selfish actions arise?)

If that is found to be the case, then Self-imposed delay of gratification can be viewed as a tool of exerting control over the ego — prior to the work of reprogramming (by replacing the false views through study, introspection and meditation).

Hopefully, this clarifies the previous comment.

Namaste

I wonder though: is there any true wisdom in delaying gratification – or is true wisdom knowing that gratification itself won’t make you happy either? I’m reminded of a video with the Dalai Lama I saw recently. He reminded us that in the west we seem to go from desire to desire: always wanting MORE. That’s not likely to bring permanent happiness, is it?

As I view it, repression of desires is not freedom, it is actually a perversely inverted enslavement to the desire. I think (in some cases) renunciation could lead to simple repression. That is, when the renunciation becomes an unconscious activity (perhaps through formalized ritual).

On the other hand, renunciation can also be a method to assert a temporary control over the egoic desires.

The root, from this mind, is the degree of conscious intention. Alteration is a willful process of freeing the inner self from the demands of the ego (which conceives of itself as a separate being). A first step in that process is that willful control. Not so much to deny the physical world or the desires, nor to live in an artificial intermediate state, such as the poverty the article mentioned. Rather, to consciously soften the ego over time, with the intention of coming to actually perceive that those desires are for things of a transient nature, whereas our real nature is eternal.

Thus, from the eyes, real renunciation and self-control is ultimately a process of observing and assigning more appropriate values to experiences.

Traditionally the main religions have advocated renunciation in one form or another. Whether it’s the fasting for Lent or the day time fast in Ramadan – lay people have been stimulated to restrain their appetites at one time in the year….