Epicureans analysed the nature of pleasure, to produce arguments that would help in the therapy of desire.
They distinguished between two kinds of pleasure: ‘kinetic’ and ‘katastematic’.
Kinetic pleasures are those we experience when actively doing something to avoid pain and gain pleasure, such as eating, drinking, having sex.
Katastematic pleasure is that stable, constitutional pleasure or sense of well-being that comes from being free of bodily pain and aware of one’s own existence.
Based on the fundamental recognition that pleasure alone is good, Epicureans therefore reasoned that we should train ourselves to identify the katastematic pleasure that is constant and reliable, while practicing the observation of the changing nature of kinetic pleasure, which turns to pain when satiated.
The therapy of desire that follows this analysis of pleasure distinguishes between desires which are natural and necessary (like those for food and water), desires which are natural and unnecessary (like those for luxury foods) and desires which are groundless (like those for wealth and fame).
To be truly happy, which is our human good, is to learn to rest in the stable katastematic pleasure that becomes possible when one’s desires are limited to those easy to acquire, simple natural pleasures such as nourishing food and good friendship.
Source: Philosophy and Buddhism as Ways of Life
To what extent can we equate right stillness (i.e. jhana) of the Buddhist path with the role of Epicureans’ Katastematic pleasure?