Does the rupa khandhas in the five aggregates is referring to as materiality ?

[sentinel]

Greetings ,

What is your view on the meaning of rupa khandhas in the five aggregates ? What does it mean ?

Thanks .

[santa100]

See Vism. XIV.34-80 for a very thorough explanation of RupaKhandha.

[SamKR]

Does the rupa khandhas in the five aggregates is referring to as materiality?

No, not in the sense of modern meaning: physical material or matter, which never appears as form in direct world except as a thought.

What is your view on the meaning of rupa khandhas in the five aggregates ? What does it mean ?

In my understanding, Rupa khanda is a more or less consistent collection or heap (a concept) of all rupa. And, rupa means direct shapes or forms which appear in the presence of nama (names causing discretization of things).

[DooDoot]

The four great elements and the material form derived from the four great elements — these are called materiality.

SN 12.2; MN 9

And why do you call it 'form'? Because it is afflicted, thus it is called 'form.' Afflicted with what? With cold & heat & hunger & thirst, with the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles. Because it is afflicted, it is called form.

SN 22.79

Rāhula, the interior earth element is said to be anything hard, solid, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This includes head hair, body hair, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, diaphragm, spleen, lungs, intestines, mesentery, undigested food, feces, or anything else hard, solid, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This is called the interior earth element. The interior earth element and the exterior earth element are just the earth element.

And what is the water element? The water element may be interior or exterior. And what is the interior water element? Anything that’s water, watery, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This includes bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, grease, saliva, snot, synovial fluid, urine, or anything else that’s water, watery, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This is called the interior water element. The interior water element and the exterior water element are just the water element.

And what is the fire element? The fire element may be interior or exterior. And what is the interior fire element? Anything that’s fire, fiery, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This includes that which warms, that which ages, that which heats you up when feverish, that which properly digests food and drink, or anything else that’s fire, fiery, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This is called the interior fire element. The interior fire element and the exterior fire element are just the fire element.

And what is the air element? The air element may be interior or exterior. And what is the interior air element? Anything that’s wind, windy, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This includes winds that go up or down, winds in the belly or the bowels, winds that flow through the limbs, in-breaths and out-breaths, or anything else that’s air, airy, and organic that’s internal, pertaining to an individual. This is called the interior air element. The interior air element and the exterior air element are just the air element.

MN 62

It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

SN 12.61

[sentinel]

Does the rupa khandhas in the five aggregates is referring to as materiality?

No, not in the sense of modern meaning: physical material or matter, which never appears as form in direct world except as a thought.

What is your view on the meaning of rupa khandhas in the five aggregates ? What does it mean ?

In my understanding, Rupa khanda is a more or less consistent collection or heap (a concept) of all rupa. And, rupa means direct shapes or forms which appear in the presence of nama (names causing discretization of things).

According to vism.

[THE MATERIALITY AGGREGATE]
{ 34. Herein, all kinds of states whatsoever that have the characteristic of “being
molested” (ruppana) by cold, etc., taken all together should be understood as the
materiality (rúpa) aggregate. }

However , your meaning is rupa khandhas are not meant to give an account of matter (four primary elements earth, water, fire and air) as constitutive of external reality . Not about materiality or physicality .

Your understanding is that the rupa khandhas are group of forms which appear to the mind ?
But, is it not what appeared in the mind is mind consciousness ? I mean in the context of five aggregates .

Do you think rupa of namarupa in paticasamuppada is something different from meaning of rupa khandhas in the five aggregates ?

Anyone care to explain ?

[SamKR]

However , your meaning is rupa khandhas are not meant to give an account of matter (four primary elements earth, water, fire and air) as constitutive of external reality . Not about materiality or physicality .

Correct, in my understanding, Rupa is not about physicality as understood in modern era.

Your understanding is that the rupa khandhas are group of forms which appear to the mind ?
But, is it not what appeared in the mind is mind consciousness ? I mean in the context of five aggregates .

I would not say Rupa appears to mind (I am not sure how you define mind). My understanding is that Rupa does not appear to anything, it just appears, or perhaps more accurately rupa is the appearance itself or form or shape. But due to ignorance it appears to appear out of some 'real' object and to some 'real' subject/person - both subject and object arise as just concepts.

Do you think rupa of namarupa in paticasamuppada is something different from meaning of rupa khandhas in the five aggregates ?

I think Rupa in both cases have same meaning - they are just different ways of classification.

[sentinel]

I would not say Rupa appears to mind (I am not sure how you define mind). My understanding is that Rupa does not appear to anything, it just appears, or perhaps more accurately rupa is the appearance itself or form or shape. But due to ignorance it appears to appear out of some 'real' object and to some 'real' subject/person - both subject and object arise as just concepts.

But , when you say due to ignorance it (the form) appear to the subject - a particular person not to an object (eg stone or tree) , because when you say " concept " this is pointing to that person . To summarise is your saying everything is but concept ?
Does the Buddha without ignorance , still retains this " concept " ?

[SamKR]

In direct actuality there are just appearances which appear and disappear (to no one). For example, the vision/shape/color/touch 'of the laptop' are the direct appearances (where as 'of the laptop' is an idea).

(Shapes and color do not exist independent of experiences. Actually, shapes/colors are the experiences.)

But due to sticky ignorance this direct actuality is totally ignored and then the stories based on thoughts, ideas, views, and concepts are believed to be the reality. For example, laptop is wrongly considered to be a 'really' existing object independent of appearances. Similarly, a person is wrongly assumed to be 'really' existing in order to experience any appearance.

The idea of a person or a subject (including body) has no actual referent that can be pinpointed in direct appearances or experiences. Similarly, the idea of physical objects (including atoms) has no actual referent that can be found in direct experiences.

All that is found directly is the direct appearances or experiences themselves. Beyond direct experiences nothing is ever found except as ideas (ideas themselves are direct appearances too but the story carried by those ideas may not be true).

[sentinel]

In direct actuality there are just appearances which appear and disappear (to no one). For example, the vision/shape/color/touch 'of the laptop' are the direct appearances (where as 'of the laptop' is an idea).

(Shapes and color do not exist independent of experiences. Actually, shapes/colors are the experiences.)

But due to sticky ignorance this direct actuality is totally ignored and then the stories based on thoughts, ideas, views, and concepts are believed to be the reality. For example, laptop is wrongly considered to be a 'really' existing object independent of appearances. Similarly, a person is wrongly assumed to be 'really' existing in order to experience any appearance.

The idea of a person or a subject (including body) has no actual referent that can be pinpointed in direct appearances or experiences. Similarly, the idea of physical objects (including atoms) has no actual referent that can be found in direct experiences.

All that is found directly is the direct appearances or experiences themselves. Beyond direct experiences nothing is ever found except as ideas (ideas themselves are direct appearances too but the story carried by those ideas may not be true).

Your view has similarity with Mahayana / Vajrayana one .
Anyway , thanks .

[Spiny Norman]

What is your view on the meaning of rupa khandhas in the five aggregates ? What does it mean ?

It is usually described in terms of the four great elements ( earth, water, wind and fire ), though what we actually experience is derived form.

[DooDoot]

Correct, in my understanding, Rupa is not about physicality as understood in modern era.

Sure. This is your understanding, as was posted twice. But how is your understanding related to Buddhism?

rupa is the appearance itself or form or shape.

So when people have major surgery such as coronary bi-passes or hysterectomy due to cancer, this is just "appearance"?

But due to ignorance it appears to appear out of some 'real' object and to some 'real' subject/person - both subject and object arise as just concepts.

This sounds like confusing 'rupa khandha' with 'sankara khandha'. To impute pesononhood onto rupa appears to be 'sankhara' rather than 'rupa'.

"And why do you call it 'form'? Because it is afflicted, thus it is called 'form.' Afflicted with what? With cold & heat & hunger & thirst, with the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles. Because it is afflicted, it is called form.

"And why do you call them 'fabrications'? Because they fabricate fabricated things, thus they are called 'fabrications.' What do they fabricate as a fabricated thing? For the sake of form-ness, they fabricate form as a fabricated thing. For the sake of feeling-ness, they fabricate feeling as a fabricated thing. For the sake of perception-hood... For the sake of fabrication-hood... For the sake of consciousness-hood, they fabricate consciousness as a fabricated thing. Because they fabricate fabricated things, they are called fabrications.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

[auto]

What is my view?
Today is:
I think rupa is the sensation what is before feeling. When you pinch yourself then that sensation is concentration, you force particles to gather to that place and more pressure(that's rupa) you apply then you start feel. Feeling is receptive quality. Rupa is engulfing, applying quality.

[salayatananirodha]

Some excerpts from Ven. ñāṇananda, paṭiccasamuppāda sermons.

But then, what has happened in our own tradition? As you all know, in the majority of books now available for you to read, the position has gone topsy-turvy. It is as if we have retraced our steps to the Vedantic philosophy, without being aware of it. Both Buddhists and non-Buddhists are talking about a consciousness that keeps jumping from one existence to another. They are unaware of the significance of the deepest point of the Law of Dependent Arising which the Buddha has proclaimed, namely, the mutual inter-relation between consciousness and name and form. That is the vortex of existence. Like the vortex in a river, it is indeed the deepest point. That is probably why the Mahā Nidāna Sutta was so named. Truly it is the Mahā Nidāna – the Great Cause. Name and form themselves are inter-related. It is not something compact. There is no ‘form’ without ‘name and there is no ‘name’ without ‘form’. That is why we identified it with the cryptic ‘tangle-within’ (antojatā). Likewise, we identified the inter-relation between consciousness and name and form with the ‘tangle-without’ (bahijatā) because when it comes to the question of rebirth, consciousness is ‘here’ and name and form is ‘there’ – in the mother’s womb. However, name and form has to have consciousness to complete the picture of a new existence.

The insinuation is that consciousness is not something solid and compact. It is only a heap. The deluded world takes it to be a monolithic whole. Name and form is also a heap.

The world is incessantly arising and ceasing. But the worldling resting on the notion of the compact due to craving and grasping, tenaciously believes that a thing exists absolutely. If absolute existence is one end the other end should be absolute non-existence, tantamount to annihilation.

‘This is me’ not only our present form but even the beautiful photographs taken in our childhood or at our wedding. That conceit is implicit in the stance ‘Am’. The perception of the compact (‘ghana saññā’) is already there. The world forgets that there is an incessant process of arising and an incessant process of ceasing. This process defies language. When we say ‘River flows’ there is only a process of flowing. But when we give it a name, say River Kelani, then we presume that it is the river that flows. So also is the fluxional nature of this body. Which is concealed. Only a Buddha points it out to us.

Craving seeks to stitch up the two ends with the help of the notion of the compact nurtured by the perception of permanence. The two ends could even be contact and the arising of contact.

All the saṁkhāras that come under these four categories are transformed into prepared form – specially prepared form. In that case all the people live within the ‘prepared’ state. Saṁkhata means prepared but the ordinary people do not understand it due to the perception of the compact or ghana saññā. The purpose of giving those similes such as ‘a mass of foam’, ‘a mirage’ etc., was to clarify the perception of the compact.

So then take it that we all have the ability to arouse ‘yoniso-manasikāra’. Get it awakened. It is then that there is the dispelling of the four perversions (vipallāsā). In place of the four perceptions so far pursued, namely the perception of permanence (niccasaññā), the perception of the pleasant (sukhasaññā), the perception of beauty (subhasaññā) and the perception of self (attasaññā), one begins to develop the perception of impermanence (aniccasaññā), the perception of suffering (dukkhasaññā), the perception of repulsiveness (asubhasaññā) and the perception of not-self (anattasaññā) according to the method of contemplation taught by the Buddha. That is the great revolution in one’s way of attention. Then the world one sees is far different from the above mentioned worlds. This is a Dhamma that penetrates through the world. Gradually, the perception of the compact (ghanasaññā), which made one posit two ends, gets liquidated through the contemplation of impermanence (aniccānupassanā). What happens with that liquidation? The perception of the heap (rāsisaññā) emerges. One begins to see a thing as a heap. Thereby the contemplation of impermanence goes deeper. One sees the flux of arising and ceasing. It culminates in disenchantment or disgust (nibbidā). In this Dhamma ‘nibbidā’ is the key to Nibbāna. There is such a norm of Dhamma in this teaching. Supramundane Paths and Fruits cannot be realized through by-hearting the Dhamma or by getting certificates. You have to get down into the practice proper. It is to those who had practiced deeply in this Dhamma in past births like Bāhiya, that the Buddha preached very brief sermons like ‘In the seen – just the seen.’ It may not apply to everybody. You have to start from the ‘nursery’ itself. That is why virtue, concentration and wisdom have to be developed. Backed by them gradually one comes to realize those Supramundane attainments. It may be a miserable leper like Suppabuddha.20 If he came to the Buddha with the correct Saṁsāric maturity, he could realize immediately on hearing the Buddha’s sermon that norm of the Dhamma enshrined in the dictum: ‘yaṁ kiñci samudayadhammaṁ – sabbaṁ taṁ nirodhadhammaṁ’ – ‘whatever is of a nature to arise – all that is of a nature to cease.’

[Spiny Norman]

(Shapes and color do not exist independent of experiences. Actually, shapes/colors are the experiences.)

I think you could say that shape, colour and movement are the "raw data" of the visual field, and that these are derived from visible form. There is then the process of recognition ( sanna ).

[SamKR]

(Shapes and color do not exist independent of experiences. Actually, shapes/colors are the experiences.)

I think you could say that shape, colour and movement are the "raw data" of the visual field, and that these are derived from visible form. There is then the process of recognition ( sanna ).

This is one of the mainstream viewpoints about the nature of reality but it is complicated and relatively less accurate. I think you are assuming inherent existence this trichotomy: (i) visible form (ii) "raw data" of the visual field, and (iii) process of recognition. But in direct nonconceptual experience, there is only one thing going on - that is all those three are actually a single process - whatever name among these three you may give.