Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8608
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:12 pm Then show what is wrong with it.
I already showed you but it seems you were unable to understand. I cannot keep repeating myself.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 14309
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by SarathW »

Maybe.
Could you find the initial discussion please or re-post it?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8608
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:28 pmCould you find the initial discussion please or re-post it?
My impression is you have posted to same topic so many times.

The suttas contain the following two sequences:

1. feeling > contact > sense bases > mind-body > consciousness > mind-body

2. feeling > contact > sense bases > mind-body > consciousness > sankhara > ignorance

Note: ">" = "caused/conditioned by"

The suttas do not appear contain:

3. feeling > contact > sense bases > mind-body > consciousness > sankhara > consciousness > namarupa

Consciousness cannot arise without a causal condition therefore some suttas say nama-rupa is the causal condition of consciousness and other suttas say sankhara is the causal condition of consciousness.

But the suttas do not contain the sequences you are posting.
Deep is this dependent co-arising, and deep its appearance. It's because of not understanding and not penetrating this Dhamma that this generation is like a tangled skein, a knotted ball of string, like matted rushes and reeds, and does not go beyond transmigration, beyond the planes of deprivation, woe and bad destinations.
......
Last edited by DooDoot on Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 14309
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by SarathW »

Sorry I can't understand your explanation.
Could you give me some Sutta reference?
Thanks.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8608
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:59 am Sorry I can't understand your explanation.
I already posted this.
SarathW wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:59 amCould you give me some Sutta reference?
Sentinal already posted some sutta references.
The real Buddhist Teachings alone are already abundant - as many as all the leaves in the forest - but that which has to be studied and practised is merely a handful, and that's already plenty. But nowadays we go and include those things which are associated with the Teachings, such as the history of the religion and an expanded psychology. Take Abhidhamma - some parts of it have become psychology, some parts philosophy, it's continually expanding to fulfill the requirement of those disciplines. And there are many more offshoots, so that the things which are associated with the teachings have become exceedingly numerous. They have all been swept in together under the one term, so that there have come to be a large number of "Buddhist Teachings".

If we don't know how to take hold of the essential points, then it will seem like there's a great amount and we won't be able to choose between them. It will be like going into a shop selling a great variety of goods, 'and being completely at a loss what to take. So we will just follow our common sense-a bit of this, a bit of that, as we see fit. And mostly we will take those things which agree with defilement (kilesa) rather than let ourselves be guided by truth-discerning awareness. Spiritual life becomes a matter of rites and rituals, of making merit by rote or to insure against some fear or other. There is no contact with the real Buddhist Teachings.

https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books/Bhikk ... o_Tree.htm
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
SarathW
Posts: 14309
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by SarathW »

I have not studied Ajahn Buddhadasa books.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by Srilankaputra »

Dinsdale wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:12 am On the contrary, the suttas clearly describe how vinnana arises in dependence on a dyad, that of sense-base and sense-object.
Yes, but the materialist extreme has to be avoided. Say for example that a generation of humans are born blind, but with intact physical eyes. Would they delineate an eye? For them that would be just an part of the body. If in the same generation you are born with sight(eye consciousness). Then an eye and sights can be delineated.
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.
justindesilva
Posts: 1310
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by justindesilva »

Dinsdale wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:12 am I have seen it argued here that vinnana (sense-consciousness) somehow creates a dyad, duality or bifurcation, but I still haven't seen any clear sutta support for this interpretation.
On the contrary, the suttas clearly describe how vinnana arises in dependence on a dyad, that of sense-base and sense-object. See for example the first paragraph of SN35.93:
https://suttacentral.net/sn35.93/en/bodhi

It's also argued that vinnana somehow creates the sense of "me", but what the suttas actually say is that self-view results from identification with the aggregates, regarding them as me and mine. Then there is the idea that vinnana ceases, but nobody can explain what replaces sense-consciousness, or how the awareness of sense-objects continues.

Your thoughts?
Vingnana translated as consciousness links with eye, ear , nose , tongue , body, intellect is is constant or is alterable. It is described so in Vinnana sutta SN25.3
The sutta winds as " One who knows and sees that these
phenomena are thus way us called stream enterer steadfast never again destined for states of woe , headed for self awakening"
From this I suggest that vinnana means a form of feeling of awareness which becomes a condition to make
Nama rupa paccaya vinnana ,etc.
SteRo
Posts: 2927
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: अ धीः

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by SteRo »

Dinsdale wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:12 am I have seen it argued here that vinnana (sense-consciousness) somehow creates a dyad, duality or bifurcation, but I still haven't seen any clear sutta support for this interpretation.
...
Your thoughts?
i would consider it to be mere speculation if there is no evidence in the suttas.
Dinsdale wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:12 am On the contrary, the suttas clearly describe how vinnana arises in dependence on a dyad, that of sense-base and sense-object. See for example the first paragraph of SN35.93:
https://suttacentral.net/sn35.93/en/bodhi
That makes sense.
Dinsdale wrote: Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:12 am It's also argued that vinnana somehow creates the sense of "me", but what the suttas actually say is that self-view results from identification with the aggregates, regarding them as me and mine. Then there is the idea that vinnana ceases, but nobody can explain what replaces sense-consciousness, or how the awareness of sense-objects continues.

Your thoughts?
it is not feasible to derive a certain experience - here the experience of 'me' - from one aggregate only because all experiences are products of the interaction of more than one aggregate.
According to the suttas self identity views result from from identification with the aggregates, i.e. with the objects or phenomena displayed by the aggregates which already presumes self view. Therefore I would differentiate between self identity views as defined in the suttas form mere 'self view' which from my perspective is the belief that experienced self is true or real. But that experienced self is only implicitly related with the aggregates since it results from the 'interactive play' of all clinging aggregates.

:anjali:
Exhaling अ and inhaling धीः amounts to བྷྲཱུཾ་བི་ཤྭ་བི་ཤུད་དྷེ
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8608
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by DooDoot »

SteRo wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:32 am
it is not feasible to derive a certain experience - here the experience of 'me' - from one aggregate only because all experiences are products of the interaction of more than one aggregate.
According to the suttas self identity views result from from identification with the aggregates
SN 22.81 explicitly attributes identification to only one aggregate. So does MN 44.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by sentinel »

Bcuz of ignorant there arises fabrication and thus conditions the consciousness that arises from namarupa interaction , mentality materiality interaction which then inturn conditions the consciousness .
Sankhara vinnana namarupa vinnana .
You always gain by giving
SteRo
Posts: 2927
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: अ धीः

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by SteRo »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:07 am
SteRo wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:32 am
it is not feasible to derive a certain experience - here the experience of 'me' - from one aggregate only because all experiences are products of the interaction of more than one aggregate.
According to the suttas self identity views result from from identification with the aggregates
SN 22.81 explicitly attributes identification to only one aggregate. So does MN 44.
It seems we are talking at cross purposes here. What I have said refers to the experience of 'me' or 'I' not to the identification of that experience with one of the aggregates.

:anjali:
Exhaling अ and inhaling धीः amounts to བྷྲཱུཾ་བི་ཤྭ་བི་ཤུད་དྷེ
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8608
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by DooDoot »

sentinel wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:42 am Sankhara vinnana namarupa vinnana .
Not found in sutta. :spy:
SteRo wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:54 am What I have said refers to the experience of 'me' or 'I' not to the identification of that experience with one of the aggregates.
SN 22.81 appears to say that experience of 'me' or 'I' is only one aggregate, as follows:
They regard form as self.
rūpaṃ attato samanupassati.

But that regarding is just a mental formation.
Yā kho pana sā, bhikkhave, samanupassanā saṅkhāro so.

SN 22.81 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Also, SN 22.79, which appears to say sankhara aggregate alone construes 'self' towards the five aggregates:
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.

SN 22.79 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by sentinel »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:23 am
sentinel wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:42 am Sankhara vinnana namarupa vinnana .
Not found in sutta.
It does , not in a linear pattern as explained .
You always gain by giving
SteRo
Posts: 2927
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: अ धीः

Re: Vinnana depends on a dyad, it doesn't create one...

Post by SteRo »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:23 am
SteRo wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:54 am What I have said refers to the experience of 'me' or 'I' not to the identification of that experience with one of the aggregates.
SN 22.81 appears to say that experience of 'me' or 'I' is only one aggregate, as follows:
They regard form as self.
rūpaṃ attato samanupassati.

But that regarding is just a mental formation.
Yā kho pana sā, bhikkhave, samanupassanā saṅkhāro so.

SN 22.81 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Also, SN 22.79, which appears to say sankhara aggregate alone construes 'self' towards the five aggregates:
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.

SN 22.79 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
From my perspective there is no contradiction between your wording and mine because you say that the aggregate of formations is involved in addition to the aggregate with which self-identification arises. And I have said above "it is not feasible to derive a certain experience - here the experience of 'me' - from one aggregate only because all experiences are products of the interaction of more than one aggregate."
Since the experience of mere self includes a moment of 'being conscious of self' there is at least consciousness in addition to formations.

you seem to be talking from the perspective of ontology while I am talking from the perspective of experience. And the suttas also seem to be talking from the perspective of experience:
"There is the case, monk, where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He does not assume feeling to be the self... does not assume perception to be the self... does not assume fabrications to be the self... He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.

"This, monk, is how self-identity view no longer comes about."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... l#selfview
"Now, this is the path of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification. One assumes about the eye that 'This is not me, this is not my self, this is not what I am.' One assumes about forms... One assumes about consciousness at the eye... One assumes about contact at the eye... One assumes about feeling... One assumes about craving that 'This is not me, this is not my self, this is not what I am.'
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... l#noselfid



I say that the perspective of experience is the relevant one considering self-identity view as taught by the suttas, not the perspective of ontology. Why? Because first there is the experience of mere self before that self identifies itself with one of the aggregates or - after being instructed by the suttas it rejects or denies identification with that aggregate. But that rejection of identification or its denials is performed by that same self-experience that performed the self-identity view before which is why that self-experience goes unnoticed and mere self view continues even when self-identity view of the suttas has ceased (not in case of the arhat).

It is not that I am saying that mere self view based on experienced self would be independent of self-identity view which is the identification of experienced self with the one or the other of the aggregates. Both views and experiences are caused by the aggregates. There doesn't exist a self anywhere at all. But from my experiential perspective it is important to differentiate mere self view from the self-identity view of the suttas because otherwise abandonment of self-identity view may be confused with the goal of the path. There is a reason why self-identity views are abandoned by the sotapanna but there are still fetters left to be abandoned after that and why e.g. conceit is abandoned by the arhat but not before.

:anjali:
Exhaling अ and inhaling धीः amounts to བྷྲཱུཾ་བི་ཤྭ་བི་ཤུད་དྷེ
Post Reply