The Five Aggregates Seem Redundant To Me

[danieLion]

As mentioned, emotions belong to number 4., volitional formation, not number 2., feeling. So, there's no contradiction..

Yeah. That was dumb of me. Sorry.
I meant that emotions are not, if I've understood daverupa, part of the five aggregates schema.
Warmly,
Dan

[danieLion]

Thanks again everyone.
If emotions are not part of the five aggregates, that removes much of the "redundancy" I mis-perceived there. It might help me to get a better understanding of what the Buddha taught about emotions and mind. I incorrectly assumed all Buddhists consider emotions a part of mind. In other words, I'm going to do a thorough search in Dhamma Wheel before I add any more posts (if any). So if anyone knows of good threads here on mind or emotions please link them for me.
Warmly,
Dan
PS: Some of the confusion for might be that some popular meditation teachers I've read and listened to online teach "mindfulness of emotions" as part of the Feeling "Pillar" of Satipatthana. Did the Buddha teach "mindfulness of emotions"?

[danieLion]

Discovery:
At thread http://www.dhammawheel.com/posting.php? ... 22&p=23566" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Retrofuturist posted:

Greetings Individual,

So, a person with a short-temper can simply be a person who has made it a habit over the years of letting themselves become angry again and again.

This is a good example of where someone would benefit from understanding the nidanas in dependent origination, and trying to break the chain at the point of contact.

Metta,
Retro.

Which reminded me of Santa100's Wiki link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%B9%A2a ... 4%81yatana" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), where the "Feeling" nidana link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedan%C4%81" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) says:

"Feeling," not "emotion"

Regarding the relationship between vedanā and "emotions," American-born Theravada teacher Bhikkhu Bodhi has written:

"The Pali word vedanā does not signify emotion (which appears to be a complex phenomenon involving a variety of concomitant mental factors), but the bare affective quality of an experience, which may be either pleasant, painful or neutral."[Bodhi, Bhikkhu (ed.) (2000). A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma: The Abhidhammattha Sangaha of Ācariya Anuruddha. Seattle, WA: BPS Pariyatti Editions.]

Similarly, Oxford-trained Vajrayana teacher Trungpa Rinpoche has written:

"In this case 'feeling' is not quite our ordinary notion of feeling. It is not the feeling we take so seriously as, for instance, when we say, 'He hurt my feelings.' This kind of feeling that we take so seriously belongs to the fourth and fifth skandhas of concept and consciousness."[Trungpa, Chögyam (2001). Glimpses of Abhidharma. Boston: Shambhala.]

Warmly,
Dan

[rowyourboat]

Hi,
Per this discussion, my NEW understanding of the five aggregates is:
1. form, body
2. feelings: pleasant, unpleasant, neither-nor
3. perception: labeling, noting, categorizing
4. mind: ???
5. Consciousness
a. eye
b. ear
c. nose
d. tongue
e. tactile
f. intellect

1) So, is 1 just the experience of 5? That is, maybe body is simply an awareness of the six sense bases holistically?
2) Emotions are not part of the khandas, but rather a complex sankhara dhamma.
3) What did the Buddha teach, if anything, about emotions?
Warmly,
Dan

1) body is composed of the six sense bases. Consciousness can take the body or other mental factor for its object. That is there is a consciousness quite seperate from its object. Consciousness is an object in itself. We can take consciousness to mean awareness.
2) There is nothing which is not part of the khandas! Every moment of experience is made up of these five khandas. While the fourth khanda ('mental fabrication'= sankhara) includes emotions, thoughts, contemplations, intentions, -these objects can becomes objects of awareness in themselves. That is, we perceive the khandas as well through consciousness.

with metta

Matheesha

[Spiny O'Norman]

Again, if you reference the diagram in my previous post, notice Feeling is part of the Mental Factors group. In your example, when you're excited about something, that means you're "attracted to", "like it", or "attached to" it, these are all volitional formation.

I'm not sure I follow you here. I thought vedana was defined as the 3 types of physical and mental feeling. And that volitional formations include the craving / aversion that arise in dependence on these?

Spiny

[daverupa]

Did the Buddha teach "mindfulness of emotions"?

Have a look: MN 137

Cognizing an idea via the intellect, one explores an idea that can act as the basis for happiness, one explores an idea that can act as the basis for unhappiness, one explores an idea that can act as the basis for equanimity.

[Spiny O'Norman]

If emotions are not part of the five aggregates, that removes much of the "redundancy" I mis-perceived there.

My understanding is that the five aggregates include everything we experience. And I don't see a problem with saying that emotions are equivalent to mental vedana.

Spiny

[adosa]

Again, if you reference the diagram in my previous post, notice Feeling is part of the Mental Factors group. In your example, when you're excited about something, that means you're "attracted to", "like it", or "attached to" it, these are all volitional formation.

I'm not sure I follow you here. I thought vedana was defined as the 3 types of physical and mental feeling. And that volitional formations include the craving / aversion that arise in dependence on these?

Spiny

Good, I'm glad somebody else asked this as I've been scratching my head for the past three or four days. So what is the process when I am in meditation and the mental imagine of something left undone at work arises and that in turn produces a physical "feeling" of anxiety? I feel the anxiety, physically, so there has to be some sort of mind/body feedback loop going on there.

adosa

[santa100]

"Spiny O'Norman wrote:
And I don't see a problem with saying that emotions are equivalent to mental vedana"

Hi Spiny and Adosa, make sure to re-visit the previous posts that has Ven. Bodhi's clarification on Feeling (Vedanā). It's not your regular kind of "feeling":

"Feeling," not "emotion"

Regarding the relationship between vedanā and "emotions," American-born Theravada teacher Bhikkhu Bodhi has written:

"The Pali word vedanā does not signify emotion (which appears to be a complex phenomenon involving a variety of concomitant mental factors), but the bare affective quality of an experience, which may be either pleasant, painful or neutral."[Bodhi, Bhikkhu (ed.) (2000). A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma: The Abhidhammattha Sangaha of Ācariya Anuruddha. Seattle, WA: BPS Pariyatti Editions.]

Similarly, Oxford-trained Vajrayana teacher Trungpa Rinpoche has written:

"In this case 'feeling' is not quite our ordinary notion of feeling. It is not the feeling we take so seriously as, for instance, when we say, 'He hurt my feelings.' This kind of feeling that we take so seriously belongs to the fourth and fifth skandhas of concept and consciousness."[Trungpa, Chögyam (2001). Glimpses of Abhidharma. Boston: Shambhala.]

[daverupa]

I feel the anxiety, physically, so there has to be some sort of mind/body feedback loop going on there.

I expect it's called Namarupa-Vinnana, a whirling interplay also known as samsara.

[khaaan]

I consider emotion to be a feedback loop involving multiple aggregates. Think of tensing your abdomen in fear (sankhara) along with the associated sensation (vedana) in the pit of your stomach, probably associated with a repetitive stream of thoughts at the mind door.

[Ben]

I consider emotion to be a feedback loop involving multiple aggregates. Think of tensing your abdomen in fear (sankhara) along with the associated sensation (vedana) in the pit of your stomach, probably associated with a repetitive stream of thoughts at the mind door.

Indeed! Though, vedanas associated with fear don't just appear in the abdomen, they occur throughout the body. Though the fear-conditioned vedanas in the abdomen are probably the most dominant.
kind regards

Ben

[danieLion]

Hi friends,

Sorry it took so long getting back.

The last three posts have pretty much answered my question about Buddhism and emotions, so thank you. I am still reading through the other "emotion" threads here and might have some more discussion points when I am done.

Relation the khandas to dependent origination (DO) is slow going but worth it for me. In retrospect a better question might have been, "What is the importance of repetitiveness and apparent repetitiveness in the teachings of the Buddha?" because that is the question this thread and the investigation it has inspired seems to be providing answers for.

Warmly,

Dan

[danieLion]

Hi,
I have concluded (for now?) that the redundancy I thought was there was due to my ignorance of the Pali. I have also concluded that the neither the Buddha nor his culture viewed human psychology emotively. Etymologically, emotion is of French-Latin origin. Emotion--along with the bulk of the ideas of the Western philosophical-psychological tradition--is a much newer (not too mention geographically differentiated) idea than "the psychology" of the Buddha. I neither mean that one is less complex or more sophisticated than the other nor that there is no overlap.

In addition to my linguistic, historical, geographical and cultural assumptions, part of my confusion came from the fact the many Western meditation teachers teach "Mindfulness of Emotions." For example, I heard Joseph Goldstein talk about the Rolodex of emotions you go through when you use this technique without explaining the Buddha (as far as I can tell) never taught "Mindfulness of Emotions." "Mental noting" emotions like this just seems like more saññā and/or-sankhāra. Ironically, the first person to ever point the idea to me that the emotional label on you stick on a feeling doesn't matter as much as mindfulness of the feeling is a Western (non-Buddhist?) psychotherapist. In general, though, psychologists can't agree on what the "primary" emotions are--although there is a general consenssus (with lots of quibbling): fear, anger, sadness, agitation, surprise, guilt and joy. I know the Buddha's teachings sometimes addressed fear, anger, sadness, agitation, guilt and joy. Did he ever teach on surprise?

I am not saying emotion theory is wrong for Buddhists, or that Buddhist practice is wrong for those who assume the validity of emotions. But I am saying that if you have been conditioned to believe in emotion, then that is one more view (sanna-sankhara?) you have to work with. The problem is that--again, as far as I know, the Buddha had much to say, for example, on anger. But he never said anything about which aggregates, dependent oriination links, six sense bases, etc..., comprise anger.

So, unless others want to continue with a topic something like, "What did the Buddha teach, if anything, about emotion?", I feel my questions have been answered. Thanks again to all. Each post helped.
Peace,
Dan

[nameless]

Anger is part of the three poisons (greed, anger, ignorance, though translated differently sometimes) which is maybe why it is talked about a bit more. Mindfulness as taught in the satipatthana sutta is of body, feeling (not emotion), mind and mental qualities, and doesn't include emotion.