Question abt Khandhas (abt Consciousness)

[indian_buddhist]

About the 5 Khandhas. Please clear my understanding.

1. Form (Material body) - This is pretty clear.
2. Vedana ( Feelings) - Pleasant/Unpleasant/Neutral - this is clear.
3. Perception - Meaning how you perceive something - similar to Judgement ?....(You perceive someone to be good/bad etc)?
4. Volition - acts of Will - similar to Kamma?
5. Consciousness - what does this mean..........How do you distinguish Consciousness from the other 4 khandhas?.

[mikenz66]

Try these links:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index-su ... ml#khandha
http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... tm#khandha


Mike

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

I think, in very simple terms, consciousness is pertinent to the other senses... it is becoming aware that you see, aware that you hear, aware that you can smell, aware that you are speaking, aware that your body is solid, aware that your mind is cogent....

Once your eye does not see, there is no awareness of sight, but awareness of non-sight, and so on....without this awareness, our senses are useless... you not only see, but must be aware that you are seeing, and thus the same for the remainder.

58. "And what is consciousness, what is the origin of consciousness, what is the cessation of consciousness, what is the way leading to the cessation of consciousness? There are these six classes of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness. With the arising of formations there is the arising of consciousness. With the cessation of formations there is the cessation of consciousness. The way leading to the cessation of consciousness is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration.

59. "When a noble disciple has thus understood consciousness, the origin of consciousness, the cessation of consciousness, and the way leading to the cessation of consciousness... he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma."

[Spiny Norman]

The one I really struggle with is sanna ( perception ), particularly how it interacts with the other aggregates.

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

Sanna (Perception) is another way of saying 'Interpretation'.....

How you specifically process what you perceive.

Simplistically:

You might perceive the taste of Kimchi as too spicy, whereas for my perception of taste, it would be just right....

You might see an ink-blot and interpret it as a candlestick.... I might see the ink-blot and see two faces looking at each other....

[Spiny Norman]

You might perceive the taste of Kimchi as too spicy, whereas for my perception of taste, it would be just right....

But that example involves vedana too? It's tricky to separate them out.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

But that example involves vedana too? It's tricky to separate them out.

Well, the truth of the matter is that they're not mutually exclusive bundles into which experience can be aggregated. Consider vedana for example... there is no vedana that could not similarly be classified within one of the six-consciousnesses.

Metta,
Retro.

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

Are they in fact even linear?
The problem is, it is all very well describing the different processes we go to, in order to arrive at the whole; but sometimes, they overlap, and overlay one another; separating these elements is often impossible, the conjunction is swift, rapid, immediate....we don't take each step as it comes - we actually leap from one position to the next, encapsulating them all.

Besides, maybe 'feeling' is not an adequate or sufficient interpretation of 'Vedana'....just as 'Suffering' is not an adequate or sufficient interpretation of 'Dhukka'...

[SarathW]

The one I really struggle with is sanna ( perception ), particularly how it interacts with the other aggregates.

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness, friend: Are these qualities conjoined or disjoined? Is it possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them?"

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

[TheNoBSBuddhist]

...And you know, honestly?
Hand on heart, I had no idea that the Buddha indeed instructed so.....

Thank you SarathW.....

[Spiny Norman]

Well, the truth of the matter is that they're not mutually exclusive bundles into which experience can be aggregated.

Yes, I do realise that. On the other hand I think it's useful to develop some understanding of their qualities, and how they interact to produce experience.
Obviously the aggregates are just one model for understanding experience, but they are mentioned so frequently in the suttas that I assume they are quite important.

[Spiny Norman]

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness, friend: Are these qualities conjoined or disjoined? Is it possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them?"

"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Yes, thanks, I'm familiar with that quote. I find it a bit puzzling though, given that consciousness, perception and feeling are repeatedly delineated in the suttas. If these 3 aggregates really can't be separated, they why did the Buddha bother to list them separately on so many occasions in the suttas?
Why not just a single term to cover the 3 combined?

[Spiny Norman]

Are they in fact even linear?

No, I think there are describing complex interactions involving feedback loops and so on. And quite difficult to follow because it all happens so quickly in experience.

[santa100]

But that example involves vedana too? It's tricky to separate them out.

Ven. Bodhi's intro from Middle Length Discourses about the Aggregates:

The aggregate of material form (rūpa) includes the physical body with its sense faculties as well as external material objects. The aggregate of feeling (vedanā) is the affective element in experience, either pleasant, painful, or neutral. Perception (saññā), the third aggregate, is the factor responsible for noting the qualities of things and also accounts for recognition and memory. The formations aggregate (sankhārā) is an umbrella term that includes all volitional, emotive, and intellective aspects of mental life. And consciousness (viññāṇa), the fifth aggregate, is the basic awareness of an object indispensable to all cognition.

Due to the close and lightening fast interaction among them and our worldling's limited capacity, it's difficult to tell them apart. But it doesn't mean the aggregates are all the same in term of their function. So if we go back to the eating Kimchi example, a crude analysis would be something like: Forms involve the physical food and the physical sense organ; Feeling involves the simple affective tone of whether it feels pleasant, painful, or neutral while eating Kimchi; Perception involves the recognition/identification that the food is indeed Kimchi, the food has a color of red, the taste is classified as "spicy", etc.; Formation involves the attitude toward Kimchi, whether one'd like and intend to eat more or hate and stay away from it; Consciousness involves the basic awareness throughout the entire process..

[indian_buddhist]

But that example involves vedana too? It's tricky to separate them out.

Ven. Bodhi's intro from Middle Length Discourses about the Aggregates:

The aggregate of material form (rūpa) includes the physical body with its sense faculties as well as external material objects. The aggregate of feeling (vedanā) is the affective element in experience, either pleasant, painful, or neutral. Perception (saññā), the third aggregate, is the factor responsible for noting the qualities of things and also accounts for recognition and memory. The formations aggregate (sankhārā) is an umbrella term that includes all volitional, emotive, and intellective aspects of mental life. And consciousness (viññāṇa), the fifth aggregate, is the basic awareness of an object indispensable to all cognition.

Due to the close and lightening fast interaction among them and our worldling's limited capacity, it's difficult to tell them apart. But it doesn't mean the aggregates are all the same in term of their function. So if we go back to the eating Kimchi example, a crude analysis would be something like: Forms involve the physical food and the physical sense organ; Feeling involves the simple affective tone of whether it feels pleasant, painful, or neutral while eating Kimchi; Perception involves the recognition/identification that the food is indeed Kimchi, the food has a color of red, the taste is classified as "spicy", etc.; Formation involves the attitude toward Kimchi, whether one'd like and intend to eat more or hate and stay away from it; Consciousness involves the basic awareness throughout the entire process..

can vinnana simply be called awareness?.....iI looks like to be more subtle than perception.

suppose we drink alcohol I guess the most important thing which will be affected is vinnana ? correct me if my understanding of vinnana is wrong..