It would be wonderful to have the Jurewicz paper freely available but it is copyrighted, and scribd isn't a legitimate source (just sayin').
Consciousness isn't atman in the Vedic system either. In the mythology, we don't get a completed atman until Prajapati/brahman creates a second (Agni in one variant, the multitude of creatures in another). Consciousness is what does the seeking for knowledge of self -- it isn't the self itself. This actually is the perfect model for what the Buddha is describing in DO. Which is why my hypothesis is that this is exactly the model he uses in the early part of DO.morning mist wrote:The term consciousness shouldn't be understood according to the Vedic definition. Consciousness is not the true self or atman in Buddhism, but merely a combination of many moments of awareness that happens very quickly to give the illusion of the observer.mikenz66 wrote: In the Rig Veda :
1. First there is nothing, not even existence or non-existence. This corresponds to ignorance.
2. A volitional impulse (kama - desire) initiates the process of creation.
3. Desire, 'the first seed of the mind', creates consciousness.
Avijja in DO corresponds to the pre-creative state in the Prajapati myth -- it is "the unknowable" -- which certainly sounds like "ignorance" to me. But what the Buddha is saying with avijja is more interesting than that. Using the model of the Vedic myth's part in the creation of self, the Vedic people would have said that the myth told them that they came into the world seeking knowledge of the self -- that life was, in fact, all about knowledge of the self. Putting avijja at the start has the Buddha saying "the way we live life it's all about ignorance of the self".The first link in Dependent Origination is Avijja. It is commonly translated as " ignorance". From the term " ignorance" we make the assumption that it means " nothing" or " nothingness " in Vedic cosmology. However, if we look at the Buddha's own explanation for what he meant by the term Avijja, it has nothing to do with " nothingness" . It has more to do with not seeing things the way they truly are while we are living , and not being able to penetrate the Four Noble Truths, which then lead to volitional formation. The Buddhist first link Avijja does not correspond with " 1. First there is nothing, not even existence or non-existence." of the Vedic teaching .
Which is why this makes sense. Ignorance of dukkha, its origin, that it can cease, and the way to end it is answered by saying "What we are ignorant of is (what we mistake for) the self, its origin, that it can cease, and the way to end it."Note: Avijj is consistently explained as not fully understanding the Four Noble Truths.