As the Moḷiyaphagguna Sutta cited above tells us “for what
is…?” (kissa nu kho…
), implies that there is no 'for who
?’ (ko nu kho
Katamo ca bhikkhave, lokassa samudayo? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ. Tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso. Phassapaccayā vedanā …Behavior of Sentient Experience:
Sotañca paṭicca sadde ca …pe… Ghāṇañca paṭicca gandhe ca …pe… Jivhañca paṭicca rase ca …pe… Kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca …pe… Manañca paṭicca dhamme ca …pe…
“And what, bhikkhus, is the arising of conditions? Dependant on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises. With the union of these three is contact. Contact is the supportive condition for the sensation of feeling… Dependant on the ear and sounds … Dependant on the nose and smells … Dependant on the tongue and tastes … Dependant on the body and bodily-contact … Dependant on the mind and phenomena …”
– SN.12.44 (Lokasuttaṃ)
The eye (cakkhu) interdependent with (paṭicca) objects of sight (rūpa) → The arising of eye-consciousness = contact (uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ = phassa) → Contact is the support of sensation (passapaccayā vedanā)
And the same for:
Ear interdependent with sound … Nose interdependent with smell … Tongue interdependent with tastes … Body interdependent with bodily-contact … Mind interdependent with mind-states
When a sense-organ connects with its object there is consciousness (viññāṇa
) in relation to that sense-organ. The union of the sense-organ, the object of sense and consciousness is contact (phassa
), which produces a sensate-experience (vedanā
) in relation to that sense-organ.
), at any given sense-organ, arises and falls in tandem with nāma-rūpa
(SN. 22.56), which represents the mental projection of the experience of a sensation; such as seeing
as reflected upon consciousness, hearing
as reflected upon consciousness etc. On its own this is neither good nor bad, but does have the potential for both depending on dispositions at a sensate-experience (vedanā
) and craving (taṇhā
as a reflection of sensate experience on consciousness is the mental impression of it, much like a reflection in a mirror as self-image, and depending upon the strengthening of this self-image at craving (taṇhā
), a self-identification with what is sensed.
Sentient experience is made up of rapidly transitory stimulations of the sense-extensions. Awareness of a sense-perception (saññā
) is never simultaneous with another, rather they are rapidly interacting from one to another as the composite of experience unfolds. For example: while reading there is an interaction through cognition of the sense-extensions as the eyes see the page, the mental-faculties process words and meaning, and the rest of the house-cleaning sense-events present hearing – touch – smell etc., to support the entire continuum of experience as relevance demands.
The interaction of sensate cognitive processes lend to assumptions of a continuity of experience of them and predictability. It is out of this predictability that the rumination of expectations and vexation when things change otherwise occur.
What the practitioner of contemplative ‘mindfulness’ is doing is directing the cognitive sum at consciousness to understanding these processes, at first with direct and clear knowing (pajānāti
), and ultimately to full understanding of things ‘as they actually are’ (yathābhutaṃ