Mindfulness in Buddhism

[thecharmedbaja]

Hey all

I was just wondering about mindfulness and the five skandhas/aggregates - if one is supposed to rid themselves of the 'self,' which includes the last of the aggregates - consciousness, why is it, then, that we are supposed to be mindful of ourselves? Surely that is one of the things we must rid ourselves of?

I know mindfulness is extremely important - I try to practise it all the time, but I was reading up about mindfulness and how to be more so, and realised that it could be related to the five skandhas...

Anyway, thank you for any help! I'm sorry that I always ask the silliest questions!!

Jasmine

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Jasmine,

In Buddhism, consciousness has a slightly different meaning perhaps to what it tends to mean in every day language.

Extract from SN 22.57: Sattatthana Sutta
http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/s ... n22-57.htm

And what is consciousness? These six bodies of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness. This is called consciousness.

So there is eye-consciouness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness and mind-consciousness... rather than some kind of broad-brush "consciousness" which is not connected to a particular object or sense-base.

As for what is to be observed, it is the impermanent nature of each of these. Are you always conscious of what you are tasting? Are you always conscious of what you are hearing? Are you always conscious of what you are thinking?..... What about when you're sleeping?

As for "not-self", how these things are to be perceived...?

‘Friend, Sariputta, eye, eye-consciousness, and things cognizable by eye consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, ear, ear-consciousness, and things cognizable by ear -consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, nose, nose-consciousness, and things cognizable by nose-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, tongue, tongue-consciousness, and things cognizable by tongue-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self. Friend, Sariputta, body, body-consciousness, and things cognizable by body-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self Friend, Sariputta, mind, mind-consciousness, and things cognizable by mind-consciousness, are not me, I’m not in them, they are not self.’

If you've not yet done so, it might be worth trying to set aside a block of time to attend a residential meditation retreat in which you can learn vipassana meditation. In the meantime, however, this sutta should give you a good 'manual' for how to cultivate mindfulness.

MN 10: Satipatthana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Metta,
Retro.

[christopher:::]

Hi Jasmine. In line with retro's observations, what is key here- as we practice mindfulness over time- we become more aware of (gain deeper insight into) how the "self" is an illusion, the aggregates arise and pass away. So its not so much being mindful of "ourselves" or "getting rid of the self" as coming to recognize over time how the illusion of self is constructed and maintained.

[thecharmedbaja]

Thank you both very much - your answers were deeply appreciated!
Hope you're both having a good day,
Metta
Jasmine

[altar]

Retro,
Although the answer you give is interesting (in that you talk about consciousness as its spoken of in the suttas as "eye consciousness," etc.), I'm not sure it's correct to say that the way consciousness is used in the suttas is only sense-consciousness, and it's maybe it's not so clear that it's not some kind of "broad brush" consciousness.
Why do I say this? Because I remember a sutta where the Buddha gives a talk and he recites some verses. In the verses he praises homelessness. Those who heard the talk later ask Maha Kaccana to explain the verses. When he gets to the homelessness part, he says it refers to consciousness not having it's home in any of the four other khandas... So, depending on the meaning of this, it could mean that consciousness still arises with other khandas (i.e. cognizing perception, or sankharas, or feelings, or with one of the six sense bases), simply not attached to them though, or it could mean something different.

More connected with the original post, I think it's interesting that the Buddha teaches disenchantment with consciousness as well as with the other khandas. He doesn't say, "Abolish consciousness (I don't think)", but he talks about practicing for disenchantment with it. If one doesn't observe it, how can one grow dispassionate towards it...
maybe kind of like when you are in the water and a wave is coming and you get scared and think, "Oh no," but then it laps over you and it's really not that impressive...
If you don't get in the water you won't have the experience... It's interesting because I think it shows a lot, about determination and rest/calm.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Altar,

I'd be happy to see the sutta, if you can find it.

Metta,
Retro.

[altar]

Hi Retro,
Yea I found the sutta on page 859 of Bhikkhu Bodhi's SN, and here is the Thanissaro link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.003.than.html

[mikenz66]

Thanks Altar,

I like Ven. Maha Kaccana's expositions...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe ... =&gs_rfai=
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el405.html

Metta
Mike

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Altar,

Hi Retro,
Yea I found the sutta on page 859 of Bhikkhu Bodhi's SN, and here is the Thanissaro link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.003.than.html

That sutta certainly speaks of the six-consciousnesses...

"The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of form, it is said to be living at home. The property of feeling... perception... fabrication is the home of consciousness.

The opposing "not dwelling at home" of the Tathagata may be implying some form of non-manifestative consciousness or "anidassana-vinnana".

Metta,
Retro.

[char101]

I was just wondering about mindfulness and the five skandhas/aggregates - if one is supposed to rid themselves of the 'self,' which includes the last of the aggregates - consciousness, why is it, then, that we are supposed to be mindful of ourselves? Surely that is one of the things we must rid ourselves of?

Our mind and body, fell under the shadow of avijja, became viewed as self.

To remove the shadow, we need to cast light on it, i.e. not just by being mindful, but by seeing them with knowledge, so that the truth will come out

Mindfulness stands as the foundation for right knowledge to arise

[christopher:::]

I was just wondering about mindfulness and the five skandhas/aggregates - if one is supposed to rid themselves of the 'self,' which includes the last of the aggregates - consciousness, why is it, then, that we are supposed to be mindful of ourselves? Surely that is one of the things we must rid ourselves of?

Our mind and body, fell under the shadow of avijja, became viewed as self.

To remove the shadow, we need to cast light on it, i.e. not just by being mindful, but by seeing them with knowledge, so that the truth will come out

Mindfulness stands as the foundation for right knowledge to arise

[Zom]

There is consciousness outside 6-class-consciousness, and it is too inconstant and stressful.

"In dependence on the intellect & ideas there arises intellect-consciousness. The intellect is inconstant, changeable, of a nature to become otherwise. Ideas are inconstant, changeable, of a nature to become otherwise. Thus this pair is both wavering & fluctuating — inconstant, changeable, of a nature to become otherwise.

"Intellect-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, of a nature to become otherwise. Whatever is the cause, the requisite condition, for the arising of intellect-consciousness, that is inconstant, changeable, of a nature to become otherwise. Having arisen in dependence on an inconstant factor, how could intellect-consciousness be constant?

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