Consciosness = Identification?

[DAWN]

'Ignorance causes volitional formation ', as i understand, means that : Ignorance of anatta create a volitional formations; when there is duality view that devides on 'me and not-me', and by this illusion causes volitional formations. If is that, so in the next step of causation 'Volitional formation causes consciosness ', consciosness can be understood like identification?

Also I would like to ask if the pali word that was traducted as 'consciousness' ma be traduced as 'identification'?

Thanks you.

[Sutiro]

Well thought through.

Our ignorance is of saccadhamma not just annatta:

‘And what is ignorance? Whatever exists in the absence of the understanding of suffering, the origin of suffering, the end of suffering and the way leading to the cessation of suffering is called ignorance, friends. (S.N. 12.2)

When we reduce the Dhamma to words we use restrictive conventions which can camouflage the Truth. The English word 'consciousness' is a tricky translation for "vinnana" as it limits our understanding of it. By derivation it means ' separate knowing'. It is used in various contexts and can mean 'consciousness', 'cognition', and yes 'identification' and more depending on who is doing the translation. Nothing is real until it has been observed, that is, identified (cognized) through one of six ayatana.

Because we are ignorant of the Truth we act with intent. But then you may ask,' If intent comes before there is consciousness how can it be conscious intent?'
This is the problem we have when we rely on translations of translations of translations of concepts first promulgated in oral tradition. We can go mad trying to work it out by this approach.

• "When we try to communicate the Dhamma we are dependent upon words which draw comparisons and give explanations. When we reduce the Dhamma to words the result is something less than the real thing. When a turtle sees a snake for the first time he can’t work out what it is or how it gets around. It has no legs, no arms and no home on its back. So what is the use of it and why is it there? And the turtle thinks himself to distraction." (Loom Por Chah, my private collection).

Lets face it we are all turtles. If we knew the Truth we would act, think and behave differently and there would be different consequences in our life.

Sutiro

[DAWN]

Well thought through.

Our ignorance is of saccadhamma not just annatta:

‘And what is ignorance? Whatever exists in the absence of the understanding of suffering, the origin of suffering, the end of suffering and the way leading to the cessation of suffering is called ignorance, friends. (S.N. 12.2)

When we reduce the Dhamma to words we use restrictive conventions which can camouflage the Truth. The English word 'consciousness' is a tricky translation for "vinnana" as it limits our understanding of it. By derivation it means ' separate knowing'. It is used in various contexts and can mean 'consciousness', 'cognition', and yes 'identification' and more depending on who is doing the translation. Nothing is real until it has been observed, that is, identified (cognized) through one of six ayatana.

Because we are ignorant of the Truth we act with intent. But then you may ask,' If intent comes before there is consciousness how can it be conscious intent?'
This is the problem we have when we rely on translations of translations of translations of concepts first promulgated in oral tradition. We can go mad trying to work it out by this approach.

• "When we try to communicate the Dhamma we are dependent upon words which draw comparisons and give explanations. When we reduce the Dhamma to words the result is something less than the real thing. When a turtle sees a snake for the first time he can’t work out what it is or how it gets around. It has no legs, no arms and no home on its back. So what is the use of it and why is it there? And the turtle thinks himself to distraction." (Loom Por Chah, my private collection).

Lets face it we are all turtles. If we knew the Truth we would act, think and behave differently and there would be different consequences in our life.

Sutiro

Thanks you Sutiro.

It's true that sometimes we can go mad by refering on traduction of traduction of traduction before to refering on practice. I have my responce, thanks you.