The awareness itself is the unconditioned

[TheSynergist]

It's true that Ajahn Sumedho, like many Thai Forest masters, uses terminology that is at odds with the suttas. SN 22.46, for instance, makes it pretty clear that ALL types of consciousness fall under the aggregate of consciousness:

And what are the five aggregates?
Katame ca, bhikkhave, pañcakkhandhā?
Any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of form.
Yaṁ kiñci, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati rūpakkhandho.
Any kind of feeling at all …
Yā kāci vedanā …pe…
Any kind of perception at all …
yā kāci saññā …
Any kind of choices at all …
ye keci saṅkhārā atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā …pe… ayaṁ vuccati saṅkhārakkhandho.
Any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of consciousness.
Yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati viññāṇakkhandho.

I guess I'm not really clear what Ajahn Sumedho means by "unconditioned" consciousness. If by that he means it's permanent, it would seem like that violates the idea that the aggregates are all anicca. If he means a type of consciousness that's free from defilement, I would assume that's the same as a non-grasping consciousness….a sort of consciousness that an Arahant would have before parinibbana, while still functioning in the world w/ a body. It's a consciousness free of greed, hatred, and delusion.

So I guess my question, in brief, is this: How does Ajahn Sumedho define "unconditioned"? Does he mean that's it's unchanging, or simply that it doesn't have greed, hatred, or delusion?

[Ceisiwr]

...

Elsewhere he has stated that it is permanent.

[TheSynergist]

...

Elsewhere he has stated that it is permanent.

Yes….after I made my post, I discovered this dhamma talk of his, which does seem to say consciousness is unchanging. It does sound rather eternalistic…perhaps he's referring to the formless realm of infinite consciousness? I hope I'm wrong and Ajahn Sumedho is just using unconventional terminology.

[Ceisiwr]

...

Elsewhere he has stated that it is permanent.

Yes….after I made my post, I discovered this dhamma talk of his, which does seem to say consciousness is unchanging. It does sound rather eternalistic…perhaps he's referring to the formless realm of infinite consciousness? I hope I'm wrong and Ajahn Sumedho is just using unconventional terminology.

I think he has just got stuck on consciousness due to his ignorance.

[TheSynergist]

Elsewhere he has stated that it is permanent.

Yes….after I made my post, I discovered this dhamma talk of his, which does seem to say consciousness is unchanging. It does sound rather eternalistic…perhaps he's referring to the formless realm of infinite consciousness? I hope I'm wrong and Ajahn Sumedho is just using unconventional terminology.

I think he has just got stuck on consciousness due to his ignorance.

All I'm willing to say is that I don't "get" Ajahn Sumedho. Whether that's because I have misunderstood him, or because he has some ignorance/wrong view, I dunno.

[mikenz66]

All I'm willing to say is that I don't "get" Ajahn Sumedho. Whether that's because I have misunderstood him, or because he has some ignorance/wrong view, I dunno.

This is probably the best approach. I also sometimes have trouble understanding what Ajahn Sumedho, and various other famous teachers that some find very helpful, are on about, and I take the advice often given at the end of such Dhamma talks: "If you don't find this useful, just ignore it".

The charitable interpretation is the it does actually seem to be important to examine the process of awareness, and these Thai Forest Ajahns are pointing towards doing that. Furthermore, I don't think it's helpful to think of these Dhamma talks as analytical essays. They are meant to be listened to and contemplated on (like suttas).

Mike

[Cause_and_Effect]

Dependent origination is the distinguishing factor.
Consciousness is implicit in the first link of dependent origination, namely ignorance as condition leading to intentions.

So it’s not unconditioned then.

Not normally no. That's the purpose of the path, to liberate consciousness by ending the process of dependent co arising and make it unconditioned.

It's true that Ajahn Sumedho, like many Thai Forest masters, uses terminology that is at odds with the suttas. SN 22.46, for instance, makes it pretty clear that ALL types of consciousness fall under the aggregate of consciousness:

And what are the five aggregates?
Katame ca, bhikkhave, pañcakkhandhā?
Any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of form.
Yaṁ kiñci, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati rūpakkhandho.
Any kind of feeling at all …
Yā kāci vedanā …pe…
Any kind of perception at all …
yā kāci saññā …
Any kind of choices at all …
ye keci saṅkhārā atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā …pe… ayaṁ vuccati saṅkhārakkhandho.
Any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of consciousness.
Yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati viññāṇakkhandho.

I guess I'm not really clear what Ajahn Sumedho means by "unconditioned" consciousness. If by that he means it's permanent, it would seem like that violates the idea that the aggregates are all anicca. If he means a type of consciousness that's free from defilement, I would assume that's the same as a non-grasping consciousness….a sort of consciousness that an Arahant would have before parinibbana, while still functioning in the world w/ a body. It's a consciousness free of greed, hatred, and delusion.

So I guess my question, in brief, is this: How does Ajahn Sumedho define "unconditioned"? Does he mean that's it's unchanging, or simply that it doesn't have greed, hatred, or delusion?

It doesn't contradict the suttas, because any type of cognizance within the context of the aggregates is clearly sensory and is annica.

This is clearly stated to not include the liberated consciousness without object.

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair.

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of contact...

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of intellectual intention...

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair.

"Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?"

"On the western wall, lord."

"And if there is no western wall, where does it land?"

"On the ground, lord."

"And if there is no ground, where does it land?"

"On the water, lord."

"And if there is no water, where does it land?"

"It does not land, lord."

"In the same way, where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food... contact... intellectual intention... consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

The sutta here very clearly discusses consciousness beyond the aggregates, so the passages describing the impermanent consciousness (sensory cognizance associated with the sense bases) in the aggregates discourses cannot be referring to the liberated consciousness described here.

[SteRo]

How can awareness that depends on life be called "the unconditioned"?

Does it depend on life, or does life also depend on it?

Please ask a stone.

[Cause_and_Effect]

How can awareness that depends on life be called "the unconditioned"?

Does it depend on life, or does life also depend on it?

Please ask a stone.

A stone is simply the four great elements without consciousnesses that sentient life has.
So what is your point?

[pegembara]

Can you imagine the Buddha being asked "Is awareness unconditioned?" at the ending of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. Out of the silence/stillness when the task is done comes this question!

"Thus, monks, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

"Any feeling whatsoever...

"Any perception whatsoever...

"Any fabrications whatsoever...

"Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every consciousness is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

[Hands up]

[So, Is awareness unconditioned and permanent? If I am not the five aggregates, who am I?]

"What lies on the other side of release?"

"Unbinding lies on the other side of release."

"What lies on the other side of Unbinding?"

"You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life gains a footing in Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

[TheSynergist]

All I'm willing to say is that I don't "get" Ajahn Sumedho. Whether that's because I have misunderstood him, or because he has some ignorance/wrong view, I dunno.

This is probably the best approach. I also sometimes have trouble understanding what Ajahn Sumedho, and various other famous teachers that some find very helpful, are on about, and I take the advice often given at the end of such Dhamma talks: "If you don't find this useful, just ignore it".

The charitable interpretation is the it does actually seem to be important to examine the process of awareness, and these Thai Forest Ajahns are pointing towards doing that. Furthermore, I don't think it's helpful to think of these Dhamma talks as analytical essays. They are meant to be listened to and contemplated on (like suttas).

Mike

Good points. Another thing to consider is teachers sometimes try be more accessible in the public talks, but then offer more nuanced/sophisticated teachings privately/1-on-1. I really can't say I know Ajahn Sumedho at all, so I don't know about the full scope of his teaching.

It's true that Ajahn Sumedho, like many Thai Forest masters, uses terminology that is at odds with the suttas. SN 22.46, for instance, makes it pretty clear that ALL types of consciousness fall under the aggregate of consciousness:

And what are the five aggregates?
Katame ca, bhikkhave, pañcakkhandhā?
Any kind of form at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of form.
Yaṁ kiñci, bhikkhave, rūpaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati rūpakkhandho.
Any kind of feeling at all …
Yā kāci vedanā …pe…
Any kind of perception at all …
yā kāci saññā …
Any kind of choices at all …
ye keci saṅkhārā atītānāgatapaccuppannā ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikā vā sukhumā vā …pe… ayaṁ vuccati saṅkhārakkhandho.
Any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of consciousness.
Yaṁ kiñci viññāṇaṁ atītānāgatapaccuppannaṁ ajjhattaṁ vā bahiddhā vā oḷārikaṁ vā sukhumaṁ vā hīnaṁ vā paṇītaṁ vā yaṁ dūre santike vā, ayaṁ vuccati viññāṇakkhandho.

I guess I'm not really clear what Ajahn Sumedho means by "unconditioned" consciousness. If by that he means it's permanent, it would seem like that violates the idea that the aggregates are all anicca. If he means a type of consciousness that's free from defilement, I would assume that's the same as a non-grasping consciousness….a sort of consciousness that an Arahant would have before parinibbana, while still functioning in the world w/ a body. It's a consciousness free of greed, hatred, and delusion.

So I guess my question, in brief, is this: How does Ajahn Sumedho define "unconditioned"? Does he mean that's it's unchanging, or simply that it doesn't have greed, hatred, or delusion?

It doesn't contradict the suttas, because any type of cognizance within the context of the aggregates is clearly sensory and is annica.

This is clearly stated to not include the liberated consciousness without object.

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair.

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of contact...

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of intellectual intention...

"Where there is no passion for the nutriment of consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair.

"Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?"

"On the western wall, lord."

"And if there is no western wall, where does it land?"

"On the ground, lord."

"And if there is no ground, where does it land?"

"On the water, lord."

"And if there is no water, where does it land?"

"It does not land, lord."

"In the same way, where there is no passion for the nutriment of physical food... contact... intellectual intention... consciousness, where there is no delight, no craving, then consciousness does not land there or increase. Where consciousness does not land or increase, there is no alighting of name-&-form. Where there is no alighting of name-&-form, there is no growth of fabrications. Where there is no growth of fabrications, there is no production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is no production of renewed becoming in the future, there is no future birth, aging, & death. That, I tell you, has no sorrow, affliction, or despair."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

The sutta here very clearly discusses consciousness beyond the aggregates, so the passages describing the impermanent consciousness (sensory cognizance associated with the sense bases) in the aggregates discourses cannot be referring to the liberated consciousness described here.

I used to entertain the idea of a consciousness beyond the aggregates, but the more I investigated the suttas, the more I became convinced this is not possible. The sutta I referenced quite plainly says, "any kind of consciousness at all—past, future, or present; internal or external; coarse or fine; inferior or superior; far or near: this is called the aggregate of consciousness." Furthermore, SN 22.56 defines the consciousness aggregate as including mind consciousness and the 5 sense consciousnesses. So no, I don't think you can say the aggregate of consciousness is just sense consciousness. It's ANY consciousness.

FWIW, Ven Sariputta talks about a "purified mind [mano] consciousness freed from the 5 senses" and says it knows the bottom 3 formless realms at MN 43. Hence, my suspicion that Ajahn Sumedho is talking about the sphere of infinite consciousness.

I am familiar with SN 12.064. Indeed, I recently heard Ajahn Pasanno quote it, saying he prefers to talk about this "unmanifest consciousness" than "universal consciousness" (which he deems too eternalistic). But I don't see how this supports the idea of a consciousness beyond the aggregates. It just means that the aggregate of consciousness doesn't manifest anymore, i.e., it doesn't take rebirth. Is an aggregate that doesn't show up still an aggregate? or something besides an aggregate? IDK, this is all starting to sound like mind games and hair splitting

[Cause_and_Effect]

~

I have come to the opposite perspective. The more I investigate the suttas it is clear to me liberation of mind/consciousness is the goal and this is beyond the aggregates.
The sutta I referenced clearly describes 'consciousness not landing' through not taking delight in the aggregate of consciousness.
Consciousness in the 6 sense bases is simply congizance. This include the mind sense base and mind-objects. So 'any arising cognizance of senses whatsoever is impermanant'.

Objectless consciousness is a synonym for Nibbana and separate from 'any type of sensory cogizance'.

The teaching doesnt really make sense if all that we consider as a person is simplythe aggregates, and yet we are trying to be liberated from the aggregates.
The witnessing is beyond this and is what is liberated.
Elsewhere it is said that the six sense bases are 'the all' and that liberated citta is beyond the all.
This all points to a continuity of awareness aware of itself and liberated from involvement with the aggregates and sense bases as Nibbana.

[Ceisiwr]

Not normally no. That's the purpose of the path, to liberate consciousness by ending the process of dependent co arising and make it unconditioned.

If it was conditioned then it can’t become permanent and unconditioned. The purpose of the path is for all consciousness to end. For all forms of existence to end.

[mikenz66]

I have come to the opposite perspective. The more I investigate the suttas it is clear to me liberation of mind/consciousness is the goal and this is beyond the aggregates.
The sutta I referenced clearly describes 'consciousness not landing' through not taking delight in the aggregate of consciousness....

I guess it's possible to interpret it that way. And there are some parallels:
https://suttacentral.net/sn12.64/en/sujato
One in translation. No simile, but I think it's best not to read too much into similes:

“There are four nutriments which benefit sentient beings, causing them to abide in the world and receive nourishment. What are these four? The first is [1] rolled food. The second is [2] subtle food. The third is [3] the food of thought. The fourth is [4] the food of consciousness.
....
“If there is no craving and no delight for the Four Nutriments, then because there is no craving and no delight, consciousness neither abides nor increases. Because consciousness does not abide and does not increase, there is not entry into names and forms. Because there is not entry into names and forms, volitions do not increase. Because volitions do not increase, future becoming does not arise and does not extend. Because future existence does not arise and extend, then there is not the arising of future worldly birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, misery, vexation, and suffering. It is also such as this for the cessation of the pure mass of suffering.”

https://suttacentral.net/sa374/en/pierquet

On the other hand, one could also read it as simply one of the variations of dependent origination that only goes back to consciousness rather than ignorance:

But with the remainderless fading away and cessation of ignorance comes cessation of volitional formations; with the cessation of volitional formations, cessation of consciousness; with the cessation of consciousness, cessation of name-and-form; with the cessation of name-and-form, cessation of the six sense bases; ...

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.1/en/bodhi

Mike

[Cause_and_Effect]

Not normally no. That's the purpose of the path, to liberate consciousness by ending the process of dependent co arising and make it unconditioned.

If it was conditioned then it can’t become permanent and unconditioned. The purpose of the path is for all consciousness to end. For all forms of existence to end.

Not quite. You are just holding a variation of an annihilationist view which is an outsider teaching.

The purpose of the path is to end becoming which is a better translation of bhava than 'existence'.

Consciousness can proliferate and becomes conditioned. It can also end proliferation and sensory involvement and become unconditioned. The goal is clearly stated to be liberation of Citta, not cessation of Citta.

I have come to the opposite perspective. The more I investigate the suttas it is clear to me liberation of mind/consciousness is the goal and this is beyond the aggregates.
The sutta I referenced clearly describes 'consciousness not landing' through not taking delight in the aggregate of consciousness....

I guess it's possible to interpret it that way. And there are some parallels:
https://suttacentral.net/sn12.64/en/sujato
One in translation. No simile, but I think it's best not to read too much into similes:

“There are four nutriments which benefit sentient beings, causing them to abide in the world and receive nourishment. What are these four? The first is [1] rolled food. The second is [2] subtle food. The third is [3] the food of thought. The fourth is [4] the food of consciousness.
....
“If there is no craving and no delight for the Four Nutriments, then because there is no craving and no delight, consciousness neither abides nor increases. Because consciousness does not abide and does not increase, there is not entry into names and forms. Because there is not entry into names and forms, volitions do not increase. Because volitions do not increase, future becoming does not arise and does not extend. Because future existence does not arise and extend, then there is not the arising of future worldly birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, misery, vexation, and suffering. It is also such as this for the cessation of the pure mass of suffering.”

https://suttacentral.net/sa374/en/pierquet

Yes, I would interpret it like that.
The purpose of the path is to prevent consciousness from descending into the domain of Mara, that is creating another nama-rupa, an identity and a compounded aggregated being-becoming destined for disintegration.
Consciousness is the starting point and the end of the Buddhist path, from ignorant proliferating suffering consciousness to taintless liberated consciousness. I don't see how to interpret the above passage or the one posted earlier of consciousness without landing, in any other way.