Concepts
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2020 10:11 pm
At which point in the cognitive process do concepts arise?
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
MN 18: Madhupindika Sutta — The Ball of Honey
A man looking to pick a fight asks the Buddha to explain his doctrine. The Buddha's answer mystifies not only the man, but also a number of monks. Ven. Maha Kaccana finally provides an explanation, and in the course of doing so explains what is needed to bring the psychological sources of conflict to an end.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.htmlJust as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles:as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.
"In the same way, Radha, you too should smash, scatter, & demolish form, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for form.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish feeling, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for feeling.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish perception, and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for perception.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish fabrications, and make them unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for fabrications.
"You should smash, scatter, & demolish consciousness and make it unfit for play. Practice for the ending of craving for consciousness — for the ending of craving, Radha, is Unbinding."
Ācariya Anuruddha & B. Bodhi wrote:§32. Summary
Vacīghosānusārena sotaviññāṇavīthiyā
Pavattānantaruppannā manodvārassa gocarā
Atthā yassānusārena viññāyanti tato paraṁ
Sāyaṁ paññatti viññeyyā lokasanketanimmitā ti.
By following the sound of speech through the process of ear-consciousness, and
then by means of the concept conceived by (the process in the) mind-door that
subsequently arises, meanings are understood. These concepts should be understood as
fashioned by worldly conventions.
when we see something outside, idea comes in mind... then there is conciousness taking mind image as object and based on mind image feeling ariseSteRo wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:53 amĀcariya Anuruddha wrote:§32. Summary
Vacīghosānusārena sotaviññāṇavīthiyā
Pavattānantaruppannā manodvārassa gocarā
Atthā yassānusārena viññāyanti tato paraṁ
Sāyaṁ paññatti viññeyyā lokasanketanimmitā ti.
By following the sound of speech through the process of ear-consciousness, and
then by means of the concept conceived by (the process in the) mind-door that
subsequently arises, meanings are understood. These concepts should be understood as
fashioned by worldly conventions.
My problem with this is that sañña involves labelling and concepts. To quote the Vism.one_awakening wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 10:31 pmobject-conciousness-contact-feeling-perception-concepts
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... on2011.pdf130. But though classed in the same way as consciousness, nevertheless, as to characteristic, etc., it all has just the characteristic of perceiving. Its function is to make a sign as a condition for perceiving again that “this is the same,” as carpenters, etc., do in the case of timber, and so on. It is manifested as the action of interpreting by means of the sign as apprehended, like the blind who “see” an elephant (Ud 68–69). Its proximate cause is an objective field in whatever way that appears, like the perception that arises in fawns that see scarecrows as men
https://suttacentral.net/mn139/en/sujato“Idha, bhikkhave, tadevekaccesu janapadesu ‘pātī’ti sañjānanti, ‘pattan’ti sañjānanti, ‘vittan’ti
sañjānanti, ‘sarāvan’ti sañjānanti ‘dhāropan’ti sañjānanti, ‘poṇan’ti sañjānanti, ‘pisīlavan’ti
sañjānanti. Iti yathā yathā naṃ tesu tesu janapadesu sañjānanti tathā tathā thāmasā parāmāsā abhinivissa voharati: ‘idameva saccaṃ, moghamaññan’ti. Evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, jana¬pada¬niruttiyā ca abhiniveso hoti samaññāya ca atisāro.
Here, bhikkhus, in different localities they call the same thing a “dish” (pāti) or they call it a “bowl” (patta) or they call it a “vessel” (vittha) or they call it a “saucer (sarava) or they call it a “pan” (dhāropa) or they call it a “pot” (poṇa) or they call it a “mug” (hana) or they call it a “basin” (pisīla). So whatever they call it in such and such a locality, he speaks accordingly, firmly adhering to and insisting on that, “Only this is true, anything else is wrong.” This is how there comes to be insistence on local language and overriding of normal usage.”
https://www.saraniya.com/books/meditati ... dhamma.pdfLedi Sayadaw explains that it is in these consequent processes that distinct recognition of the object occurs; such recognition does not occur in a bare five-door process itself. An eye-door process, for example, is followed first by a conformational mind-door process (tadanuvattik± manodv±rav²thi), which reproduces in the mind door the object just perceived in the sense-door process. Then comes a process grasping the object as whole (samud±yag±hik±); then a process recognizing the colour (vaººasallakkhaº±); then a process grasping the entity (vatthug±hik±); then a process recognizing the entity (vatthu- sallakkhaº±); then a process grasping the name (n±mag±hik±); then a process recognizing the name (n±masallakkhaº±).
As I understand, for us yes. strictly speaking no concepts are associated with any of the five sense door processes. But sañña occurs in all cittas. Since we don't have the power of mental development to slow down, as it were the stream of cittas, we have to go the wisdom route.