viññāṇa as divided knowing

[PeterC86]

Moreover, most people understand avijja as 'not-knowing', as in opposed to 'knowing'. So they think they have to gain knowledge to dissolve not-knowing. But there is no knowing without not-knowing, because what would one know if it wasn't opposed to not-knowing? It is like trying to say that there can be form without formless, existence without non-existence...So avijja can only be dissolved together with vijja.

Those people who try to gain knowledge by reading all these texts that proclaim to have knowledge, stuffing their bookshelfs with books, thinking "I have read a lot of books, so I am very knowledgeable, therefore I must be wise", instead all they have done is gaining self-view.

I don’t think anyone thinks they will awaken just by reading books on the Dhamma, but you have to start somewhere. Not being Buddhas we have to hear (or read) and conceptually understand the Dhamma first.

Of course, and through reading different texts, one might be fortunate to arrive upon the insight that I explained above, or one is less fortunate and one either doesn't stumble upon this insight, or one stumbles upon this insight but one isn't able to acknowledge the value of this insight due to conceit gained in the quest for 'knowledge'. In the last two cases, one continues to accumulate 'knowledge', in the hope to arrive upon that special kind of 'knowledge' that would dissolve ignorance. A life-filling quest in which one accumulates more and more 'knowledge', self-view, conceit, and suffering.

So the question in relation to your point is; to what extent is one able to let go of that what is assumed to be the Dhamma but hasn't brought one any attainment?

[User13866]

It is not easy to think of a good analogy that also fits the etymology situation so i'll leave it at that.

However ignoring the etymological point for a moment.

Suppose we want to figure out what is existence and what is it's cessation.

Someone then says existence is of two types, with delusion & without delusion, and the cessation of existence is actually a cessation of existence with delusion.

Then he isn't talking about a cessation of existence in a definitive sense but rather a cessation of existence in a qualified sense. He could likewise be talking about losing his pet as a cessation of existence [with a pet] in a qualified sense.

He is not going to explain neither what is existence nor it's cessation in a definitive sense because he doesn't know and can't see it.

[ssasny]

Hi,

That words can take on various shades of meaning based on their context should not be a source of dismay, it's just how language works.
Here is an example of the English word 'conscious' used in two different ways, off the top of my head.
[p.s. the phrase 'the top of my head' is used here differently than if I were to say, 'I placed the hat on the top of my head'.]

"As I lay there in the dark, I became conscious of something crawling up my leg."
('body consciousness')

"Ever the skillful diplomat, he was always conscious of his guest's desire to end the conversation."
(a general awareness)

Here are two examples from one Pali sutta: Middle Length Discourses #9, Sammādiṭṭhi Sutta

Cattārome, āvuso, āhārā bhūtānaṁ vā sattānaṁ ṭhitiyā, sambhavesīnaṁ vā anuggahāya.
There are these four fuels. They maintain sentient beings that have been born and help those that are about to be born.

Kabaḷīkāro āhāro oḷāriko vā sukhumo vā, phasso dutiyo, manosañcetanā tatiyā, viññāṇaṁ catutthaṁ.
Solid food, whether coarse or fine; contact is the second, mental intention the third, and consciousness the fourth.

...

Viññāṇasamudayā nāmarūpasamudayo, viññāṇanirodhā nāmarūpanirodho, ayameva ariyo aṭṭhaṅgiko maggo nāma­rūpa­nirodha­gāminī paṭipadā, seyyathidaṁ— sammādiṭṭhi …pe… sammāsamādhi.
Name and form originate from consciousness. Name and form cease when consciousness ceases. The practice that leads to the cessation of name and form is simply this noble eightfold path …”

Certainly, the type of consciousness that is described as ceasing here cannot be the 'consciousness' of an Arahat, since an Arahat would not fall into a coma upon enlightenment!

So, the same word means something a bit different in different places. And, I should add, it is not a defect of the translation that the same English word has been used as well. This is simply how language works.

[Sasha_A]

Viññāṇasamudayā nāmarūpasamudayo, viññāṇanirodhā nāmarūpanirodho, ayameva ariyo aṭṭhaṅgiko maggo nāma­rūpa­nirodha­gāminī paṭipadā, seyyathidaṁ— sammādiṭṭhi …pe… sammāsamādhi.
...
Certainly, the type of consciousness that is described as ceasing here cannot be the 'consciousness' of an Arahat, since an Arahat would not fall into a coma upon enlightenment!

Or DO is simply not about the origination and cessation of arahants or the world, or any other beings in the world, but only about the origination and cessation of dukkha for non arahants to see and to understand.

[ssasny]

Or DO is simply not about the origination and cessation of arahants or the world, or any other beings in the world, but only about the origination and cessation of dukkha for non arahants to see and to understand.

Yes, certainly not. My post was about viññāṇa.

[Pulsar]

Sasha_A wrote

Or DO is simply not about the origination and cessation of arahants or the world, or any other beings in the world, but only about the origination and cessation of dukkha for non arahants to see and to understand.

A nice way of putting it, down to earth, but the world for most of us, puthujjana, is the self created world due to Dependent Origination.
Self created would be the "self imagined by the mind"
Why do some say DO has a physical component? Does the self of Sakkaya Dhitti have a physical component, I mean the imagined self?
Abhidhamma appears to think so, enlightened Buddha did not.
Thus between the teachings of abhidhamma and the original teaching of Buddha (Pali Sutta pitaka contains both) disputes have gone on for 2500 years or more, endless and beginningless as Samsara itself.
Happy day to all! to those who insist that Arrahant's consciousness is the same as the puthujjana's. And to those who believe the teachings of Sutta Nipata plus suttas like "The Burden", that insist that the Arahant has laid down the burden, is free of the aggregates, even the aggregate of consciousness.
It is kind of fun to argue when one gets bored of mundane life, that kind of sucks at
times.
With Love

[Pulsar]

ssasny wrote

Yes, certainly not. My post was about viññāṇa.

Can vinnana (Buddha's teaching of it) be created apart from Dependent origination?
Can you bring me a sutta that says so?
Regards

[ssasny]

Can vinnana (Buddha's teaching of it) be created apart from Dependent origination?
Can you bring me a sutta that says so?
Regards

Sorry, I don't understand what (or why) you are asking. My post was about the various usages of the word viññāṇa.
(certainly consciousness is dependent on conditions, sorry if I seemed to suggest otherwise.)

Or maybe you are asking if the term viññāṇa is used outside the context of the dependent origination formula?
If so, the answer is yes. An example can be found quoted by me above, viññāṇa as an āhāra (fuel/nutriment).

[Vivekananda]

Here are two examples from one Pali sutta: Middle Length Discourses #9, Sammādiṭṭhi Sutta

Cattārome, āvuso, āhārā bhūtānaṁ vā sattānaṁ ṭhitiyā, sambhavesīnaṁ vā anuggahāya.
There are these four fuels. They maintain sentient beings that have been born and help those that are about to be born.

Kabaḷīkāro āhāro oḷāriko vā sukhumo vā, phasso dutiyo, manosañcetanā tatiyā, viññāṇaṁ catutthaṁ.
Solid food, whether coarse or fine; contact is the second, mental intention the third, and consciousness the fourth.

Certainly a good example where consciousness makes more sense, yet personally i can not go back.
Give it a try and replace consciousness in DO by defiled knowing, or discriminative knowing, and the comateous arahant will never again pose a riddle.
Best wishes from the forest.

[ssasny]

Certainly a good example where consciousness makes more sense, yet personally i can not go back.
Give it a try and replace consciousness in DO by defiled knowing, or discriminative knowing, and the comateous arahant will never again pose a riddle.
Best wishes from the forest.

adding adjectives to 'consciousness' or 'knowing' , defiled, discriminative, divided, eye, ear, 'aggregate of...' 'nutriment of...', 'dependent origination link of...' etc. can be helpful in understanding the context of its usage.

[Vivekananda]

Certainly a good example where consciousness makes more sense, yet personally i can not go back.
Give it a try and replace consciousness in DO by defiled knowing, or discriminative knowing, and the comateous arahant will never again pose a riddle.
Best wishes from the forest.

adding adjectives to 'consciousness' or 'knowing' , defiled, discriminative, divided, eye, ear, 'aggregate of...' 'nutriment of...', 'dependent origination link of...' etc. can be helpful in understanding the context of its usage.

Well, but when viññāṇa is equal to consciousness, then there is no adjective added and the arahant is unconscious, after awakening!

Yet taking soley jña, adding vi, we get a expanded knowing, a corrupted knowing, a knowing of the world, ...

I am not sure if it was posted before, but in the dictionary the broad scope of viññāṇa is clearly described. [Initially didn't study it thoroughly.]

PE1 Pali English Dictionary（PTS）
...
It is difficult to give any one word for v., because there is much difference between the old Buddhist and our modern points of view, and there is a varying use of the term in the Canon itself. In what may be a very old Sutta S.II,95 v. is given as a synonym of citta (q. v.) and mano (q. v.), in opposition to kāya used to mean body. This simpler unecclesiastical, unscholastic popular meaning is met with in other suttas. E. g. the body (kāya) is when animated called sa-viññāṇaka (q. v. and cp. viññāṇatta). Again, v. was supposed, at the body’s death, to pass over into another body (S.I,122; III,124) and so find a support or platform (patiṭṭhā).
...
V, was justly conceived more as “minding” than as “mind.”

Here the last two marked bits, to me hint quite clearly at how viññāṇa is to be understood in DO, viz. minding everything, dicriminating, propagating...

Best wishes from the forest.