Vinnana v. Phassa

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by SDC »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:36 pm There is no self in relation to contact and the subsequent feeling, no, but it still occurs for them as you say. They are detached from pain, but in the experience of pain there is still the experience of dukkha.
Pending we all agree that context matters, it is safe to say that the dukkhā (suffering) described in the four noble truths is far broader than dukkhā vedanā (painful feeling).

So, sure the fact that conceit is gone means that contact would never mean what it used to, but the ingredients that once made up the mass of suffering still lie about cut off like palm stumps.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by SDC »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:41 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:26 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:00 pm
You say that the presence of sight, etc., is the result of internal/external sense bases and consciousness. You then say that contact has other connotations, but in your sentence immediately before that you just outlined what contact is: the meeting of the three, i.e. the internal, the external, and consciousness, and furthermore that this results in sensory cognition, or rather "the presence of" sensory cognitions.
I’m calling it a meeting as not to be belligerent. The presence of all three is the basis for exposure to painful feeling, craving, clinging, etc.

You’re not privy to what produces sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches and thoughts: they are there because the faculties are intact. Action and intention in regard to what is felt is rooted in being exposed to senses with a mind not free of greed, hate and delusion, and that seems to be where contact applies.
What about the various places in the Canon in which Arhats or even the Buddha, free of greed etc., experience unpleasant vedanā that they traquilize using equanimity or the jhānas?
Can you quote one that describes a reversal of liberation and the presence of dukkhā to the extent of a renewal of the five aggregates subject to clinging? If not, painful feeling and suffering should not be bound up in these discussions.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
mjaviem
Posts: 2299
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by mjaviem »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 10:56 pm Venerable Ṭhānissaro hasn't translated sañña as "discernment". He has translated paññā as "discernment". For sañña he uses "perception". Sañña is about recognising signs and features and matching that with memory. Sañña recognises first light and so we conceptualise "dawn".
...
Discernment is Venerable Ṭhānissaro's choice of word for paññā. I think understanding or knowledge is more apt. Neither are about sañña.
Oh, now I understand what you were saying. My bad. Yes, I agree, wisdom means pañña, of course. In any case what I was saying is that to me sañña means discernament, distinction, differentiation. And that sañña and vinnana (and vedana) are conjoined.
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 10:56 pm ...
I don't really understand the neuroscience comment?
...
I mean that many people think that vedana has to do with nerve stimulation. They think that vinnana has to do with not being dead and not being in a coma and not being an animal. And that sañña has to do with memory and concepts. To me, as I said vedana is the affection, the experience we get. Vinnana and sañña is that ability of noticing this affection, this experience, and differentiating it from what it is not.
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 10:56 pm ... the perception of a skeleton... Sañña then recognises the signs and features of both "a skeleton" and "foul"...
The experience of foulness is of the unpleasant kind. This is what sañña distinguish, this unpleasant experience. This is what vinnana cognizes, this unpleasant experience.
Last edited by mjaviem on Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammā Sambuddhassa
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by asahi »

Spiny Norman wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:43 pm
asahi wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:35 pm
Spiny Norman wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:24 pm Surely sanna is the act of naming. Again, I don't see how this relates to phassa.

You clearly don't understand what that phrase means.
I think you are confused and mixed up individual process and naming the link in DO processes .
Sanna is your own naming activity .
Phassa is simply an account of naming Given by the Buddha for those 3 in meeting . :rofl:
You still haven't explained the meaning and purpose of phassa in the teachings, or provided a coherent response to my questions.
Just parroting "meeting of the three" explains nothing.
Didnt you understand phassa refers to primary phase of your sense experience ?
After so many years of studies !
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by Ceisiwr »

SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:44 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:36 pm There is no self in relation to contact and the subsequent feeling, no, but it still occurs for them as you say. They are detached from pain, but in the experience of pain there is still the experience of dukkha.
Pending we all agree that context matters, it is safe to say that the dukkhā (suffering) described in the four noble truths is far broader than dukkhā vedanā (painful feeling).

So, sure the fact that conceit is gone means that contact would never mean what it used to, but the ingredients that once made up the mass of suffering still lie about cut off like palm stumps.
Sure, but pain is also a form of dukkha.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by asahi »

Physical body pains is also referred as dukkha and is one of the component per the dukkha sacca . This particular dukkha havent completely get eliminated while still alive .
No bashing No gossiping
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by Coëmgenu »

SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:46 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:41 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:26 pm

I’m calling it a meeting as not to be belligerent. The presence of all three is the basis for exposure to painful feeling, craving, clinging, etc.

You’re not privy to what produces sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches and thoughts: they are there because the faculties are intact. Action and intention in regard to what is felt is rooted in being exposed to senses with a mind not free of greed, hate and delusion, and that seems to be where contact applies.
What about the various places in the Canon in which Arhats or even the Buddha, free of greed etc., experience unpleasant vedanā that they traquilize using equanimity or the jhānas?
Can you quote one that describes a reversal of liberation and the presence of dukkhā to the extent of a renewal of the five aggregates subject to clinging? If not, painful feeling and suffering should not be bound up in these discussions.
In this life, vedanā still reoccurs. There are many instances of this in the Pāli suttas, such as when the Buddha plainly states that his back aches and he can't teach the Dhamma right now. I can get a quote when I'm back at a computer. The Mahāyānika explanation is that this back pain is a skillfull means to instruct beings burdered with bodies and minds how to overcome their own pains, but a plain reading suggests that his back simply ached to the extent that he could not teach.

On terms of a "renewal" of the aggregates, this would be rebirth, which doesn't happen to Arhats and Buddhas. If a reader of the suttas has a preconceived notion that rebirth is impossible or superstitious or must be otherwise re-defined as the appropriation of new identities, then that creates all sorts of problems. In the moment that the Buddha's back ached, was he lost in an identity for instance? There was vedanā, so does that mean that the aggregates were "renewed" for a moment? Obviously not, but that is the conclusion of this reconstructionist Buddhism.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by SDC »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:57 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:44 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 1:36 pm There is no self in relation to contact and the subsequent feeling, no, but it still occurs for them as you say. They are detached from pain, but in the experience of pain there is still the experience of dukkha.
Pending we all agree that context matters, it is safe to say that the dukkhā (suffering) described in the four noble truths is far broader than dukkhā vedanā (painful feeling).

So, sure the fact that conceit is gone means that contact would never mean what it used to, but the ingredients that once made up the mass of suffering still lie about cut off like palm stumps.
Sure, but pain is also a form of dukkha.
I’m not sure what you mean. To what extent? If the first noble truth is, in short, the five aggregates subject to clinging, and if that clinging is desire-and-lust towards those aggregates, I’m not sure how that relates to the experience of the arahant. Is this in reference to anything other than dukkhā vedanā? If so, it would help to see a sutta.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by Ceisiwr »

SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm
I’m not sure what you mean. To what extent? If the first noble truth is, in short, the five aggregates subject to clinging, and if that clinging is desire-and-lust towards those aggregates, I’m not sure how that relates to the experience of the arahant. Is this in reference to anything other than dukkhā vedanā? If so, it would help to see a sutta.
To the extent that it is pain. Pain is included under the definition of what is dukkha in the 1st Noble Truth. The 5 aggregates when subject to clinging are dukkha because when there is clinging there is existence, and when there is existence there is literal birth. Having been literally born one will experience all manner of pain, which is a form of dukkha. Life itself is, according to the Buddha, intrinsically suffering. What the Arahant experiences is the dukkha that is there because of past clinging, because when there is clinging there will be suffering.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by SDC »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:42 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm
I’m not sure what you mean. To what extent? If the first noble truth is, in short, the five aggregates subject to clinging, and if that clinging is desire-and-lust towards those aggregates, I’m not sure how that relates to the experience of the arahant. Is this in reference to anything other than dukkhā vedanā? If so, it would help to see a sutta.
To the extent that it is pain. Pain is included under the definition of what is dukkha in the 1st Noble Truth. The 5 aggregates when subject to clinging are dukkha because when there is clinging there is existence, and when there is existence there is literal birth. Having been literally born one will experience all manner of pain, which is a form of dukkha. Life itself is, according to the Buddha, intrinsically suffering. What the Arahant experiences is the dukkha that is there because of past clinging, because when there is clinging there will be suffering.
Needless to say we see this differently. Thank you for the clarification.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by Ceisiwr »

SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:31 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:42 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm
I’m not sure what you mean. To what extent? If the first noble truth is, in short, the five aggregates subject to clinging, and if that clinging is desire-and-lust towards those aggregates, I’m not sure how that relates to the experience of the arahant. Is this in reference to anything other than dukkhā vedanā? If so, it would help to see a sutta.
To the extent that it is pain. Pain is included under the definition of what is dukkha in the 1st Noble Truth. The 5 aggregates when subject to clinging are dukkha because when there is clinging there is existence, and when there is existence there is literal birth. Having been literally born one will experience all manner of pain, which is a form of dukkha. Life itself is, according to the Buddha, intrinsically suffering. What the Arahant experiences is the dukkha that is there because of past clinging, because when there is clinging there will be suffering.
Needless to say we see this differently. Thank you for the clarification.
Indeed we do.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by SDC »

Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm In this life, vedanā still reoccurs. There are many instances of this in the Pāli suttas, such as when the Buddha plainly states that his back aches and he can't teach the Dhamma right now.
Again, there would have to be some indication that the back pain is the same dukkha that is sorrow, lamentation, pain with ignorance as a condition. Otherwise, painful feeling and that abysmal dukkha should be carefully distinguished.
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm On terms of a "renewal" of the aggregates, this would be rebirth, which doesn't happen to Arhats and Buddhas. If a reader of the suttas has a preconceived notion that rebirth is impossible or superstitious or must be otherwise re-defined as the appropriation of new identities, then that creates all sorts of problems. In the moment that the Buddha's back ached, was he lost in an identity for instance? There was vedanā, so does that mean that the aggregates were "renewed" for a moment? Obviously not, but that is the conclusion of this reconstructionist Buddhism.
I don’t disagree since the above is a careful distinction, which is good because painful feeling and suffering are not always the same thing. The dart sutta makes this abundantly clear (SN 36.6).
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by Ceisiwr »

SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:45 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm In this life, vedanā still reoccurs. There are many instances of this in the Pāli suttas, such as when the Buddha plainly states that his back aches and he can't teach the Dhamma right now.
Again, there would have to be some indication that the back pain is the same dukkha that is sorrow, lamentation, pain with ignorance as a condition. Otherwise, painful feeling and that abysmal dukkha should be carefully distinguished.
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm On terms of a "renewal" of the aggregates, this would be rebirth, which doesn't happen to Arhats and Buddhas. If a reader of the suttas has a preconceived notion that rebirth is impossible or superstitious or must be otherwise re-defined as the appropriation of new identities, then that creates all sorts of problems. In the moment that the Buddha's back ached, was he lost in an identity for instance? There was vedanā, so does that mean that the aggregates were "renewed" for a moment? Obviously not, but that is the conclusion of this reconstructionist Buddhism.
I don’t disagree since the above is a careful distinction, which is good because painful feeling and suffering are not always the same thing. The dart sutta makes this abundantly clear (SN 36.6).
Back pain is pain, and pain is defined as a form of dukkha. Physical pain arises with ignorance as a condition. In relation to the two darts, both are suffering. To suggest that pain is not dukkha is to say pain is unconditioned, since only the unconditioned is devoid of dukkha.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by SDC »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:49 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:45 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm In this life, vedanā still reoccurs. There are many instances of this in the Pāli suttas, such as when the Buddha plainly states that his back aches and he can't teach the Dhamma right now.
Again, there would have to be some indication that the back pain is the same dukkha that is sorrow, lamentation, pain with ignorance as a condition. Otherwise, painful feeling and that abysmal dukkha should be carefully distinguished.
Coëmgenu wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 2:09 pm On terms of a "renewal" of the aggregates, this would be rebirth, which doesn't happen to Arhats and Buddhas. If a reader of the suttas has a preconceived notion that rebirth is impossible or superstitious or must be otherwise re-defined as the appropriation of new identities, then that creates all sorts of problems. In the moment that the Buddha's back ached, was he lost in an identity for instance? There was vedanā, so does that mean that the aggregates were "renewed" for a moment? Obviously not, but that is the conclusion of this reconstructionist Buddhism.
I don’t disagree since the above is a careful distinction, which is good because painful feeling and suffering are not always the same thing. The dart sutta makes this abundantly clear (SN 36.6).
Back pain is pain, and pain is defined as a form of dukkha. Physical pain arises with ignorance as a condition. In relation to the two darts, both are suffering.
But like I’ve said many times before, you’re putting grains of sand next to a mountain, which the Buddha himself said is not a reasonable comparison. Can you please post the sutta that you are referring to - where the “pain is defined as a form of dukkha”? What’s the context?

Is it the Sariputta one? “All that is felt is included in suffering”?
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22382
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Vinnana v. Phassa

Post by Ceisiwr »

SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:53 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:49 pm
SDC wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 3:45 pm

Again, there would have to be some indication that the back pain is the same dukkha that is sorrow, lamentation, pain with ignorance as a condition. Otherwise, painful feeling and that abysmal dukkha should be carefully distinguished.



I don’t disagree since the above is a careful distinction, which is good because painful feeling and suffering are not always the same thing. The dart sutta makes this abundantly clear (SN 36.6).
Back pain is pain, and pain is defined as a form of dukkha. Physical pain arises with ignorance as a condition. In relation to the two darts, both are suffering.
But like I’ve said many times before, you’re putting grains of sand next to a mountain, which the Buddha himself said is not a reasonable comparison. Can you please post the sutta that you are referring to - where the “pain is defined as a form of dukkha”? What’s the context?
“And what is suffering, what is the origin of suffering, what is the cessation of suffering, what is the way leading to the cessation of suffering? Birth is suffering; ageing is suffering; sickness is suffering; death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair are suffering; not to obtain what one wants is suffering; in short, the five aggregates affected by clinging are suffering. This is called suffering." - MN 9

We could also refer to the many suttas which state that all forms of vedanā are suffering. Pain is the 1st dart, grief the 2nd to give a brief example from above. The 1st dart is still a dart ;)
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Thu Aug 18, 2022 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Post Reply