Vinnana v. Phassa

[Spiny Norman]

Whats the practical difference between vinnana and phassa?

[asahi]

Whats the practical difference between vinnana and phassa?

Phassa include vinnana , vinnana by itself alone cannot arise .

[Spiny Norman]

Whats the practical difference between vinnana and phassa?

Phassa include vinnana , vinnana by itself alone cannot arise .

Why not?

The suttas say eye-consciousness arises in dependence on eye and form, isn't that sufficient to see something?

[sunnat]

MN148
"… Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the [sense-base]. The meeting of the three is contact. …”

For example:

When there is a functioning eye and an external object in its field of view, eye consciousness [vinnana] arises. The presence of these three (“the meeting of the three”) is what The Buddha called contact [phassa].

[as a result, feeling arises and with it the opportunity to step off the wheel of becoming]

[Spiny Norman]

MN148
"… Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the [sense-base]. The meeting of the three is contact. …”

For example:

When there is a functioning eye and an external object in its field of view, eye consciousness [vinnana] arises. The presence of these three (“the meeting of the three”) is what The Buddha called contact [phassa].

[as a result, feeling arises and with it the opportunity to step off the wheel of becoming]

So what's the practical difference between eye-consciousness and eye-contact?

[asahi]

Contact per the sutta :

Eye vs object vs vinnana = eye contact
It is always in unitary movement .

Therefore eyes or objects alone does not give rise to eyes vinnana .


eye-consciousness is seeing

[Spiny Norman]

Contact per the sutta :

Eye vs object vs vinnana = eye contact
It is always in unitary movement .

Therefore eyes or objects alone does not give rise to eyes vinnana .


eye-consciousness is seeing

So what's the practical difference between seeing and eye-contact?

If I've already seen something, why is "contact" necessary?

[asahi]

Contact per the sutta :

Eye vs object vs vinnana = eye contact
It is always in unitary movement .

Therefore eyes or objects alone does not give rise to eyes vinnana .


eye-consciousness is seeing

So what's the practical difference between seeing and contact?

Contact is labelling of the processes when 3 of them in assemblage or in unification .
Seeing refers to eye vinnana only .

[Spiny Norman]

Contact per the sutta :

Eye vs object vs vinnana = eye contact
It is always in unitary movement .

Therefore eyes or objects alone does not give rise to eyes vinnana .


eye-consciousness is seeing

So what's the practical difference between seeing and contact?

Contact is labelling of the processes when 3 of them in assemblage or in unification .
Seeing refers to eye vinnana only .

Contact is labelling? What do mean by "labelling", and where is this described?

[asahi]

So what's the practical difference between seeing and contact?

Contact is labelling of the processes when 3 of them in assemblage or in unification .
Seeing refers to eye vinnana only .

Contact is labelling? What do mean by "labelling", and where is this described?

Labelling , describing or naming it .

MN 148

Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. The meeting of the three is contact. Ear consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds. The meeting of the three is contact. Nose consciousness arises dependent on the nose and smells. The meeting of the three is contact. Tongue consciousness arises dependent on the tongue and tastes. The meeting of the three is contact. Body consciousness arises dependent on the body and touches. The meeting of the three is contact. Mind consciousness arises dependent on the mind and thoughts. The meeting of the three is contact.

[Spiny Norman]

Contact is labelling of the processes when 3 of them in assemblage or in unification .
Seeing refers to eye vinnana only .

Contact is labelling? What do mean by "labelling", and where is this described?

Labelling , describing or naming it .

MN 148

Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. The meeting of the three is contact. Ear consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds. The meeting of the three is contact. Nose consciousness arises dependent on the nose and smells. The meeting of the three is contact. Tongue consciousness arises dependent on the tongue and tastes. The meeting of the three is contact. Body consciousness arises dependent on the body and touches. The meeting of the three is contact. Mind consciousness arises dependent on the mind and thoughts. The meeting of the three is contact.

Nothing in there about describing or naming.

Anyway, I'm familiar with what the suttas say, but I'm asking a specific question here.

[asahi]

Nothing in there about describing or naming.

Isnt that is call tagging , assigning , specifying , describing , attributing ?!

[Spiny Norman]

Nothing in there about describing or naming.

Isnt that is call assigning , specifying , describing , attributing ?!

There is no reference to any of that in MN148. Just "meeting of the three".

[asahi]

There is no reference to any of that in MN148. Just "meeting of the three".

Eye consciousness arises dependent on the eye and sights. The meeting of the three is contact.


I am baffled why you cant see violet color statement are describing the blue color statement . It is really simple , clear , straight and plain .

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Anyway, I'm familiar with what the suttas say, but I'm asking a specific question here.

And with that said, it feels timely to introduce Nanavira Thera's note on Phassa into the conversation.

Metta,
Paul.