Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
Mahabrahma
Posts: 2232
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:02 am
Location: Krishnaloka :).
Contact:

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Mahabrahma »

cappuccino wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 9:20 pm
Mahabrahma wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 8:43 pm Instead of meditating ourselves out of existence, there are some who feel
said by the Master:

As even a little excrement is of evil smell, I do not praise even the shortest spell of existence, be it no longer than a snap of the fingers.

:quote:
Then where will you be for the beings of the future who will need your help in Spiritual Life? Buddha continued to help people.
That sage who has perfect insight,
at the summit of spiritual perfection:
that’s who I call a brahmin.

-Dhammapada.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by cappuccino »

Mahabrahma wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 10:16 pm Then where will you be for the beings of the future who will need your help in Spiritual Life?
Gone
User avatar
Mahabrahma
Posts: 2232
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:02 am
Location: Krishnaloka :).
Contact:

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Mahabrahma »

Gone, Gone, Gone beyond Gone utterly beyond

Gone, Gone, Gone beyond Gone utterly beyond

Gone, Gone, Gone beyond Gone utterly beyond

Oh what an Awakening...
That sage who has perfect insight,
at the summit of spiritual perfection:
that’s who I call a brahmin.

-Dhammapada.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Pulsar »

Ceisiwr wrote
I don't really know what divided vs undivided knowledge actually means to you.
It means bifurcated thinking. Try not to hung up on words.
In the puthujjana every thought that arises is "I" centered, creating a subject and object. Puthujjana lives in an "I" centered world. i.e. Sakkayaditthi in other words.
"I" in relation to the rest of the world.
Think of Nama-rupa. When a rupa arises in the mind of the worldling, it gets named (identified) leading to the creation of a new consciousness. Consiousness in Buddha's teaching is subject to ever renewal, an extension of samsara in other words, in the case of the worldling.
This does not happen in the enlightened mind. All identification has been left behind, hence no new consciousness is created, in the Arahant. Nothing around the Arahant has changed, but the way he sees the world had undergone a transformation.
Arahant is done with becoming. Many worldlings think Arahant has to physically die to be done with suffering.
In this very life no new consciousness is born for him (birth). How can he be born? If he does not get born, how can he die?
Think profoundly, the reference is not to the physical birth or death of the Arahant.
I am sure you have the intelligence to figure this out.
Good Night :candle:
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by User13866 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 9:42 pm
User13866 wrote: Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:44 pm
According to the dictionary Pali viññāṇa is analog form of Sanskrit विज्ञान (vijñāna)

From वि- (vi-, “diverse”) +‎ ज्ञान (jñāna, “knowledge”)

This is according to Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages

Therefore when you say

Ceisiwr wrote: Viññāṇa doesn’t mean “divided knowing”.


Yes you are saying the dictionary is wrong in expressing your disagreement with the above.

When did i ever misrepresent you... you are lying.

Ceisiwr wrote: Yes, but in any given language the suffix might not mean anything. Vitakka is an example. This is why breaking down words into roots doesn’t necessarily tell you what the word means.

[name redacted by admin] wrote: This is utterly irrelevant to this particular case. There is overwhelming evidence to the contrary of your pet theory and as far as i know you are in disagreement with pretty much all authority in linguistics.

The pali is constistently translated based on the assertions contrary to your belief and the wording lends itself to be properly translated in it's many derivatives & causatives like viññāpeti, vijānāti, viññeyya.
I'm not denying that the word can be broken down into "vi" and "jñāna" in Sanskrit, nor am I denying that it can be likewise broken down in Pāli, so your claim that I was saying the dictionary is wrong is false. You can break down the word like that, but the prefix "vi" doesn't mean anything. It's the same with Vitakka. The "vi" there doesn't mean anything. Furthermore, as I mentioned in my post above, you are committing the etymological fallacy here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy
You are not denying that it can be broken down but you are saying that it ought not be broken down and therefore saying that it can't rightly be broken downas to derive that meaning. When the dictionary breaks it down like this then they really do so not because it can be broken but because they hold that it rightly can & ought be thus broken down.

You say that it ought not be broken down like this because some prefixes don't mean anything but you do not provide any proof for the prefix in vinnana not meaning anything.

Even if you were to assert that no prefixes whatsoever mean anything you still need to provide proof.

Your claim is extraordinary but you provide no evidence.

Gratis asseritur gratis negatur. Your proposition is asserted without evidence and can also be dismissed without evidence.

Your not understanding the sutta is not evidence of them being erroneously translated because your ability to understand the sutta hasn't been established.

Furthermore you say that i am comitting an etymological fallacy but it is not so that i translated this word based on it's etymology alone.

The translations we use most of all make sense in context and therefore i approve of them. These translations paint a semantically coherent picture such that a transmission of knowledge can occur and lend itself to be codified into the various languages to paint the same picture.

Anyway do refrain from engaging me in this thread. I've had enough of you.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Ceisiwr »

On the meaning of words, one can of course break words down into their roots but what is more important is to look at how the word is actually used in any given language. If we take Vitakka, breaking it down doesn't tell you much because in the way the word is used the prefix "vi" is meaningless. The same for viññāṇa, which is why no dictionary that I know of defines it as "divided knowledge". The only time we hear this argument is when someone is trying to bolster their pet theories regarding the Dhamma and non-duality.
“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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Pulsar wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 2:52 am Ceisiwr wrote
I don't really know what divided vs undivided knowledge actually means to you.
It means bifurcated thinking. Try not to hung up on words.
In the puthujjana every thought that arises is "I" centered, creating a subject and object. Puthujjana lives in an "I" centered world. i.e. Sakkayaditthi in other words.
"I" in relation to the rest of the world.
Think of Nama-rupa. When a rupa arises in the mind of the worldling, it gets named (identified) leading to the creation of a new consciousness. Consiousness in Buddha's teaching is subject to ever renewal, an extension of samsara in other words, in the case of the worldling.
This does not happen in the enlightened mind. All identification has been left behind, hence no new consciousness is created, in the Arahant. Nothing around the Arahant has changed, but the way he sees the world had undergone a transformation.
Arahant is done with becoming. Many worldlings think Arahant has to physically die to be done with suffering.
In this very life no new consciousness is born for him (birth). How can he be born? If he does not get born, how can he die?
Think profoundly, the reference is not to the physical birth or death of the Arahant.
I am sure you have the intelligence to figure this out.
Good Night :candle:
You make it sound like the Arahant is unconscious. On thinking, Buddhas and Arahants would still think "I" would they not? If they think as a subject, then there is your "bifurcated thinking" that you speak of. If Arahants have this way of thinking, then its not the subject vs object distinction which is the problem.
“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
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Coëmgenu »

User13866 wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:41 am[...] From वि- (vi-, “diverse”) +‎ ज्ञान (jñāna, “knowledge”)

This is according to Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages

Therefore when you say

Ceisiwr wrote: Viññāṇa doesn’t mean “divided knowing”.


Yes you are saying the dictionary is wrong in expressing your disagreement with the above.

When did i ever misrepresent you... you are lying.
Rather than hiding behind the alleged contents of a dictionary entry like a bookish coward, you should consider the fact that it seems you haven't actually posted the definition given in the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, unless you're about to prove me wrong with a quotation from earlier.

Instead of the definition of vijñāna, you've copied out an etymology and an outline of what informs the principles of compositionality behind the derivation of the term.

I don't have access to the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, but that's an etymology, not a definition, and the principle of compositionality is not a universal principle of semantics. In fact, no natural human language naturally obeys the principle systematically. Human languages are characterized by semantic drift as much as phonetic change, and Pāli and Sanskrit are no different. Once any significant degree of semantic drift has taken root, the compositional derivation of a word becomes steadily more meaningless with regards to semantics.
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.
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by User13866 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 11:43 am
User13866 wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:41 am[...] From वि- (vi-, “diverse”) +‎ ज्ञान (jñāna, “knowledge”)

This is according to Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages

Therefore when you say

Ceisiwr wrote: Viññāṇa doesn’t mean “divided knowing”.


Yes you are saying the dictionary is wrong in expressing your disagreement with the above.

When did i ever misrepresent you... you are lying.
Rather than hiding behind the alleged contents of a dictionary entry like a bookish coward, you should consider the fact that it seems you haven't actually posted the definition given in the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, unless you're about to prove me wrong with a quotation from earlier.

Instead of the definition of vijñāna, you've copied out an etymology and an outline of what informs the principles of compositionality behind the derivation of the term.

I don't have access to the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, but that's an etymology, not a definition, and the principle of compositionality is not a universal principle of semantics. In fact, no natural human language naturally obeys the principle systematically. Human languages are characterized by semantic drift as much as phonetic change, and Pāli and Sanskrit are no different. Once any significant degree of semantic drift has taken root, the compositional derivation of a word becomes steadily more meaningless with regards to semantics.
Why are you talking to me? Rhetorical question. Thought we agreed not to talk to eachother but you seem to think you can unilaterally decide to start engaging me...
You are spreading lies about me making up vinaya rules and doctrines so why on earth do you think id want to talk to you?
Either way do not engage me. I've no interest in talking to you.
https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/s ... type=exact
Last edited by User13866 on Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Coëmgenu »

It looks like the claim that the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages defines vijñāna as "diverse knowledge," or "divided knowing," or whatever else of such nonsense, was totally bogus and nothing but a false claim.
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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Its a shame there is a tendency amongst some on this forum that, when their claims are pressed and shown to be dubious if not false, rather than use that as a point for growth they instead double down on the error or retreat.
“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
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Sam Vara »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:14 pm It looks like the claim that the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages defines vijñāna as "diverse knowledge," or "divided knowing," or whatever else of such nonsense, was totally bogus and nothing but a false claim.
What's strange is that the last link actually makes the point that Ceisiwr was repeating...
User13866
Posts: 1238
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:50 am

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by User13866 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:14 pm It looks like the claim that the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages defines vijñāna as "diverse knowledge," or "divided knowing," or whatever else of such nonsense, was totally bogus and nothing but a false claim.
It translates it as consciousness, derived from latin privity of knowledge which pretty much makes it's etymology co-knowing or collective knowing or divided knowing

I am not sure what "definition" of consciousness you are looking for because it's nature is a very controversial matter.

How do you expect someone to define consciousness or mind for that matter.

In the sutta there is manocittavinnana consistently translated mind-intellect-consciousness

What on earth are you expecting for a definition?
Last edited by User13866 on Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:28 pm, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Ceisiwr »

Sam Vara wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:23 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:14 pm It looks like the claim that the Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages defines vijñāna as "diverse knowledge," or "divided knowing," or whatever else of such nonsense, was totally bogus and nothing but a false claim.
What's strange is that the last link actually makes the point that Ceisiwr was repeating...
:shrug:
“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.”
Lal
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: Contradiction 1- Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?

Post by Lal »

Let me see if I can get everyone focused on the issue. My original post was to point out the following FACT.
- Translating “viññāṇa” as "consciousness" leads to self-contradiction. Therefore, there is a CRITICAL ERROR with that translation. We can discuss what the correct translation SHOULD BE after settling this issue.

I am re-wording my first post, “Contradiction 1 - Viññāṇa Means Consciousness?" below to make the case as simple as possible. Let us focus on that first.

1. “Paṭi­c­ca­samu­p­pāda Sutta (SN 12.1)”: https://suttacentral.net/sn12.1/en/suja ... =latin#2.1 states that “Avijjā paccayā saṅkhārā. saṅkhāra paccayā viññāṇaṁ.” That means “viññāṇa” arises due to “avijjā.”
- I have pointed to marker 2.1, where the above verses are translated as “Ignorance is a condition for choices. Choices are a condition for consciousness.“

2. At marker 3.1 of the same sutta, the reverse Paṭicca Samuppāda process states the opposites of the verses in #1, i.e., “Avijjāya tveva asesavirāganirodhā saṅkhāranirodho, saṅkhāranirodhā viññāṇanirodho
- At marker 3.1, those verses are translated as “When ignorance fades away and ceases with nothing left over, choices cease. When choices cease, consciousness ceases.”
- That means there will be no consciousness when avijja is completely removed from a mind. There is no way to avoid that conclusion per that translation.

3. Now, all Arahants (and the Buddha) would have removed avijjā (cessation of ignorance of the Four Noble Truths.) That is also a fact that no one can deny.

4. But according to the translation in #2 above, the translator says, “if avijja has been removed, consciousness will cease too."

5. That means the Buddha must have lost consciousness upon attaining Buddhahood. Does it not?

6. Obviously, that cannot be true since the Buddha lived for 45 more years teaching Dhamma. He must have had "consciousness" or "awareness." You can search for the definition of "consciousness" and make sure that is what it means.

7. That is the contradiction of translating “viññāṇa “ as “consciousness” regardless of the context.

8. Again, this is not a doctrinal issue on viññāṇa for discussion. This is simple English. Even a child can see the logic.
- Once we agree that the above translation cannot be correct (since it leads to a contradiction), then we can focus on the fact that its meaning depends on the context.

9. For example, "right" means two different things in the following cases: "Turn right" and "You are right."
- Suppose someone is translating those two sentences into the German language. If they use one meaning in both cases, that would lead to a contradiction and much confusion.
- That is the confusion we have today about translating “viññāṇa” as "consciousness" in all situations. Take any sutta, and in every sutta, the word “viññāṇa” is translated as "consciousness." That is insanity!

P.S. Some people cannot comprehend simple logic. I am not trying to convince them. I will stop posting on this issue on consciousness until I see a comment worthy of a response. Of course, I will keep pointing out such inconsistencies. There are so many!
Last edited by Lal on Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply