Discernment challenge 😎

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 13, 2019, 3:01pm

I should maybe update the challenge description also because it doesn’t mention presently arisen.

DCM · February 13, 2019, 4:28pm

Okay here goes. The presently arisen feeling/mood in my current experience is one of mildly unpleasant. I have this feeling right now which is filling my whole experience from a background point of view. This general feeling seems to be other people’s fault without reflection, and the feeling has affected the level of anger i have towards others. My level of craving for sensuality increasing as this feeling persists, as a way of trying to escape the unpleasantness. It is, and will, build and build until I give in.

It appears as a background cloud when I think of it, and I have no power of when it comes or goes, it is not under my control, just like when pleasant feeling arises. At the moment this knowledge does not help me as much as I would like, possibly because I am too involved on the particular level of experience and not mindful enough.

Mat · February 13, 2019, 5:52pm

I meant people on this forum are generally more likely to be progressing but I agree some people might find this a bit of enjoyment from the dhamma.

Coemgenu · February 13, 2019, 7:02pm

I see a computer screen. I see my hands. I see my room. I do not see my eyes themselves, unless looking in a mirror.

To me, my eyes are a locationless television screen that something watches. I mentally conceive of my field of vision as a flat screen “somewhere” locally in my head, but this somewhere is demonstrably no where.

So speak of more than eyes: when I touch my forehead, it seems far in front of this somewhere, when I touch the back of my head, it seems far behind this somewhere.

Now to disobey the OP and speak from experience in reading.

When the antique Jewish Abrahamists imagined omniperception, they spoke of “eyes within eyes”. Eyes all over the body. We can interpret this image literally, and imagine Jewish angels and those who ascend in the heavenly chariot as bodily covered in numerous eyes like a Lovecraftian horror. Or we can understand “eye” and “source of vision” and see that they may be simply describing a supernaturally enlarged “field” of vision. Eyes within eyes.

There is a notion that the mind, soul, spirit, what-have-you, can leave the body. This has actually happened to me before, but never in a context where I couldn’t be sure it wasn’t a particularly inventive dream.

It seems awfully convenient, that this locationless flat screen can leave the context of the head and continue on, soaring and self-luminous, seeing just as it did through the eyes outside of the eyes. IMO this is one of the most suspiciously convenient beliefs in some Buddhisms. It is actually pan-religious more or less, that an eternal field of vision can be separated from a to-be annihilated organ.

When I look at my conceived field of vision, conceived as it is like a flat screen both"somewhere" and “nowhere in particular”, I don’t see how it could begin to fly around like a movie camera on a crane.

karl_lew · February 13, 2019, 7:22pm

Um, isn’t the visual cortex involved in processing visual thoughts (i.e., internal sights)?
I can certainly fly around my mental image of a cube.

Coemgenu · February 13, 2019, 7:25pm

Yes, but I don’t intuitively “imagine” the inside of my head as a “brain”. Despite knowing it is a brain. Instead, I experience it as a flat TV-screen-like something in a place I am not familiar with. Sounds come in from “somewhere”.

Tactile sensation and proprioception are much more “direct” seeming. I know where my hand is, I feel it touch.

Once in my younger days I did a massive amount of weed and it significantly impaired my proprioception for a few days, but other than that those senses seem just so much more straightforward.

karl_lew · February 13, 2019, 7:34pm

Oh wow! You visualize yourself as stationary in a room.
I visualize as an ephemeral viewpoint independently orientable and translatable and not restricted to head. Now I understand your post.

Thank you.

Coemgenu · February 13, 2019, 7:44pm

Not too stationery. I mean, I do move around, and this nowhere/somewhere is clearly “in my head,” I can see my torso, etc.

But also yes in some way.

I suppose my intuitive self-conception is something like a brain homunculus, despite knowing this is something silly to intuit. Intuition is largely unconscious, though, IMO.

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 13, 2019, 11:26pm

Excellent. This is not as silly as it might seem, because by discerning the presently arisen feeling, one can then understand its Nature.
There is also no right way of answering, because it’s the way one attends to feeling, here and now, which is important. The proper way of investigation and ability to compose ones mind in knowing-background-feeling-while-perceiving.

Exactly.

Although you are still trying to know and describe feeling, you do however slip into an explanation of what is going on i.e " its because feeling is like this and that this is happening".
This slip into explanation is normal, it is the losing of the sight of feeling and thinking about it too much i.e you lose the direct knowing of the background, by thinking too far into the foreground of thought.

The bold= description;
The italics = explanation.
Although your explanation may be right and true it is again a slip.
You try to explain the reasons and implications of the arisen feeling and craving instead of describing its present characteristic features.

Again, let me just say, it’s not wrong, but seeing the difference is crucial because then you can see when you are thinking about feeling(perceiving it) or directly knowing it(feeling the feeling). (This is the whole point)

The bold= this is the describing of the Nature of feeling. What more can be said really?
Knowing/discerning the feeling, correctly reveals its Nature!
As you might be able to notice then, you don’t need to resort to a thoughtful explanation about feeling to Understand its Nature.
By discerning the Nature of feeling correctly, enough times, what do you think will happen?

Here you are giving voice to your craving i.e I want and expect something to happen.
This will take you away from discerning the present feeling. ( however, its not something that you should deny is happening, because noticing the difference rather than trying to fix things…is a crucial point i.e THERE is craving, THERE is feeling)

The abandoning of expectation of trying to FIND something will allow you to just discern what is there.

Describing what is there relies on you not interfering with what is there i.e looking through feeling to try to find something, you will not ‘see’ it but will be instead absorbed into thinking about it, expecting to find something, lost in craving.

Discerning feeling will reveal the craving…as you can begin to see from your description.
Being able to discern the pressure of craving which is in regards to a feeling, will reveal the Nature of that situation…and that is…well I wonder if you see what that is?

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 13, 2019, 11:49pm

Great.
Again this will reveal the nature of the eye-element and the nature of the attempts at the appropriation of the eye-element.

I am pleased that you can tell the difference.

I see what you mean.
The omni_perception_ is in some sense,not a wrong description of perception in general.
Also, the need to represent this in images(angels etc) may be an attempt to describe it and to ‘capture’ the insight, but that trying to ‘capture’ it will inevitably lead to views about it i.e its God, i have a transcendent soul, the world is eternal etc etc

Martin · February 14, 2019, 10:10am

IMO it is what is described in the second frame of satipatthana ( MN10), basically knowing what feelings are present at any one time: “They meditate observing feelings as liable to originate, as liable to vanish, and as liable to both originate and vanish. Or mindfulness is established that feelings exist, to the extent necessary for knowledge and mindfulness.”

Sure, though without full equanimity there will inevitably be some craving or aversion involved. Awareness of craving and aversion is part of the third fame of satipatthana ( states of mind ). This relates to DO where craving ( tanha ) arises in dependence upon feeling ( vedana ).

Yes, there is a directness and immediacy about tactile sensation - possibly why mindfulness of the body is stressed in the EBTs?

Mat · February 14, 2019, 11:38am

I think this might be because we consider the body to be mine, as differing from sights and sounds.

DCM · February 14, 2019, 9:16pm

Eventually anattā will be realised I’d suspect.

So Venerable would you recommend doing this as contemplation, drilling continuously?

It arises and ceases by itself as is not me or mine.

This kind of contemplation is very helpful for me, as reading the Suttas on there own isn’t enough for understanding, I need to know what these Dhammas are in my experience as the the Suttas are so general.

Bhante, I’d be very happy if you had the time to write up your experience of, and nature of the 5 Aggregates as you did for the eye.
Best Wishes
Darren

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 15, 2019, 12:43am

Indeed, doing this only a few times will not make a difference.
Of course, there is only so much you can say about ‘feeling’, but the point is to be able to discern it sufficiently enough, through initially describing it and ‘learning how to let feeling feel’, and then when it is ‘discernable’ to let it be (although its just like it always was), persisting in the background.
There is always a feeling, so if you discern it correctly, you cannot forget about it, you cannot forget about that significant background. Thus mindfulness becomes effortless.
Keep trying until one simply cannot give in to or be fooled by the feeling-pressure-effect anymore. That can then verify if you are in fact headed in the right direction.

It will because it is the way it is, its not something that you have to create. It becomes apparent.

And one just needs to learn to let that significance endure; or allow that sign of ‘not mine’ to sink in, so to speak.

Yes, the instructions need to be applied.
Restraint being an obvious instruction or guarding the doors /apertures of the senses.
By not giving into the pressure of the senses, your situation, your world begins to become apparent here and now, one becomes truly alive, so to speak…a great way to cure depression actually.

Well I accept the challenge, and I will try it a bit later.

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 15, 2019, 8:01am

Before I begin and before you read my description, I suggest you write down your own description first, so as not to be influenced by mine.
The point is not to get the right answers but to be able to get the right base(yoniso manasikara) established, so that the right answers(parato ca ghosa) will become apparent (sanditthiko).

There are two conditions for the arising of right view:
“Dve kho, āvuso, paccayā sammādiṭṭhiyā uppādāya—
the words of another and knowledge of the ground by which attention is .
parato ca ghoso, yoniso ca manasikāro." MN43

It is said “Five aggregates, five aggregates”, what is " five aggregates?

There are five aggregates which constitute the entirety of my experience and so I will refer to them as ‘THIS’ meaning the ‘five-aggregates’ as one thing.
THIS is a thing, my whole experience. It is a general thing.
It is my whole situation, not the particular parts within.

I see, hear, smell, taste, touch, think. I feel. I intend. I am typing. There is movement. There is stillness. There is attention…all of that is encompassed by THIS, the situation as a whole.

Those particular things within THIS, I will refer to as this.
I can’t call it that because that would leave ‘me’ out.
I am included in the term this. I am also a particular part encompassed by THIS.

THIS I cannot perceive directly, even as I think THIS…that is a thought about THIS which is a part of this.
I can only know THIS as a kind of significance of this.
this points to THIS.
Wherever I look I whatever I think, that is all within the situation as a whole.
The knowledge of THIS, is in a way, a higher knowledge, literally higher. It is not something I can pay attention to. It is behind attention while I attend to this typing.
It is the behind my thinking as I think about this description.
I can only know it indirectly on account of this.

The source of my attention cannot be attended to but I can know it indirectly while I am attending.

What I attend to is in front, the foreground.
That foreground is this.
The foreground indicates the background.
If I imagine " if that foreground was not here", I can’t now imagine how I could know of THIS background.
I can’t even now imagine THIS background without _this_foreground.
They seem inseparable but not joined.
When there is the background, there is the foreground.
When there is the foreground, there is the background.
“With THIS, this is”

The THIS is there unmoving, but it IS just there. It’s beginning I cannot remember. It has manifested and as such, it is manifested. It endures.
It is more apparent to me now, not like before I started typing I could say that, its apparentness is increasing while it endures.

THIS is manifested and this is manifested.
I cannot imagine one without the other.
I cannot grasp that background, its beyond my grasp.

Where are perceptions? In front
Where is attention? Behind perceptions pointing forwards
Where are intentions? All around perceptions , directing attention. (There are infinite possibilities, but only a few get attended to)
Where is feeling? Behind perceptions, behind attention, behind intentions, undirected, not pointing anywhere
Where is form/rupa? Unperceivable, unattendable, further behind or even below/beyond this. Inconceivable.

All that this is there within THIS.
The THIS is undeniable. It IS even if I don’t want it to be. It is even if I want more of it. It is indifferent to me or this
It has manifested, which indicates the opposite of what it is.
It indicates the ‘possibility of non-manifestation’.
The sign of ‘possibility of non- manifestation’ has manifested on account of the manifested.
Or
THIS indicates its negative i.e its possibility of cessation, NOT-THIS.

I think I will stop there and leave you with the following sutta:

MN38
“Bhikkhus, do you see: ‘THIS has manifested’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, do you see: ‘Its manifestation occurs with that this as nutriment’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, do you see: ‘With the(possibility of)cessation of that this nutriment, what has manifested is subject to the (possibility of )cessation’?”—“Yes, venerable sir

Bhikkhus, does doubt arise when one is uncertain thus: ‘Has THIS manifested’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, does doubt arise when one is uncertain thus: ‘Does its manifestation occur with that this as nutriment’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, does doubt arise when one is uncertain thus: ‘With the possibility of cessation of that this nutriment, is what has manifested subject to possibility of cessation’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“Bhikkhus, is doubt abandoned in one who sees as it actually is with right understanding thus: ‘THIS has manifested’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, is doubt abandoned in one who sees as it actually is with right understanding thus: ‘Its manifestation occurs with that this as nutriment’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, is doubt abandoned in one who sees as it actually is with right understanding thus: ‘With the (possibility of)cessation of that this nutriment, what has manifested is subject to possibility of cessation’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“Bhikkhus, are you thus free from doubt here: ‘This has manifested’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, are you thus free from doubt here: ‘Its manifestation occurs with that this as nutriment’?” —“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, are you thus free from doubt here: ‘With the possibility of cessation of that this nutriment, what has manifested is subject to cessation’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“Bhikkhus, has it been seen well by you as it actually is with right understanding thus: ‘This has manifested’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, has it been seen well by you as it actually is with right understanding thus: ‘Its manifestation occurs with that this as nutriment’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, has it been seen well by you as it actually is with right understanding thus: ‘With the possibility of cessation of that this nutriment, what has manifested is subject to possibility of cessation’?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

“Bhikkhus, purified and bright as this view is, if you adhere to it, cherish it, treasure it, and treat it as a possession, would you then understand that the Dhamma has been taught as similar to a raft, being for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of acquiring?”—“No, venerable sir.”—“Bhikkhus, purified and bright as this view is, if you do not adhere to it, cherish it, treasure it, and treat it as a possession, would you then understand that the Dhamma has been taught as similar to a raft, being for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of acquisition?”—“Yes, venerable sir.”

DCM · February 15, 2019, 4:34pm

Here goes…
5 Aggregates- I noticed as I was writing this all the Aggregates are working together constantly, their nature is to ‘experience’

Consciousness- The nature of my consciousness is to experience, and it will experience whether i say so or not, it is the ultimate background and becomes particular when my senses are contacted.

Form- For me, form is the hardness of the steering wheel I am feeling, the heat of my body sitting in this seat, the cool breath coming into my body, and the horrible tasting saliva in my mouth from not eating all day. My senses are also form, and their nature is to search out sense pleasures, I can’t stop them doing that as long as I have this body, but I practice restraint of them as the sense objects contact me.

Perception- Right now I perceive things based on the eye, the shape of a black car in front of me, my perceptions based on the ear are of traffic passing by, close, then off into the distance. My overall general background perception is one of ‘my experience’.

Feeling- The presently arisen feeling/mood in my current experience is one of mildly unpleasant. I have this feeling right now which is filling my whole experience from a background point of view. My level of craving for sensuality increasing as this feeling persists. It appears as a background cloud, and I have no power of when it comes or goes, it is not under my control.

Determinations- My intention is driving me to type these words on my tablet screen, and as I become more aware of my intentions i see there are a number of them determining each other constantly, ‘faster I type the quicker I will get home from work’, ‘no, slow down and get this right’.

I may have mixed a lot up and some may not make sense. I’ve got a long way to go, but at least I’m making a start!

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 16, 2019, 12:40am

I will ask you some questions in regards to those descriptions that you gave, not to get right answers but to keep your thinking ‘concrete’, or to keep your thinking to be concerned with the ‘thing’ which you are actually experiencing; so that you learn the difference between abstract thinking and concrete thinking, so that you can think rightly without being distracted into your thoughts, divorcing yourself from the thing you are describing. ( which you might already be doing of course)

Abstract thinking is not wrong but if one approaches the Dhamma like this, one will remain unaffected by the meaning of the Dhamma and instead will be solely a scholar with great concepts and ideas or a scientist with great theories and conclusions.
Those ideas are necessary to a degree, but there needs to be concrete thinking so to be able to see and know what those ideas MEAN, to know what those teachings mean or point to in your present experiential reality.
For example, it is said, ’ all sankharas are anicca’, so I could look up the meaning of those words and then sutta references and think ‘about’ those concepts, abstractly divorced from ‘direct’ discernment of those actual things which the concepts are in regards to. Of course, as you can see, I need to know first ABOUT the words, so dictionaries and sutta referencing is important, but then I need to know or discern what the words are REFERRING to.
This is why the description rather than explanation is important.
I can think about a feeling, but that is not the feeling.
The feeling is not a thinking, its a feeling.
I cannot stop thinking, but I can think without abstract, distracted thinking(vicikiccha)and without losing the discernment of the feeling.
Thinking (vitakka-vicara ) which is not divorced from the actual thing that I am presently thinking i.e yoniso manasikara.

MN16
“puna caparaṃ, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhamme kaṅkhati vicikicchati nādhimuccati na sampasīdati … pe … evamassāyaṃ dutiyo cetokhilo appahīno hoti.__Furthermore, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is uncertain about, thinks abstractly about, does not become settled on, does not become clear about the Dhamma… in this way there is this second mental barrenness which is not abandoned."

MN43
“paṭhamaṃ kho, āvuso, jhānaṃ pañcaṅgavippahīnaṃ, pañcaṅgasamannāgataṃ. idhāvuso, paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa bhikkhuno kāmacchando pahīno hoti, byāpādo pahīno hoti, thīnamiddhaṃ pahīnaṃ hoti, uddhaccakukkuccaṃ pahīnaṃ hoti, vicikicchā pahīnā hoti; vitakko ca vattati, vicāro ca pīti ca sukhañca cittekaggatā ca. paṭhamaṃ kho, āvuso, jhānaṃ evaṃ pañcaṅgavippahīnaṃ pañcaṅgasamannāgatan”ti. Friend, the first jhāna, with five things abandoned, is endowed with five things. Here, friend, the desire for sensual pleasures is abandoned by a bhikkhu who has entered upon the first jhāna, ill-will is abandoned, rigidity-&-sluggishness is abandoned, over-excitement-&-misconduct is abandoned, abstract thinking is abandoned. Thinking goes on, and pondering, and joy, and pleasure, and the unification of mind. In this way, friend, the first jhāna, with five things abandoned, is endowed with five things."

Usually one tries to attend a feeling but this is not possible because ‘feeling’ is in the background, and so one needs to discern that background while attending the foreground(thinking).
Thinking thinks, feeling feels.

SN47:35
“_kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu sampajāno hoti? idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno viditā vedanā uppajjanti, viditā upaṭṭhahanti, viditā abbhatthaṃ gacchanti. viditā vitakkā uppajjanti, viditā upaṭṭhahanti, viditā abbhatthaṃ gacchanti. viditā saññā uppajjanti, viditā upaṭṭhahanti, viditā abbhatthaṃ gacchanti. evaṃ kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu sampajāno hoti.
And how, bhikkhus, is a bhikkhu aware? Here, bhikkhus, it is known by a bhikkhu that feelings arise, it is known that they are present, it is known that they disappear. It is known that thoughts arise, it is known that they are present, it is known that they disappear. It is known that perceptions arise, it is known that they are present, it is known that they disappear. In this way, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is aware. _"

My questions to you then are:
1 - How does consciousness become particular when your senses are contacted?
Is consciousness one thing?

2-

Which one is form, is it the senses or the perceptions? Or is it both?

3- Can you perceive your feeling?

Things are already mixed up, and seeing the ‘mix up’ is, in fact, a giant leap.
How long does it take to untangle a tangle?

It seems that you are unsure about the word sankhara because you used the word ‘determination’ in relation to intention. Which is not wrong, because intention does determine action, but also, action determines intention. ??

DCM · February 16, 2019, 8:20am

Thankyou Venerable.
To answer the questions:

It seems that I have a ‘perception’ of consciousness being one, and then going out to the respective sense objects when contacted, instead of discerning consciousness directly.
Consciousness is behind the perceptions and cannot be seen directly, but it must be there for me to be able to cognise. It must be with the objects already as soon as there is contact.
If the Aggregates are the background, then the senses (Eye, ear, nose, etc) and their objects are the particulars in the foreground?

Me saying ‘hardness’, ‘Eye, ear, nose, etc’ is explaining by perception, form is the senses in the foreground, it seems I cannot access form directly, but can point towards it with perceptions, although that is not the ‘form’ itself. We cannot ‘form’ a form, we can only ‘perceive, feel or cognise’ what we assume to be the form, whereas in fact we are ‘perceiving a perception, feeling a feeling, cognising a cognisant’.
Form then comes before perception? Feeling comes before perception, consciousness before, determinations before. Me saying ‘comes before’ is meant from my experiential point of view. So I can only ‘perceive’ form, is that right Bhante?

No, perceptions perceive, feelings feel. A correct perception can point towards a ‘feeling’, but it is not the ‘feeling’ itself. Feelings come before perception.

I thought that intentions are determinations, and that they are also determined. Same with actions, they are determined, and are determinations. Determined actions will create habits, which determine future intentions. I will read up on this.

Mat · February 16, 2019, 11:59am

This is what’s called the ‘ghana sanna’- seeing nama Rupa and vinnana, compounded.

Thaniyo_Bhikkhu · February 16, 2019, 12:40pm

Once you get a feel for this way of thinking i.e ‘concrete’ thinking, thinking about something while that something is discerned/known (abhijanati) peripherally. (Vipassana and samadhi, ‘composed in right contemplation’)
Not just abstract thinking which is divorced from the presently arisen thing that you are thinking about; then you can pretty much set sail on your own, of course being familiar with the suttas can help keep you attending to the things that matter. But really if you discern feeling, craving will be revealed and then one needs to abandon it ( the actual phenomenon of craving). And you will know if you are doing it right or wrong because you will see the direct correlation between craving and possibility to suffer.

“You have a perception of consciousness being one.”
Now just try and be more accurate in your description i.e what is exactly is meant by perception of consciousness?
If the aggregates are in the background? Maybe they are not?

In the suttas, the Buddha describes the aggregates in a particular order, that order is structural.
Form, feeling, perception, determinations, consciousness.
Where are you in this structure? Try to describe where you are in relation to these things…

Well, I could answer that, but it’s better if you press forward with your descriptions and try to see if that makes sense.

Once you read, then try to see it, describe it to yourself.
Determinations are determining this determined determination (this being my experience here).

What is determining this here your experience of 'feeling, perceiving, attending, intending’?
What determines that which determines this here your experience of ‘feeling, perceiving, attending, intending’?

This way of thinking is what can be called ‘opanayika’, because it brings one into or ‘close’ to being able to know the structural principle of paticcasamupada (with THIS, this is) and when that principle is understood/ sammapanna, then this way of thinking based on that understanding of the principle leads one on to the uprooting of ignorance, greed and hate.

Thanks for the descriptions DCM.