Is background awareness consciousness aggregate or something else?

If it would help, perhaps it would be better to revert to the term"established", rather than “landed”, for patiṭṭhaṃ. One needs to see where Ven Thanissaro’s comes from with his “lands”, as it is part of his belief that there is some thing called a consciousness that does not land. See his translation of SN 12.64 -

"Where there is passion, delight, & craving for the nutriment of physical food, consciousness lands there and increases. Where consciousness lands and increases, there is the alighting of name-&-form. Where there is the alighting of name-&-form, there is the growth of fabrications. Where there is the growth of fabrications, there is the production of renewed becoming in the future. Where there is the production of renewed becoming in the future, there is future birth, aging, & death, together, I tell you, with sorrow, affliction, & despair.

(Ditto for contact, intention and consciousness)

“Just as if there were a roofed house or a roofed hall having windows on the north, the south, or the east. When the sun rises, and a ray has entered by way of the window, where does it land?”
“On the western wall, lord.”
“And if there is no western wall, where does it land?”
“On the ground, lord.”
“And if there is no ground, where does it land?”
“On the water, lord.”
“And if there is no water, where does it land?”
“It does not land, lord.”

Firstly, it’s a grammatically incorrect translation. The text does not say “It does not land”. The text does not have the present indicative verb na patiṭṭhahati. It has the past participle appatiṭṭhita. This is a significant point, as it throws into doubt his translation of the questions that precede the final answer in the passage of the metaphor of sunlight. Those questions ask “where is it patiṭṭhita”? Why is this important? Because that sutta starts off with this doctrinal proposition -

Kabaḷīkāre ce, bhikkhave, āhāre atthi rāgo atthi nandī atthi taṇhā, patiṭṭhitaṃ tattha viññāṇaṃ virūḷhaṃ.

If there is desire, relishing, and craving for solid food, consciousness becomes established there and grows. (per Bhante Sujato)

Again, the past participle is used; there is no present indicative verb establishes or lands as proposed by Ven Thanissaro’s translation. The crux of the matter is that this piece of bad translation gives him the leeway to introduce the idea of an “unestablished consciousness”, like some kind of arahant’s post-mortem consciousness. But the opening proposition in SN 12.64 makes clear that the issue is not “establishment” as a quality/adjective of the noun consciousness. Rather, establishment or non-establishment of consciousness is functioning adverbally to describe the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event. The correct translation is simply “Consciousness does not become established”.

I would add to that the grammatical observation that the verb patiṭṭhahati is intransitive. Predication is dependent on transitivity, which means that an “unestablished consciousness” is a grammatical unicorn in Pali.

But coming back to your question above, consciousness can be established on consciousness, as per SN 12.64. It is the passion, delight and craving for consciousness that causes consciousness to be established on consciousness.

6 Likes

I find it useful to generalise or simplify as much as possible. How to live in the world but be unaffected by it, how to be aloof from it. And what makes you get sucked in to it.

Mendicants, I will teach you the things that are prone to being fettered, and the fetter. Listen …

What are the things that are prone to being fettered? And what is the fetter?

Form is something that’s prone to being fettered. The desire and greed for it is the fetter.

Feeling …
Perception …
Choices …

Consciousness is something that’s prone to being fettered. The desire and greed for it is the fetter.

These are called the things that are prone to being fettered, and this is the fetter.”
SN22.120
It’s the desire for more that proliferates the world.

One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no yearning. There being no yearning, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.
Nibbana Sutta

2 Likes

Thanks, but I still don’t get how sense-consciousness (vinnana) can establish and grow on itself. This seems like a paradox to me.
How for example would eye-consciousness establish itself on eye-consciousness?
I can understand eye-consciousness becoming established and growing on attractive visible form, but not on eye-consciousness itself.
Or perhaps its describing the craving for continued sense-consciousness, in this case a desire to continue seeing?

1 Like

Though wishing not to get run over while crossing a busy road implies an instinct for self-preservation, which presumably means there is still a “you” there?

Found this great essay online which addresses a large number of issues raised within this discussion, so I’m taking the liberty of posting the entire essay below. :pray:
# Nonduality – Defining the Undefinable By Michael W Taft

What Is Nonduality?

Nonduality is the human experience of oneness with all things; a sense of connection to and identity with the entire universe. It is intimacy with everything. In this experience, the sense of being a witness or seer of things vanishes completely, and instead you feel yourself to be whatever thing you are beholding. You don’t see the mountain, you are the mountain. You don’t hear a bird, you are birdsong. Awareness is no longer split into a experiencer and the thing that is experienced, there is just pure experience with no divisions. This experience of connection is the essence of nonduality.

How to Have an Experience of Nonduality

Every culture worldwide has known about nonduality, and they have developed hundreds of techniques to help human beings to have this experience. (If you want to give one of these a try, click here.) But one of the many things that makes nonduality so fascinating is that you don’t actually have to do a practice at all to experience it, because it’s not a kind of altered state or religious vision. Instead, the experience of nondual awareness is an essentially human one.

Perhaps it is true, as many nondual philosophies have insisted, that nondual awareness is actually at the root of all human awareness. Maybe nondual awareness is simply there , in all of our experience like a spleen or a leg bone, for anyone who looks deeply enough to discover.

So while it’s possible to do special meditation practices to induce nondual awareness (or maybe we should say to reveal nondual awareness), and I recommend that you do that if you’re interested, it’s also the case that many people only need to have their always-already-existing nondual awareness pointed out to them to have at least a little taste of it. Whether you get their via meditation or via “pointing out,” however, nondual awareness is something that underlies all your perceptions of yourself, the world, and the transcendental. It’s there for you to find, if you want to go looking.

Nonduality in Religion

There are some religions, such as Hinduism and Buddhism that have concepts of nonduality at the core of their belief systems. Other religions and philosophies include at least a branch that is concerned with a nondual view. Even indigenous cultures and shamanism talk about such a view of the world.

Because nonduality is at the core of human experience, most groups of people get around to talking about it at some point. However, there was one place in the world where culture became utterly captivated by ideas about nonduality and methods for achieving (or revealing) nondual awareness, and that was in the Indian subcontinent. Indian culture became strongly focused on nonduality, as you can see from the religious terms used for it.

In Hindu contexts, nonduality is called advaita , which literally means “not-two-ness” and is the source of the English word nonduality. Usually Hindu nonduality involves oneness and identity with God(dess), and so is a deity-based practice.

In Buddhist tradition, nonduality is called no-self ( anatta ), emptiness ( shunyata ), or rigpa . The theories of Buddha Nature and Tathagatagarbha talk about why nonduality exists or what it means, and unlike Hinduism is non-deity-based (i.e. it is not about God).

All human cultures everywhere have experienced and described nonduality and nondual experience, but ancient India became particularly focused on it.

If you want to learn more about the history of nonduality in Indian religion, click here.

Nonduality and Awakening

To say it simply, nonduality is the essence of awakening; what is also called enlightenment, liberation, realization, divine union. When a person has a strong nondual experience, they have begun the process of awakening. For most people this process takes an entire lifetime, and is always growing deeper and broader, encompassing more and more areas of their life.

Because in a religious context nondual awakening is considered to be the ultimate salvation, Indian religious are extremely focused on ways to gain this salvation. It is somewhat similar to the way Christian religion became obsessed with ways to gain the salvation of Heaven (although also different in important ways).

In short, if you have any interest in “getting enlightened,” then what you are actually looking for is an experience of nondual awareness. Because nondual awareness is at the base of the mind, a first experience of nonduality—however minor, fleeting, or shallow—is luckily not all that difficult to achieve (or notice).

After that, it becomes a process of deepening and expanding your nondual awareness to affect all areas of life. The profoundity of access to nonduality in daily life is what distinguishes spiritual dabblers from the heavyweights.

Is Nonduality Some Kind of Ultimate Reality?

In most religious descriptions of nonduality, it is described as the ultimate reality. The extent to which you contact nondual awareness is the extent to which you contact God, the Universe, and Everything. Another way to say this same idea is that “consciousness is everything.”

But is this really true?

In short, any assertion about ultimate reality is untestable by definition. That means that nobody can prove whether nonduality is the ultimate reality or whether consciousness is everything. No matter how much you believe that to be true or believe it to be a fantasy, there is literally no way of testing, proving, or knowing whether you’re right.

In one way of looking at it, having the experience proves that it’s real, at least to the satisfaction of the person to whom it’s happening. If you have a deeply spiritual experience of oneness with all things, which utterly revolutionizes your life, and transforms your interactions with everyone else, who cares whether it’s real in some scientific sense? It’s certainly real enough in the ways that matter.

However, there is another way to look at it.

How Does Nondual Awareness Arise?

The basic understanding of nonduality in a religious context is that it is the true, real view of ultimate reality. Because everything is made of consciousness, to see that everything is one in awareness is to see ultimate reality.

But let’s talk about the same experience in a different way for a moment.

From a scientific viewpoint, a human being only knows about their environment through the senses. For example, you don’t see the world directly through your eyes, as if you’re inside your head looking out two open windows. Instead, the eyes function very much like video cameras. The photons from the exterior world stream through the lenses and strike the retinas. The cells of the retina convert these photon strikes into electrical pulses which are then sent down the optical nerve deep into the brain.

These electrical pulses represent digital information about the visual field outside the eyes. The brain then decodes this digital information through many layers of pre-processing and processing until it is eventually assembled into a mental image of the outside world. It is this mental image that arises in consciousness.

Therefore, you never see the outside world. You have never seen the outside world in your entire life. You only see your constructed mental representation of decoded signals from the eyes.

And it is the same for all the other senses. The ears encode air waves, which the brain decodes into the experience of sound. The nose and tongue encode chemical signatures, which the brain decodes into smell and taste. The skin encodes pressure, heat, and so forth, which the brain decodes into touch.

Therefore, you have never experienced the world directly in any way. You have only experienced the constructed mental representation of decoded signals from the senses. If you understand this fundamental point, you understand how “the entire world is consciousness.” Because your experience of the world always arises only in consciousness, it would be more accurate to say “ my experience of the entire world is consciousness.”

For the same reason that you cannot prove that nonduality is ultimate reality, you cannot prove that the above description is ultimately true. It does have the advantage of being scientifically provable, however. It also has the very big advantage of removing a tremendous amount of confusion, superstition, and wasted time. You can read more about that here. And here.

In the end, it probably doesn’t matter which view of nonduality you believe is real (“consciousness is everything” or “the experience of consciousness is everything”). The important thing is to contact nondual awareness, because doing so is a life-changing capacity.

Does a Nondual Experience Require Effort?

Another big controversy concerns what a person has to do to have an experience of nonduality. Because from a spiritual viewpoint, nondual awareness underlies everything, and is always already there at the base of all experience, it’s possible to state that absolutely nothing need be done to experience it. It’s already there and you’re already experiencing it. You just have to notice it. This is the “effortless” model.

A second way of looking at it is the “effort” model, which says that while, yes, nondual awareness underlies everything, there are a lot of layers of belief, psychological blockages, and simple ignorance getting in the way of seeing this experience. The purpose of meditation and other practices is not to create awakening, but to remove what is blocking the experience of the nondual awareness that is already there. Even if you’ve already had a strong nondual experience, the deepening of your awakening requires more effort.

Proponents of the effortless model say that even making an effort at all is just putting more blockages in the way of seeing the nonduality that is already there. The very act of meditating to “get something,” they say, is paradoxically just one more thing that’s getting in the way of direct perception of ultimate reality.

Try this practice of effortless meditation, called “Do Nothing”

Proponents of the effort model say that very often people who pursue the effortless path don’t have very deep awakening. They see the effortless model as being more about developing a concept of nonduality—i.e. being able to talk about it, and being very concerned with language around it—rather than developing actual depth of nondual experience.

Given that this (ironically dualistic) dichotomy has been discussed for thousands of years without reaching a conclusion that is satisfying for everybody, we can say with confidence that you have to choose for yourself which side you feel more drawn towards.

Even better would be to let go of the need to see either one as right or true or the best, and simply notice the nonduality at the center of the apparent dichotomy.

Talking about Nonduality

Nonduality contains within it a lot of paradoxes. This is only natural when you think about it, since a paradox is something that contains apparent opposites—and the essence of nonduality is the union of opposites.

One of the big paradoxes is that it’s hard to talk or write about correctly. Almost any language you use is actually incorrect, misleading, or contains dualisms.

For example, even simple statement in the above text such as “having a nondual experience” are slightly misleading. Think about it. If nondual awareness, as described above, means the collapse of the experiencer and the experienced, the seer and the seen, then in precise language it may not be correct to call nondual awareness an experience at all.

Even apparently simple ideas in the text above, such as the “external world” don’t really make sense in the mode of nonduality. For there to be an external world, there needs to be an internal world, and those two things need to be opposite and different—which of course they are not in nondual awareness.

The simple fact is that language is inherently dualistic, and there’s no way to say anything intelligible if you try to talk about nonduality from an absolutely nondual perspective. It cannot be done, and yet it is important and useful to talk about nonduality. Therefore, in this article I’ve chosen to just go ahead and talk about it from a normal, dualistic perspective.

Conclusion

Nondual experience is something that is always available, and also something that you may spend the rest of your life cultivating, deepening, and integrating into your everyday experience. It’s very helpful to find someone who can point it out to you with confidence and clarity, since it’s easy to mistake various other experiences for nonduality. Just like some of the more famous internet memes, nondual experience is something that, once seen, it cannot be unseen. You and your relationship with other people and the world are forever changed.

1 Like

Surprisingly, that is not how one crosses a road in Delhi.

To cross a road in Delhi, one simply open one’s heart to an open path wishing all other happiness in their journey. Then one steps on the road, seeing and blending with all, open to all, merging with all, crossing with all. This requires universal consciousness of sorts.

1 Like

Thanks for the article on non-duality, though I found it rather muddled and new-agey. And having read the article, I’m not at all clear what they actually mean by “non-duality” - what does collapsing the distinction between experience and experienced actually mean, practically speaking?

The article claims that in Buddhism non-duality is called anatta and sunyata, but doesn’t substantiate this assertion.
I don’t think for example that the idea of everything being an appearance to consciousness is present in the suttas. And I don’t think the suttas deny an “external” world, given the inclusion of external elements of rupa (see MN140), and the references to “the seen” in the Bahiya Sutta passage.
Nor do I understand how sunyata equates to non-duality. The Heart Sutra basically says that the aggregates are empty of independent existence, in other words all experience is conditional.

I haven’t crossed a road in Delhi, but where I live you need your wits about you when crossing roads - many drivers are very unmindful! My point though was about the practicalities and limits of “No you there”, given the presence of evolutionary “survival instinct”.
And I assume you don’t regard the goal of Buddhist practice as not caring if you get run over when crossing a busy road?

1 Like

:rofl: :car: :walking_man: :oncoming_automobile: :scream_cat:

This body typing is part of the background awareness and a sad feeling would arise if any body got smashed by a car.

1 Like

It’s great to see you back here @Sylvester. Your inputs are much appreciated! :anjal:

4 Likes

My friend Martin, I feel your pain!
Rather than struggle unfruitfully to intellectually understand what is better understood experientially, why not go back to basics and develop a robust Ethics+meditation+ insight practice?

There are 3 doors to the Deathless…to the Unconditioned:

  1. Anicca… The perception of Impermanence
  2. Dukkha… The perception of Suffering
  3. Anatta… The perception of Non Self
    Of these three, Anatta (which is what you appear to have chosen) is the hardest to understand and develop. All three, in any case, developed well and practiced regularly, will lead to the same place… And once you have had that experience, all that has been discussed will make good sense.
    :pray:
2 Likes

Just curious, but would these three doors be:

SN43.4:1.2: Emptiness immersion; signless immersion; undirected immersion. …”

  • Anicca → Impermanence → Emptiness
  • Dukkha → Suffering → Signless
  • Anatta → Non self → Undirected

:thinking:

Thanks for that clarification. Ajahn Sumedho’s talks are a little confusing for me, since he sometimes seems to be talking about some kind of cosmic consciousness. The charitable interpretation is that it is like when the Zen people talk about “finding your true self”. It used to be unsettling, but I now just translate it into yathābhūta:

1 Like

Yes, exactly!!
One of the three would suit the temperament of the Trainee best. The mind naturally inclines towards a particular approach.
Thereafter, one should adopt practices which foster the development of that kind of immersion.

To illustrate, if one naturally inclines towards Anicca, then one can start off by observing the Impermanence in everyday events. That builds virtue as we don’t react aggressively any more… which supports our meditation practice. One can build on that and start seeing that all external things are put together/ are born… and break apart/ die… And their stuff gets recycled into new things. Applying it to the body, one can do body/ food/death contemplation seeing the constituents of the body as constantly coming together, falling apart… Inorganic matter is constantly forming plants, which form animals, which we eat, and their matter gets assimilated to form our body for a while, ultimately being recycled at death into new organisms. Once one can see that the body is simply a temporary aggregation of matter in the ceaseless flow of matter, like a whirlpool in a River, the boundaries between oneself and others begin to break down. Then it’s time to move onto the mental elements and reflect on their Impermanence. Using the same technique earlier perfected on the body, one can do Satipathanna practice to look at the feeling tone, the mind objects and state of Mind itself. One can see how intimately it is connected to the external world, and how impermanent it is… mental processes change so much faster than the body! Digging deeper, one can examine a particular feeling with regard to how it arose, dependent on the external input…then one can see the entirety of the dependent origination process. That lesson can be applied across everything learnt previously, one can see how craving leads one to stick to ideas of My Body, My Mind etc… where actually it’s all impermanent and interconnected. Seeing this, there is letting go. One can see that one’s form and mental processes are just a small bit of the interconnected, ever changing process that is the Universe. Trying to hold onto something like that is just Dukkha. One can see that any boundaries we put between oneself and the World are just artificial delineations… Anatta is seen. In that moment of feeling one with the world, there is peace. One completely lets go… Nibbana happens.

1 Like

… And since I was probably remiss in not describing the process of developing the perception of Anatta that the OP had originally chosen, the Buddha kindly chose to deliver the following to my Inbox a few minutes ago…:smile:

(A Deeper Understanding of Anattā | Abhayagiri Monastery)

by Ajahn Viradhammo

To reach a deeper understanding of anattā we simplify our perspective on life’s events by observing our experiences as bodily sensations, feelings, perceptions, mental constructs, sensory phenomena. In other words we observe the changing nature of the khandhas.

If this objective perspective is missing we easily get caught up with the narrative or story line that each life situation generates. For instance, not only is there a feeling of annoyance because of some disturbance in our lives, but there are also all the thoughts, stories, justifications, past resentments and guilt trips that proliferate from that energy of annoyance. All of this will have a strong smell of self and other. This is full-blown attachment.

If we are practising non-attachment we observe the physical sensations that are conditional upon annoyance. We observe the thoughts that are conditional upon annoyance. Most importantly we observe the craving that is conditional upon annoyance. This might be the craving that manifests as a desire to hurt someone else through cruel speech or the feelings of guilt and harsh self-judgments.

By indulging in these story lines, the annoyance would become a personal problem. However, when emotions such as annoyance are observed as objects of mind rather than ultimately true realities, then we are inclining to right understanding and non-attachment.

The khandhas are the changing conditions that come and go, are born and die. This is not the whole story, however: there is the uncreated, the unoriginated, the unformed, Nibbana, the deathless. The realisation of the deathless or nibbana is the goal of Buddhism. The way to realize that goal is through non-attachment to the five khandhas.

Non-attachment thus has depths of meaning that become apparent as we develop the path. A novice’s understanding of letting go changes and becomes both more subtle and more accurate over the years.

This reflection by Ajahn Viradhammo is from the book, The Stillness of Being, (pdf) pp. 34-35 .

Posted January 24, 2020.

Read this and other reflections on the Abhayagiri Website.

3 Likes

The way the word “awareness” is used can mean many things depending on the context. At its most profound sense it is what the Buddha talks about as a state of non-conceptualizing - as in the Mulapariyaya Sutta or the instructions to Bahiya - “in the seen is merely what is seen” etc. and there are many more such utterances in the suttas.

This “awareness” is what you have when your mind is stilled - there are no thoughts or thinking. There is no internal dialogue. You can “examine awareness” but then you will no longer be in the state of awareness as your thoughts kick in to examine your experience - duality sets in , the mental dialogue starts again.
In the context of the Sattipattana the “awareness” of the objects of meditation - is meant in a more broader sense .

5 Likes

I think it is not correct to call it the consciousness of the senses. Because by senses we mean basically our five material senses. while the 6 senses in Buddhism refer to the “6th sense”. This is the mind that perceives not only thoughts and ideas, but also very subtle objects such as the nature of the mind, emptiness, nirvana, and so on. Any perception that is not related to the material senses belongs to the sphere of mind, manas.

It seems your question on “background awareness” may refer to “acting with awareness” sampajāna-kārī, according to SN 47.2 = SA 622 on aware “sampajāno”. Cf. p. 216:
Pages 215-8 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism Choong Mun-keat 2000.pdf (285.9 KB)

Thanks, but I’m not sure what is quoted there fits very well with what I was referring to. It seems much more active that a “background awareness”:

And how, bhiksus, is a bhiksu aware? Herein, bhiksus, a bhiksu in
going forth and in returning is acting with awareness (sampajana-
karl). In looking in front and looking behind he is acting with
awareness. In bending or relaxing he is acting with awareness. In
wearing his robe, in bearing bowl and outer robe he is acting with
awareness. In eating, drinking, chewing and tasting he is acting with
awareness. In easing himself he is acting with awareness. In going,
standing, sitting and sleeping, in waking, speaking and keeping
silence he is acting with awareness. Thus, bhiksus, is a bhiksu aware.

The action, being not real, arises by causal condition (nidaana). It is also a result of previous action, but there is no doer (anatta ‘not-self’).