This sounds more like a function of mind-consciousness, remembering something that has just happened.
Both these passages would allow for a continuity of consciousness during waking hours each day.
The fact that the objects of consciousness are continually changing doesn’t necessarily mean that consciousness itself is continually changing. It just means our attention is repeatedly switching between different objects.
Yes, mind-consciousness, that’s right. And yes. We are never in the ‘present moment’ (whatever those old yogi’s say), that’s an important point, we are always remembering the past, albeit sometimes the very very near past. I think that’s why the Buddhists sometimes refer to sati as recollection?? 
I should’ve given you the long version. What the present (mind) consciousness observes is the arising, persistence and fall of a previous (any type of) consciousness. Then the gap. Then start again. But this is experiential as the world slows down. First a torrent, then a stream, then a dribble, then individual drops.
What is your intepretation of the following.
At Sāvatthī. Seated to one side, Venerable Rādha said to the Buddha: “Sir, they speak of things being ‘liable to originate’. What is liable to originate?” “Rādha, form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are liable to originate.
SN23.21
At Sāvatthī. Seated to one side, Venerable Rādha said to the Buddha: “Sir, they speak of things being ‘liable to vanish’. What is liable to vanish?” “Rādha, form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness are liable to vanish.
SN23.20
above suttas seem to confirm all five khandhas originate and vanish. I guess what you are questioning is how long they last.
or are you saying consciousness is permanent. If you think it is impermanent how long do you think it lasts?
1 Like
Clearly the EBTs describe consciousness as impermanent. I am challenging the notion of “mind moments”, ie consciousness repeatedly arising and ceasing in each moment. I’m suggesting that there can be a continuity of consciousness for periods of time, eg during waking hours each day. I’m suggesting that it is the focus of our attention which is repeatedly changing, rather than consciousness itself.
I don’t think mind-consciousness observes eye-consciousness ( for example ). It observes mental objects like thoughts and feelings.
ok. How long is a period of time in your experience ?
And does consciousness cease at the of that period and a new consciousness arise ?
That’s right. It doesn’t observe eye-consciousness by itself. It observes eye, eye object and eye consciousness together as a mental object. How do you know that you’ve seen something?
Did the Buddha use a special ability to detect eye-consciousness arising after the arising of the eye and image?
For me they arise together (eye, image and eye-consciousness). Don’t know what the Buddha said or the ability he used, but if eye-consciousness does arises after eye and image, then this is beyond my current experience. For me they all rise, persist and fall together; they depend on each other yes, but I do not see eye and image arising without eye-consciousness arising.
I have really bad eyesight and I therefore see slowly. Because of this I often see a shapeless blur that suddenly snaps into recognition. There is a delay. And I am aware of both the sight initially and then later (sometimes almost a second), the name-form of the sight. Also, I think that we all share the experience of time-separated awareness of:
- seeing a face
- knowing the familiarity of a face
- remembering the name of a familiar face
This is also what Abhidhamma represents. Different kinds of cittas.
With the arising of samadhi it is possible to see how the unified image is caused. If it’s possible to be aware of sensing something, it is possible to be aware, of being aware.
If we concentrate on something more detail becomes visible. If we focus on how awareness arises, more detail become apparent. The ‘detail’ is the five aggregates and how that makes up our experiences.
3 Likes
@ karl_lew, @ Mat,
Mat:
Overcoming defilements are obviously part of the path but that only leads to samadhi and not to wisdom (though the path properly practiced leads to both).
Ah. Thank you. I had assumed that extinguishment (of defilements) was the end of the path from MN44:
What is the counterpart of extinguishment?”
“Your question goes too far, Visākha. You couldn’t figure out the limit of questions.
I think Mat is referring to the five hindrances, which must be temporarily absent to enter samadhi. However, if all defilements of the mind (including of course the underlying tendencies and the asavas) were truly extinguished, that indeed would be arahantship, the completion of the path (according to Early Buddhism)
2 Likes
There are hindrances, defilements, cankers, etc…
Then there are the “Fetters” – all 10 of them overcome = Nibbana.
2 Likes
Sorry but I don’t agree. Mind-consciousness observes mental objects, not sights.
I am seeing stuff all day. What changes is the visual objects involved, and how much attention I am paying to them at any one time.
Ok. If this is your experience who am i to say it is not. But when you also said consciousness is impermanent , what is your experience of that ?
This is soooo tricky. A sight disappears when we close our eyes and what lingers is the memory of the sight, which is the thought form that our mind consciousness can work with. However, for people with photographic memory the distinction gets blurry and we have people who can draw from that memory quite precisely. Because of this, I find it hard to draw a clean line between a sight and a sight-thought. For me it’s more of a continuous spectrum.
This understanding that there is a spectrum of consciousness (vs. discrete chunks) also matches what I know of AI imaging systems with their layers of perception. The lowest layers “see” things like adjacent contrasts. The higher layers “see” across the lower layers. All layers have abstract data representations (i.e., thoughts) that can be serialized and re-used (as thoughts). Normally, we would only use the output of such neural nets (i.e., the final thoughts) as we see a “flower” or a “dog”. But the mechanism is the same for all layers–they all correlate inputs and generate outputs.
Therefore I’d agree with both of you.
1 Like
I liked your description of AI image generation. Sanna, vedana both add layers of recognition on to the initial contact.
2 Likes
I was told by one practitioner who had practiced in this way - intensively - in a monastery in Myanmar, that this rapid stream of changing experience gives rise to intense nibidda. The proof is in the pudding!