Obviously consciousness doesn’t last for ever. When I am sleeping I am not conscious of things…well, apart from dreams, and loud noises which might wake me up. 
loud noise gave rise to consciousness…
I’m wondering if/how your theory would account for conditions such as ‘blindsight’ and some other conditions covered in this article?
Or residual consciousness recognises loud noise? I’m talking about actually being woken up, not about the subsequent awareness of waking up.
I don’t think there’s a ‘residual consciousness’
I mean the consciousness or awareness which detects a loud noise ( whatever ) when we’re asleep - it seems like consciousness is never completely “switched off”, even in a deep sleep. The only exception I can think of is general anesthetic for surgery, where consciousness is fully “switched off”.
This doesn’t appear to be explained by the 6-fold description of consciousness in the EBTs.
Sure. I was reflecting the way that 6-fold consciousness is described in the EBTs, where each ( internal ) sense-base has specific objects.
This is an assumption. I see it rising because it is causally generated.
Me too!
So I would say that when someone with blindsight successfully points out an object without being “conscious” of it (i.e. when asked to guess), then that is eye/image/eye-consciousness arising by itself.
And when someone without blindsight reports being “conscious” of a visual object then that is mind/mind-object/mind-consciousness arising. The mind-object in this instance is the eye/image/eye-consciousness of the previous “moment”.
How does it work in your model?
An alternate hypothesis is that awareness exists but new forms (i.e., memories) do not arise. With this hypothesis, there would be no memory of anesthetization. This hypothesis arises out of the experience of “sleep mode” in CPUs which execute continuously at very low power consumption rates until a triggering interrupt awakens the CPU. The CPU is aware but not switched off. While asleep, the CPU collects no new memories.
…and we seem to have wandered a bit away from Mr. Jack…
2 Likes
It is an assumption based on practical experience. If there is no consciousness at all while we are asleep, then how does a loud noise wake us up? How would you explain this, practically speaking?
Experientially the loud noise is the cause and the consciousness is the effect.
You might say the potential to become conscious is there.
My experience is that sights, sounds and odours feel like they are “out there”. Flavours are in my mouth, while I feel sensations at specific places in my body. Thoughts feel like they’re “in my head”!
It feels like this is all going on at the same time, with my attention continually shifting between various sense-impressions.
1 Like
Apologies! Returning to the OP, I tend to agree with this comment: “My understanding is that when the Buddha recommended reflecting on impermanence, he was focussed on the objects of desire, aversion and attachment.”
Or reflecting on impermanence is concerned primarily with developing dispassion, rather than with the nature of consciousness, or whatever.
1 Like
It’s by contemplating consciousness:
“Whatever ascetics and brahmins, having thus directly known consciousness, its origin, its cessation, and the way leading to its cessation, are practising for the purpose of revulsion towards consciousness, for its fading away and cessation, they are practising well. Those who are practising well have gained a foothold in this Dhamma and Discipline. SuttaCentral
I find that Ven. Bodhi’s “revulsion towards consciousness” wanders a bit too close to the aversion/hate in the dukkha sense and that makes it hard for me to apply this translation in practice. In other words, one might be tempted to misread Ven. Bodhi as advocating unconscious zombie-hood practicing rote behaviour without awareness. In Jack’s own Twitter post, he counts the mosquitoes biting him, which is an impressive feat of consciousness. He is also not feeling revulsion to the awareness of being eaten.
I am personally more comfortable with Bhante Sujato’s translation of nibbidāya as disillusionment. And yet we do also have Ven. Bodhi’s translation as “revulsion”. Has the vehemence of Ven. Bodhi’s translation as “revulsion” been more effective than “disillusionment” for you in certain situations?
1 Like
If it’s a process of developing insight, experiencing the incessant arising and passing away, the emotions raised from everything you thought was real being deconstructed is intense.
2 Likes
Ah! Thanks for the insight. That does indeed make sense. I’ve personally been more of a vagabond chasing butterflies of passing interest to have that experience of intense revulsion. But it would certainly take revulsion and dynamite to deconstruct a concrete bunker of established thought.
2 Likes
You can go to a meditation retreat and not get a single clue about Buddhism
Would calling for murder get Trump banned from Twitter? CEO Jack Dorsey won’t say.
Translation:
As long as advertising dollars created from Trump’s spectacle keep flowing in, ethics do matter to Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter
“On day 11, all I wanted to do was listen to music […]”
The Four Noble Truths strike again! Good for him though.