On the conditions for seeing-consciousness (cakkhu-viññāṇa)
"Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṃ, tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso" (MN 18 Madhupiṇḍika Sutta)
When there's eye-sensitivity, doesn't visible form make contact? Doesn't seeing-consciousness arise? Without eye-sensitivity, could seeing-consciousness arise when visible form makes contact? Even with eye-sensitivity, can seeing occur in darkness when visible form makes contact? No, it cannot.
Seeing-consciousness only arises when four conditions are met: eye-sensitivity, visible form, light, and attention (manasikāra).
Is that seeing-consciousness "I who sees" or just seeing-consciousness? Before these two physical elements (eye and form) make contact, can you point to where this seeing-consciousness exists? It only arises when the two make contact.
So is it an inherently existing phenomenon? Since it only arises when two physical elements make contact, isn't it taught as a conditioned phenomenon? Is it inherently existing or conditionally arising? If you truly understand it's a conditioned phenomenon that only arises when two physical elements meet, isn't it worth asking what benefit this understanding brings?
On the three types of formations (saṅkhāra):
"Tayome, bhikkhave, saṅkhārā – puññābhisaṅkhāro, apuññābhisaṅkhāro, āneñjābhisaṅkhāro." (SN 12.51 Parivīmaṃsana Sutta)
Will you still hold the view of a soul, spirit, or permanent essence? Will you still believe in permanent beings, humans, or devas? Doesn't this break down personality-belief (sakkāya-diṭṭhi)? This is what needs to be understood - isn't it worth investigating?
On personality-belief (sakkāya-diṭṭhi):
"Idha, bhikkhave, assutavā puthujjano... rūpaṃ attato samanupassati, rūpavantaṃ vā attānaṃ, attani vā rūpaṃ, rūpasmiṃ vā attānaṃ..." (MN 44 Cūḷavedalla Sutta)
Because people don't understand this, don't they perform rituals for the dead, offering food to departed spirits, and memorial services? These are all due to clinging (upādāna) causing becoming (upāda).
Did any Buddha reject wholesome deeds like giving (dāna), morality (sīla), or concentration (samatha)? Think about it. Should we abandon giving or defilements? Should we abandon morality or defilements? Should we abandon concentration or defilements? We abandon defilements.
So when we talk about abandoning defilements, aren't there three types of formations (saṅkhāra): meritorious (puññābhisaṅkhāra), demeritorious (apuññābhisaṅkhāra), and imperturbable (āneñjābhisaṅkhāra)?
On conditionality of consciousness:
"Paṭiccasamuppannaṃ kho pana viññāṇaṃ vuttaṃ. Kiṃ paṭicca? Phassaṃ paṭicca." (SN 22.53 Upaya Sutta)
Don't meritorious formations lead to human or deva existence? Are these free from aging, sickness, and death?
Isn't it taught that through imperturbable formations, practicing the 40 meditation subjects and gaining concentration, one can know others' minds? With further development, one can even fly through the air. Dying with such a mind leads to brahma existence - but is this free from aging, sickness, and death? What truth is this? Is this true happiness? No, it's not true happiness.
And demeritorious formations lead to the path of lower realms.
"Paṭiccasamuppannaṃ kho pana viññāṇaṃ vuttaṃ. Kiṃ paṭicca? Phassaṃ paṭicca." (SN 22.53 Upaya Sutta)
Don't meritorious formations lead to human or deva existence? Are these free from aging, sickness, and death?
Isn't it taught that through imperturbable formations, practicing the 40 meditation subjects and gaining concentration, one can know others' minds? With further development, one can even fly through the air. Dying with such a mind leads to brahma existence - but is this free from aging, sickness, and death? What truth is this? Is this true happiness? No, it's not true happiness.
And demeritorious formations lead to the path of lower realms.
However, if there's no one to teach the Dhamma about the aggregates (khandha), Noble Truths (sacca), and Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda), don't we need to perform meritorious formations (puññābhisaṅkhāra) along our path? Without puññābhisaṅkhāra, one goes to the lower realms. Through puññābhisaṅkhāra, don't we obtain human or deva existence?
If we encounter a Buddha's teaching with this human or deva existence from puññābhisaṅkhāra, and if we determine to understand the Noble Truths, aggregates, and Dependent Origination, we can achieve the fourfold task of knowing, abandoning, realizing, and developing (pariññeyya, pahātabba, sacchikātabba, bhāvetabba) through momentary path consciousness.
After such understanding, will we still create puññābhisaṅkhāra? We still perform wholesome deeds, but donations made with the intention of liberation from the aggregates are called vivatta-dāna (donations leading to liberation). Donations made with the intention of gaining better existence are called vatta-dāna (donations leading to continued existence). Isn't this worth examining?
Vivatta-dāna is led by wisdom (vijjā). Knowing the nature of aggregates is vijjā, knowing impermanence is vijjā. When donations are led by wisdom, they're called vivatta-dāna. When led by ignorance (avijjā), don't they include formations (saṅkhāra)?
When there are formations, isn't there ignorance behind them? Isn't it taught "avijjā-paccayā saṅkhārā" (dependent on ignorance, formations arise)? Is this free from aging, sickness, and death? This is the difference. Donations made with understanding of truth lead to path and cessation (magga-nirodha).
Therefore, one needs to understand the aggregates, sense bases (āyatana), elements (dhātu), Noble Truths (sacca), and Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda).
Only then will wrong views about being human, deva, or brahma be eliminated. Isn't this worth investigating?
Study, study, study!
Relevant Pali references:
1. On formations and ignorance:
"Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā" (SN 12.2 Vibhaṅga Sutta)
2. On the fourfold task:
"Idaṃ dukkhaṃ ariyasaccanti me, bhikkhave, pubbe ananussutesu dhammesu cakkhuṃ udapādi, ñāṇaṃ udapādi, paññā udapādi, vijjā udapādi, āloko udapādi." (SN 56.11 Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta)
If we encounter a Buddha's teaching with this human or deva existence from puññābhisaṅkhāra, and if we determine to understand the Noble Truths, aggregates, and Dependent Origination, we can achieve the fourfold task of knowing, abandoning, realizing, and developing (pariññeyya, pahātabba, sacchikātabba, bhāvetabba) through momentary path consciousness.
After such understanding, will we still create puññābhisaṅkhāra? We still perform wholesome deeds, but donations made with the intention of liberation from the aggregates are called vivatta-dāna (donations leading to liberation). Donations made with the intention of gaining better existence are called vatta-dāna (donations leading to continued existence). Isn't this worth examining?
Vivatta-dāna is led by wisdom (vijjā). Knowing the nature of aggregates is vijjā, knowing impermanence is vijjā. When donations are led by wisdom, they're called vivatta-dāna. When led by ignorance (avijjā), don't they include formations (saṅkhāra)?
When there are formations, isn't there ignorance behind them? Isn't it taught "avijjā-paccayā saṅkhārā" (dependent on ignorance, formations arise)? Is this free from aging, sickness, and death? This is the difference. Donations made with understanding of truth lead to path and cessation (magga-nirodha).
Therefore, one needs to understand the aggregates, sense bases (āyatana), elements (dhātu), Noble Truths (sacca), and Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda).
Only then will wrong views about being human, deva, or brahma be eliminated. Isn't this worth investigating?
Study, study, study!
Relevant Pali references:
1. On formations and ignorance:
"Avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā" (SN 12.2 Vibhaṅga Sutta)
2. On the fourfold task:
"Idaṃ dukkhaṃ ariyasaccanti me, bhikkhave, pubbe ananussutesu dhammesu cakkhuṃ udapādi, ñāṇaṃ udapādi, paññā udapādi, vijjā udapādi, āloko udapādi." (SN 56.11 Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta)
