Skip to main content

12ps dependent origination question: why phassa is meeting of three, not just "when eye contacts visible object, eye-consciousness arises"




Question

There is this line:
"Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact."
Why did the Buddha describe this process in this way? Why didn't he say "When there is contact between eye and form, eye-consciousness arises"? Is there any subtle difference?
I do understand that the eye must be capable of seeing (e.g. not blindfolded) for it to see forms.


Answer

Because an internal sense faculty contacting an external  sense object doesn't mean a moment of sense-consciousness will definitely arise.

Even very ordinary scenarios, say a mosquito bites you at the same moment you see something and hear a sound, you don't necessarily register all 3 sense base consciousness.

Maybe just the ear consciousness registered with ear contact, and you didn't notice the sight of a road sign you were looking for. 

Similar question about requisite conditions

The question is also similar to a common one with 12ps, it seems to say if there is vedana, then tanha (craving) will arise. 

The thing we have to remember about the suttas, it's an oral tradition, and often the formulas memorized are very terse outlines, or part of a matrix, not meant to be interpreted with strict logic or grammar rules. There are often implied assumptions we have to incorporate, extra information not in the bare sutta words.

What the 12ps formula says, is that for craving to arise, 
there must have been vedana that arose previously for the craving to be based on.

Vedana is a requisite condition for tanha to arise.

It doesn't mean that if there is vedana, then tanha will definitely arise right after.
Or if there is tanha, that upadana will definitely arise right after.





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha
Post a Comment
Read more

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a
Post a Comment
Read more

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex
Post a Comment
Read more