Skip to main content

What's the difference between Viññāṇa (consciousness) and Sañña (perceptions)?


4👑☸ → STED → 5uk  

🔗📚: collection of studies on 5uk


consciousness is raw sensory data, perception is higher on the food chain. For example, MN 18 and DN 22.

SN 22.79 explains it with a confusing simile


cdpatton notes:

The Chinese parallel (SA 46) doesn’t have these definitions [from SN 22.79] for perception or consciousness. They look more standard.


Perception

is defined like this: 諸想是想受陰,何所想?少想、多想、無量想、都無所有作無所有想,是故名想受陰。 Perceptions are the clinging aggregate of perception. What is perceived by it? The perception of few, the perception of many, and the perception of measureless. When there’s nothing at all, there’s the perception of nothingness. Therefore, it’s called the clinging aggregate of perception.

For consciousness,

the definition is to be conscious of all the sensory objects: 別知相是識受陰,何所識?識色,識聲、香、味、觸、法,是故名識受陰。 The signs of discernment are the clinging aggregate of consciousness. What is it conscious of? It’s conscious of form and conscious of sound, odor, flavor, touch, and mental objects. Therefore, it’s called the clinging aggregate of consciousness.



Dr. William Chu comments on same SA 46 passage

諸想是想受陰,何所想?少想、多想、無量想、都無所有作無所有想,是故名想受陰. 

"All the perceptions is what the clung-to aggregate of perception about. What are these perceptions? The perception of singularity, the perception of multiplicity, the perception of infinity, and the perception of 'there's no do-er whatsoever and there's not a thing whatsoever.' That is what is meant by the clung-to aggregate of perception." 
別知相是識受陰,何所識?識色,識聲、香、味、觸、法,

"The clung-to aggregate of consciousness is about [the ability to] differentiate-discern characteristics (note: the literal translation of vijnana is to differentiate-know). What is differentiated and discerned? Sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile feelings, and mental contents [are differentiated and discerned]. That is what is meant by the clung-to aggregate of consciousness."

Now, as for the question about how perception is different from "differentiation as in by consciousness." For one thing, the "differentiating" in vijnana/consciousness is, in ancient Indian Upanishadic usage, about the bifurcation into and reification of subject-object duality. To be a conscious being is to experience a "oneself" that stands in opposition to an environment (world). In Buddhist usage, an added meaning is often found: the experience of continuity (therefore consciousness is intimately connected with the retention of memory and karmic continuity). Here's a way to summarize: Being conscious is being aware of senses and their corresponding objects; being conscious is also about experiencing continuity--to have memories and to be able to anticipate the future.

To be a percipient being, on the other hand, is to experience "specific contents" such as "there is a multiplicity/diversity of experience...there's only One-ness...there's not-a-thing." In Buddhist cosmology, all sentient beings are conscious, but not all beings are necessarily percipient. An example would be a human in deep sleep, an asanna being in the non-percipient state--both are said to be conscious without experiencing specific contents. A meditator in the nirodha state only experiences the temporary abeyance of feeling and perception, but is still "conscious," and therefore retains the continuum/memory of the person when he comes out of the samadhi. Quite a few Buddhist treatises speak of beings with 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1 aggregates, always with consciousness being the indispensable aggregate.




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

illustration of Buddha Gotoma where he looks like a human being

Illustration by Bhikkhu Vimalo from a BPS postcard wishing a happy vesak   More images where Buddha looks human: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2021/02/where-are-buddha-images-and-statues.html Buddha and Arahant images that look like real humans

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