- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
In Mahānidāna sutta, Buddha describes the Paticca Samuppada process in detail. While referring to the feelings that can conditionally lead to tanha, the sutta specifically mentions samphassa-ja vedana:
‘Vedanāpaccayā taṇhā’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā vedanāpaccayā taṇhā. Vedanā ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ—cakkhusamphassajā vedanā sotasamphassajā vedanā ghānasamphassajā vedanā jivhāsamphassajā vedanā kāyasamphassajā vedanā manosamphassajā vedanā, sabbaso vedanāya asati vedanānirodhā api nu kho taṇhā paññāyethā”ti?
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo taṇhāya, yadidaṁ vedanā.
The English translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi in Sutta Central:
“It was said: ‘With feeling as condition there is craving.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no feeling of any kind anywhere—that is, no feeling born of eye-contact, feeling born of ear-contact, feeling born of nose-contact, feeling born of tongue-contact, feeling born of body-contact, or feeling born of mind-contact—then, in the complete absence of feeling, with the cessation of feeling, would craving be discerned?”
“Certainly not, venerable sir.”
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for craving, namely, feeling.
Similarly, while describing the contact that can conditionally lead to (defiled) feelings, the sutta specifically refers to “samphassa“:
‘Phassapaccayā vedanā’ti iti kho panetaṁ vuttaṁ, tadānanda, imināpetaṁ pariyāyena veditabbaṁ, yathā phassapaccayā vedanā. Phasso ca hi, ānanda, nābhavissa sabbena sabbaṁ sabbathā sabbaṁ kassaci kimhici, seyyathidaṁ—cakkhusamphasso sotasamphasso ghānasamphasso jivhāsamphasso kāyasamphasso manosamphasso, sabbaso phasse asati phassanirodhā api nu kho vedanā paññāyethā”ti?
“No hetaṁ, bhante”.
“Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṁ nidānaṁ esa samudayo esa paccayo vedanāya, yadidaṁ phasso.
The English Translation:
“It was said: ‘With contact as condition there is feeling.’ How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If there were absolutely and utterly no contact of any kind anywhere—that is, no eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, or mind-contact—then, in the complete absence of contact, with the cessation of contact, would feeling be discerned?”
“Certainly not, venerable sir.”
“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for feeling, namely, contact.
The English translations make no distinction between “phassa” & “samphassa” and “vedana” & “samphassa ja vedana“. I looked into some Pali dictionaries and they don’t describe the differences either.
What surprised me is that ChatGPT caught up on this issue pretty quickly. The following is a brief summary of my conversation:
Me: What is the difference between phassa and samphassa?
ChatGPT:
In simpler terms:
- Phassa is the basic, neutral contact when the sense faculties interact with objects and consciousness.
- Samphassa is a more complex form of contact, often charged with emotional or sensual involvement, which can lead to craving or aversion.
Me: What is the difference between vedana and samphassa ja vedana?
ChatGPT:
- Vedanā is the general term for the basic, immediate experience of feeling that arises from sensory contact. It is neutral in the sense that it is just the raw experience of pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral sensation.
- Samphassa-jā-vedanā is a more specific type of feeling that arises from a more involved, emotional, or sensual contact. These feelings are not neutral but are conditioned by mental reactions and are often linked with craving and attachment.
In practice, understanding the difference between vedanā and samphassa-jā-vedanā is crucial for developing mindfulness (sati) and insight (vipassanā). By recognizing when feelings are simply vedanā and when they become samphassa-jā-vedanā, practitioners can learn to observe their experiences without becoming entangled in the emotional responses that lead to suffering.
Me: So what type of feelings are involved in the Paticca Samuppada process?
ChatGPT:
In the context of Paṭicca Samuppāda (Dependent Origination), the key concept involved is vedanā (feeling or sensation), not samphassa-jā-vedanā.
- Samphassa-jā-vedanā refers to feelings that are born from sensual contact, which are more complex and often intertwined with craving and attachment. While these feelings can occur and contribute to the cycle of suffering, samphassa-jā-vedanā as a specific term is not explicitly mentioned in the traditional twelve-link formula of Paṭicca Samuppāda.
- However, it’s important to note that as vedanā leads to taṇhā in the Paṭicca Samuppāda process, the feelings involved in this transition could be influenced by samphassa (sensual contact) and can become what is described as samphassa-jā-vedanā, especially when these feelings become entangled with emotional reactions.
Me: An arahant removes avijja. If the PS process refers to vedana and not samphassa-ja-vedana, do arahants stop experiencing any feeling?
ChatGPT:
An Arahant—one who has attained enlightenment and eradicated all defilements, including avijjā (ignorance)—does not stop experiencing feelings (vedanā), but their relationship to those feelings changes fundamentally.
- Arahants do not stop experiencing vedanā. They continue to experience the natural feelings that arise from sense contact.
- What is eliminated is the reactive component that turns basic sensory feelings into a cause for further suffering, which would typically occur in the form of samphassa-jā-vedanā.
- An Arahant lives with full awareness, experiencing the world without the delusions and attachments that normally arise in response to sensory experiences, thus breaking the cycle of dependent origination at the link between vedanā and taṇhā.
Me: So you agree that it is the samphassa ja vedana that stops arising after avijja is removed (while the arahant is still alive)?
ChatGPT:
Yes, I agree. After the removal of avijjā (ignorance) in an Arahant, the samphassa-jā-vedanā (feelings born of sensual contact) as understood in the context of reactivity and mental proliferation stops occurring.
Summary:
- After the removal of avijjā, an Arahant no longer experiences samphassa-jā-vedanā as it is understood in the context of conditioned and reactive emotional experiences.
- Vedanā still occurs, but it is experienced in a purified, non-reactive way, free from the emotional and mental defilements that lead to suffering.
If an AI can resolve this issue so quickly, why aren’t the scholars able to do the same?
-
Taryal: “If an AI can resolve this issue so quickly, why aren’t the scholars able to do the same?”
- I have asked that question numerous times on this website and in discussion forums like Dhamma Wheel.
- P.S. See, for example, “Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda.”
My tentative conclusions:
- It is possible that the translators have not read any of my posts. However, that cannot be entirely correct since Bhikkhu Dhammanado (who posted regularly at Dhamma Wheel) criticized my posts. He is a close friend of Bhikkhu Sujato, who has translated most of the suttas at Sutta Central, so it is quite likely that they had discussed my writings. That leads to the conclusion that they don’t have the capability for logical thinking. That is a harsh way to say it, but I don’t have any other explanation.
- As for the readers, most who commented at Dhamma Wheel (including its “moderators”) have the same issue. No logical thinking capability.
- However, there was a silver lining. Some people who initially criticized me stopped commenting altogether. I guess they understood at some point but were too “high-minded” to admit online that they had been ignorant to criticize my writings.
-
In psychology, there is something called the confirmation bias: people’s tendency to process information in a way that is consistent with their existing beliefs. It is one of many cognitive biases, but it is the central one.
What makes this so hard to correct is because we don’t even know that it is going on, because of another bias: the blind spot bias, ie we cannot see our own biases.
Furthermore, even when we can see things logically, another layer of ego protection comes in: we can’t be wrong. Accepting new view points mean that we were wrong before, and if we have been wrong for decades then the stakes are too high.
To be a bit facetious, those old enough to know the sitcom “Happy Days” may remember the Fonzi character, who cannot get the word “wrong” out of his throat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvdY3HfepOo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPMIdIGj8v0
The confirmation bias, plus a bit of “Fonzi” in us, may prevent people from accepting Dhamma concepts if they conflict with their existing understanding.
AI is free from these emotional conflicts.
That’s my 2 cents.
Best,
Lang -
If that is true, then it is really petty and I have to say I agree with Lang here. I have described some of my personal experiences in the forum where people rejected Dhamma because they seemed to be too attached to their preconceived views. It would be a total misconduct for Dhamma practitioners to do the same, even worse when they call themselves “Bhikkhus”. Someone who is genuinely seeking the truth wouldn’t fear being wrong if it means their understanding will grow.
I used to wonder why Tipitaka doesn’t explicitly mention the terms like abhisankhara, samphassa, etc. in the traditional PS conditionality chain. Now I am starting to think that even if they were mentioned, puthujjanas would still interpret them wrongly. That’s the tragedy of not having ariyas I guess.
-
It seems that in the days of the Buddha, everyone knew that words like phassa, sankhara, cetana, vedana, and sanna meant samphassa, abhisankhara, sancetana, samphassa-ja-vedana, and “distorted sanna” in most situations. However, Abhidhamma specifically makes that distinction.
- Only in a few suttas are the specific words in the latter set defined. But such suttas are in the Tipitaka, as Taryal pointed out.
- However, until Ariya explains them, the terminology is too confusing for others to figure out. Furthermore, one should be able to figure out whether vipaka vinnana or kamma vinnana (for example) applies in the given situation. That is why it is critical to not only be aware of those specific usages (janato) but to comprehend them (passato). See “Jānato Passato” and Ājāniya – Critical Words to Remember”
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.