Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“I realized that many people (especially those who are new to this website) are not aware of the role played by the ‘distorted saññā.’”
As someone who is new, I got forwarded to this topic very fast because many posts on this page, that a newby would be intetested in to read, adressed or linked to this topic. I think I got a good understanding of it in the very beginning but it expanded during the following weeks and the last realisation for me was that this inherent distorted sanna only works when the outside world is generated by the mind as well to fit together with the gati of a being.
I still struggle with the khandas in that way that I dont really understand what is happening right now in my mind and how the understanding helps with my depression. Your page seems to focus on reaching maga phalla but it hasnt really helped me yet in my everyday struggles, I hope it will get better with increased understanding. I will read your recommended links today and hope it will get clearer. Tying the PS with the pancaupadanakhandas seems like something I would be happy to read.
One thing I would like to reccommend is that you add kama and guna to the glossary because they were used very often but explained very rarely.
Thank you
“Also, over the years I often saw the 5 khandas being explained as a process, saying vedana follows the contact with a rupa and sanna following vedana or the other way around vedana following sanna. But all of this must rise together right? Without rupa and vinnana there is no contact and without contact no vedana and sanna and no cetana leading to sankhara. But a citta including contact, sanna, vedana and cetana arises as a whole so this cant be a process but mere dependent co-arising. Am i getting this right? “
I will write it again because I realized it’s a bit confusing, and I dont know if I can edit the post.
So on the one side I heard that contact is the condition for vedana and vedana is the condition for sanna. Meaning vedana is kind of an alert that something happened and sanna is the following analyzing of “what is it”, i.e. the perception. Other sources said sanna is the condition for vedana because how is one supposed to have a feeling for something if one does not know what it is. Sankhara in both cases is the action based on this experience and vinnana the overall process, encompassing at least rupa, sanna and vedana and also the condition for sankhara (cetana).
Your explanation seems to be that contact leads to vedana but it is always neutral at first (except bodily sensations that are instantly pleasurable or painful (but also mind-made)). But with the distorted sanna it also distorts the contact and therefore also distorts the vedana (samphassaja vedana). The cetana becomes sancetana leading to abhisankhara and the vinnana is the series of cittas, encompassing this process.
The point I try to make is: since a citta arises as a whole there cant just be a vedana or a sanna on it’s own that is then followed by another khanda. Vedana and sanna must arise together and also together with the contact (encompassing the rupa and vinnana) right? I hope it is now clearer what I meant.
“Namarupa is a somewhat complex subject. Can you provide the link(s) to the post(s) that you read on it? I may need to revise them. In some old posts, I may have talked about vipaka vinna and kamma vinnana. But I realized that there is no such distinction. I can revise those posts and address your questions there.”
I mainly got it from” Idappaccayatā Paṭicca Samuppāda – Bhava and Jāti Within a Lifetime”, but you also wrote about kamma vinnana and vipaka vinnana here “Khandhā in Idappaccayatā Paṭicca Samuppāda”. Why is there no such distinction? It made sense to me.
“Regarding the second question: Mental images (namarupa) arise first, and then ‘thoughts’ about them arise. So, they are not the same.”
Can I understand it as every namarupa being a new rupaupadanakhanda, inducing a new citta?
Also, over the years I often saw the 5 khandas being explained as a process, saying vedana follows the contact with a rupa and sanna following vedana or the other way around vedana following sanna. But all of this must rise together right? Without rupa and vinnana there is no contact and without contact no vedana and sanna and no cetana leading to sankhara. But a citta including contact, sanna, vedana and cetana arises as a whole so this cant be a process but mere dependent co-arising. Am i getting this right?
Thanks also for the rest of the explanation. Posts about distorted sanna were the very first I read when I came to this page, maybe it is time to read them again now with increased understanding.
