Consciousness is not momentary

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

Here is a good example that we cannot always see what is actually there but we see what is constructed by our minds,

svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Malcolm
Posts: 35124
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Malcolm »

Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary...
Take it up with the Buddha.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5229
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by LastLegend »

There are always noises around we don’t hear them because mind is not paying attention.

You are right that we cannot see what’s there...but we know a difference between a sound of water and sound of wind for example. If there are thoughts, that means mind already knows. Already recognize a difference. Very crucial issue here. As this determines samsara or Bodhi.
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5229
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by LastLegend »

It’s hard to detect. Hard to disappear.

When you have seen this consciousness, you find it is neither out nor in: without hurry, objectively & calmly observe it. When you master this, then melt and flux over and over, empty yet solid, profoundly stable, and then the flowing consciousness will disappear.

Those who get this consciousness to disappear will then destroy the obstructing confusions of the Bodhisattvas of the ten stages. Once this consciousness is gone, then the mind is open and still, quiet, serene and calm, perfectly pure, and enormously stable.


https://terebess.hu/zen/sodoka.html#f
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 5112
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Please define “momentary”
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook develops outward insight.
Malcolm
Posts: 35124
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Malcolm »

Life, personhood, pleasure and pain
— This is all that's bound together
In a single mental event
— A moment that quickly takes place.

Even the spirits who endure
For eighty-four thousand aeons
— Even these do not live the same
For any two moments of mind.

What ceases for one who is dead,
Or for one who's still standing here,
Are all just the same aggregates
— Gone, never to connect again.

The states which are vanishing now,
And those which will vanish some day,
Have characteristics no different
Than those which have vanished before.

With no production there's no birth;
With becoming present, one lives.
When grasped with the highest meaning,
The world is dead when the mind stops.

There's no hoarding what has vanished,
No piling up for the future;
Those who have been born are standing
Like a seed upon a needle.

The vanishing of all these states
That have become is not welcome,
Though dissolving phenomena stand
Uncombined from primordial time.

From the unseen, [states] come and go,
Glimpsed only as they're passing by;
Like lightning flashing in the sky
— They arise and then pass away.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .olen.html
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
User avatar
Budai
Posts: 826
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:12 pm
Location: ༀ ∞ Nam Myoho Renge Kyo ∞ ༀ

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Budai »

The entire Saha world is as brief as a lightning flash in the scope of Sukhavati.

:bow:
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 10:26 pm
Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Please define “momentary”

Kṣaṇa (क्षण, “moment”) refers to a unit of time according to the 2nd century Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra (chapter XXV).—Accordingly, “In the time of a finger-snap (acchaṭā-mātra), there are sixty moments (kṣaṇa); in each kṣaṇa, the mind is born (utpāda) and ceases (bhaṅga); but as it arises in a series, we know that this is a mind of desire (rāgacitta), that, a mind of anger (dveṣacitta), or a mind of delusion (mohacitta), a mind of faith (prasādacitta), or a pure mind (viśuddhacitta) of wisdom (prajñā) or rapture (dhyāna)”.

The kṣaṇa, moment, is the shortest time. Buddhists of the Lesser Vehicle agree in saying that Dharmas are kṣaṇika, momentary, but disagree on the meaning of this epithet. Pāli scholars and the Sarvāstivādin-Vaibhāṣikas, who accept the existence of the past and the future and who recognize in the kṣaṇika dharma two, three or four characteristics of the conditioned dharma (saṃskṛtadharma-lakṣaṇa), are of the opinion that the dharma arises, perdures and perishes in the space of one kṣaṇa (cf. Visuddhimagga; Abhidhammaṭṭhasaṃgha; Kośa; Saṃghabhadra).

Samjña (perception) and other mental events take time to occur

Mind in Indian Buddhist Philosophy
First published Thu Dec 3, 2009; substantive revision Fri Oct 12, 2012 :

In seeking to reconcile the Abhidharma analysis of mind, and its synchronic model of momentary cognitive events, with the diachronic phenomenon of karmic activity, the Abhidharma philosophers came up with different solutions. The Vaibhāṣika (also referred in the literature as the Sarvāstivādins), solved the problem of the continuity of karmic potential by proposing an ontology of the constitutive elements of reality (or dharmas) as existing in all three temporal dimensions: past, present, and future. On this ontological model, dharmas do not change, only their temporal condition does. The principal reason for adopting this peculiar ontology is the theory of the momentariness (kṣaṇikavāda) of all phenomena: if nothing endures for more than a moment how, then, can a cause that is no longer present lead to a manifest result? Similarly, if the accumulated karmic potential from past experience is no longer present, how could it affect the present condition? But in postulating the existence of the constituent elements of experience throughout the three temporal dimensions, the Sarvāstivādins simply shifted the Abhidharma problematic: having presumably explained what accounts for the efficacy of accumulated karmic potential, the question now is why a karmic result arises at one time rather than another? [for detailed discussions of Vaibhāṣika ontology and its analysis of mind see Williams 1981, Bastow 1994, and Cox 1995]

The Vaibhāṣika solution consists in the introduction of a new type of dharma, that of appropriation (prāpti), whose persistence in the mental stream is not due to any other factors, including the results of past actions, but rather to its own capacity to replicate itself. The presence of a factor of appropriation in the mental stream thus ensures the karmic efficacy of past causal chains. It also explains why mental factors and events remain associated with a given mental stream. This new dharma of appropriation is classified as being dissociated from thought and as neutral; it is also classified as being one of the determining factors for differentiating one mental stream from another (see AKBh ad II 35). Furthermore, it explains why certain dispositions, such as aversion, persist in the mental stream of an individual (because appropriation follows the initial experience of a first moment of aversion), and how it is possible to overcome such dispositions (when appropriation is associated with factors that condition non-aversive states of mind). In both cases, the concept of appropriation provides an account of continuity in the mental stream that goes against the stipulations of the Abhidharmic principle of the momentariness of mental states. Thus, the Vaibhāṣika solution to reconciling the theory of causality with the theory of the momentariness of all phenomena rests on a notion that itself defies explanation, prompting traditional critics such as Vasubandhu to ask whether appropriation is a real entity or a merely conventional one, and in the end to dismiss it altogether (see AKBh ad II 36cd).
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 5112
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Oh... ksana. Yeah okay
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook develops outward insight.
User avatar
Caoimhghín
Posts: 3132
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Caoimhghín »

There are many ways to be "anti-momentaryism," and just because you disagree with Ābhidharmika momentaryisms of various Śrāvaka sects, that does not equate to "There are no moments (at all or in general)." As mentioned before by another user, Śrāvaka momentary doctrine is a form of "atomism for time" and is critiqued in largely the same way that atoms are critiqued by Yogācārins and Madhyamakas alike. Just because there are no ultimate atoms of ultimate form, it does not follow that there are not bits of rūpa that sentient beings interact with. Just because the moments are deconstructed, it doesn't mean that there is no such thing as a particular moment of time for a particular locus of experience.
Then, the monks sang this gāthā:

These bodies are like foam.
Them being frail, who can rejoice in them?
The Buddha attained the vajra-body.
Still, it becomes inconstant and rots.
The many Buddhas are vajra-entities.
All are also subject to inconstancy.
Quickly ended, like melting snow --
how could things be different?

The Buddha passed into parinirvāṇa afterward.
(T1.27b10 Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra DĀ 2)
Malcolm
Posts: 35124
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Malcolm »

Caoimhghín wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 7:24 pm There are many ways to be "anti-momentaryism," and just because you disagree with Ābhidharmika momentaryisms of various Śrāvaka sects, that does not equate to "There are no moments." As mentioned before by another user, Śrāvaka momentary doctrine is a form of "atomism for time" and is critiqued in largely the same way that atoms are critiqued by Yogācārins and Madhyamakas alike. Just because there are no ultimate atoms of ultimate form, it does not follow that there are not bits of rūpa that sentient beings interact with. Just because the moments are deconstructed, it doesn't mean that there is no such thing as a particular moment of time for a particular locus of experience.
Also, the Buddha was quite clear that phenomena, including minds, were momentary. The Buddha may not have elaborated in detail upon what a "moment" was, but in the end, the basic unit of time in Buddhism is number of moments it takes to form a thought. In reality, moments are partless. Partless moments that perish as soon as they arise have no observable duration and are immune from Madhyamaka critique.

The notion that the mind is permanent (i.e. not momentary) is just a Hindu idea, Vedantic.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5229
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by LastLegend »

Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Before perception happens, what already happened?
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

LastLegend wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 8:22 pm
Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Before perception happens, what already happened?
That is a good question. I have heard explanations of the Buddhist view of perception in 1990's, that means daily lectures for a month. According to what I remember, the Buddhist view is that first the object informs you that "here I am, look at me, or listen to me, etc.." Then the mind turns its attention towards it. The whole thing is rather complicated.

The explanations that I received were mostly in the Vibhasha-sarvastivada view. There are atleast three extant Buddhist traditions of perception, Theravada, Vibhasha-sarvastivada and Sautrantika. These have existed and developed to some extent during the centuries after leaving India, I assume.

Here is something, so that you get a feel of it:
Restricting the account to the consciousness process of ordinary beings, two types of process are described: five-sense-door processes (pañcadvāra) and mind-door processes (manodvāra). These may occur in succession, or mind-door processes may occur independently. Five-sense-door processes account for sensory perception as information is directly received from the fields of the five physical sense faculties. Mind-door processes internalize the information received through the sense faculties and characterize the mind that is absorbed in thought or memory. Objects at the “door” of the mind, which is treated in Buddhist thought as a sixth sense faculty, may be past, present, or future, purely conceptual or even transcendent. Normally, however, the object at the mind door will be either a past memory or a concept. If there is no perceptual activity, as is the case in deep, dreamless sleep, the mind is in a state of rest called inactive mode (bhavaṅga). Throughout one’s life, the same type of citta performs this function of the inactive mind that is the natural mode to which the mind reverts. The mind switches from its inactive mode to a simple mind-door process when a concept or memory occurs and no attention is directed to the other five sense fields. The simplest mind-door process is a succession of the following functions: 1) adverting to the object of thought: a function that lasts one moment and becomes internalized as an object support; 2) impulsion: occurs for up to seven moments and performs the function of the mind’s responding actively to the object with wholesome or unwholesome karma; 3) retaining: holding on to the object of the consciousness process for one or two moments.

The mind switches from its inactive mode to any of the five-sense-door processes when an object occurs at the “door” of the appropriate sense faculty. This process of sensory perception involves a greater number of functions: 1) disturbed inactive mind: a function that arises due to the stimulus of the sense object. It lasts for two moments, during which sensory contact takes place, i.e., a physical impact of the sense object on the physical matter of the appropriate sense faculty; 2) adverting: lasts one moment, during which the mind turns towards the object at the appropriate sense “door;” 3) perceiving: lasts one moment and is the sheer perception of the sense object with minimal interpretation; 4) receiving: lasts one moment and performs the intermediary role of enabling transit to and from the appropriate discriminative consciousness, whether visual, auditory, etc.; 5) investigating: lasts one moment and performs the role of establishing the nature of the sense object and of determining the mind’s response to that object that has just been identified; 6) impulsion: same as in the mind-door process; 7) retaining: same as in the mind-door process. As an example, visual perception involves not only seeing itself, but also a succession of moments of fixing of the visual object in the mind, recognition of its general features, and identification of its nature. In both the mind-door and five-sense door processes, the sense faculty and its sense object condition the arising of a present moment of a corresponding apprehending consciousness, that is, perception here is modeled on simultaneous conditioning. And in both the mind-door and five-sense door processes, when the retaining function ceases, the mind reenters its inactive mode.

The consciousness types that perform most of the functions that make up the mind-door and the five-sense-door processes fall into the category of resultant cittas, that is, those that are the result of past actively wholesome or unwholesome consciousness. This means that the experience of the sense data presented to one’s mind is determined by one’s previous actions and is beyond of one’s immediate control. Whenever one remembers or conceptualizes, sees, hears, smells, tastes, or touches something that is desirable or pleasing, one experiences a result of previous wholesome consciousness. And vice versa with objects that are undesirable or unpleasing and previous unwholesome consciousness respectively. Only in the final stage of the consciousness process, when the mind has chosen to respond actively to its object in some way, actively present wholesome or unwholesome consciousness operates and constitutes karma that will bear future results. The Abhidhamma thus “provides an exact small-scale analysis of the process of dependent arising” (Gethin 1998, 216).

from Abhidharma https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abhi ... rTheConPro
First published Mon Aug 16, 2010; substantive revision Wed May 30, 2018

There are also teachings of perception of the Yogacara tradition, these are influential and important.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5229
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by LastLegend »

I was thinking: there is slight different between pereception, awareness, mindfulness, and just being present...perception seems to involve a deliberate act...which one takes less effort?
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5229
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by LastLegend »

Aemilius wrote: Tue May 11, 2021 8:59 am
LastLegend wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 8:22 pm
Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Before perception happens, what already happened?
That is a good question. I have heard explanations of the Buddhist view of perception in 1990's, that means daily lectures for a month. According to what I remember, the Buddhist view is that first the object informs you that "here I am, look at me, or listen to me, etc.." Then the mind turns its attention towards it. The whole thing is rather complicated.

The explanations that I received were mostly in the Vibhasha-sarvastivada view. There are atleast three extant Buddhist traditions of perception, Theravada, Vibhasha-sarvastivada and Sautrantika. These have existed and developed to some extent during the centuries after leaving India, I assume.

Here is something, so that you get a feel of it:
Restricting the account to the consciousness process of ordinary beings, two types of process are described: five-sense-door processes (pañcadvāra) and mind-door processes (manodvāra). These may occur in succession, or mind-door processes may occur independently. Five-sense-door processes account for sensory perception as information is directly received from the fields of the five physical sense faculties. Mind-door processes internalize the information received through the sense faculties and characterize the mind that is absorbed in thought or memory. Objects at the “door” of the mind, which is treated in Buddhist thought as a sixth sense faculty, may be past, present, or future, purely conceptual or even transcendent. Normally, however, the object at the mind door will be either a past memory or a concept. If there is no perceptual activity, as is the case in deep, dreamless sleep, the mind is in a state of rest called inactive mode (bhavaṅga). Throughout one’s life, the same type of citta performs this function of the inactive mind that is the natural mode to which the mind reverts. The mind switches from its inactive mode to a simple mind-door process when a concept or memory occurs and no attention is directed to the other five sense fields. The simplest mind-door process is a succession of the following functions: 1) adverting to the object of thought: a function that lasts one moment and becomes internalized as an object support; 2) impulsion: occurs for up to seven moments and performs the function of the mind’s responding actively to the object with wholesome or unwholesome karma; 3) retaining: holding on to the object of the consciousness process for one or two moments.

The mind switches from its inactive mode to any of the five-sense-door processes when an object occurs at the “door” of the appropriate sense faculty. This process of sensory perception involves a greater number of functions: 1) disturbed inactive mind: a function that arises due to the stimulus of the sense object. It lasts for two moments, during which sensory contact takes place, i.e., a physical impact of the sense object on the physical matter of the appropriate sense faculty; 2) adverting: lasts one moment, during which the mind turns towards the object at the appropriate sense “door;” 3) perceiving: lasts one moment and is the sheer perception of the sense object with minimal interpretation; 4) receiving: lasts one moment and performs the intermediary role of enabling transit to and from the appropriate discriminative consciousness, whether visual, auditory, etc.; 5) investigating: lasts one moment and performs the role of establishing the nature of the sense object and of determining the mind’s response to that object that has just been identified; 6) impulsion: same as in the mind-door process; 7) retaining: same as in the mind-door process. As an example, visual perception involves not only seeing itself, but also a succession of moments of fixing of the visual object in the mind, recognition of its general features, and identification of its nature. In both the mind-door and five-sense door processes, the sense faculty and its sense object condition the arising of a present moment of a corresponding apprehending consciousness, that is, perception here is modeled on simultaneous conditioning. And in both the mind-door and five-sense door processes, when the retaining function ceases, the mind reenters its inactive mode.

The consciousness types that perform most of the functions that make up the mind-door and the five-sense-door processes fall into the category of resultant cittas, that is, those that are the result of past actively wholesome or unwholesome consciousness. This means that the experience of the sense data presented to one’s mind is determined by one’s previous actions and is beyond of one’s immediate control. Whenever one remembers or conceptualizes, sees, hears, smells, tastes, or touches something that is desirable or pleasing, one experiences a result of previous wholesome consciousness. And vice versa with objects that are undesirable or unpleasing and previous unwholesome consciousness respectively. Only in the final stage of the consciousness process, when the mind has chosen to respond actively to its object in some way, actively present wholesome or unwholesome consciousness operates and constitutes karma that will bear future results. The Abhidhamma thus “provides an exact small-scale analysis of the process of dependent arising” (Gethin 1998, 216).

from Abhidharma https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abhi ... rTheConPro
First published Mon Aug 16, 2010; substantive revision Wed May 30, 2018

There are also teachings of perception of the Yogacara tradition, these are influential and important.
Mostly confusing and complicated for me.


As an example, visual perception involves not only seeing itself, but also a succession of moments of fixing of the visual object in the mind, recognition of its general features, and identification of its nature.


1) That ‘seeing’ whether through hearing or seeing with eyes close is known as [mind] appearance of perception? Is there an deliberate act involved yet? How is this different from awareness?

2) Why is there a need to see itself? Our nature is equal...why was there a thing to differentiate? If this is not original ignorance then what is? To differentiate is to recognize or to know itself from other for what? other than creating appearance of self?

3) Take to contemplation department: what sees itself?
It’s eye blinking.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

Malcolm wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 7:32 pm
Caoimhghín wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 7:24 pm There are many ways to be "anti-momentaryism," and just because you disagree with Ābhidharmika momentaryisms of various Śrāvaka sects, that does not equate to "There are no moments." As mentioned before by another user, Śrāvaka momentary doctrine is a form of "atomism for time" and is critiqued in largely the same way that atoms are critiqued by Yogācārins and Madhyamakas alike. Just because there are no ultimate atoms of ultimate form, it does not follow that there are not bits of rūpa that sentient beings interact with. Just because the moments are deconstructed, it doesn't mean that there is no such thing as a particular moment of time for a particular locus of experience.
Also, the Buddha was quite clear that phenomena, including minds, were momentary. The Buddha may not have elaborated in detail upon what a "moment" was, but in the end, the basic unit of time in Buddhism is number of moments it takes to form a thought. In reality, moments are partless. Partless moments that perish as soon as they arise have no observable duration and are immune from Madhyamaka critique.

The notion that the mind is permanent (i.e. not momentary) is just a Hindu idea, Vedantic.
There is a case for the existence of the three times in Buddhism, take for example the Abhijña or supernormal perception of past and future events. Like the Buddha's, Arhats' and Bodhisattvas' seeing the events in the infinite past and future.
Another one is the perception of movement by normal consciousness. The third one is perception of sounds and words. These need more time than a sixtieth part of a fingersnap to take place.
I don't think this is contrary to the Abhidharma, because the problem is discussed there at least to some extent.
The name Sarvastivada means "Three times exist"-vada. This is the traditional explanation.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
muni
Posts: 5061
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by muni »

Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Somehow this reminds on this, not yet estatblished. How about it?

”As I move my fingers from here to there (moving hand from left to right), you see my hand is moving, that is an illusion because everything you see is already gone when you see it. It is a moment and that moment is not yet established.
Right now, we have a smallest particle and the fastest thing, light; when the light passes through that smallest particle, that is a moment. So when I do this (moving hand from left to right), many moments are gone and what you are seeing is a reflection that is left behind, a trace behind, ... it has already happened.
When you are hearing what I am saying, actually, the sound has already happened, it is already gone. It is wonderful, but it is an illusion, it is a wonderful illusion. We don't feel scared about it, we don't feel fear for it. We are not disappointed by it but the truth is: when you see something, when you hear something, it is already gone, long time back, millions of moments ahead and you are seeing and hearing it millions of moments later; same thing with taste, same thing with touch, everything.”
“Everything is a moment”
All appearances are understood as being dharmakaya. We perceive everything in its natural purity, and there is nothing we can call impure.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

"The name Sarvastivada means "Three times exist"-vada."
to be more accurate Vasubandhu says: "He who affirms the existence of the dharmas of the three time periods [past, present and future] is held to be a Sarvastivadin."
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Consciousness is not momentary

Post by Aemilius »

muni wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 9:05 am
Aemilius wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 4:23 pm If it were momentary, we could not perceive the movement of hand or of any other object, we would see the hand or the object only at one particular point in space (and time). When you move your hand or an object, you see a larger slice of time, or more exactly your mind or brain constructs a series of moments into a thing called movement, so that what you perceive is a construction made by your mind.

Brain studies confirm this: When you see a painting or a picture, your eyes look in a quick succession at a number of points in the painting or picture, and based on this your brain or mind constructs an image, that you actually see. (I.e. what you see exists in your mind).

Same with sounds and melodies: Your ear hears only individual notes, or actually fragments of notes or sounds. Then based on this your mind constructs a sound and a melody. Sound and melody take place during a longer slice of time. When you hear a sound or melody, they are not momentary but constructions made by your mind based on samples of sounds, that you perceive through your ears.
Somehow this reminds on this, not yet estatblished. How about it?

”As I move my fingers from here to there (moving hand from left to right), you see my hand is moving, that is an illusion because everything you see is already gone when you see it. It is a moment and that moment is not yet established.
Right now, we have a smallest particle and the fastest thing, light; when the light passes through that smallest particle, that is a moment. So when I do this (moving hand from left to right), many moments are gone and what you are seeing is a reflection that is left behind, a trace behind, ... it has already happened.
When you are hearing what I am saying, actually, the sound has already happened, it is already gone. It is wonderful, but it is an illusion, it is a wonderful illusion. We don't feel scared about it, we don't feel fear for it. We are not disappointed by it but the truth is: when you see something, when you hear something, it is already gone, long time back, millions of moments ahead and you are seeing and hearing it millions of moments later; same thing with taste, same thing with touch, everything.”
“Everything is a moment”
It is really cool. What I mean is slightly different. If we heard only a fraction of a second at a time, we could not hear sounds or melodies. Our hearing also anticipates what is coming, we kind of hear in advance. Sounds and melodies are constructed in our minds or brains. What we hear is a construction in our minds. We hear only samples of sounds from the real world.

svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”