Aemilius wrote: Son of Buddha wrote:
I don't think consciousness in itself is suffering. Feelings are painful, pleasurable or neutral, but consciousness is not.
the suttas say consciousness is suffering.
It leads to incoherence if we take the skandhas separately and say that they are suffering each. In the Diamond Sutra
Tathagata says that He also calls the sands of the River Ganges "sand".
so the Buddha taught incoherence when he said Consciousness is suffering?
http://what-buddha-said.net/Canon/Sutta ... .196.1.htm
At Savatthi. While once seated, the Venerable Radha asked the Blessed One:
Venerable Sir, one says: Suffering!! What, Venerable Sir, is suffering?
Form, Radha, is suffering, feeling is suffering, perception is suffering, mental constructions are suffering, consciousness is suffering
Understanding this, Bhikkhus, a well instructed Noble Disciple experiences disgust towards form, disgust towards feeling, disgust towards perception, disgust towards mental construction, & disgust towards consciousness itself! Experiencing disgust, he becomes disillusioned! Through disillusion his mind is released. When it is released, one instantly knows: This mind is liberated, and one understands: Extinguished is birth, this Noble Life is all completed, done is what should be done, there is no state of being beyond this...
If the Tathagata perceives sand, which is an example of the first skandha material form (rupa), He should have suffering according to You.
its not according to me,the Buddha said the 5 skandhas is suffering(quote provided up above)
Tathagata has in the case of perceiving sand the other skandhas too, the skandha of feeling through eyes and other senses, the name "sand", consciousness of it as sand, and the mental factor of equanimity as samskara skandha.
so seeing through the phisical eyes is a skandha would you consider "seeing" images in the mind to be a skandha?
feeling and form is a skhandha would you consider "feeling and form inside your mind to be a phisical skhadha?
the Buddha need not to precieve anything for everything is already known
but all such things are well beyond my knowledge I can only quote what is taught in the texts themselves
check out chapter 5 of the Nirvana Sutra.
He is not round and not square. He is no skandha, sphere or realm, and yet he is the skandha, sphere, and realm. He is non-increasing and is not a lessening. He is no victor, and yet is one not vanquished. The body of the Tathagata is perfect in such innumerable virtues. There is none that he knows, none not known. There is none that is seen and none that is not seen. It is not that there is any creating and not that there is no creating. It is non-world and is not non-world. He does not do and is not non-doing. He is none to depend upon and is not none to depend upon. He is not the four great elements, nor is he not the four great elements.
The Buddha-Dharma is incalculable and hard to fathom The same is also the case with the Tathagata. He is beyond knowing." Bodhisattva Kasyapa said to the Buddha: "O World-Honoured One! It is so, it is so. It is as you, the Holy One, say. Unbounded and incomprehensible is Buddha-Dharma. Thus, too, is the Tathagata. All stands beyond comprehension; so too the Tathagata. Thus, I know now that the Tathagata is eternal and indestructible and that there is no change with him. I shall now study well and expound it widely to people."
Then the Buddha praised Bodhisattva Kasyapa and said: "Well said, well said! The body of the Tathagata is adamantine and indestructible. You, Bodhisattva, now have the right view and right understanding. If you see clearly thus, you will see the adamantine and indestructible body of the Tathagata just as you see things reflected in a mirror."
the 5 skandhas are based upon Samsara/ignorance they are derived from ignorance through the 12 links of dependent origination and are the reason for the great mass of suffering
read this short sutta... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
It is not common sense to say that matter in itself is suffering. Are carbon and oxygen suffering? How?
Matter or form is empty of inherent nature. It is not suffering in itself.
Similarly with the other skandhas, they are empty of inherent nature, they are not inherently suffering.
its is a byproduct of the process from which all suffering is derived.
From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.
personally I don't like using the term Mind in relation to Nibbana due to there needing to be a seperation between the terms mind and consciousness, I perfer using the term Pristen Wisdom or noumenon however the topic is "difference between consciousness and the mind" so my posts are simply to show how mind can be considered different to consciousness and what teachers teach this and how they come to such conclusions. also this is actually the most common held view in the Thervadan thai forest tradition, so if you or anyone what to know more about this view you can actually get a large amount of info on this topic by looking up TFT teachers and discussions.
peace and love to you