This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This stub lacks ; vijnana is a huge concept. See the Yogacara school, the alayavijnana.. or, Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga, for the theravadin understanding. My english a bad and i have to work on the french articles... pyl 21:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
On July 25, 2007, a clean-up tag was inserted at the top of this article. Since then I believe there have been a number of minor improvements done, both structurally and in terms of content and (perhaps) style. Could someone identify explicit remaining factors that might merit the continuation of the clean-up tag? Thanks so much for any help! Larry Rosenfeld ( talk) 18:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
On Oct. 18, 2007, an anonymous user inserted the following information in the opening paragraph:
Six-and-a-half hours afterwards, I added a {{Fact}} tag with this Edit Summary:
It's been two weeks and there's been no response, so I am going to delete this uncited text (along with the associated "See also" addition of Jnana). If someone, perhaps prompted by my deletion, decides to re-add the deleted text, please do so with a citation or, minimally, providing a rational basis here. I'd very much appreciate any justifying insight. With metta, Larry Rosenfeld ( talk) 18:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I want to point out that vijñāna (viññāṇa) has an alternative meaning besides "consciousness." The Sanskrit (and Pali) language seems to have different expressions and words for consciousness or mindfulness, including saṃjñā (saññā), cittaṃ (cittaŋ), smṛti (sati), samprajaña (sampajañña) and dhyānaṃ (jhāna), among others. Saṃjñā is the most accurate translation for "consciousness," while cittaṃ can be translated to "mind", smṛti is usually translated to "awareness" or "remembrance," samprajaña is translated to "clear comprehension," and dhyānaṃ is usually translated to mean "meditating" or "awareness." Vijñāna, on the other hand, should be translated to mean "discriminating knowledge," or just "knowledge," and should not be translated to mean "consciousness" itself. - Ano-User ( talk) 05:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
References
There are several issues with "consciousness". First, it's not well defined in English so doesn't aid understanding. Second, it conflicts with modern and ancient translation of cit, citta as "consciousness" in several Indian languages. And consciousness fails to capture both scope and range: consciousness encompasses more (vinnana deals with sense experience, concepts and distinctions (nama-rupa)) and less (vinnana includes animation, life force).
The word "soul", I posit, is most accurate, including its historic philosophical debate and confusion. The Latin "anima" is more obvious, though the Greek "psyche" is likely least controversial. I believe "sentience" captures the scope and range of "vinnana" well, both the "sensual experience" and "life force" meanings of vinnana. Alexgenaud ( talk) 13:58, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
San- (Pali), Con- (Latin), Syn- (Greek), Together, join, one (English); Vi- (Pali), De- (Latin), Di- (Greek), Separate, two (English); ña (Pali), gno (Greek), know (English);
Sañña is joining together knowledge (for example forming colours from light waves). Viññana is dividing or discriminating knowledge (for example apple vs oranges). Nama-rupa (named form) are the concepts of apples and oranges in mind.
As for the "life force" we can think of this vitality as discriminating and organising principal in opposition to entropy. Viññana discriminates and organizes and collects energy in separate life forms. Without viññana an object succumbs to entropy and dissolves to dust once again.
Viññana (sentience, in both senses of discriminating perception and discriminating life) is a prerequisite to using senses seeking food, reproduction, pleasure, and avoiding displeasure (vedana), which is a prerequisite of thirst (tanha), and leads to pain (dukkha). Alexgenaud ( talk) 21:08, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi All, I suspect that my understand is still lacking. Additionally, this is my first contribution so please don't bite. I wanted to bring to the discussion MN 38 which Sati declares a pernicious view "'As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on [from birth to birth], not another.'" The Buddha corrects this pernicious view by stating that consciousness is dependently originated: "Consciousness, monks, is classified simply by the requisite condition in dependence on which it arises." [1] I think this is worth including in the Life Force section, but I wanted to propose it here first in case there was a clear error in my thinking. Thanks! Twipsy mcgee ( talk) 14:13, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vijñāna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:41, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanissaro is quoted as saying that ("the cause for the arising of consciousness (viññāṇa) is the arising of one of the other aggregates (physical or mental); and the arising of consciousness in turn gives rise to one or more of the mental (nāma) aggregates").
This elaborate and confusing explanation arises from unjustified translation of vinnana and nama-rupa as consciousness and menality-physicality. Nama-rupa is quite literally "named form" and refers to distinctions, concepts or conceptualisation, the mental manifestations of observed forms (rupa). Discernment or discrimination or perception or sentience (vinnana) is dependant upon distinctions and concepts (nama-rupa); and in turn distinctions (nama-rupa) are dependant upon discrimination (vinnana).
As observe (sanna) and value (vedana) external forms (rupa) and construct (sankhara) concepts (mental forms, nama-rupa) for perception, sentience (vinnana).
Sanna is not perception (etymology San=Con, Ña=Gno, thus cognition), the closest modern term might be qualia (literally red, blue, yellow, white according to the Buddha himself). Vedana is not feeling but rather valent emotive tone (painful, pleasant and ambivalent). Sankhara is construction (both the verb and noun, used in context of building chariots, houses, and the sense of self. In both modern and ancient India, in the sense of rituals, "character building", "making a man", rites of passage). Vinnana is not consciousness but only the sensual experience of nama-rupa, animation, life (even soul or psyche fits). Alexgenaud ( talk) 13:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
As an aid to expanding the Hindu part of this page, here are several mentions of the term vijnana in the Upanishads, many of them early: Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2:1:16-17, 2:4:12-13; Chandogya Upanishad 7:7:1-2, 7:8:1, 7:26:1, Taittiriya Upanishad 2:4:1, 2:5:1, 2:6:1, 3:5:1, Subala Upanishad 5:1-15, 9:1-14, Kaivalya Upanishad 4. This may not be exhaustive. Of course there are limits to what can be done on Wikipedia here w/o secondary sources. But the frequency of early Upanishadic references suggests that there should be a long history of this term in Hinduism, allowing expansion. -- Presearch ( talk) 23:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This stub lacks ; vijnana is a huge concept. See the Yogacara school, the alayavijnana.. or, Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga, for the theravadin understanding. My english a bad and i have to work on the french articles... pyl 21:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
On July 25, 2007, a clean-up tag was inserted at the top of this article. Since then I believe there have been a number of minor improvements done, both structurally and in terms of content and (perhaps) style. Could someone identify explicit remaining factors that might merit the continuation of the clean-up tag? Thanks so much for any help! Larry Rosenfeld ( talk) 18:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
On Oct. 18, 2007, an anonymous user inserted the following information in the opening paragraph:
Six-and-a-half hours afterwards, I added a {{Fact}} tag with this Edit Summary:
It's been two weeks and there's been no response, so I am going to delete this uncited text (along with the associated "See also" addition of Jnana). If someone, perhaps prompted by my deletion, decides to re-add the deleted text, please do so with a citation or, minimally, providing a rational basis here. I'd very much appreciate any justifying insight. With metta, Larry Rosenfeld ( talk) 18:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I want to point out that vijñāna (viññāṇa) has an alternative meaning besides "consciousness." The Sanskrit (and Pali) language seems to have different expressions and words for consciousness or mindfulness, including saṃjñā (saññā), cittaṃ (cittaŋ), smṛti (sati), samprajaña (sampajañña) and dhyānaṃ (jhāna), among others. Saṃjñā is the most accurate translation for "consciousness," while cittaṃ can be translated to "mind", smṛti is usually translated to "awareness" or "remembrance," samprajaña is translated to "clear comprehension," and dhyānaṃ is usually translated to mean "meditating" or "awareness." Vijñāna, on the other hand, should be translated to mean "discriminating knowledge," or just "knowledge," and should not be translated to mean "consciousness" itself. - Ano-User ( talk) 05:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
References
There are several issues with "consciousness". First, it's not well defined in English so doesn't aid understanding. Second, it conflicts with modern and ancient translation of cit, citta as "consciousness" in several Indian languages. And consciousness fails to capture both scope and range: consciousness encompasses more (vinnana deals with sense experience, concepts and distinctions (nama-rupa)) and less (vinnana includes animation, life force).
The word "soul", I posit, is most accurate, including its historic philosophical debate and confusion. The Latin "anima" is more obvious, though the Greek "psyche" is likely least controversial. I believe "sentience" captures the scope and range of "vinnana" well, both the "sensual experience" and "life force" meanings of vinnana. Alexgenaud ( talk) 13:58, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
San- (Pali), Con- (Latin), Syn- (Greek), Together, join, one (English); Vi- (Pali), De- (Latin), Di- (Greek), Separate, two (English); ña (Pali), gno (Greek), know (English);
Sañña is joining together knowledge (for example forming colours from light waves). Viññana is dividing or discriminating knowledge (for example apple vs oranges). Nama-rupa (named form) are the concepts of apples and oranges in mind.
As for the "life force" we can think of this vitality as discriminating and organising principal in opposition to entropy. Viññana discriminates and organizes and collects energy in separate life forms. Without viññana an object succumbs to entropy and dissolves to dust once again.
Viññana (sentience, in both senses of discriminating perception and discriminating life) is a prerequisite to using senses seeking food, reproduction, pleasure, and avoiding displeasure (vedana), which is a prerequisite of thirst (tanha), and leads to pain (dukkha). Alexgenaud ( talk) 21:08, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi All, I suspect that my understand is still lacking. Additionally, this is my first contribution so please don't bite. I wanted to bring to the discussion MN 38 which Sati declares a pernicious view "'As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on [from birth to birth], not another.'" The Buddha corrects this pernicious view by stating that consciousness is dependently originated: "Consciousness, monks, is classified simply by the requisite condition in dependence on which it arises." [1] I think this is worth including in the Life Force section, but I wanted to propose it here first in case there was a clear error in my thinking. Thanks! Twipsy mcgee ( talk) 14:13, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vijñāna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:41, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanissaro is quoted as saying that ("the cause for the arising of consciousness (viññāṇa) is the arising of one of the other aggregates (physical or mental); and the arising of consciousness in turn gives rise to one or more of the mental (nāma) aggregates").
This elaborate and confusing explanation arises from unjustified translation of vinnana and nama-rupa as consciousness and menality-physicality. Nama-rupa is quite literally "named form" and refers to distinctions, concepts or conceptualisation, the mental manifestations of observed forms (rupa). Discernment or discrimination or perception or sentience (vinnana) is dependant upon distinctions and concepts (nama-rupa); and in turn distinctions (nama-rupa) are dependant upon discrimination (vinnana).
As observe (sanna) and value (vedana) external forms (rupa) and construct (sankhara) concepts (mental forms, nama-rupa) for perception, sentience (vinnana).
Sanna is not perception (etymology San=Con, Ña=Gno, thus cognition), the closest modern term might be qualia (literally red, blue, yellow, white according to the Buddha himself). Vedana is not feeling but rather valent emotive tone (painful, pleasant and ambivalent). Sankhara is construction (both the verb and noun, used in context of building chariots, houses, and the sense of self. In both modern and ancient India, in the sense of rituals, "character building", "making a man", rites of passage). Vinnana is not consciousness but only the sensual experience of nama-rupa, animation, life (even soul or psyche fits). Alexgenaud ( talk) 13:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
As an aid to expanding the Hindu part of this page, here are several mentions of the term vijnana in the Upanishads, many of them early: Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2:1:16-17, 2:4:12-13; Chandogya Upanishad 7:7:1-2, 7:8:1, 7:26:1, Taittiriya Upanishad 2:4:1, 2:5:1, 2:6:1, 3:5:1, Subala Upanishad 5:1-15, 9:1-14, Kaivalya Upanishad 4. This may not be exhaustive. Of course there are limits to what can be done on Wikipedia here w/o secondary sources. But the frequency of early Upanishadic references suggests that there should be a long history of this term in Hinduism, allowing expansion. -- Presearch ( talk) 23:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)