Emotions and the skandha's

[Crures]

Hey fellas!

 

I read a book in which the skandha's were mentioned and briefly described, but I got some questions about emotions and the skandha's and the sites google brought up are not clear.

 

So in the first skandha, there are the 6 senses and their sense objects. Because the sixth sense is "the mind's eye", the third and fourth skandha reside here/are perceived by it.

The second skandha is about whether something feels pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.

To me, it'd be logical that all emotions would therefore be categorized in these 3 categories.

 

However, in my book it's stated that the second skandha is *not* about emotions.

 

About the fourth skandha, my book says that traditionally there are about 10 or 20 or so phenomena, but that they are reducable to five categories:

1. volition/decisionmaking,

2. clinging and rejecting,

3. forms of energy (positive ones like calm and willpower, negative ones like restlessnes and laziness),

4. pure emotions, like anger, joy, (but these are not based on words or concepts)

5. ethical factors like friendliness, compassion, wisdom.

 

So where are emotions that arise from conditioning categorized? To the category of clinging and rejecting?

 

Would it not be much more logical to say "hey, the second skandha is about emotion too", since they would fit perfectly in the "pleasant, unpleasant, neutral" category?

 

Curious to hear what you think. If there is anything else stated above that you think is wrong, please let me know.

 

 

In any case, have a nice day

Crures.

 

 

PS.

A buddhist, a catholic and a muslim walk into a bar. When the bartender notices them, he shouts: "What's this, a joke!?"

 

[Marblehead]

 

PS.

A buddhist, a catholic and a muslim walk into a bar. When the bartender notices them, he shouts: "What's this, a joke!?"

 

And Baptists never recognize each other when shopping in a liquor store.

 

The only thing I can say to the rest of your post is that I love my emotions.

[cold]

I got a lecture once buying beer at a small general store in the south, "that's the devils blood and drinking it will send one straight to hell".

 

A long pause on my part before I replied "But selling it is GOD'S work eh?

[SeekerOfHealing]

To understand answer to that question you need understand pratītyasamutpāda

 

 

 

If there is anything else stated above that you think is wrong

 

I like that. 

 

Skandhas are generally empty they appear because we do not hear our true nature or soundless sound that's why we get caugh into skandhas. Skandhas describe reality of regular people and also serves as guide map to noble people.

Edited January 16, 2017 by SeekerOfHealing

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Hi, new member! 

 

My understanding - the second skandha, vedana (feeling - positive/negative/neutral), refers to something more basic than emotion. It's the immediate liking/disliking/indifference that comes before or alongside the emotion, which is more complex. Emotion is an aspect of the fourth skandha.

 

For example, you hear someone say something unpleasant about you and the process is something like this (numbers = skandhas 1-5):

 

Sound enters ear[1] and ear consciousness arises[5]. The sounds are perceived as words and understood[3, 4]. Negative feeling[2]. Depending on interpretations based on who is talking and the wider social context[4] there may be emotions of sadness or anger or embarrassment, etc[4].

 

Hopefully that makes things clearer?

 

Though a more important point imo is to bear in mind the purpose for this teaching about the skandhas. The idea isn't to give the one and only way you can put all the stuff that makes a person in different categories. There are lots of ways you could do that. The simplest way would be to use just two categories: 'physical' and 'mental'. Or you could think up as many categories as you wanted. This set of 5 is just a way to be comprehensive but not ridiculously complicated. It doesn't matter as such whether a particular thing is this skandha or that skandha. This is just to help us understand anatta - it makes it easier to see that we are a bunch of processes, and all these processes interacting account for our entire being - without there being any central 'self' or 'perceiver' or 'subject' independent from the rest. 

 

As the Buddha says to Bahiya:

 

When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Seeker of Wisdom

[Crures]

 

 

Sound enters ear[1] and ear consciousness arises[5]. The sounds are perceived as words and understood[3, 4]. Negative feeling[2]. Depending on interpretations based on who is talking and the wider social context[4] there may be emotions of sadness or anger or embarrassment, etc[4].

 

So there's a negative feeling, and then after that something like anger? This negative feeling is not an emotion itself?

Can a sound be negative, then? Well, I guess they could if it is spoken in for instance an angry way? 

 

So... I guess that emotions in general often arise from clinging and aversion then? 

 

 

And yes, I know that the skandha's are there to "point at" no self, but I just couldn't place emotions arising from conditioning, since it was stated that in my book that the emotions in skandha four do not arise from words and concepts... 

It just kinda seemed like a pity to go through so much effort creating the skandha's, and then not giving "emotions arising from conditioning" a place

[Seeker of Wisdom]

So there's a negative feeling, and then after that something like anger? This negative feeling is not an emotion itself?

Can a sound be negative, then? Well, I guess they could if it is spoken in for instance an angry way? 

 

So... I guess that emotions in general often arise from clinging and aversion then? 

[...]

it was stated that in my book that the emotions in skandha four do not arise from words and concepts[...]

 

Yes, emotion is elaborated from feeling. For example the exact same situation could cause many people to have the same type of feeling, but based on their differing life histories and way of thinking and so on they could all have a subtly or not-so-subtly different emotional response.

 

Well the sound itself is just sound. Other factors lead to a certain feeling in response, further factors elaborate that into the emotion.

 

Emotions, like everything else, arise from a complex interplay. Certainly attachment and aversion have roles.

 

All this is just how I see the idea of the skandhas. I can't see quite where your book is coming from on this. Bhikkhu Bodhi also seems to say that emotion involves the forth skandha:

 

The Pali word vedanā does not signify emotion (which appears to be a complex phenomenon involving a variety of concomitant mental factors), but the bare affective quality of an experience, which may be either pleasant, painful or neutral.

 

I don't see how emotions not arising from conditioning could even be a thing.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Seeker of Wisdom

[Crures]

Thanks for your responses.