The Five Aggregates

ThailandTom

I have been reading up on the 5 aggregates online and it seems that a lot can be learnt about clinging and siffering from first understanding them and then having direct insights into them. If one is to dismantle the self of anything, would this be a good place to start? I have been trying to observe everyday things like my computer, a book, whatever, and see them for what they really are. I have read though that this is merely an intellectual observation, what would it require to have a profound insight into such a thing?

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/khandha.html

Cinorjer

For my own practice, the 5 aggregates are a starting point for asking yourself "What am I?" and beginning the journey to insight that way. If you are the aggregates, then where is the abiding self and what is it asking the question?

Jeffrey

There is also the four mindfulnesses: body, feeling, citta, and dharma. I'm not quite clear what a citta is but I think it is a thought realm perhaps a claustrophobic feeling permeating your experience. Like a world of thought. I think a dharma is a 'thing' that you have ideas and beliefs about. Feeling is 'good bad and neutral'.

So you watch these four and it brings you out of agitation, worry and so forth.

Jason

ThailandTom said:

I have been reading up on the 5 aggregates online and it seems that a lot can be learnt about clinging and siffering from first understanding them and then having direct insights into them. If one is to dismantle the self of anything, would this be a good place to start? I have been trying to observe everyday things like my computer, a book, whatever, and see them for what they really are. I have read though that this is merely an intellectual observation, what would it require to have a profound insight into such a thing?

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/khandha.html

Yes, the five aggregates are a useful way of looking at and dividing up experience in order to see the process by which we construct our sense of self, as well as the process by which suffering arises due to the presence of clinging in the mind. To utilize them effectively in our practice not only requires gaining a working understanding of them, however, but also requires one to constantly observe them in action since they're more like activities or processes than static things, which is why in SN 22.79 they're described in verb form, illustrating the element of intention that goes into our experience of suffering via clinging. For a more indepth look at the aggregates and the role they play in the practice, I suggest checking out this talk by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

Jeffrey

Reflect on how, in meditation, you can see the thoughts giving way to each other in a very free and easy way. In fact that is the essence of how one thinks: each thought is transparent to the next one. None of them actually takes up any space, the next one seems to be there even before the first thought is gone. Thoughts are like images in a mirror because, like a mirror, the mind is always receptive. If you just rest in the fundamental quality that allows that to happen, you feel very relaxed and happy. The chitta does not have to do anything to be like that because it is like that naturally. The problem only arises when your mind wanders from that easy, light quality and starts to relate to thigns as heavy and solid. That is when the joy disappears.

From Discovering the Heart of Buddhism

BeeHurst

Jason said:

...in SN 22.79 they're described in verb form, illustrating the element of intention that goes into our experience of suffering via clinging.

Verb is the "doing". Sutta discourse linked describing working of khandhikata and not the intention. Intention is in the sankhara khandhika. The conscious, feeling, perception khandhika not working because of the intention. When the fire burning your hand and the painingfullness come, painingfullness feeling not come because of the intention.

Jason you making a self atman controlling khandhikata. Sutta discourse linked say "it" felts. "It" is khandha. Vedana khandha feels. Why it called "feeling". In English language nose called "nose". Is better to call it "smeller". Because it smells, it is called "smeller". Same in sutta discourse Because it feel, it is called "feeler" or "feeling". When body matter get disease, not because of intention.

Jason

BeeHurst said:

Jason said:

...in SN 22.79 they're described in verb form, illustrating the element of intention that goes into our experience of suffering via clinging.

Verb is the "doing". Sutta discourse linked describing working of khandhikata and not the intention. Intention is in the sankhara khandhika. The conscious, feeling, perception khandhika not working because of the intention. When the fire burning your hand and the painingfullness come, painingfullness feeling not come because of the intention.

Jason you making a self atman controlling khandhikata. Sutta discourse linked say "it" felts. "It" is khandha. Vedana khandha feels. Why it called "feeling". In English language nose called "nose". Is better to call it "smeller". Because it smells, it is called "smeller". Same in sutta discourse Because it feel, it is called "feeler" or "feeling". When body matter get disease, not because of intention.

Perhaps you're right, @BeeHurst, but I think that you may be misunderstanding what I'm saying here. I suggest rereading what I wrote and listening to the talk I linked to as I think that may help to clear up any misconceptions. If not, then we can discuss it further if you'd like.