Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Form (Rupa) and Perception (Sanna)
upekka
Veteran
can anyone explain the difference between form and perception?
(take time before answer please)
(take time before answer please)
0
Comments
All I can discern is that it appears that rupa is that which has the capacity to be objectively recognised. Anything that can be manifested as a physical or apparently mental formation (which brings to mind a good question: rupa vs skanda) whereas perception seems to be anything whose capacity is subjective and possibly when combined with sensation (vedana) creates mental formations (samskara) all of which together creates consciousness. But it seems they're all one and the same, sort of like the concept of dependent origination maybe? Maybe that's the beauty of it, it's just the skanda torn apart into conventional discernments, but that's not as thought out as I would prefer, so take this for a grain of salt.
Forms/Rupa(s?) are transient [impermanent] physical phenomena, devoid of self nature and dependent upon conditions to arise/change/disperse. They are interdependent with their surroundings and are impossible to describe without making note of how they affect those surroundings in some way. Forms are the purely "physical" phenomena, without consciousness.
Perceptions are mental reflections of Forms as experienced with one or more senses, often become attached views or conceptual templates, and are influenced heavily by ignorance of the nature of those forms and of the aggregates that "perceive"; thus the apparent forms as perceived may differ greatly from the actual phenomena. Perceptions are how humans classify all that they come into contact with, and are one of the factors of "mind".
It is the nature of Forms to change; it is the nature of Perceptions to solidify and preserve an abstract/conceptual view of those Forms. Mind precedes all matter; with wrong view, perceptions stand in stark contrast with reality and are a powerful source of dukkha.
In an ultimate sense, all phenomena including these are empty, and we can then focus on the engineers of change: Conditionality (Karma), Impermanence and Dependent Origination. In this way, there is no difference at all; all phenomena are merely conditioned.
I'm sure you probably have something much cooler and awe-inspiring to say about it upekka or else you wouldn't have asked.
Rupa = matter
Vedana = Feeling (Pleasure, displeasure, neutral)
Perception = awareness or "understanding" of sensory information (rupa by contact with the sense organs). For example: recognition of that being a something. The recognition per se, not the application of the category of that something: an animal has perceptions but not the recognition through categories like us.
Formation and Vijñaña are a little bit more complex to explain in a few words imo, and I should be doing some translations for a seminar class tomorrow
On coming into contact with a sense-object, the mind perceives it, that is to say, it notes it as to its colour such as: “This is white, this is red, or this is green.” It notes it as to its former shape such as : “This is round, this is flat or this is soft, this is hard and so on. This is called cognition of an object. Once the mind has perceived or cognized an object, it recognizes it as it has cognized on noted. A child who has everything around him to cognize, and which he is able to recognize. Sanna means simple sense-perception, the cognition of a child. It does not know about what the object actually is. It does not know the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ about it. But the sense perception lasts, so that it enables one to recognize the object that has once been perceived. Repeated recognition of an object as such and such makes the mind conscious of it, like phassa and vedana, that makes the mind conscious of an object. Sanna is called by the object it perceives - not by the sense-door.
Thus there are six kinds of Perception;
1. Rupasanna=the Perception of a visible object,
2. Saddasanna=the Perception of a sound,
3. Gandhasanna=the Perception of a smell,
4. Rasasanna=the Perception of a taste,
5. Photthabbasana=the Perception of a tangible object, and
6. Dhammasanna=the Perception of a mind-object.
there are six kinds of Forms
1. Rupa-rupa
2. Sadda-rupa
3. Gandha-rupa
4. Rasa-rupa
5. Photthabba-rupa
6. Dhamma-rupa
if we (i/you) touch the back of our neck (form) we can not see it but we can feel it
at the same time we have sort of picture in our mind (sanna) even though we never see the back of our neck
we can do it now and get the experience and think a bit more
can anyone give an answer to OP, please
so to what we react?
so where our ignorance lie?:)
the perception is the condition (conditioning through the whole history of knowledge of particular thing or incident)?
ignorance is that we think our perception is the true form/condition?
what i wanted was, for people to see where the problem (suffering) lies and how easily they can grasp it if they look for it
thanks to you, you bring down the thread exactly the way it should be
if one can grasp the perception at the time of the perception arise one will be able to see 'what is dukka, what is the cause for dukka, how can one get rid of dukka and stay without dukka , in other words be able to face to face 'the four noble truths'
one can pay attention to the perception when one is doing walking meditation, sitting meditation or while doing day today activities whenever it reminds oneself
we use our six sense bases all the time (except when we are sleeping)
we can call this vipassana meditation
remember ,when we say 'paying attention', that means we are trying to grasp the perception at the time the perception arises and it is hard because our attention is always slower than the perception
but
one day we will be able to grasp the perception at the time it arises and see everything through and through
thanks for your input Cloud!
thanks for everyone who participate in this thread!
Thanks to you too! (and the other posters)
Sometimes I think that form is a conceptual construct based on perception. For instance if I see a wall I immediately get the conceptual image that it is solid and flat, and furthermore the conceptual idea that if I was to move my hand toward the wall then it will meet resistance and texture. I also have the conceptual idea that it has matter underneath the surface of the wall, ie if I scratch the surface I will expose some of the inner material of the wall. So to me, the "form" part of the wall is a conceptual entity. Without these concepts the wall becomes formless.
Cheers, WK
but
practice will bring the knowing/wisdom:)
This childlike/innocent perception is not identical to a child's perception. Otherwise one would walk into the path of oncoming car. The idea is to drop all preconceived ideas and concepts conditioned through society, thus allowing direct knowing.
Cheers, WK
ex:
form: the form of a tree, for example
perception: the eye seeing the form of the tree.