<p>If you look at original Pali, what they translated as "consciousness" is actually "vijnana" - (discriminative) experience. </p>

<p>The point of the sutta is, as you meditatively investigate what seems to be your "I", you progressively exclude all physical elements as obviously not "I", until you are left with just <em>experience</em> itself. Then you investigate that experience and realize that it depends on the sensory input, which depends on attention.</p>

<p>When you don't pay attention to any sensory input, experience stops. What's left is called "equanimity" ("upekkha"), characterized as "luminous" or "radiant" ("pabhassara"). See Pabhassara Sutta for the canonical reference to "luminous mind".</p>

<p>Then Buddha explains that although this equanimity can be shaped into any other meditative state, including the formless jhanas, the meditator understands that any such state would be contrived and conditioned and therefore finite and prone to suffering.</p>

<p>This realization leads to letting go of desire to attain any state different from what is presently unfolding. The resulting state is pure suchness providing no basis for suffering to arise. The meditator realizes that this indeed is the culmination of the path, "the knowledge of the ending of suffering". </p>

<hr>

<p>So, the "experience" is not analyzed as internal and external because we are talking about meditator's own experience as he tries to find who he is by separating from everything that is conditioned and unreliable. Experience (vijnana) itself is conditioned on sensory input and is therefore unreliable, not suitable to be called "I" or to be our basis for eternal happiness. Which leaves us with nothing to rely on, nothing to stand on - and this final realization being the only unshakable truth, acceptance of which gives unconditional freedom from any mismatch of expectations, - is the very Nirvana the Buddha is leading us to. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T21:48:23.990Z
Consciousness is one of 3 conditions that creates contact. Contact does not condition consciousness; as is written above. Also, the Pali does not use the term “subjective” in relation to consciousness; which, if so, would have certain connotations similar to Hindu nondualism
Dhamma Dhatu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:00:42.603Z
Hi Andrei. Did you notice that Pukkusati is an Anagami, not an Arahant?
SarathW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:09:21.457Z
@Dhammadhatu "What does one cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, there arises a feeling of pleasure. When sensing a feeling of pleasure, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of pleasure.' "
Andriy Volkov
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:11:59.243Z
@SarathW yes, because he was stupid enough to ask for ordainment. If he understood the teaching he would have no desire to ordain, he would not think he needs to become a monk.
Andriy Volkov
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:13:07.193Z
Andrei.. Your comment appears unrelated to my comment.
Dhamma Dhatu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:25:00.423Z
@Dhammadhatu you seem to be incapable of following the logic of the passage. Sensory contact is felt as pleasure or pain, which is cognized. Therefore cognition depends on sensory contact.
Andriy Volkov
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-25T10:10:38.827Z
the pleasure & pain is a mind object. Mind sense organ + mind object + mind consciousness = contact.
Dhamma Dhatu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T14:26:07.723Z
2020-05-25T14:10:55.310Z
2020-05-25T14:10:55.310Z
Andriy Volkov
<blockquote>
<p>The space property may be either internal or external...</p>
<p>There remains only consciousness: pure &amp; bright...</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Possibly because there're 2 ways of classification: space and time. The Rupa-related components(earth, liquid, fire,...) were space-wise, while the Non-Rupa-related components(consciousness, equanimity,...) are time-wise. Notice the Buddha didn't reject the space-classification of consciousness since He did mention internal/external consciousness in other suttas. He just didn't use it here and the phrase &quot;There remains only consciousness&quot; indicates this time-wise classification (ie. there might be other consciousnesses, external, not pure, not bright, etc.. until there remains only the pure&amp;bright consciousness).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-25T14:11:25.573Z
2020-05-25T14:11:25.573Z
2020-06-17T09:56:10.877Z
santa100
<p>Perhaps it's because the first four elements at least, probably the first five, are included in <em>rupa</em> -- but consciousness is separate from <em>rupa</em>.</p>
<p><a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn12.67/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN 12.67</a> says that &quot;consciousness&quot; and &quot;name and form&quot; are like two bundles of reeds leaning on each other (i.e. they are not part of the same bundle).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Suppose there were two bundles of reeds leaning up against each other.</p>
<p>In the same way, name and form are conditions for consciousness. Consciousness is a condition for name and form. Name and form are conditions for the six sense fields.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:34:25.430Z
SN 12.19 refers to external nama-rupa. Consciousness does not necessarily arise due to external nama-rupa, such as in jhana or immaterial sphere, where there is only internal nama-rupa. .
Dhamma Dhatu
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T22:04:16.847Z
2020-05-24T22:04:16.847Z
2020-06-17T09:56:10.877Z
ChrisW
<p>The five elements (earth, water, fire, wind and space) are physical. They are described as internal, when they are part of the body, and they are described as external when they are not part of the body.</p>

<p>Consciousness, the sixth element, here, is purely mental. It is of the mind - that's why it's only internal, not external.</p>

<p>Pure and bright definitely refers to this verse: "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements." (<a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.049.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AN 1.49</a>), as Andrei has already mentioned.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-25T15:41:43.040Z
2020-05-25T15:41:43.040Z
ruben2020
<p>The two truths... relative truth and absolute truth.</p>
<p>Look into that for deeper penetration into your subject matter. For example; relative in the moment could say my my isn't the sky a bright blue today? Relating to all of those words? Why yes it is!</p>
<p>Absolute truth no it isn't as there is no sky no blue etc etc.</p>
<p>Relative truth is attachment, grasping.</p>
<p>However both are and are not correct as truth at the exact same time... creating a paradox. Nagarjuna is a good commentator on the two truths.</p>
<p>For the sake of peace one truth is samsara and one truth is nirvana; The yin and yang or inseparable whole impermanent and always in motion as the seventh jhana/consciousness. Cease to grasp and the infinite rounds of birth and death due to the consciousness skandha falls away into nirodha samapadi or the 8th jhana.</p>
<p>That's the very meaning of: &quot;Fall down seven get up eight.&quot; as a koan.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-10-12T23:54:01.923Z
2020-10-12T23:54:01.923Z
มนต์ดำ
<p>There is no &quot;external&quot; consciousness (SN 12.19) in relation to individual experience.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>At Savatthī. “Bhikkhus, for the fool, hindered by ignorance and
fettered by craving, this <strong>group</strong> (<strong>kaya</strong>; comprised of five
aggregates including consciousness) has thereby originated. So there
is this [internal] group and <strong>external</strong> <strong>mentality-materiality</strong> (nama-rupa): thus this dyad. Dependent on
the dyad there is contact. There are just six sense bases, contacted
through which—or through a certain one among them—the fool experiences
happiness and suffering.</p>
<p>SN 12.19</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is consciousness of external objects, such as consciousness of external earth, wind, fire, water &amp; space element and consciousness of external mentality &amp; physicality (nama-rupa; per SN 12.19) but there is no consciousness of external consciousness.</p>
<p>For example, when experiencing foolishness externally, the wise man experiences the foolish mentality of others, externally. But the wise man cannot experience the consciousness of another. For example, the wise man cannot experience what another person is seeing, hearing, smelling, etc. They can only experience the mental feelings &amp; sankharas of another (such as experiencing externally another's confusion, ignorance, happiness, sadness, lust, anger, etc), which is why the suttas refer to external &quot;citta&quot; rather than external &quot;vinnana&quot;:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>They understand the minds of other beings and individuals, having
comprehended them with their own mind. …</p>
<p>Parasattānaṃ parapuggalānaṃ <strong>cetasā ceto</strong> paricca pajānāti. Sarāgaṃ vā
<strong>cittaṃ</strong> ‘sarāgaṃ cittan’ti pajānāti, vītarāgaṃ vā cittaṃ … pe … sa<strong>dosa</strong>ṃ
vā <strong>citta</strong>ṃ … vītadosaṃ vā cittaṃ … samohaṃ vā cittaṃ … vītamohaṃ vā
cittaṃ … saṅkhittaṃ vā cittaṃ … vikkhittaṃ vā cittaṃ … mahaggataṃ vā
cittaṃ … amahaggataṃ vā cittaṃ … sauttaraṃ vā cittaṃ … anuttaraṃ vā
cittaṃ … samāhitaṃ vā cittaṃ … asamāhitaṃ vā cittaṃ … vimuttaṃ vā
cittaṃ … avimuttaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘avimuttaṃ cittan’ti pajānāti.</p>
<p>MN 119</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Note: when the suttas refer to &quot;external consciousness&quot;, such as in SN 22.59, this external consciousness is only imputed (such as if saying: &quot;<em>my friend had a heart attack and lost consciousness</em>&quot;). It is not something directly experienced.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or
present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior,
far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with
correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my
self.’</p>
<p>SN 22.59</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T21:06:21.660Z
2020-10-13T10:40:15.210Z
2020-10-13T10:40:15.210Z
Dhamma Dhatu
<p>Why consciousness not discussed as internal and external in Dhathu-vibhanga sutta?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;And what is the space property? <strong>The space property may be either internal or external.</strong> What is the internal space property? Anything internal, belonging to oneself, that's space, spatial, &amp; sustained: the holes of the ears, the nostrils, the mouth, the [passage] whereby what is eaten, drunk, consumed, &amp; tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby it is excreted from below, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's space, spatial, &amp; sustained: This is called the internal space property. Now both the internal space property &amp; the external space property are simply space property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is present with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the space property and makes the space property fade from the mind.</p>
<p>&quot;<strong>There remains only consciousness: pure &amp; bright.</strong> What does one cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, there arises a feeling of pleasure. When sensing a feeling of pleasure, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of pleasure.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, the concomitant feeling — the feeling of pleasure that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure — ceases, is stilled.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pain... In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, there arises a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. When sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, the concomitant feeling — the feeling of neither pleasure nor pain that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain — ceases, is stilled.'</p>
<p><a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html</a></p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:05:57.370Z
I have posted this question in Dhamma Wheel as well. https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=37245&start=15
SarathW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-05-24T23:16:44.120Z
I’m voting to close this question because this question is likely to be answered with opinions rather than facts and citations. It should be updated so it will lead to fact-based answers.
Dhamma Dhatu
<theravada><sutras>
Dhatu-vibhanga sutta question?
# Dhatu-vibhanga sutta question?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-05-24)

Why consciousness not discussed as internal and external in Dhathu-vibhanga sutta?

> "And what is the space property? **The space property may be either internal or external.** What is the internal space property? Anything internal, belonging to oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: the holes of the ears, the nostrils, the mouth, the [passage] whereby what is eaten, drunk, consumed, & tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby it is excreted from below, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: This is called the internal space property. Now both the internal space property & the external space property are simply space property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is present with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the space property and makes the space property fade from the mind.
>
> "**There remains only consciousness: pure & bright.** What does one cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, there arises a feeling of pleasure. When sensing a feeling of pleasure, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of pleasure.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, the concomitant feeling — the feeling of pleasure that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure — ceases, is stilled.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pain... In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, there arises a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. When sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain.' One discerns that 'With the cessation of that very sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain, the concomitant feeling — the feeling of neither pleasure nor pain that has arisen in dependence on the sensory contact that is to be felt as neither pleasure nor pain — ceases, is stilled.'
>
> <https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html>

**Tags:** theravada, sutras

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I have posted this question in Dhamma Wheel as well. https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=37245&start=15  
> **username_1**: I’m voting to close this question because this question is likely to be answered with opinions rather than facts and citations. It should be updated so it will lead to fact-based answers.  

---

## 6 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-05-24. Score: 1

If you look at original Pali, what they translated as "consciousness" is actually "vijnana" - (discriminative) experience.

The point of the sutta is, as you meditatively investigate what seems to be your "I", you progressively exclude all physical elements as obviously not "I", until you are left with just *experience* itself. Then you investigate that experience and realize that it depends on the sensory input, which depends on attention.

When you don't pay attention to any sensory input, experience stops. What's left is called "equanimity" ("upekkha"), characterized as "luminous" or "radiant" ("pabhassara"). See Pabhassara Sutta for the canonical reference to "luminous mind".

Then Buddha explains that although this equanimity can be shaped into any other meditative state, including the formless jhanas, the meditator understands that any such state would be contrived and conditioned and therefore finite and prone to suffering.

This realization leads to letting go of desire to attain any state different from what is presently unfolding. The resulting state is pure suchness providing no basis for suffering to arise. The meditator realizes that this indeed is the culmination of the path, "the knowledge of the ending of suffering".

---

So, the "experience" is not analyzed as internal and external because we are talking about meditator's own experience as he tries to find who he is by separating from everything that is conditioned and unreliable. Experience (vijnana) itself is conditioned on sensory input and is therefore unreliable, not suitable to be called "I" or to be our basis for eternal happiness. Which leaves us with nothing to rely on, nothing to stand on - and this final realization being the only unshakable truth, acceptance of which gives unconditional freedom from any mismatch of expectations, - is the very Nirvana the Buddha is leading us to.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Consciousness is one of 3 conditions that creates contact. Contact does not condition consciousness; as is written above. Also, the Pali does not use the term “subjective” in relation to consciousness; which, if so, would have certain connotations similar to Hindu nondualism  
> **username_0**: Hi Andrei. Did you notice that Pukkusati is an Anagami, not an Arahant?  
> **username_2**: @Dhammadhatu "What does one cognize with that consciousness? One cognizes 'pleasure.' One cognizes 'pain.' One cognizes 'neither pleasure nor pain.' In dependence on a sensory contact that is to be felt as pleasure, there arises a feeling of pleasure. When sensing a feeling of pleasure, one discerns that 'I am sensing a feeling of pleasure.' "  
> **username_2**: @username_0 yes, because he was stupid enough to ask for ordainment. If he understood the teaching he would have no desire to ordain, he would not think he needs to become a monk.  
> **username_1**: Andrei.. Your comment appears unrelated to my comment.  
> **username_2**: @Dhammadhatu you seem to be incapable of following the logic of the passage. Sensory contact is felt as pleasure or pain, which is cognized. Therefore cognition depends on sensory contact.  
> **username_1**: the pleasure & pain is a mind object. Mind sense organ + mind object + mind consciousness = contact.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2020-05-25. Score: 0

> The space property may be either internal or external...
>
> There remains only consciousness: pure & bright...

Possibly because there're 2 ways of classification: space and time. The Rupa-related components(earth, liquid, fire,...) were space-wise, while the Non-Rupa-related components(consciousness, equanimity,...) are time-wise. Notice the Buddha didn't reject the space-classification of consciousness since He did mention internal/external consciousness in other suttas. He just didn't use it here and the phrase "There remains only consciousness" indicates this time-wise classification (ie. there might be other consciousnesses, external, not pure, not bright, etc.. until there remains only the pure&bright consciousness).


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-05-24. Score: 0

Perhaps it's because the first four elements at least, probably the first five, are included in *rupa* -- but consciousness is separate from *rupa*.

[SN 12.67](https://suttacentral.net/sn12.67/en/sujato) says that "consciousness" and "name and form" are like two bundles of reeds leaning on each other (i.e. they are not part of the same bundle).

> Suppose there were two bundles of reeds leaning up against each other.
>
> In the same way, name and form are conditions for consciousness. Consciousness is a condition for name and form. Name and form are conditions for the six sense fields.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: SN 12.19 refers to external nama-rupa. Consciousness does not necessarily arise due to external nama-rupa, such as in jhana or immaterial sphere, where there is only internal nama-rupa. .  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2020-05-25. Score: 0

The five elements (earth, water, fire, wind and space) are physical. They are described as internal, when they are part of the body, and they are described as external when they are not part of the body.

Consciousness, the sixth element, here, is purely mental. It is of the mind - that's why it's only internal, not external.

Pure and bright definitely refers to this verse: "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements." ([AN 1.49](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.049.than.html)), as Andrei has already mentioned.


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2020-10-12. Score: 0

The two truths... relative truth and absolute truth.

Look into that for deeper penetration into your subject matter. For example; relative in the moment could say my my isn't the sky a bright blue today? Relating to all of those words? Why yes it is!

Absolute truth no it isn't as there is no sky no blue etc etc.

Relative truth is attachment, grasping.

However both are and are not correct as truth at the exact same time... creating a paradox. Nagarjuna is a good commentator on the two truths.

For the sake of peace one truth is samsara and one truth is nirvana; The yin and yang or inseparable whole impermanent and always in motion as the seventh jhana/consciousness. Cease to grasp and the infinite rounds of birth and death due to the consciousness skandha falls away into nirodha samapadi or the 8th jhana.

That's the very meaning of: "Fall down seven get up eight." as a koan.


---

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-05-24. Score: 0

There is no "external" consciousness (SN 12.19) in relation to individual experience.

> At Savatthī. “Bhikkhus, for the fool, hindered by ignorance and
> fettered by craving, this **group** (**kaya**; comprised of five
> aggregates including consciousness) has thereby originated. So there
> is this [internal] group and **external** **mentality-materiality** (nama-rupa): thus this dyad. Dependent on
> the dyad there is contact. There are just six sense bases, contacted
> through which—or through a certain one among them—the fool experiences
> happiness and suffering.
>
> SN 12.19

There is consciousness of external objects, such as consciousness of external earth, wind, fire, water & space element and consciousness of external mentality & physicality (nama-rupa; per SN 12.19) but there is no consciousness of external consciousness.

For example, when experiencing foolishness externally, the wise man experiences the foolish mentality of others, externally. But the wise man cannot experience the consciousness of another. For example, the wise man cannot experience what another person is seeing, hearing, smelling, etc. They can only experience the mental feelings & sankharas of another (such as experiencing externally another's confusion, ignorance, happiness, sadness, lust, anger, etc), which is why the suttas refer to external "citta" rather than external "vinnana":

> They understand the minds of other beings and individuals, having
> comprehended them with their own mind. …
>
> Parasattānaṃ parapuggalānaṃ **cetasā ceto** paricca pajānāti. Sarāgaṃ vā
> **cittaṃ** ‘sarāgaṃ cittan’ti pajānāti, vītarāgaṃ vā cittaṃ … pe … sa**dosa**ṃ
> vā **citta**ṃ … vītadosaṃ vā cittaṃ … samohaṃ vā cittaṃ … vītamohaṃ vā
> cittaṃ … saṅkhittaṃ vā cittaṃ … vikkhittaṃ vā cittaṃ … mahaggataṃ vā
> cittaṃ … amahaggataṃ vā cittaṃ … sauttaraṃ vā cittaṃ … anuttaraṃ vā
> cittaṃ … samāhitaṃ vā cittaṃ … asamāhitaṃ vā cittaṃ … vimuttaṃ vā
> cittaṃ … avimuttaṃ vā cittaṃ ‘avimuttaṃ cittan’ti pajānāti.
>
> MN 119

Note: when the suttas refer to "external consciousness", such as in SN 22.59, this external consciousness is only imputed (such as if saying: "*my friend had a heart attack and lost consciousness*"). It is not something directly experienced.

> Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or
> present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior,
> far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with
> correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my
> self.’
>
> SN 22.59


---

