Herein, the mind-element has the characteristic of being the forerunner of eye-consciousness, etc., and cognizing visible data, and so on. Its function is to advert. It is manifested as confrontation of visible data, and so on. Its proximate cause is the interruption of (the continued occurrence of consciousness as) life-continuum (bhavanga). It is associated with equanimity (upekkhā) only.
Owing to a dual (thing), monks, consciousness comes into being. And what, monks, is that dual owing to which consciousness comes into being?Owing to the eye and objects arises eye-consciousness. The eye is impermanent, changing, its state is “becoming otherness”. So also are objects. Thus this dual, mobile and transitory, impermanent, changing, its state is “becoming otherness”.Eye-consciousness is impermanent, changing, its state is “becoming otherness”. That condition, that relation of the uprising of eye-consciousness, - they also are impermanent, changing, their state is “becoming otherness”. This eye-consciousness, arising as it does from an impermanent relation, - how could it be permanent?Now the striking together, the falling together, the meeting together of these three things (49), - this, monks, is called “eye-contact”. Eye-contact is impermanent, changing, its state is “becoming otherness”. That condition, that relation of the uprising of eye-contact - they also are impermanent... This eye-contact, arising as it does from an impermanent relation,-how could it be permanent?Contacted, monks, one feels. Contacted, one is aware. Contacted, one perceives. Thus these states also are mobile and transitory, impermanent and changing. Their state is “becoming otherness”...
I will teach you, monks, a discourse (illustrated) by fire, a Dhamma-discourse. Do you listen to it. And what, monks, is that discourse?It were a good thing, monks, if the organ of sight were seared with a red-hot iron pin, on fire, all ablaze, a glowing mass of flame. Then would there be no grasping of the marks or details of objects cognizable by the eye. The consciousness might stand fast, being firmly bound by the satisfaction either of the marks or details (of the objects). Should one die at such a time, there is the possibility of his winning one of two destinies, either hell or rebirth in the womb of an animal. Seeing this danger, monks, do I so declare.It were a good thing, monks, if the organ of hearing were pierced with an iron spike, on fire ...if the organ of smell were pierced with a sharp claw, on fire ...if the organ of taste were seared with a sharp razor, on fire ...if the organ of touch were seared with a sword, on fire ...It were a good thing, monks, to be asleep. For sleep, I declare, is barren for living things. It is fruitless for living things, I declare. It is dull for living things, I declare. For (if asleep) one would not be applying his mind to such imaginations as would enslave him, so that (for instance) he would break up the Order. Seeing this danger (of being awake), monks, do I so declare.As to that, monks, the well-taught ariyan disciple thus reflects:“Let alone searing the organ of sight with an iron pin, on fire, all ablaze, a glowing mass of flame; what if I thus ponder: Impermanent is the eye, impermanent are objects, impermanent is eye-consciousness, eye-contact, the pleasant or unpleasant or neutral feeling which arises owing to eye-contact, - that also is impermanent...”So seeing, the well-taught ariyan disciple is repelled by the eye, by objects, by eye-consciousness, by eye-contact. He is repelled by that pleasant or unpleasant or neutral feeling that arises owing to eye-contact ...Being repelled he is dispassionate. Dispassionate, he is set free. By freedom comes the knowledge, “I am freed”, so that he realizes: “Destroyed is rebirth. Lived is the righteous life. Done is the task. For life in these conditions there is no hereafter.”Such, monks, is the Dhamma-discourse (illustrated) by fire.