Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby boris » Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:11 am

greenjuice wrote:
boris wrote: One Mind it's not new concept :smile:

Maybe for Vedanta.


We are different in body, venerable sir, but one in mind.
:smile:
http://suttacentral.net/mn31/en/
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.

Nicolás Gómez Dávila
boris
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:00 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby greenjuice » Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:39 am

Not Buddha's words, and plus obviously metaphorical, being that just after that he says “That is how, venerable sir, we are living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing"
User avatar
greenjuice
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby boris » Tue Dec 03, 2013 12:11 pm

Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.

Nicolás Gómez Dávila
boris
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:00 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby daverupa » Tue Dec 03, 2013 12:40 pm

boris wrote:Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?


The monk under this tree, the monk under that tree. It's very simple.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4171
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby boris » Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:30 pm

You pointed out two different bodies. Should I undrestand it as your commitment to idea that consciousness is a brain derivative? If so, I like to point out, that this idea is without support in Suttas. So perhaps it is not as simple as you suggest.
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.

Nicolás Gómez Dávila
boris
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:00 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby boris » Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:41 pm

The mistake is to approach consciousness by way of the body. But rational science, being essentially the study of what is public, namely matter, has no alternative. The laws of science are the laws of matter, and if these laws are universal then consciousness (whatever it may be) must necessarily be subordinate to matter. What science overlooks, and cannot help overlooking, is the fact that in order to know the body it is first necessary to be conscious of it—the body is an object (amongst other objects) of consciousness, and to seek to investigate consciousness by way of the body, instead of the other way round, is to put the cart before the horse. Consciousness comes first, and if it is to be known it must be studied directly (that is to say, by immediate reflexion). This matter has been stated clearly by J.-P. Sartre, who, in his principal work dealing with consciousness, writes more than 250 pages out of a total of 700 before mentioning the body at all. This is what he says.

Perhaps some may be surprised that we have treated the problem of knowing without raising the question of the body and of the senses and even once referring to it. It is not my purpose to misunderstand or to ignore the role of the body. But what is important above all else, in ontology as elsewhere, is to observe strict order in discussion. Now the body, whatever may be its function, appears first as the known. We cannot therefore refer knowledge back to it, or discuss it before we have defined knowing, nor can we derive knowing in its fundamental structure from the body in any way or manner whatsoever. (EN, pp. 270-1; B&N, p. 218)
http://nanavira.org/index.php/letters/p ... march-1962
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.

Nicolás Gómez Dávila
boris
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 5:00 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby greenjuice » Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:03 pm

boris wrote:Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?

I've already asked on a different topic about the cessation of feeling in Nibbana, and how that relates to Nibbana being supreme happiness, maybe there is in citta an unmanifest feeling, just like there is unmanifest consciousness :mrgreen: Same could be asked about perception, although I have read people say how in Nibbana there is direct knowledge of things, unmediated knowledge, which could mean that perception wouldn't be neccessary to know whether their minds are distinct or not.
Last edited by greenjuice on Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
greenjuice
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby daverupa » Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:09 pm

boris wrote:You pointed out two different bodies. Should I undrestand it as your commitment to idea that consciousness is a brain derivative? If so, I like to point out, that this idea is without support in Suttas. So perhaps it is not as simple as you suggest.


It's not necessarily a brain derivative - this isn't implied. Rather, it's one set of khandas or another, denoted by "this monk, that monk". This monk is training this citta, that monk is training that citta.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4171
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby pulga » Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:07 pm

boris wrote:Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?


Nirodhasamāpatti is above all the jhānas and all the arūpa attainments: well beyond what is necessary for arahattā which only requires the first jhāna.

In the Suttas, consciousness does not cease until saññāvedayitanirodha, 'cessation of perception and feeling', which is above all the jhānas and all the arūpa attainments. Breathing, on the other hand, stops in the fourth jhāna, where there is still consciousness. (This means that, from the point of view of the individual concerned—which is the only point of view that matters—the body ceases in fourth jhāna and above. One cannot take one's body with one into the arūpa or 'immaterial' attainments. Ñāṇavīra [L. 76 | 83] 17 December 1963


To the extent that consciousness and individuality are one and the same, I think your line of thinking is correct.
pulga
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby kirk5a » Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:11 pm

The arahant, one who is endowed with ten qualities, gains release from the nine abodes of living beings. This can be compared to writing the numerals 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. 1 to 9 are numbers that can be counted, named, added, subtracted, multiplied, and divided. As for ten — 1 and 0 (zero) — when we erase the 1, because it's a repetition, we are left with 0 (zero). If we use 0 to add, subtract, multiply, or divide with any other number, it won't increase the value of that number; and 0 by itself has no value at all — but you can't say that it doesn't exist, because there it is. The same is true with the heart: It's a nature whose attributes are like 0. When 0 is connected to any other number, it greatly increases the value of that number. For instance, 1 connected with 0 becomes 10. So it is with the heart. When connected with anything, it instantly proliferates into things elaborate and fantastic. But when trained until it is wise and discerning with regard to all knowable phenomena, it returns to its state as 0 (zero) — empty, open, and clear, beyond all counting and naming. It doesn't stay in the nine places that are abodes for living beings. Instead, it stays in a place devoid of supposing and formulation: its inherent nature as 0 (zero), or activityless-ness, as mentioned in § 14.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eased.html
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
kirk5a
 
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations

Postby pulga » Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:02 pm

"Samvijjati kho āvuso Bhagavato mano, vijānāti Bhagavā manasā dhammam, chandarāgo Bhagavato n'atthi, suvimuttacitto Bhagavā."

"The Auspicious One, friend, possesses a mind (mano); the Auspicious One cognizes images (ideas) with the mind; desire-&-lust for the Auspicious One there is not; the Auspicious One is wholly freed in heart (citta)." (S.iv.164)

I'd leave speculations about nirodhasamāpatti for those who have the capacity to attain such a state, i.e. the anagamins and the arahats.
pulga
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Previous

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SarathW, VinceField and 10 guests