Page 5 of 8

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 1:28 am
by retrofuturist
Greetings Anicca,
Anicca wrote:pS: you really do look like Andre Agassi in your avatar! Are you related???? :anjali:
That does it... I'll have to get a new avatar.

:tongue:

Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 1:34 am
by tiltbillings
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Anicca,
Anicca wrote:pS: you really do look like Andre Agassi in your avatar! Are you related???? :anjali:
That does it... I'll have to get a new avatar.

:tongue:

Metta,
Retro. :)
Try this one:

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 1:59 am
by Anicca
retrofuturist wrote:That does it... I'll have to get a new avatar.
Try for one without that tennis/Buddhist "Love means nothing to me" look in your eye.... :oops: :offtopic: :rules:

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 2:10 am
by robertk
acinteyyo wrote:It seems to me that citta according to Abhidhamma and commentarial literature is equal to what is conventionally meant by "consciousness" (in contrast to viññāna), but also includes viññāna.
Viññāna, citta and mano are synonyms- they are they same element - so it is confusing when you say citta also includes vinnana.

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 9:56 pm
by acinteyyo
robertk wrote:
acinteyyo wrote:It seems to me that citta according to Abhidhamma and commentarial literature is equal to what is conventionally meant by "consciousness" (in contrast to viññāna), but also includes viññāna.
Viññāna, citta and mano are synonyms- they are they same element - so it is confusing when you say citta also includes vinnana.
I don't think so. But if it's really that simple it would be contradicting D.O.. There is not only one viññāna at a time and it doesn't have to cease completely before the next one can arise. This would be more like "after this, that is" instead of "when this is, that is" like D.O. is defined by the suttas.

Currently I have a lot of work to do, so I'll need more time to think about all this. Maybe I'll find some more time this weekend.

best wishes, acinteyyo

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 12:50 am
by tiltbillings
acinteyyo wrote:
robertk wrote:
acinteyyo wrote:It seems to me that citta according to Abhidhamma and commentarial literature is equal to what is conventionally meant by "consciousness" (in contrast to viññāna), but also includes viññāna.
Viññāna, citta and mano are synonyms- they are they same element - so it is confusing when you say citta also includes vinnana.
I don't think so.
"That which is called citta is also called mano, and is called viññāna." S II

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 7:59 am
by mikenz66
Hi Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote: "That which is called citta is also called mano, and is called viññāna." S II
Can you explain what the reference "S II" is to? If it's a Sutta reference a little more detail on where exactly to find it would be helpful.

Mike

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:08 pm
by tiltbillings
mikenz66 wrote:Hi Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote: "That which is called citta is also called mano, and is called viññāna." S II
Can you explain what the reference "S II" is to? If it's a Sutta reference a little more detail on where exactly to find it would be helpful.

Mike
Samyutta Nikaya SN II 95. Page 595 in Ven Bodhi's translation. And here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 5:50 pm
by acinteyyo
acinteyyo wrote:
robertk wrote:
acinteyyo wrote:It seems to me that citta according to Abhidhamma and commentarial literature is equal to what is conventionally meant by "consciousness" (in contrast to viññāna), but also includes viññāna.
Viññāna, citta and mano are synonyms- they are they same element - so it is confusing when you say citta also includes vinnana.
I don't think so.
tiltbillings wrote:"That which is called citta is also called mano, and is called viññāna." S II
Wonderful! This is exactly what I thought citta means, but this doesn't fit with the "one citta at a time"-thing of the Abhidhamma, because it's contradicting D.O.. That's why it seems to me Abhidhamma probably has another definition for "citta" and is the reason for the "I don't think so" I wrote above.

Tilt, do you understand what contradiction I'm trying to point out between Abhidhamma and Sutta with respect to "citta"? This is the reason why I try to understand in which way Abhidhamma defines "citta", equally or differently to the Sutta definition?

How can it be that citta/mano/viññāna is supposed to cease completely before the next one can arise although the cause for it's arising (namely avijja) still exists? Or in other words, let's consider the eye-consciousness for a moment, it arises when the eye (sight) and visible forms (in the world of the puthujjana, which is panc'upadanakhandha having its origin in avijja) come together, please anybody try to tell me when there isn't the case that visible forms and sight doesn't come together at all so that the cause for the arising of eye-consciousness ceases which would enable the related eye-consciousness to cease?

Somewhere, I don't remember exactely right now where, the Buddha said: "arising is manifest, change while standing is manifest, cessation is manifest". It seems to me that "change while standing" possibly has not been understood correctly.
IMHO citta arises because of conditions, changes during "existence" and ceases finally, when the cause which is responsible for it to arise ceases. This process can take a long time and for the case if avijja is the cause for cittas arising (puthujjana related citta), it lasts changing until avijja ceases, which means it changes while standing until one reaches enlightenment.

best wishes, acinteyyo

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:17 pm
by retrofuturist
Greetings acinteyyo,

Further to my earlier post, you seem to have come across a "perceived discrepency" in the sum basket of Mahavihara and Tipitaka materials.

Summarized, your options are as follows:

- If you are uncertain whether the perceived discrepency is real, you may continue to dig deeper here with a view of resolving it
- If you are certain that the discrepency is real, accept to yourself that it is what it is, and take it out of this sub-forum

I hope that helps guide you appropriately.

Thanks.

Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:41 pm
by mikenz66
Acinteyyo, Retro,

As far as I understand my reading of the CMA and the Suttas, and expositions by Bhikkhu Bodhi and others, the Abhidhamma does use terminology in a different way (e.g. whether nama-rupa includes consciousness or not).

I think that if this is not appreciated it can cause confusion, so in my opinion it is very much on-topic in the Abhidhamma forum to clarify how to reconcile the (real or perceived) differences. (A completely separate issue from arguing about the superiority of the various approaches, which would be way off-topic... ).

The Appendix to Ven Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... append.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; can be useful for disentangling some of this.
Cetasika: This term occurs often in the old sutta texts, but only as adj. (e.g. cetasikam sukham etc.) or, at times, used as a sing. neut. noun (e.g. D. 1; p. 213, PTS). As a designation for mental properties, or properties of consciousness citta-sampayuttā dhammā it is frequently met with in Dhs. (§ 1189, 1512) as cetasika-dhamma while in Vis.M, Abh. S., etc., cetasika is used also as a neuter noun, in the sense of mental phenomenon.

Citta-vīthi: as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes of consciousness, such as āvajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santīrana, votthapana, javana, tadārammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana in Pts.M. Even in the Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less known. Cf. e.g Patth: ''cakkhu-viññānam tam sampayuttakā ca dhammā (= cetasikā) mano-dhātuyā (performing the sampaticchana-function),tam sampayuttakānañ ca dhammānam (cetasikānani) anantara-paccayena paccayo. Mano-dhātu... manoviññāna-dhātuya (performing the santīrana and votthapana function). Purimā purimā kusalā dhammā (javanā) pacchimānam pacchimānam kusalānam dhammānam (javanacittānam) anantara-paccayena paccayo... avyākatānam dhammānam (tadārammana- and bhavanga-cittānam. ).
Mike

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 1:51 am
by tiltbillings
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/mind/00_toc.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This book might of value, but I have no idea. In quickly paging through it, it does have tons of references to Pali sources. My favorite bit that caught my attention was the subsection tiltled: Giddy-Patted Heart. I am not sure I want one of those.

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Sat May 15, 2010 7:57 am
by Dhammanando
acinteyyo wrote:I don't think so. But if it's really that simple it would be contradicting D.O.. There is not only one viññāna at a time and it doesn't have to cease completely before the next one can arise. This would be more like "after this, that is" instead of "when this is, that is" like D.O. is defined by the suttas.
I think you are falling into the same error as Nyanavira Thera: that of supposing that a temporal locative construction like "imasmi.m sati, ida.m hoti" necessarily indicates the simultaneity of the two things or events. But this simply isn't so.

Such a construction in Pali is every bit as ambiguous as a "when... then..." sentence in English. In both languages the relationship between the referents of the two clauses may be one of simultaneity OR subsequence OR consequence.

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Wed May 19, 2010 4:42 am
by Sylvester
Dear Ven Dhammanando

Might you be referring to what Warder terms the "locative absolute"? It does seem that Ven Nanavira's application of the simultaneity option in the temporal locative was the basis for his one-life model of Dependant Origination.

May I ask a big favour pls? Could you point out some instances of the locative absolute in the MN and SN? It would really help if you could use Bhikkhu Bodhi's translations of the MN and SN, and direct me to a few examples of such temporal locatives.

Is the temporal locative used to regulate only relations between nouns, or is it also applied to a set of 2 or more verbs?

Many thanks in advance.

Re: One "citta" at a time

Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 2:58 pm
by acinteyyo
Dhammanando wrote:
acinteyyo wrote:I don't think so. But if it's really that simple it would be contradicting D.O.. There is not only one viññāna at a time and it doesn't have to cease completely before the next one can arise. This would be more like "after this, that is" instead of "when this is, that is" like D.O. is defined by the suttas.
I think you are falling into the same error as Nyanavira Thera: that of supposing that a temporal locative construction like "imasmi.m sati, ida.m hoti" necessarily indicates the simultaneity of the two things or events. But this simply isn't so.

Such a construction in Pali is every bit as ambiguous as a "when... then..." sentence in English. In both languages the relationship between the referents of the two clauses may be one of simultaneity OR subsequence OR consequence.
I disagree. Imho it's not at all comparable with a "when... then..." sentence in english.
I try to explain why I think so. If anybody sees any mistakes in my explanation, please tell me.

"imasmiṃ" is the singular masculine locative of "ayaṃ" meaning "he" or "this".
"sati" is the locative of sat/sant, which is a preposition of "atthi" meaning "to be", the meaning of "sati" is "being".
"idaṃ" is a singular neuter locative of "ayaṃ" meaning "it" or "this".
"hoti" means "to be" or "to exist"
So,"imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti" literelly transleted is: "he/this being it/this is/exists" or "this being that is". "this being" in other words means "when this is" or "while this is", and therefore it should be understood as: "when this is, that is" or "while this is, that is". In my humble opinion this necessarily indicates simultaneity. It is not the same like "when this, then that" which leaves such a construcion being ambiguous, like you pointed out already.

best wishes, acinteyyo