mind pervades the entire universe

[dhammachakka]

respected dhamma friends,

regards and greetings.

is there any quote in the tipitaka, attakathas or pali abhidhamma texts that can be translated to mean that the "mind pervades the entire universe"?
[by universe - i specifically mean the okasa loka]

can the meaning of "manomaya" (dhammapada) or "cittena niyati loko" (SN.I.39) be extended to mean that mind (citta or nama) pervades the entire universe (okasa loka)?

sayagyi u ba khin and elders in attakathas say that okasa loka, sankhara loka and satta loka are inte-woven & inter-linked and that okasa loka houses the nama and rupa. but, can it be extended to mean that nama/citta pervades the entire okasa loka?

rohitassa sutta looks at the 'loka' to be within the body. can this sutta be extended to the extent of okasa loka? venerable mahasi sayadaw opines that rohitassa asked about the end of okasa loka but, buddha responded about the end of sankhara loka but, buddha's reply is perfect because the end of sankhara loka is the end of okasa loka. can rohitassa sutta or ven. mahasi sayadaw's reply be extrapolated to mean that mind pervades the entire universe - an analogy which may find concordance with certain concepts of modern day quantum physics.

a wise and respected elder, prof. p l dhar from the thai tradition commented: "Citta is not a material entity and so you cannot put it in 3D space ..... so all talks of pervading etc. have no meaning.....Pure consciousness is a fundamental reality and it is the principle of sentience....." how should this statement by prof. dhar be taken in the context of okasa loka and buddha's statement 'cittena niyati loko'?

if such quotes or references are found where it is explicitly or implicitly stated that mind pervades the entire universe - can citta/nama/mano/vinnana be interchangeably used - or in the strictest abhidhammic sense only "citta" is best suited for 'mind' that pervades the entire universe (okasa loka)?

kindly note that my question is not related to the "extent" of the number of cakkavalas to which buddha mind waves or metta can travel nor is my question related to 'loka cinta' - which can easily be dismissed as acinteyya!

at many places, for example in the udanas, buddha used abstract analogies to describe nibbana & nirodha akin to the upanishad style of "neti neti" (not this. not this). some respected thai tradition elders may point at these quotes and say that it means that there is a "pure consciousness" OUTSIDE the 6-sense door mind-matter continuum. in my personal opinion - nibbana is 'seen' at the mind-door and nirodha is 'seen' beyond the mind-matter process. both nibbana and nirodha are un-conditioned 'states' and not 'places' and should not be extended to mean that there is 'something outside' because, the rohitassa sutta makes it very clear that nirodha-sacca is experienced within the mind-body framework itself. further, to call a nirodha experience as "pure consciousness" will not be correct because, nirodha is a state is where all the 5-aggregates (including all 6 vinnana) are in cessation. moreover, if the "pure consciousness" theory is accepted then it will mean sassata ditthi and that the "pure consciousness" of buddha's and arahats - who have passed into unupadhisesa parinibbana (final nibbana without residue) - still exists! am i right or wrong?

further, some elders consider the word "anidassana" used by the buddha for vinnana to mean that there is a pure consciousness outside "all" (sabba) and then this idea is extended to include anatta / sunnata into it and extended to mean that there is a mind or pure consciousness outside that pervades the entire universe. the akashic field ideas of ervin laszlo fall within the spectrum of this line of thought. in my opinion - ven. sujato is spot-on when he does not ascribe any special meaning to "anidassana" except that vinnana is what cannot be seen physically. kindly allow me to ask whether buddha's teachings on anatta, sunnata, vinnana, nibbana and nirodha should be extrapolated to mean that there is a "pure consciousness outside" (as some suggest) or that "mind (citta) pervades the entire universe (okasa loka)"?

if anyone may please help to quote relevant quotes from authoritative pali texts that explicitly or implicitly means that mind (citta) pervades the entire universe (okasa loka) - if may help to connect buddha's sublime dhamma with modern quantum physics and may open doors to deeper understanding of buddha's pariyatti which may inspire some scientific or inquisitive intellectuals to taste the flavour of dhammic patipatti leading to pativedhana for the benefit of many (bahujanahitaya, bahujanasukhaya)!

bhavatu sabba mangalam!

with deep respect and much metta for all quoted in this query and all who may read, reflect or reply to my message irrespective of whether they agree or disagree with me,

manish

[Gwi]

Cittå: heart (not organ), thought images,
Images (mental impression or visual image
created by a word, phrase, or sentence).

[auto]

mind explores, wanders - anuvicarati
And if that exploring ceases as a result of certain samadhi, its still possible to know, because of having insight.

“Could it be, mendicants, that a mendicant might gain a state of immersion like this?
..
And they wouldn’t perceive what is seen, heard, thought, known, attained, sought, or explored by the mind. And yet they would still perceive.”

you have mind what explores the world what can be known with aññā(perfect knowledge)

In this world—with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans—whatever is seen, heard, thought, known, sought, and explored by the mind: that I have insight into.
Yaṁ, bhikkhave, sadevakassa lokassa samārakassa sabrahmakassa sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya diṭṭhaṁ sutaṁ mutaṁ viññātaṁ pattaṁ pariyesitaṁ anuvicaritaṁ manasā, tamahaṁ abbhaññāsiṁ.
That has been known by a Realized One, but a Realized One is not subject to it.
Taṁ tathāgatassa viditaṁ, taṁ tathāgato na upaṭṭhāsi.

Namarupa is according to the abhidhamma a person. But Realized One is not that or doesn't identify or isn't subject of what you gain from the namarupa.