🟩 Mind doesn't obsess the mind (Weeks of November 14 and 21, 2021)

[SDC]

This week is the final installment of a three part series on "mind". To get a better idea about what has already been covered please see previous sessions: compilation on citta and compilation on mano. As most know, these two terms are both rendered "mind" in most suttas, citta sometimes found as heart, mano usually mind as a faculty, a sense base/door (in compounds relating to attention towards wholesome or unwholesome). As stated in those threads, the goal was to first attempt to establish a distinction between the two terms by showing cases of each on their own. However, this week we will take a look at six suttas where citta and mano appear in the same sentence or close to it, with the hope that the distinction remains clear, and that a useful relationship be understood.

This week will feature a very interesting sutta in SN 12.61 where citta, mano and viññāṇa (consciousness) are together, introducing a strong case that any use of these terms interchangeably may not suffice, and that it is possible to establish individual meanings. Please feel free to bring in suttas and discussion points from the two previous compilations.

Enjoy.

[SDC]

1:

santi, bhikkhave, manoviññeyyā dhammā manoramāpi amanoramāpi. Tyāssa phussa phussa cittaṁ na pariyādāya tiṭṭhanti. Cetaso apariyādānā āraddhaṁ hoti vīriyaṁ asallīnaṁ, upaṭṭhitā sati asammuṭṭhā, passaddho kāyo asāraddho, samāhitaṁ cittaṁ ekaggaṁ. Imaṁ khvāhaṁ, bhikkhave, appamādaphalaṁ sampassamāno tesaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ chasu phassāyatanesu appamādena karaṇīyanti vadāmī”ti.

There are, bhikkhus, sounds cognizable by the ear … mental phenomena cognizable by the mind that are agreeable and those that are disagreeable. One should train so that these do not persist obsessing one’s mind even when they are repeatedly experienced. When the mind is not obsessed, tireless energy is aroused, unmuddled mindfulness is set up, the body becomes tranquil and untroubled, the mind becomes concentrated and one-pointed. Seeing this fruit of diligence, bhikkhus, I say that those bhikkhus still have work to do with diligence in regard to the six bases for contact.”
- SN 35.134

• The six sense base beginning with "eyes" and ending with "mind" (mano). It is said that one should "train so these do not persist obsessing one's mind" (citta). Clear that mano and mind-objects/thoughts are something that can contribute to obsessing the citta.

2:

Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno yaṁ nimittaṁ āgamma yaṁ nimittaṁ manasikaroto uppajjanti pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṁhitāpi dosūpasaṁhitāpi mohūpasaṁhitāpi, tena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā tamhā nimittā aññaṁ nimittaṁ manasi kātabbaṁ kusalūpasaṁhitaṁ. Tassa tamhā nimittā aññaṁ nimittaṁ manasikaroto kusalūpasaṁhitaṁ ye pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṁhitāpi dosūpasaṁhitāpi mohūpasaṁhitāpi te pahīyanti te abbhatthaṁ gacchanti. Tesaṁ pahānā ajjhattameva cittaṁ santiṭṭhati sannisīdati ekodi hoti samādhiyati. Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, dakkho palagaṇḍo vā palagaṇḍantevāsī vā sukhumāya āṇiyā oḷārikaṁ āṇiṁ abhinihaneyya abhinīhareyya abhinivatteyya; evameva kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno yaṁ nimittaṁ āgamma yaṁ nimittaṁ manasikaroto uppajjanti pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṁhitāpi dosūpasaṁhitāpi mohūpasaṁhitāpi, tena, bhikkhave, bhikkhunā tamhā nimittā aññaṁ nimittaṁ manasi kātabbaṁ kusalūpasaṁhitaṁ. Tassa tamhā nimittā aññaṁ nimittaṁ manasikaroto kusalūpasaṁhitaṁ ye pāpakā akusalā vitakkā chandūpasaṁhitāpi dosūpasaṁhitāpi mohūpasaṁhitāpi te pahīyanti te abbhatthaṁ gacchanti. Tesaṁ pahānā ajjhattameva cittaṁ santiṭṭhati sannisīdati ekodi hoti samādhiyati.

Here, bhikkhus, when a bhikkhu is giving attention to some sign, and owing to that sign there arise in him evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with hate, and with delusion, then he should give attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome. When he gives attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome, then any evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with hate, and with delusion are abandoned in him and subside. With the abandoning of them his mind becomes steadied internally, quieted, brought to singleness, and concentrated. Just as a skilled carpenter or his apprentice might knock out, remove, and extract a coarse peg by means of a fine one, so too…when a bhikkhu gives attention to some other sign connected with what is wholesome…his mind becomes steadied internally, quieted, brought to singleness, and concentrated.
- MN 20

• "Giving attention" (manasikaroto) to a wholesome sign, his mind (citta) becomes steady. So again we have a case of the placement of mano as a factor to the condition of citta: giving attention to the wholesome sign can lead to the abandonment of thoughts connected with desire, hate and delusion contributing to a steadied, quieted and singleness of citta.
  
  My notes from the previous compilation on mano: (According to PTS, manasi of manasikaroti is the locative of mano, which is intriguing given the many descriptions having to do with location and position of the mind. Any input from our Pali people would be much appreciated!)

3:

Yassa kassaci, bhikkhave, bhikkhussa vā bhikkhuniyā vā cakkhuviññeyyesu rūpesu yo rāgo so atthi, yo doso so atthi, yo moho so atthi, yo rāgo so appahīno, yo doso so appahīno, yo moho so appahīno tassa parittā cepi cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā cakkhussa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti pariyādiyantevassa cittaṁ; ko pana vādo adhimattānaṁ. Taṁ kissa hetu? Yo, bhikkhave, rāgo, so atthi, yo doso so atthi, yo moho so atthi, yo rāgo so appahīno, yo doso so appahīno, yo moho so appahīno …pe….

Bhikkhus, in regard to forms cognizable by the eye, if in any bhikkhu or bhikkhunī lust still exists and has not been abandoned, if hatred still exists and has not been abandoned, if delusion still exists and has not been abandoned, then even trifling forms that enter into range of the eye obsess the mind, not to speak of those that are prominent. For what reason? Because lust still exists and has not been abandoned, hatred still exists and has not been abandoned, delusion still exists and has not been abandoned. The same in regard to sounds cognizable by the ear … mental phenomena cognizable by the mind.
- SN 35.231

• Again the six sense base: "forms that enter the range of the eye" obsess the mind (citta), and "the same in regard" to "mental phenomena cognizable by the mind" (mano). Here we have the introduction of viññāṇa (consciousness) in viññeyyesu (cognizable). In the above we have manoviññeyyesu, cognizable by the mind. Some layers are emerging here: thoughts cognizable of the mind when lust, hate and delusion are not abandoned (as above) contribute to an obsessed citta.
  
  Citta is clearly more than what we find in cases of mano. Understandable that a broader mind called "heart" or "mood" is indicative is what we find described for citta. The types of mind from MN 10/DN 22, cittānupassanā (contemplating mind): mind with passion, mind without passion, mind with ill-will, mind without ill-will, mind with delusion, mind without delusion, stuck together mind, scattered mind, enlarged mind, unenlarged mind, mind with something superior, mind without anything superior, composed mind, uncomposed mind, liberated mind as a liberated mind, unliberated mind.
  
  My notes from the previous thread on mano: (Explicitly, mano is a door like the other five senses and must be guarded, while mind, cetasā (instr. of ceto), looks to be a broader reference to vedanā (feeling), which, along with sañña (perception), are the saṅkhāra (determination/formation) of citta. (cf. MN 44, "Saññā ca vedanā ca cetasikā ete dhammā cittappaṭibaddhā tasmā saññā ca vedanā ca cittasaṅkhāro Perception and feeling are mental, bound up with the mind. That is why perception and feeling are mind-determinations." And also MN 18, "Mind consciousness arises dependent on the mind and thoughts. The meeting of the three is contact. Contact is a condition for feeling. What you feel, you perceive. What you perceive, you think [vitakka] about. What you think about, you proliferate. What you proliferate about is the source from which a person is beset by concepts of identity that emerge from the proliferation of perceptions. This occurs with respect to thoughts [dhammā] known by the mind in the past, future, and present.)

4:

Khayā rāgassa vītarāgattā asammohādhimutto hoti, khayā dosassa vītadosattā asammohādhimutto hoti, khayā mohassa vītamohattā asammohādhimutto hoti.

Evaṁ sammā vimuttacittassa, bhante, bhikkhuno bhusā cepi cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā cakkhussa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, nevassa cittaṁ pariyādiyanti. āpātaṁ āgacchanti (mr)Amissīkatamevassa cittaṁ hoti ṭhitaṁ āneñjappattaṁ vayañcassānupassati. Bhusā cepi sotaviññeyyā saddā … ghānaviññeyyā gandhā … jivhāviññeyyā rasā … kāyaviññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā … manoviññeyyā dhammā manassa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, nevassa cittaṁ pariyādiyanti. Amissīkatamevassa cittaṁ hoti ṭhitaṁ āneñjappattaṁ vayañcassānupassati.

They’re dedicated to clarity of mind because they’re free of greed, hate, and delusion with the end of greed, hate, and delusion.

When a mendicant’s mind is rightly freed like this, even if compelling sights come into the range of vision they don’t overcome their mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance. Even if compelling sounds … smells … tastes … touches … and thoughts come into the range of the mind they don’t overcome the mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance.

Suppose there was a mountain that was one solid mass of rock, without cracks or holes. Even if violent storms were to blow up out of the east, the west, the north, and the south, they couldn’t make it shake or rock or tremble.- AN 6.55

• "...thoughts come into the range of the mind they don’t overcome the mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance." Again mano and citta respectively. Thoughts on the level of mano don't overcome citta, i.e. mind/thoughts do not overcome the heart or mood.

5:

assutavā, bhikkhave, puthujjano imasmiṁ cātumahābhūtikasmiṁ kāyasmiṁ nibbindeyyapi virajjeyyapi vimucceyyapi. Taṁ kissa hetu? Dissati, bhikkhave, imassa cātumahābhūtikassa kāyassa ācayopi apacayopi ādānampi nikkhepanampi. Tasmā tatrāssutavā puthujjano nibbindeyyapi virajjeyyapi vimucceyyapi.

Yañca kho etaṁ, bhikkhave, vuccati cittaṁ itipi, mano itipi, viññāṇaṁ itipi, tatrāssutavā puthujjano nālaṁ nibbindituṁ nālaṁ virajjituṁ nālaṁ vimuccituṁ. Taṁ kissa hetu? Dīgharattañhetaṁ, bhikkhave, assutavato puthujjanassa ajjhositaṁ mamāyitaṁ parāmaṭṭhaṁ: ‘etaṁ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā’ti. Tasmā tatrāssutavā puthujjano nālaṁ nibbindituṁ nālaṁ virajjituṁ nālaṁ vimuccituṁ.

Bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling might experience revulsion towards this body composed of the four great elements; he might become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it. For what reason? Because growth and decline is seen in this body composed of the four great elements, it is seen being taken up and laid aside. Therefore the uninstructed worldling might experience revulsion towards this body composed of the four great elements; he might become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it.

“But, bhikkhus, as to that which is called ‘mind’ and ‘mentality’ and ‘consciousness’ —the uninstructed worldling is unable to experience revulsion towards it, unable to become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it. For what reason? Because for a long time this has been held to by him, appropriated, and grasped thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self.’ Therefore the uninstructed worldling is unable to experience revulsion towards it, unable to become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it.
- SN 12.61

• Not much by way of descriptions here, but often it is said that citta, mano and viññāṇa can be used interchangeably, but not only do many of these suttas show otherwise, it doesn't seem possible that they would appear right on top of each other if they were in reference to the same thing.

6:

Dukkhanti khandhe paṭipassa yoniso,
Yato ca dukkhaṁ samudeti taṁ jaha;
Idheva dukkhassa karohi antaṁ’,
Itissu maṁ citta pure niyuñjasi.

‘Aniccaṁ dukkhanti vipassa yoniso,
Suññaṁ anattāti aghaṁ vadhanti ca;
Manovicāre uparundha cetaso’,
Itissu maṁ citta pure niyuñjasi.

‘Muṇḍo virūpo abhisāpamāgato,
Kapālahatthova kulesu bhikkhasu;
Yuñjassu satthuvacane mahesino’,
Itissu maṁ citta pure niyuñjasi.

‘Susaṁvutatto visikhantare caraṁ,
Kulesu kāmesu asaṅgamānaso;
Cando yathā dosinapuṇṇamāsiyā’,
Itissu maṁ citta pure niyuñjasi.

‘Āraññiko hohi ca piṇḍapātiko,
Sosāniko hohi ca paṁsukūliko;
Nesajjiko hohi sadā dhute rato’,
Itissu maṁ citta pure niyuñjasi.

Ropetva rukkhāni yathā phalesī,
Mūle taruṁ chettu tameva icchasi;
Tathūpamaṁ cittamidaṁ karosi,
Yaṁ maṁ aniccamhi cale niyuñjasi.

Arūpa dūraṅgama ekacāri,
Na te karissaṁ vacanaṁ idānihaṁ;
Dukkhā hi kāmā kaṭukā mahabbhayā,
Nibbānamevābhimano carissaṁ.

“Reflect properly on the aggregates as suffering,
and abandon that from which suffering arises;
make an end of suffering in this very life!”
So you used to urge me, mind.

“Properly discern that impermanence is suffering,
that emptiness is non-self, and that misery is death.
Uproot the wandering mind!”
So you used to urge me, mind.

“Bald, unsightly, accursed,
seek alms amongst families, bowl in hand.
Devote yourself to the word of the teacher, the great hermit!”
So you used to urge me, mind.

“Wander the streets well-restrained,
unattached to families and sensual pleasures,
like the full moon on a bright night!”
So you used to urge me, mind.

“Be a wilderness-dweller and an alms-eater,
one who lives in charnel grounds, a rag-robe wearer,
one who never lies down, always delighting in ascetic practices.”
So you used to urge me, mind.

Mind, when you urge me to the impermanent and unstable,
you’re acting like someone who plants trees,
then, when they’re about to fruit,
wishes to cut down the very same trees.

Incorporeal mind, far-traveler, lone-wanderer:
I won’t do your bidding any more.
Sensual pleasures are suffering, painful, and very dangerous;
I’ll wander with my mind focused only on quenching.
- Thag 19.1

• The above was included in the previous compilation on citta - most of the verses are the former actor Tālapuṭa talking to his mind. This is a fascinating account in many respects, but for our purposes here it was interesting to see the two occurrences of mano in a sea of references to citta, and both have connotations of placement of mind where mano is concerned.

[SDC]

Thoughts?

Now that all three parts are complete, the burning question: how different are these two references to mind? Do these suttas make a clear distinction? Again, please feel free to bring in anything form the previous sessions.

Looking forward to this week.

[pulga]

Khayā rāgassa vītarāgattā asammohādhimutto hoti, khayā dosassa vītadosattā asammohādhimutto hoti, khayā mohassa vītamohattā asammohādhimutto hoti.

Evaṁ sammā vimuttacittassa, bhante, bhikkhuno bhusā cepi cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā cakkhussa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, nevassa cittaṁ pariyādiyanti. āpātaṁ āgacchanti (mr)Amissīkatamevassa cittaṁ hoti ṭhitaṁ āneñjappattaṁ vayañcassānupassati. Bhusā cepi sotaviññeyyā saddā … ghānaviññeyyā gandhā … jivhāviññeyyā rasā … kāyaviññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā … manoviññeyyā dhammā manassa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, nevassa cittaṁ pariyādiyanti. Amissīkatamevassa cittaṁ hoti ṭhitaṁ āneñjappattaṁ vayañcassānupassati.


When a mendicant’s mind is rightly freed like this, even if compelling sights come into the range of vision they don’t overcome their mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance. Even if compelling sounds … smells … tastes … touches … and thoughts come into the range of the mind they don’t overcome the mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance.

Vayañcassānupassati should be translated as "observing its disappearance". The "it" referring to cittaṁ. Since we don't actually "observe" the disappearance of cognizance I prefer to render anupassati here as contemplate.

[SDC]

Khayā rāgassa vītarāgattā asammohādhimutto hoti, khayā dosassa vītadosattā asammohādhimutto hoti, khayā mohassa vītamohattā asammohādhimutto hoti.

Evaṁ sammā vimuttacittassa, bhante, bhikkhuno bhusā cepi cakkhuviññeyyā rūpā cakkhussa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, nevassa cittaṁ pariyādiyanti. āpātaṁ āgacchanti (mr)Amissīkatamevassa cittaṁ hoti ṭhitaṁ āneñjappattaṁ vayañcassānupassati. Bhusā cepi sotaviññeyyā saddā … ghānaviññeyyā gandhā … jivhāviññeyyā rasā … kāyaviññeyyā phoṭṭhabbā … manoviññeyyā dhammā manassa āpāthaṁ āgacchanti, nevassa cittaṁ pariyādiyanti. Amissīkatamevassa cittaṁ hoti ṭhitaṁ āneñjappattaṁ vayañcassānupassati.


When a mendicant’s mind is rightly freed like this, even if compelling sights come into the range of vision they don’t overcome their mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance. Even if compelling sounds … smells … tastes … touches … and thoughts come into the range of the mind they don’t overcome the mind. The mind remains unaffected. It is steady, imperturbable, observing disappearance.

Vayañcassānupassati should be translated as "observing its disappearance". The "it" referring to cittaṁ. Since we don't actually "observe" the disappearance of cognizance I prefer to render anupassati here as contemplate.

It does seem more plausible that it would be ordered that way. The description is of citta as steady and imperturbable, so citta also as the agent observing disappearance seems out of place. I’m wondering if this has to do with the fact that citta is freed - and if we take into account AN 1.51, it is also not obstructed, bright and unlimited. So even if a sight, sound…thought is “compelling”, dissipation is the only possible result.

[pulga]

I take citta to be the background of experience, Ajahn Nyanamoli’s “peripheral” if I understand him correctly. It always “exists” as is alluded to in the Satipatthana Sutta:

…he abides contemplating in cognizance its inseparability from the idea of origin, or he abides contemplating in cognizance its inseparability from the idea of fall, or he abides contemplating in cognizance its inseparability from the idea of origin and fall. *

Or else mindfulness that ‘there is cognizance’ is simply established in him to the extent of bare knowledge and remembrance [of it], while he abides independent, not clinging to anything in the world. ~ MN 10 (translation by Ven. Ñanamoli)

*Cf. Ven. Akiñcano’s essay Uppādavaya . Though I’m not fully satisfied with the essay, he is grappling with the same insight that is reflected in Ven. Ñanamoli’s seemingly cumbersome translation of dhamma as "idea", which is related to Ven. Ñanavira’s thoughts on the discontinuous nature of change.

[SDC]

I take citta to be the background of experience, Ajahn Nyanamoli’s “peripheral” if I understand him correctly. It always “exists” as is alluded to in the Satipatthana Sutta:

…he abides contemplating in cognizance its inseparability from the idea of origin, or he abides contemplating in cognizance its inseparability from the idea of fall, or he abides contemplating in cognizance its inseparability from the idea of origin and fall. *

Or else mindfulness that ‘there is cognizance’ is simply established in him to the extent of bare knowledge and remembrance [of it], while he abides independent, not clinging to anything in the world. ~ MN 10 (translation by Ven. Ñanamoli)

Agreed. And considering MN 10 describes the possibility of knowing a liberated mind as liberated mind, it seems clear that there is always some extent available for discernment, even for the arahant. Indeed it was more than enough to know, “There is mind” to that necessary extent, i.e. enough to become dispassionate towards that which is there on its own accord.

I should’ve included this bit during the study session on citta:

Tassime satta bojjhaṅge bhāvayato kāmāsavāpi cittaṁ vimuccati, bhavāsavāpi cittaṁ vimuccati, avijjāsavāpi cittaṁ vimuccati. Vimuttasmiṁ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti.

While one is developing these seven factors of enlightenment, one’s mind is liberated from the taint of sensuality, from the taint of existence, from the taint of ignorance. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’

This recognition is found with a few variations in dozens of suttas, though I was glad to find the one above where citta is not implied but directly mentioned (often found simply as “Nibbindaṁ virajjati; virāgā vimuccati; vimuttasmiṁ vimuttamiti ñāṇaṁ hoti Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion it is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’). This is tremendous support for that recognition described in MN 10.

[mikenz66]

Thanks SDC for bringing this out.

• Again the six sense base: "forms that enter the range of the eye" obsess the mind (citta), and "the same in regard" to "mental phenomena cognizable by the mind" (mano). Here we have the introduction of viññāṇa (consciousness) in viññeyyesu (cognizable). In the above we have manoviññeyyesu, cognizable by the mind. Some layers are emerging here: thoughts cognizable of the mind when lust, hate and delusion are not abandoned (as above) contribute to an obsessed citta.

The difficulty I see (in my self and various presentations) is avoiding thinking of mano and citta as "things" (see the endless discussions of eternal citta in the context of the Thai Forest tradition).

Since all these aspects of mind are conditioned, they are processes. And when we talk about an obsessed citta, in this case, or a developed citta in other cases, presumably it means that the conditions are such that those processes are working badly, or better, not that there is some separate "citta-thing" in there that we are polishing up so that it become awakened.


Mike

[SDC]

Thanks SDC for bringing this out.

• Again the six sense base: "forms that enter the range of the eye" obsess the mind (citta), and "the same in regard" to "mental phenomena cognizable by the mind" (mano). Here we have the introduction of viññāṇa (consciousness) in viññeyyesu (cognizable). In the above we have manoviññeyyesu, cognizable by the mind. Some layers are emerging here: thoughts cognizable of the mind when lust, hate and delusion are not abandoned (as above) contribute to an obsessed citta.

The difficulty I see (in my self and various presentations) is avoiding thinking of mano and citta as "things" (see the endless discussions of eternal citta in the context of the Thai Forest tradition).

Since all these aspects of mind are conditioned, they are processes. And when we talk about an obsessed citta, in this case, or a developed citta in other cases, presumably it means that the conditions are such that those processes are working badly, or better, not that there is some separate "citta-thing" in there that we are polishing up so that it become awakened.


Mike

I think a safe play at the outset is to understand that some aspect of the experience is that cittānimitta, sign of the mind, even if it is unclear what it is or what direction it comes from. The key seems to be that it’s coming from a place of familiarity - perhaps one so close that we don’t expect it.

That’s what’s so intriguing about SN 47.8 - pretty much the only sutta that directly addresses this “sign of the mind” (although it gets several mentions throughout the suttas). It is understandable that a cook who picks up the sign of his master’s preference is going to get gifts, but it was only recently that I was able to away something a bit more that I could apply to my own experience. And the takeaway is further bolstered for the previously mentioned Thag 19.1, where Tālapuṭa gets a rude awakening when he finally makes it to the forest where his mind urged him to go when he was back in the lay life. The insight, it seems, is that these minds, as either mano or citta (citta in the case of the cook simile), have preferences that are not always wanted, nor are those preferences consistent, not by a long-shot. For Tālapuṭa, he finally made it to forest, where his mind urged him to go, only to immediately have it begin urging him back to the city. But he refuses and tells his mind that he knows what is best for it, and will provide that by staying in the forest. The cook too knew every preference of the king, and the wise bhikkhu of SN 47.8 knew what pleased the mind wanted as well, but instead of settling for feeding it sensuality, the wise bhikkhu practices mindfulness, gains concentration and establishes something supreme.

And like you say, there are indications of some aspect not working correctly, and that needs to be accepted and understood. If virtue is established, precepts are kept, and the mind is any of the unpleasant shapes described in MN 10, it is a safe bet that the senses are frustrated, but faith can keep you on the side of that virtue, and carry things through. On the other hand, if your behavior is all over the place, precepts are not followed, and the mind is any of those shapes, you can be pretty sure it is on account of being around the dangerous ground of sensuality. Point being, discomfort is not always a sign of something being wrong, but that shape of the mind will always tell that same story: mind has its own preferences - and like AN 6.55 says above, for so long it has been taken as mine, so it is very difficult to refuse it.

Didn’t mean to be so long-winded there. Needless to say, I agree with you.

[asahi]

Lets formulate our mind simple as below .
If we talk about mind per mano , we are referring to a base or door . If mind per citta , then mind included the mind objects as one unit .

[Pulsar]

SDC wrote 

And considering MN 10 describes the possibility of knowing a liberated mind as liberated mind, it seems clear that there is always some extent available for discernment, even for the arahant. Indeed it was more than enough to know, “There is mind” to that necessary extent, i.e. enough to become dispassionate towards that which is there on its own accord

MN 10 or its larger cousin MN 22 are later additions to the Sutta pitaka. These have been often labelled as fraudulent. 
Can we rely on these to explain "mind?" What is "mind?"
Now I know Theravadin abhidhamma adds a "Mind base" to the teaching, but suttas do not.

• According to the suttas "mind" or "self "is a thing reflected due to the arising of aggregates

a delusion.
When sutta compilers wrote "mind", is it not a means of conveying an idea, or the idea of "Self"?  Tricky, is it not? Self is done away with, but replaced by "mind", or "citta" in the yogacara tradition. An idea gets solidified in the reader's mind, and does a disservice to the original teaching.
Did Buddha speak of a mind? I know the compilers did.
The "All" according to Buddha did not contain a mind.
MN 10 refers to a "liberated mind" What is a liberated mind?
Modus operandi of the Arahant is completely different, a Latin phrase, approximately translated as mode (or manner) of operating. 
Mind in the sutta pitaka appears to be a euphemism for self. Self is what is reflected by the aggregates. 

• There are no aggregates in the Arahant

A previous sutta you quoted SN 35.238 (Empty village) describes the 5 aggregates as 5 murderous enemies. Many Theravadins appear to think that the Arahant has aggregates.
This is impossible. Buddha already taught us that the aggregates are five murderous enemies in SN 35.238. Will the Arahant harbour murderous enemies.
If he does, would he not meet with death. 
Then deathless becomes an oxymoron.
You wrote 

it seems clear that there is always some extent available for discernment, even for the arahant.What do you mean by discernment? do you mean discrimination? Has not the Arahant left behind all discrimination.

Does not discrimination arise due to contact and feeling? When there is discrimination, that is where origination of Dukkha begins, ie DO. Arahant has left aggregates behind.
With love

[Pulsar]

mikenz66 wrote

The difficulty I see (in my self and various presentations) is avoiding thinking of mano and citta as "things" (see the endless discussions of eternal citta in the context of the Thai Forest tradition). Since all these aspects of mind are conditioned, they are processes. And when we talk about an obsessed citta, in this case, or a developed citta in other cases, presumably it means that the conditions are such that those processes are working badly, or better, not that there is some separate "citta-thing" in there that we are polishing up so that it become awakened.

True, there is no mind or citta, but the relentless arising of aggregates in the unawakened. Every tradition tends to falter in trying to explain this.
The unawakened takes language for granted.
We need the tool of language to communicate, but we also need to be aware of its limitations. So when Buddhist traditions speak of "Mind" or "citta" Reader Beware! There is no steady entity called the "Mind" or "Citta" or "self".
Aggregates arise and fade away (five murderous enemies) making us believe that there is a "Mind" or "Citta". "Eternal citta" in the forest tradition might be an attempt at explaining the awakened state (Forest tradition has borrowed ideas from Yogacara, it appears).
Leaving all traditions behind, things become simply clearer when you understand "The Empty village" SN 35.238.
It is all a process, as mikenz66 says.
When we introduce terms like "Mind" or "Citta" to describe the process, without being aware of its possible wrong implications, then we introduce an operator to the process.
Whose mind is it? Whose citta is it?
There is no operator, "no doer" as explained in Phagguna sutta https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nypo.html
Process simply depends on what is fed into it. OP dealt with it in sutta studies of early October ie Nutriment or Ahara, results of greed and feeding.
Dearest SDC,This session has included many seminal suttas that lead to liberation from the aggregates. Thank you for the well chosen suttas from the Sutta Pitaka. You work hard to bring us these suttas. We love you for that.
Traditions flounder. The original message is as simple as "Be free of the murderous enemies AKA aggregates. An early Buddhist philosopher writes ... "folks hang on to aggregates and suffer" being too greedy for the aggregates.
The unawakened feels lost without feelings.
With love

[mjaviem]

Good topic and thread.

... in SN 12.61 where citta, mano and viññāṇa (consciousness) are together, introducing a strong case that any use of these terms interchangeably may not suffice, and that it is possible to establish individual meanings..

So, mind seems to be a tricky translation to use and better to avoid I think, ok? But now I wonder what citta means and what are the main suttas to refer for it.

What do you people understand by "manoviññāṇaṁ"? I think mano is attention, right? Is there "citta"-"viññāṇaṁ"?

And, Is there a relationship of citta with mentality (I mean nama: Vedanā, saññā, cetanā, phasso, manasikāro)?

[Pulsar]

mjaviem wrote

What do you people understand by "manoviññāṇaṁ"? I think mano is attention, right? Is there "citta"-"viññāṇaṁ"?

This is a discussion that touches on many points. The best and most useful way to approach it is through an understanding of Dependent Origination, and the five aggregates, elements (dhatu) and sense fields.
How do the five aggregates come into play? They are murderous enemies, right? How do you stop the murder?
To make story short...."manoviññāṇaṁ"? Dependent Origination refers to 6 cognitions or six vinnanas, Eye vinnana, ear vinnana, smell vinnana etc vinnanas that arise due to the sensory fields.
Manovinnam is simply the last one. Don't you think every vinnana requires attention, not only Manovinnana?
Cognition or vinnana due to a taste, or smell or sight or touch, does it not require attention?
One does not pay attention to everything one sees. One only pursues the sight that attention goes to? right?
With love

[ToVincent]

Again, the SN 35.93 extract should be translated properly (namely sambhoti, paṭicca, and paccaya, with their pre and contemporary meanings), as such:

Bhikkhus, consciousness is to be present (sambhoti*), realizing (paṭicca) a duality.
“Dvayaṁ, bhikkhave, paṭicca viññāṇaṁ sambhoti.
सम्भू sambhū
- to cause to be born or produced , effect AitBr. MBh (meaning across Buddha's time)
- to be or become anything RV. Br. MBh. (meaning across Buddha's time)
- to be effective ŚBr (pre-Buddhist meaning).
"Present" is the PTS meaning the most approaching — as in "effectively" = In actuality/reality.

And what is that consciousness to be present, realizing a duality?
Kathañca, bhikkhave, dvayaṁ paṭicca viññāṇaṁ sambhoti?

Eye-consciousness comes into existence, "feed backing" (paccaya) on the eye (etc.) and on a form (etc.).
Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṁ.

Then it makes sense. That is to say that consciousness becomes present effective and real, only when it feeds back with an eye and a form, etc. In other words, when it becomes sense-consciousness.


This is an example of understanding paṭiccasamuppāda rightly.

See here: viewtopic.php?p=653924#p653924
.
.