The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

[Dhammanando]

That is not correct. A pure citta that starts arising in one's mind gets contaminated in 9 stages within a billionth of a second, and that contamination depends on the arammana and that person's gati.

I have given a reference in #4 of the post, "https://puredhamma.net/abhidhamma/pabha ... -bhavanga/", which is Patisambhidamaggapakarana (Part I, p. 360). That is from the Buddha Jayanthi Tipitaka. I am not sure how to match that page number with Sutta Central version.

There are actually ten terms in all; your two articles inexplicably omit the mind-consciousness-element (manoviññāṇadhātu).

None of the sources that you cite describe the ten terms as being stages in a citta's evolution. Nor do any other Pali texts describe them so.

On the other hand, many texts explicitly state that the terms are synonyms for citta. Indeed the author of the Nettipakaraṇa —which I understand is a text that meets with your approval— cites several of the terms for the precise purpose of illustrating what the word "simile" (vevacanaṃ) means. (See the Netti's Vevacanahāravibhaṅga, "Analysis of the Mode of Conveying Similes"; Nett. 53-4).

The very idea that a momentary citta might undergo some sort of change in character (e.g., a pure citta becoming impure, or vice versa) would contravene one of the most elementary premises of Abhidhammic momentarism, namely, that each momentary citta has but a single jāti. A citta of one jāti (e.g. a kusala citta) may arise, pass away and then be followed by a citta of a different jāti, but a citta does not undergo a change of jāti during the brief span of its existence.

[SarathW]

On the other hand, many texts explicitly state that the terms are synonyms for citta.

Bhante is it possible these terms identify a different state of Citaa like the seventeen thought moment in Abhidhamma?

[Lal]

@[name redacted by admin], @robertk, @SarathW, @DooDoot, @Dhammanando:
I am having only a few minutes before going on the road again. So, here is an excerpt from the post (#11):"https://puredhamma.net/living-dhamma/na ... lly-means/".

The real nature of viññāna as cause for suffering is clearly stated in the “Dvaya­tānu­passa­nā­sutta (Sutta Nipata 3.12)“:

“Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
Sabbaṃ viññāṇapaccayā;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
Natthi dukkhassa sambhavo“.

Translated: “Whatever suffering that arises, all that arises due to viññāṇa; With the not arising of viññāṇa, there is no existence with suffering“.

The initial stage at the uppada stage of a citta, it is pure citta with just the 7 universal cetasika. The it gets contaminated during the tithi stage by the incorporation of cetasika before ending at the bhanga stage. That contamination leads it from a pure citta with just the universal cetasika to the contaminated viññāṇa.

There are more references from the Tipitaka in that post.

[SarathW]

The initial stage at the uppada stage of a citta, it is pure citta with just the 7 universal cetasika.

What about the Citta of Buddha?
Aren't they Vinnana?
What is the term for the consciousness of an Arahant?

[Dhammanando]

Bhante is it possible these terms identify a different state of Citta like the seventeen thought moment in Abhidhamma?

I'm not sure if I understand your question rightly, but I'll take it for now that you're asking whether the different terms for citta are being used to specify the different kinds of consciousness that arise within a 17-moment cognitive process. If that's so, then my answer would be...

Being synonyms, in their general sense the ten terms share the same referent: the dhamma called “consciousness”.

But besides the general sense each term has its own specific application. Here the choice between one term and another is determined principally by what facet of consciousness one wishes to highlight. If it’s consciousness’s status as an object of grasping, then viññāṇakkhandha is the appropriate term; if it’s the interiority of consciousness, then hadayaṃ (heart); if it’s lucidity, then paṇḍaraṃ, etc.

I think the only cases where the specific application has to do with denoting a particular kind of consciousness in the cognitive series would be paṇḍaraṃ, which most often refers to bhavaṅgacitta, and manoviññāṇadhātu.

For more details see:
Ho Thi Lien, A Study of Viññāṇa in the Abhidhamma.
Sujin Boriharnwanaket, A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, part II, chapter 7.

Both works are available here.

All the synonyms of viññāṇa that have been mentioned above are understood as knowing or recognizing of the object; but depending on different contexts, they perform different functions. For instance, at home, ‘A’ is the son of ‘Mr. B’, and the brother of ‘C’; but at the office, he is a manager, a senior and so on. Therefore, according to the function of viññāṇa, referring to 89 or 121 types of cittas, it has particular names in particular contexts; however, all of them have the same characteristic, that is, cognizance of the objects.

[SarathW]

If it’s consciousness’s status as an object of grasping, then viññāṇakkhandha

So, Vinnana in DO is viññāṇakkhandha?

[Dhammanando]

So, Vinnana in DO is viññāṇakkhandha?

If the terms are synonyms, then any arising of viññāṇa is an arising of viññāṇakkhandha.

[Lal]

@Dhammanando, @SarathW

1. A citta is an entity that arises and passes away in a billionth of a second. Vinnanakkhandha is essentially infinite. How can they be the same?

I think it is not a good idea to quote other people 's work (if their work is also wrong). This is why these discussions do not get anywhere. One should be able to quote only from the Tipitaka and use one's own words to explain. That is what I have done in all points mentioned above. If there are any inconsistencies in what I have stated, please quote those and explain why they are wrong.

2. As I pointed out above, the real nature of viññāna as cause for suffering is clearly stated in the “Dvaya­tānu­passa­nā­sutta (Sutta Nipata 3.12)“:

“Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
Sabbaṃ viññāṇapaccayā;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
Natthi dukkhassa sambhavo“.

I translate is as: “Whatever suffering that arises, all that arises with viññāṇa as a condition; With "not arising of viññāṇa", there is no existence with suffering“.

How would you translate it?

[SarathW]

I translate is as: “Whatever suffering that arises, all that arises with viññāṇa as a condition; With "not arising of viññāṇa", there is no existence with suffering“.

I do not think anyone in this forum may disagree with above statement.

[Lal]

SarathW said: "I do not think anyone in this forum may disagree with above statement."

OK. So, you agree that vinnana is a defiled state mind, and one has attained Nibbana if a defiled state of mind does not arise in that person, i.e., vinnana does not arise in a living Buddha or an Arahant (this is the same as saying, “avijja paccaya sankhara”, “sankhara paccaya vinnana” steps do not occur in the mind of an Arahant; it is the also the same as saying an “akusala-mula paticca samuppada cycle” never takes place in the mind of an Arahant).

But citta arise in a living Buddha or an Arahant; they both can experience the external world, think thoughts better than any normal human.
Doesn’t this prove that citta and vinnana are very different?

By the way, this answers one of your previous questions on what arises in the mind of an Arahant. An Arahant's mind does not proceed beyond the "manasan" stage, i.e., the evolution of a citta goes only though the mano, manasan stages. It does not get even to the "hadayan" stage, and thus stops well before the vinnana stage.

In simple terms this means an Arahant can identify a given person/object, but does not get attached to them.

[mikenz66]

SarathW said: "I do not think anyone in this forum may disagree with above statement."

OK. So, you agree that vinnana is a defiled state mind, and one has attained Nibbana if a defiled state of mind does not arise in that person, i.e., vinnana does not arise in a living Buddha or an Arahant (this is the same as saying, “avijja paccaya sankhara”, “sankhara paccaya vinnana” steps do not occur in the mind of an Arahant; it is the also the same as saying an “akusala-mula paticca samuppada cycle” never takes place in the mind of an Arahant)....

I don't think that is correct. See, for example:
https://suttacentral.net/sn22.85/en/sujato#sc8--11

What do you think, Reverend Yamaka? Do you regard the Realized One as form?” “No, reverend.” “Do you regard the Realized One as feeling … perception … choices … consciousness?” “No, reverend.”

“What do you think, Reverend Yamaka? Do you regard the Realized One as in form?” “No, reverend.” “Or do you regard the Realized One as distinct from form?” “No, reverend.” “Do you regard the Realized One as in feeling … or distinct from feeling … as in perception … or distinct from perception … as in choices … or distinct from choices … as in consciousness?” “No, reverend.” “Or do you regard the Realized One as distinct from consciousness?” “No, reverend.”

“What do you think, Yamaka? Do you regard the Realized One as possessing form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness?” “No, reverend.”

“What do you think, Yamaka? Do you regard the Realized One as one who is without form, feeling, perception, choices, and consciousness?” “No, reverend.” “In that case, Reverend Yamaka, since you don’t acknowledge the Realized One as a genuine fact in the present life, is it appropriate to declare: ‘As I understand the Buddha’s teaching, a mendicant who has ended the defilements is annihilated and destroyed when their body breaks up, and doesn’t exist after death.’?”

See also this thread: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=32250#p478673


Mike

[Lal]

@mikenz66:
Could you explain in your words why the sutta that you quote contradicts what I stated?: " So, you agree that vinnana is a defiled state mind, and one has attained Nibbana if a defiled state of mind does not arise in that person, i.e., vinnana does not arise in a living Buddha or an Arahant (this is the same as saying, “avijja paccaya sankhara”, “sankhara paccaya vinnana” steps do not occur in the mind of an Arahant; it is the also the same as saying an “akusala-mula paticca samuppada cycle” never takes place in the mind of an Arahant)"

Please first state which part(s) of the above statement is incorrect.

Then, please explain how the sutta contradicts that.

I just want to make sure I understand what objections you are raising and regarding what statement.

[SarathW]

When you have Avijja, the Sankhara and Vinnana etc. the whole set of casual link take the same unwholsesome path.
The same way when you have wisdom, the Sankahara and Vinnana etc. the whole set of casual link take the wholesome path.
The Vinnana of Arahant is called the Kiriya Citta.

[mikenz66]

@mikenz66:
Could you explain in your words why the sutta that you quote contradicts what I stated?: " So, you agree that vinnana is a defiled state mind, and one has attained Nibbana if a defiled state of mind does not arise in that person, i.e., vinnana does not arise in a living Buddha or an Arahant (this is the same as saying, “avijja paccaya sankhara”, “sankhara paccaya vinnana” steps do not occur in the mind of an Arahant; it is the also the same as saying an “akusala-mula paticca samuppada cycle” never takes place in the mind of an Arahant)"

Please first state which part(s) of the above statement is incorrect.

Then, please explain how the sutta contradicts that.

I just want to make sure I understand what objections you are raising and regarding what statement.

Hi there. The sutta, and the suttas in the link I gave, seem to suggest that the khandhas still arise, until the final passing away of the arahant. Is that not clear?


Mike

[SarathW]

For the Arahant Transcendental DO applies.
Perhaps Lal may be correct. I do not think that we can use the word Vinnana to identify Arahant's consciousness.

Mundane Order
Ignorance (avijja)
Kamma formations (sankhara)
Consciousness (viññana)
Mentality-materiality (namarupa)
Sixfold sense base (salayatana)
Contact (phassa)
Feeling (vedana)
Craving (tanha)
Clinging (upadana)
Existence (bhava)
Birth (jati)
Suffering (dukkha)

Transcendental Order

Faith (saddha)
Joy (pamojja)
Rapture (piti)
Tranquillity (passaddhi)
Happiness (sukha)
Concentration (samadhi)
Knowledge and vision of things as they are (yathabhutañanadassana)
Disenchantment (nibbida)
Dispassion (viraga)
Emancipation (vimutti)
Knowledge of destruction of the cankers (asavakkhaye ñana)

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... el277.html