and I answered a couple of comments ago. Let me revisit sound, in case my response was unclear. Abhidahmma treats sound and light as a solidity or materiality, you wrote earlier. Here is what you wroteDo I think sound, for example, is a mental activity?
Now, to explain my position on sound (which is neither a solidity nor a mentality) let me bring an excerpt from Samyutta nikaya. SN 35.246. Its parallel is SA 1169.Dear Pulsar, Sound, colour, light, hardness,
odour and so are all materiality in Abhidhamma.
I have got into the habit of studying the Samyukta agama parallel, when I study a Pali sutta, since many times I find errors such as deletions, and additions by Pali translators.
I recall VBB saying Samyutta nikaya is closest to Buddha. He even wrote AN, DN and MN were written for non-buddhists.
But let us leave that aside, and examine sound.
An excerpt from Sutta on the Simile of the Lute condensed.
Now dear robertk, according to abhidhamma sound is physical, right?Suppose a king hears the sound of a lute for the first time,
and found that sound tantalizing, intoxicating, entrancing,
and demands those who serve him to bring
the sound.
If sound is physical, the servant should be able to bring him this beautiful sound. Can he bring the sound to the king? Why can't he bring the sound?
Even ordinary people will say "that is impossible" because it is the lute that made the sound.
Lute itself is unable to make the sound, can it?
Lute is fetched however, King is taken aback, insists on only the sound. The king is told that the lute is made of many parts, the king gets hold of the lute and breaks it apart.
Yet no sound?
In relation to Sound cognized by the ear, what exactly was the king requesting?
Can you figure it out? what did Buddha mean when he taught that Nama-rupa creates ear consciousness?
- What is the rupa of the ear, in relation to the creation of auditory conssciousness?