A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of TheravÄda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
I think the key word here is "appears".TMingyur wrote:There is "mind" if there is "an object of mind" otherwise there is no "mind". It appears as if all this talk about "mind" or "the nature of mind" entails its reification.
Kind regards
Would you say that "mind" is different from "consciousness" which is said to be the effect of ignorance and sankhara according to the 12 links of DO?Sherab wrote:I think the key word here is "appears".TMingyur wrote:There is "mind" if there is "an object of mind" otherwise there is no "mind". It appears as if all this talk about "mind" or "the nature of mind" entails its reification.
Kind regards
Let's wait until someone actually reify something and we take it from there.
The question is: are you sure you can reasonably conflate all these "luminosities" to mean the same thing?Sherab wrote:
It would seem to me that if defilements are not intrinsic to the luminous mind (the mind the meditator is trying to develop), then it is possible that the luminous mind is the same as/part of/aspect of the "consciousness without feature." Therefore the so-called development of the mind is not really development but merely named as such.
Within a mind, there are different consciousness.TMingyur wrote:Would you say that "mind" is different from "consciousness" which is said to be the effect of ignorance and sankhara according to the 12 links of DO?Sherab wrote:I think the key word here is "appears".TMingyur wrote:There is "mind" if there is "an object of mind" otherwise there is no "mind". It appears as if all this talk about "mind" or "the nature of mind" entails its reification.
Kind regards
Let's wait until someone actually reify something and we take it from there.
Kind regards
But that which is called 'mind [citta],' 'mentality [mano],' or 'consciousness [vi~n~naana]' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. - SN II 94-5TMingyur wrote:
Would you say that "mind" is different from "consciousness" which is said to be the effect of ignorance and sankhara according to the 12 links of DO?
Since this is in the General Theravada discussion section, let us keep this within a Theravadin framework, tying it to texts when possible.Sherab wrote: Within a mind, there are different consciousness.
"Within a mind ..." Now that's postulating a difference of entity and reificationSherab wrote:Within a mind, there are different consciousness.TMingyur wrote: Would you say that "mind" is different from "consciousness" which is said to be the effect of ignorance and sankhara according to the 12 links of DO?
Kind regards
I don't know. That's one of the purpose of this discussion I guess.tiltbillings wrote:The question is: are you sure you can reasonably conflate all these "luminosities" to mean the same thing?Sherab wrote:
It would seem to me that if defilements are not intrinsic to the luminous mind (the mind the meditator is trying to develop), then it is possible that the luminous mind is the same as/part of/aspect of the "consciousness without feature." Therefore the so-called development of the mind is not really development but merely named as such.
This is interesting. Please elaborate.TMingyur wrote:"Within a mind ..." Now that's postulating a difference of entity and reificationSherab wrote:Within a mind, there are different consciousness.TMingyur wrote: Would you say that "mind" is different from "consciousness" which is said to be the effect of ignorance and sankhara according to the 12 links of DO?
Kind regards
Kind regards
Educate me. Are you saying that in Theravada, a mind = a consciousness at every moment?tiltbillings wrote:Since this is in the General Theravada discussion section, let us keep this within a Theravadin framework, tying it to texts when possible.Sherab wrote: Within a mind, there are different consciousness.
Perhaps you could answer the question I asked of Tiltbillings earlier:TMingyur wrote:If you say "Within a mind, there are different consciousness." this is postulating different entities and reification of what you call "mind" as a separate entity.
Otherwise you would have to say something like "the meaning of 'mind' comprises/covers 'different consciousness'"
kind regards
What do you mean by "a mind?"Sherab wrote:Perhaps you could answer the question I asked of Tiltbillings earlier:TMingyur wrote:If you say "Within a mind, there are different consciousness." this is postulating different entities and reification of what you call "mind" as a separate entity.
Otherwise you would have to say something like "the meaning of 'mind' comprises/covers 'different consciousness'"
kind regards
Are you saying that in Theravada, a mind = a consciousness at every moment?