What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
char101
Posts: 150
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:21 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by char101 » Mon Oct 28, 2019 1:37 pm

In nirodha samapatti wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that the existence of citta is suppressed by nibbana instead of just citta is disappearing which would implies annihilation.

SarathW
Posts: 12567
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by SarathW » Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:14 pm

because it is conditioned to arise.
What is the condition (paccaya) here?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

alfa
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:43 pm
Location: India

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by alfa » Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:15 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 6:25 am
char101 wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:54 am
Citta is like a pond while cetasikas are like fish swimming inside it.
That's how I understand it. Citta as a sort of mental space where stuff arises.
What's this mental space made of?

Srilankaputra
Posts: 749
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by Srilankaputra » Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:28 am

They cannot be separated. But through wisdom the realization arises; without Cetasikas, citta cannot be delineated as a dhamma. Without citta, Cetasikas cannot be delineated as a dhamma. I like to think of Cetasikas as abilities of the citta. In terms of spiritual development the Bodhipakkhiya dhammas are the most important to develop. They are all included in the Noble eightfold path.
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:10 am

SarathW wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:14 pm
because it is conditioned to arise.
What is the condition (paccaya) here?
So what is the condition (paccaya) for the next moment now?

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:12 am

Srilankaputra wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:28 am
through wisdom the realization arises; without Cetasikas, citta cannot be delineated as a dhamma. Without citta, Cetasikas cannot be delineated as a dhamma. I like to think of Cetasikas as abilities of the citta. .
Do you have any references for these statements.

SarathW
Posts: 12567
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by SarathW » Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:15 am

robertk wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:10 am
SarathW wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:14 pm
because it is conditioned to arise.
What is the condition (paccaya) here?
So what is the condition (paccaya) for the next moment now?
Nama-rupa?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

Srilankaputra
Posts: 749
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by Srilankaputra » Tue Oct 29, 2019 6:28 am

robertk wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:12 am
Srilankaputra wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:28 am
through wisdom the realization arises; without Cetasikas, citta cannot be delineated as a dhamma. Without citta, Cetasikas cannot be delineated as a dhamma. I like to think of Cetasikas as abilities of the citta. .
Do you have any references for these statements.
The first part is how I understand the following in terms of Abhidhamma.
How do you understand something that can be known?”
“Neyyaṃ panāvuso, dhammaṃ kena pajānātī”ti?

“You understand something that can be known with the eye of wisdom.”
“Neyyaṃ kho, āvuso, dhammaṃ paññācakkhunā pajānātī”ti.
Feeling, perception, and consciousness—
are these things mixed or separate?
And can we completely dissect them so as to describe the difference between them?”


“Feeling, perception, and consciousness—
“Yā cāvuso, vedanā yā ca saññā yañca viññāṇaṃ

these things are mixed, not separate.
ime dhammā saṃsaṭṭhā, no visaṃsaṭṭhā.

And you can never completely dissect them so as to describe the difference between them.
Na ca labbhā imesaṃ dhammānaṃ vinibbhujitvā vinibbhujitvā nānākaraṇaṃ paññāpetuṃ.

For you perceive what you feel, and you cognize what you perceive.
Yaṃ hāvuso, vedeti taṃ sañjānāti, yaṃ sañjānāti taṃ vijānāti.
https://suttacentral.net/mn43/en/sujato
The king said: ‘When those conditions (whose marks you have just specified) have run together, is it possible, by bending them apart one to one side and one to the other, to make the distinction between them clear, so that one can say:, “This is contact, and this sensation, and this idea, and this intention, and this perception, and this reflection, and this investigation”?’

‘No: that cannot be done.’

‘Give me an illustration.’

‘Suppose, O king, the cook in the royal household were to make a syrup or a sauce, and were to put into it curds, and salt, and ginger, and cummin seed, and pepper, and other ingredients. And suppose the king were to say to him: “Pick out for me the flavour of the curds, and of the salt, and of the ginger, and of the cummin seed, and of the pepper, and of all the things you have put into it.” Now would it be possible, great king, separating off one from another those flavours that had thus run together, to pick out each one, so that one could say: “Here is the sourness, and here the saltness, and here the pungency, and here the acidity, and here the astringency, and here the sweetness”?’

‘No, that would not be possible . But each flavour would nevertheless be distinctly present by its characteristic sign.’

‘And just so, great king, with respect to those conditions we were discussing.’

‘Very good, Nāgasena!’
https://suttacentral.net/mil3.4.1/en/tw_rhysdavids

The second part; I have found it useful to think of Cetasikas as abilities or functions of the citta. Especially sati or mindfulness.
Reverends, all things are rooted in desire. Attention produces them. Contact is their origin. Feeling is their meeting place. Immersion is their chief. Mindfulness is their ruler. Wisdom is their overseer. Freedom is their core. They culminate in the deathless. And extinguishment is their final end.’
‘chandamūlakā, āvuso, sabbe dhammā, manasikārasambhavā sabbe dhammā, phassasamudayā sabbe dhammā, vedanāsamosaraṇā sabbe dhammā, samādhippamukhā sabbe dhammā, satādhipateyyā sabbe dhammā, paññuttarā sabbe dhammā, vimuttisārā sabbe dhammā, amatogadhā sabbe dhammā, nibbānapariyosānā sabbe dhammā’ti.

When questioned by wanderers who follow other paths, that’s how you should answer them.”
https://suttacentral.net/an10.58/en/sujato

Is there a error in my thinking?
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:27 am

SarathW wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:15 am
robertk wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:10 am
SarathW wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:14 pm

What is the condition (paccaya) here?
So what is the condition (paccaya) for the next moment now?
Nama-rupa?
So defining paccaya depends on the Buddha’s understanding as expressed in the Patthana, the last book of the Abhidhamma. It is IMHO required reading if one wishes to get a handle on Dependent Origination.

CHAPTER XVII The Soil of Understanding (conclusion): Dependent Origination
Visuddhimagga
25. The truth, a being, rebirth-linking,
And the structure of conditions,
Are four things very hard to see

And likewise difficult to teach.


Let’s take seeing, (cakkhu Vinnana) which I mentioned earlier in this thread: this is more ‘present’ and relevant to understand than the causes for elements after nirodha sampatti.


So, it is arising now but what are the conditions for it to arise?
I cite some passages from the Visuddhimagga
CHAPTER XVII The Soil of Understanding (conclusion): Dependent Origination
…: “When any states, as states
of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants, arise contingent upon any
states, these [latter] states are conditions, as object condition, for those [former]
states” (Paþþh I 1).11 For just as a weak man both gets up and stands by hanging
on to (álambitvá) a stick or rope, so states of consciousness and consciousness concomitants
always arise and are present contingent upon visible data, etc., as
their object (árammaóa = álambana). Therefore all states that are objects of
consciousness and consciousness-concomitants should be understood as object
condition. [534]

73. (4), (5) A state that assists by being proximate is a proximity condition. A
state that assists by being contiguous is a contiguity condition. The explanation of
this pair of conditions is very diffuse, but substantially it is this:12 the regular
order of consciousness begins thus, mind element is proximate (next) after eye consciousness,
mind-consciousness element is proximate (next) after mind
element, and this is established only by each preceding consciousness, not
otherwise; consequently, a state that is capable of arousing an appropriate kind
11. “‘Which are contingent upon other such states’: because it is said without distinction
of all visible-data bases … and of all mental-data bases, there is consequently no
dhamma (state) among the formed, unformed, and conceptual dhammas, classed as
sixfold under visible data, etc., that does not become an object condition” (Vism-mhþ
584).
12. “Proximity and contiguity conditions are not stated in accordance with the
distinction between making occur and giving opportunity, as the absence and
disappearance conditions are: rather they are stated as the causes of the regular order
of consciousness [in the cognitive series]” (Vism-mhþ 585).
of consciousness proximate (next) to itself is a proximity condition. Hence it is
said: “Proximity condition: eye-consciousness and the states associated
therewith are a condition, as proximity condition, for mind element and for the
states associated therewith” (Paþþh I 2).
“The four
immaterial aggregates are a condition, as support condition, for each other”
(Paþþh I 3), but the sixth instance has been set forth in this way here: “The eye
base [is a condition, as support condition,] for the eye-consciousness element
[and for the states associated therewith]
; the ear base … the nose base … the
tongue base … the body base is a condition, as support
But in the exposition there is a
distinction, because in the exposition of the schedule (mátiká-nikkhepa) they are
given as proximity in the way beginning, “Eye-consciousness element and the
states associated therewith are a condition
, as proximity condition, for mind
element and for the states associated therewith” (Paþþh I 2) and as decisive support
in the way beginning, “

85. (10) A state that assists by being present, having arisen previously, is a
prenascence condition. It is elevenfold as physical basis and object in the five
doors, and as the heart-basis, according as it is said: “The eye base is a condition,
as prenascence condition, for the eye-consciousness element
and for the states
associated therewith. The ear base … The nose base … The tongue base … The
body base … The visible-data base …
volition acting from a different time, and (b) as all conascent volition (see Paþþh I
172), according as it is said: “Profitable and unprofitable kamma is a condition,
as kamma condition, for resultant aggregates and for the kinds of materiality
due to kamma performed.
so the Visuddhimagga neatly summarizes some of the conditions for seeing (and subsequent states) to arise . Do you see how amazing it is for a moment of seeing (cakkhu Vinnana)- an element that only lasts for a miniscule moment and has so many conditions : enough to occupy our interest and happening right now.

Still if you want something on rarer states, ones we might never experience, then here is a quote:

7
5. The opinion of [certain] teachers13 is that proximity condition refers to
proximity of aim (fruit) and contiguity condition refers to proximity of time. But
that is contradicted by such statements as “The profitable [consciousness]
belonging to the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception in
one who emerges from cessation is a condition, as contiguity condition, for
fruition attainment [consciousness]” (Paþþh I 160).
76. Now, they say in this context that “the ability of states to produce [their
fruit] is not diminished, but the influence of meditative development prevents
states from arising in proximity.” But that only establishes that there is no
proximity of time; and we also say the same, namely, that there is no proximity of
time there owing to the influence of development. [535] But since there is no
proximity of time, the state of contiguity condition is therefore impossible
[according to them] since their belief is that the contiguity condition depends on
proximity of time (cf. M-a II 363). Instead of adopting any such misinterpretation,
the difference should be treated as residing in the letter only, not in the meaning.
How? There is no interval (antara) between them, thus they are proximate
(anantara); they are quite without interval because [even the distinction of] copresence
is lacking, thus they are contiguous (samanantara).14

SarathW
Posts: 12567
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by SarathW » Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:36 am

Perhaps this?

Pre-nascence condition (pure jāta paccaya). This refers to a state that has already arisen
and, while still present, serves as a condition for something else that arises later. A
particular sense consciousness arises because the pre-arisen sense organ and object are
already present. Thus the organ and object are prenascent conditions for
consciousness.

http://103.242.110.22/theravadins/Engli ... actice.pdf
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:37 am

I will add some more about the various conditions later today.

SarathW
Posts: 12567
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by SarathW » Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:40 am

Thanks Rob.
I am more interested in knowing how consciousness comes back in a person in Nirodhasamapatthi.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:56 am

SarathW wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 7:36 am
Perhaps this?

Pre-nascence condition (pure jāta paccaya). This refers to a state that has already arisen
and, while still present, serves as a condition for something else that arises later. A
particular sense consciousness arises because the pre-arisen sense organ and object are
already present. Thus the organ and object are prenascent conditions for
consciousness.

http://103.242.110.22/theravadins/Engli ... actice.pdf
Well this is a useful quote - as is anything based on the Patthana.
--------------------------

The key point, for now , is that there are always multiple conditions:
CHAPTER XVII
No Single Fruit from Single Cause]
105. Here it may be asked: But how is this? Is ignorance the only condition for
formations, or are there other conditions? What is the position here? For firstly, if
it is the only one, there follows the assertion of a single cause;
condition there are formations,” is incorrect—It is not incorrect. Why not? Here
is the reason:
Nor from a single cause arise
One fruit or many, nor one fruit from many;
’Tis helpful, though, to utilize
One cause and fruit as representative.


106. Here there is no single or multiple fruit of any kind from a single cause,
nor a single fruit from multiple causes, but only multiple fruit from multiple
causes.
So from multiple causes, in other words, from temperature, earth, seed,
and moisture, is seen to arise a multiple fruit, in other words, the shoot, which
has visible form, odour, taste, and so on.
But one representative cause and fruit
given in this way, “With ignorance as condition there are formations; with
formations as condition, consciousness,” have a meaning and a use.
107. For the Blessed One employs one representative cause and fruit when it is
suitable for the sake of elegance in instruction and to suit the idiosyncrasies of
those susceptible of being taught. And he does so in some instances because it
is a basic factor, and in some instances because it is the most obvious, and in
some instances because it is not common to all.
So possibly if given a few hours I can search the Patthana and find the details of the causes for the first citta after exiting nirodha-sampatti. But unfortunately that is not of much interest to me: so perhaps you can be the one to do it...

However I do have time to give a hint : do you think aramana paccaya will be one?
Will the hetu paccaya include the unwholesome roots? and so on. It is helpful to consider in this way because it all points to the complexity and uncontrollability of the elements- no manager behind it all.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Tue Oct 29, 2019 11:09 am

SarathW wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:40 am
entering on the stopping of perception and feeling,
I can understand this but it does not say stopping Vinnana (Citta)
Guide to Conditional Relations by Narada, MULAPATTHANASAYADAW (pali text Society).
OBJECT CONDITION (Arammana PACCAYA) Chapter II
But in the non-percipient plane of existence and during
the period of Attainment of Extinction (nirodha-samapatti)
no objects are taken because consciousness and mental
factors are absent.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3258
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: What is the diffrent between Citta and Citasika in Abhidhamma?

Post by robertk » Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:22 am

robertk wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 5:10 am
SarathW wrote:
Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:14 pm
because it is conditioned to arise.
What is the condition (paccaya) here?
So what is the condition (paccaya) for the next moment now?
Some more on conditions related to seeing:
From the forword to Guide to conditional relations \By Narada
The materiali ty-mentali ty, which constitute the human
being, is not willed nor incited by atta or by any abiding
entity, but is due to many causes. For example, when
visible objects are seen daily, the seeing is due to four
causes: (1) visible object, (2) sensitive eye, (3) light
and (4) attention. For it is only when these four causes
are present at the same time that eye-consciousness arises
to see or know a visible object. But with the ariSing of
eye-consciousness with a very great object a mental process
takes place according to the fixed nature of the mind
(citta-niyama). This process1 consists of: (1) past
life-continuum, (2) vibrating life-continuum, (3) arresting
life-continuum, (4) five-door advertence, (5) eyeconsciousness,
(6) recipient consciousness, (7) investigating
consciousness, (8) determining consciousness,
(9) seven impulSions and (10) two registering consciousnesses.
Again, the states involved in the process of
seeing: eye-consciousness, visible object and sensitive
eye arise due to many causes as shown below:
~e-consciousness. When eye-consciousness arises it never
arises alone. As expounded in Dhs., the seven primary
mental states, the associated states, arise together with
it. When eye-consciousness and the seven primary mental
factors are classified under the aggregates, as shown in
the Disc. on Elem. they are the four mental aggregates.
These four mental aggregates are mutually related to one
another by the forces of seven conditions: conascence,
mutuality, dependence, resultant, association, presence
and non-disappearance. Also, eye-consciousness is related
to the seven primary mental factors by the forces of two
condi tions: nutriment and faculty.
1 The mental processes were not made up by the Commentators.
They took them from proximity condition of P~h.
expounded by the Buddha. These mental processes are
deal t with in the proximity condition of this Guide.
xiv Preface
Of the seven primary mental factors, contact is related
to the others by the force of nutriment condition, feeling
by that of faculty condition, volition by those of karnma
and nutriment conditions, one-pointedness by that of
faculty condition (although one-pointedness is related
also by the forces of jhana and path conditions, these
forces are not included here because they are not concerned
with eye-consciousness), psychic life-faculty by
that of faculty condition. Perception and attention are
not included in the minor conascence group of conditions
and so their forces are not given.
Five-door advertence is related to eye-consciousness
and the seven primary mental factors, i.e. eight mental
states, by the forces of five conditions: proximity, contiguity,
proximity-strong-dependence, absence and
disappearance.
The falll tless and faulty kamma done in past existences
are related respectively to the rootless faultlessresultant
eye-consciousness and rootless faulty-resultant
eye-consciousness by the forces of two conditions:
natural strong-dependence and asynchronous karnma.
Visible Object. Visible object is related to eyeconsciousness
and the rest of the eight mental states by
the forces of four conditions: object, objectprenascence,
object-prenascence-presence and objectprenascence-
non-disappearance.
Sensitive ~e. Sensitive eye is related to eyeconsciousness
and the rest of the eight mental states by
the forces of six conditions: base-prenascencedependence,
base-prenascence, base-prenascence-faculty,
base-prenascence-dissociation, base-prenascence-presence
and base-prenascence-non-disappearance.
From the above it will be seen that when the group of
mental states including eye-consciousness arises, it does
so by the forces of eighteen conditions exclusive of root,
predominance, postnascence, repetition, jhana and path
which are not concerned with eye-consciousness. Therefore,
these mental states are neither willed nor planned
by atta which does not really exist but is imagined to
exist by certain sects.
In the discourse on the Six Sixes (M.L.S. III, 333) it
is stated: 'If anyone should say, "Eye is self," that is
not fitting. For the arising of the eye is to be seen,
and its decaying. Since its arising and decaying are to
be seen one would thus be brought to the stage of saying:
"Self arises in me and passes away." Therefore if anyone
should say, "Eye is self," that is not fitting; in this
way e~re is not self' and so on. This shows in detail the
anatta nature of materiality-mentality. So when it is
xv Preface
said that a being sees and so on, it is really the functions
of materiality-mentality and, according to P~h. as
shown above, the functions of the conditioning forces. It
is not the functions of atta.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests