Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Gwyddion
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:59 pm
Location: Kings Bromley - Watt Mahathat

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by Gwyddion » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:37 am

It would seem all the sine-wave graphic explains is that Karma moves from one state to the next, vacillation if you will - and that Buddha nature is the stationary black line in the middle -

it either needs to have more explanation alongside it with a better key, or it is a very basic and doesn't explain much.

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:38 am

tiltbillings wrote: This is nice new-age thinking, but it is not the Buddha-Dhamma.

Assuming they did, that does not mean that they are correct or that you correctly understood them.

Not that you have shown. What you are describing fits far better with Hinduism and Perennial Philosophy and New-Age-ism, but really misses the point of the Buddha-Dhamma.
Ok.
It's not important, all that it's just some intelectual cosmology that have nothink to do with practice. So go speak practice and you will tell me what it is, perharps i misunderstand it.
So:
tiltbillings wrote:
If i could re-ask you, because you dont answer, what hear your internal voice?
I'll tell you what: do your best to put this question into clear, accurate English so that I can clearly understand what you are asking, and I'll consider it.
Close your eyes, and without tell nothink with mouth, count : One, two, three...
You hear your voice?
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:42 am

Gwyddion wrote:It also frustrates me these new-age cliches, because it covers up the Dhamma and muddies the water. I live in a Buddhist temple and I hear it all the time from people who visit and think they are experts on Buddhist/Dhamma, but i'm patient and I listen, everyone deserves that at least.

I should be asking these questions to the monks or the Abbot but the eye-opener here is that many monks don't actually know Dhamma very well - I help the monks out and they are good people, but some of them become monks for reasons other than practicing Dhamma which is a shame.

I want to teach Dhamma myself one day because of what it has done for me in my life so far, so i need to get it right 100% so I don't spread muck around so to speak.

Sorry to go off-topic but it explains why this forum is invaluable to me at this time.

Thank you
The most important if it brings them freedom from suffering. Noun, label is not important. If i will call it "a chair", or "airplane", or "parachute" it would be the same freedom.
Ask them if they feel free, ask them if they realise it, or just logicaly understan it. The rest have no importance.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by tiltbillings » Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:52 pm

DAWN wrote:[qu

Close your eyes, and without tell nothink with mouth, count : One, two, three...
You hear your voice?
If you are hearing a "nothink" voice, it is a conditioned process. Where in the suttas did the Buddha teach such a thing?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 18, 2012 3:48 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
DAWN wrote:[qu

Close your eyes, and without tell nothink with mouth, count : One, two, three...
You hear your voice?
If you arehearing a "nothink" voice, it is a conditioned process. Where in the suttas did the Buddha teach such a thing?
I have just ask you if you hear your voice. Yes/No would be apropriate answer.

And now, please, count "one two three", and ask you the question : what is wisely hearing your voice?

It is impermanent?
It is brings suffering?
It is self?
It is your nature?
It is unconditioned?
It is uncreated?
It is refuge?
It is goes with Lord Buddha explications?

Please study it, and give me "Yes/No - Why" answer.
I'am realy sorry that i tell you what to do, i have no any legitimity for it, but if you have some compassion to my wrong view, it would be helpfull to me to know what do you thinking obout.

Thanks you a lot :heart:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

ALot
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:55 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by ALot » Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:50 pm

Gwyddion wrote:I want to teach Dhamma myself one day because of what it has done for me in my life so far, so i need to get it right 100% so I don't spread muck around so to speak.
There's only one way to get it right 100%.

Supatipanno Bhagavato Savakasangho

...and then investigate again. It's not a sure thing.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by tiltbillings » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:33 pm

DAWN wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
DAWN wrote:[qu

Close your eyes, and without tell nothink with mouth, count : One, two, three...
You hear your voice?
If you arehearing a "nothink" voice, it is a conditioned process. Where in the suttas did the Buddha teach such a thing?
I have just ask you if you hear your voice. Yes/No would be apropriate answer.

And now, please, count "one two three", and ask you the question : what is wisely hearing your voice?

It is impermanent?
It is brings suffering?
It is self?
It is your nature?
It is unconditioned?
It is uncreated?
It is refuge?
It is goes with Lord Buddha explications?

Please study it, and give me "Yes/No - Why" answer.
I'am realy sorry that i tell you what to do, i have no any legitimity for it, but if you have some compassion to my wrong view, it would be helpfull to me to know what do you thinking obout.

Thanks you a lot :heart:
I have already answered your "voice" question, but I see that you refuse to answer mine: Where does the Buddha teach such a thing?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:06 pm

tiltbillings wrote: I have already answered your "voice" question, but I see that you refuse to answer mine: Where does the Buddha teach such a thing?
I'am sorry, my answer is:
No, the voice is not the voice of "nothing", it's not what i want to show you. No, i dont know any sutta of Buddha where he tell that voice of "nothing" is Nibbana.

Actualy, this question, about "if you hear your voice", was asked not to put your intention on the voice itself, but on "what is knowing" this voice.
It's true that the voice itself, and the consciosness of it, is impermanent, but, if you do it right, you will be able to see the nature of consciosness, to push off on your voice (any dhamma), and by this reflection of consciosness-light, jump into your self, see/feel the base, on wich all sankharas and dhammas are based, the impenetrable ground beyound impermanence.

You will see that there is peace, calm, permanence, clarity, light, freedom, Nibbana...

Buddha not teach about voice, it's just a tool, it's just the way that i saw it, so i just try to show you it, and get your opinion.
Dont zap quotations from Udana, read all what is following, and i hope you will be able to understand what i mean.

Ud 8.1-4 : Nibbāna Sutta — Parinibbana.

There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished,[1] unevolving, without support [mental object].[2] This, just this, is the end of stress.

It's hard to see the unaffected,
for the truth is not easily seen.
Craving is pierced
in one who knows;
For one who sees,
there is nothing.


There is, monks, an unborn[1] — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.[2]

One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no yearning. There being no yearning, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.[1]
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by beeblebrox » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:16 pm

DAWN wrote: I have just ask you if you hear your voice. Yes/No would be apropriate answer.

And now, please, count "one two three", and ask you the question : what is wisely hearing your voice?
I think there might be a confusion in telling the difference in between "hearing" and "thinking"... dhamma vicaya (discernment) is one of the important factors to enlightenment.

If you're hearing something, then that means there is a contact in between the ear and its object. In Buddhist terms, that's called "ear-consciousness."

If there is a consciousness of some thoughts arising... then that means there's a contact in between mind and its objects, which gave rise to this consciousness. When this contact falls away, the consciousness also falls away. What then?

To keep in with the topic of this thread: what is the Citta, after that? Where is the Brahma, or maybe this one is a more useful question: what is he made of?

Could we approach this Brahma with any of the senses that we have now? If not, how could we approach him? (Or to Fall into His Being, if you want to be non-dualist about it...) Would these sort of thoughts be even useful for our practice, which is working on the cessation of our own greed, hatred and delusion... or to put it in other words, to be less troublesome to others? That is, to work on Nirvana, which I think would be the whole point of the Buddhist practice?
Last edited by beeblebrox on Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by daverupa » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:18 pm

DAWN wrote:jump into your self, see/feel the base, on wich all sankharas and dhammas are based, the impenetrable ground beyound impermanence.
This is adhamma.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16477
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by mikenz66 » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:22 pm

Hi Gwyddion,
Gwyddion wrote: Yet recently I have been looking into the concept of 'Pure Citta' as taught by the forest tradition - in regards to the 'base level (pure) Citta which is always there from one life to the next and the only thing that does not change':
Are you referring to Ajahn Maha Boowa and so on, the "Citta that never dies"?
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 51&start=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=1205" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:34 pm

beeblebrox wrote: If there is a consciousness of some thoughts arising... then that means there's a contact in between mind and its objects, which gave rise to this consciousness. When this contact falls away, the consciousness also falls away. What then?
Then there is secession of consciosness. Thats all.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by DAWN » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:41 pm

daverupa wrote:
DAWN wrote:jump into your self, see/feel the base, on wich all sankharas and dhammas are based, the impenetrable ground beyound impermanence.
This is adhamma.
Cessetion of suffering is aBuddhadhamma?
Cessetion of contact with sankharas is aBuddhadhamma?

If you know what i try to show, tell me please what i have to do, to see that this state is anicca and dukkha.
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by tiltbillings » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:43 pm

DAWN wrote: Actualy, this question, about "if you hear your voice", was asked not to put your intention on the voice itself, but on "what is knowing" this voice.
It's true that the voice itself, and the consciosness of it, is impermanent, but, if you do it right, you will be able to see the nature of consciosness, to push off on your voice (any dhamma), and by this reflection of consciosness-light, jump into your self, see/feel the base, on wich all sankharas and dhammas are based, the impenetrable ground beyound impermanence.
And you are making my point, you not talking about the Buddha's teachings here.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Difference between Citta and Brahma?

Post by beeblebrox » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:45 pm

DAWN wrote: Then there is secession of consciosness. Thats all.
If a consciousness seems to secede... then I think the following quote might be useful:
SN 44.9

"Master Gotama, at the moment a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes a far distance, what do you designate as its sustenance then?"

"Vaccha, when a flame is being swept on by the wind and goes a far distance, I designate it as wind-sustained, for the wind is its sustenance at that time."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 68 guests