Practitioners have to realise it, before make some critics about it.
Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
DN 11.
M. Walshe:
Where do earth, water, fire and air no footing find?
Where are long and short, small and great, fair and foul -
Where are "name-and-form" wholly destroyed?
And the answer is:
Where consciosness is signless, boundless, all-luminous,
That's where earth, water, fire and air find no footing,
There both long and short, small and great, fair and foul -
There "name-and-form" are wholly destroyed.
With the cessation of consciousness this all destroyed.
Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu:
Where do water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing?
Where are long & short,
coarse & fine,
fair & foul,
name & form
brought to an end?
"'And the answer to that is:
Consciousness without feature,[1]
without end,
luminous all around:
Here water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing.
Here long & short
coarse & fine
fair & foul
name & form
are all brought to an end.
With the cessation of [the activity of] consciousness
each is here brought to an end.'"
M. Walshe:
Where do earth, water, fire and air no footing find?
Where are long and short, small and great, fair and foul -
Where are "name-and-form" wholly destroyed?
And the answer is:
Where consciosness is signless, boundless, all-luminous,
That's where earth, water, fire and air find no footing,
There both long and short, small and great, fair and foul -
There "name-and-form" are wholly destroyed.
With the cessation of consciousness this all destroyed.
Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu:
Where do water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing?
Where are long & short,
coarse & fine,
fair & foul,
name & form
brought to an end?
"'And the answer to that is:
Consciousness without feature,[1]
without end,
luminous all around:
Here water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing.
Here long & short
coarse & fine
fair & foul
name & form
are all brought to an end.
With the cessation of [the activity of] consciousness
each is here brought to an end.'"
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
- greenjuice
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
http://www.theravada-dhamma.org/pdf/Aja ... anatta.pdfConsciousness or vinnana is one of the khandhas and of course is not eternal. The citta is eternal. Just remember what the Lord Buddha said, the Thatagata after dead neither is nor is not. The citta is not individualistic, not personal. How could the Lord Buddha talk to Acharn Mun presenting Dhamma to him in the form of the Lord
Buddha, if there is nothing that is eternal and everything dies away? We grasp the term citta wrongly, we think every beeing has a citta, no that is not right, every being is part of that one citta, that is eternal.
First thing- citta is eternal, somewhat ok, but positing that there is one citta, first time I've read this. Second thing- Buddha talked to Acharn Mun?
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
One Mind it's not new conceptgreenjuice wrote: First thing- citta is eternal, somewhat ok, but positing that there is one citta, first time I've read this.
Nanamoli Thera http://nyanamoli.blogspot.com/2009/12/c ... being.htmlBut while life, etc. cannot be or not be without the cooperation of the negative presence of consciousness, which gives room for them (and itself) to “come to be” in this way (gaining its own peculiar form of negative being, perhaps from them)—the only possible way of being—they are, by ignorance, simultaneously individualized in actual experience. Unindividualized experience cannot, I think, be called experience at all. Thus there appears the positive illusion also of individual consciousness: “illusion” because its individuality is borrowed from the individualness of (1) its percepts, and (2) the body seen as its perceiving instrument.
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
- greenjuice
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
Maybe for Vedanta.boris wrote: One Mind it's not new concept
The way I understood some of the "less mainstream" Theravada explanations of the Buddha's teaching is this- there are the mahabhutas of fire, earth, air, water, space and citta. The body/ rupa is made of the first four mahabhutas, and the intellect/ manas is the manifestation of a citta that is connected to a rupa, manas is the name/ nama, it's functions are feeling, perception, contact, consciousness and intention. The citta is the person, as when Buddha says that the khandas are the burden and the person is the carrier of the burden, that can remember it's past births, it is the bhavanga, what get's reborn, it is the place of unmanifest consciousness, that is beyond the allness of the all, and that is luminous, and that's why citta itself is called luminous, and it is citta that attains the paramam sukham of Nibbana.
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
greenjuice wrote:Maybe for Vedanta.boris wrote: One Mind it's not new concept
”We are different in body, venerable sir, but one in mind.
http://suttacentral.net/mn31/en/
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
- greenjuice
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
Not Buddha's words, and plus obviously metaphorical, being that just after that he says “That is how, venerable sir, we are living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing"
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
The monk under this tree, the monk under that tree. It's very simple.boris wrote:Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?
- "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]
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
You pointed out two different bodies. Should I undrestand it as your commitment to idea that consciousness is a brain derivative? If so, I like to point out, that this idea is without support in Suttas. So perhaps it is not as simple as you suggest.
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
http://nanavira.org/index.php/letters/p ... march-1962The mistake is to approach consciousness by way of the body. But rational science, being essentially the study of what is public, namely matter, has no alternative. The laws of science are the laws of matter, and if these laws are universal then consciousness (whatever it may be) must necessarily be subordinate to matter. What science overlooks, and cannot help overlooking, is the fact that in order to know the body it is first necessary to be conscious of it—the body is an object (amongst other objects) of consciousness, and to seek to investigate consciousness by way of the body, instead of the other way round, is to put the cart before the horse. Consciousness comes first, and if it is to be known it must be studied directly (that is to say, by immediate reflexion). This matter has been stated clearly by J.-P. Sartre, who, in his principal work dealing with consciousness, writes more than 250 pages out of a total of 700 before mentioning the body at all. This is what he says.
Perhaps some may be surprised that we have treated the problem of knowing without raising the question of the body and of the senses and even once referring to it. It is not my purpose to misunderstand or to ignore the role of the body. But what is important above all else, in ontology as elsewhere, is to observe strict order in discussion. Now the body, whatever may be its function, appears first as the known. We cannot therefore refer knowledge back to it, or discuss it before we have defined knowing, nor can we derive knowing in its fundamental structure from the body in any way or manner whatsoever. (EN, pp. 270-1; B&N, p. 218)
The man who wants to avoid grotesque collapses should not look for anything to fulfill him in space and time.
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
- greenjuice
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
I've already asked on a different topic about the cessation of feeling in Nibbana, and how that relates to Nibbana being supreme happiness, maybe there is in citta an unmanifest feeling, just like there is unmanifest consciousness Same could be asked about perception, although I have read people say how in Nibbana there is direct knowledge of things, unmediated knowledge, which could mean that perception wouldn't be neccessary to know whether their minds are distinct or not.boris wrote:Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?
Last edited by greenjuice on Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
It's not necessarily a brain derivative - this isn't implied. Rather, it's one set of khandas or another, denoted by "this monk, that monk". This monk is training this citta, that monk is training that citta.boris wrote:You pointed out two different bodies. Should I undrestand it as your commitment to idea that consciousness is a brain derivative? If so, I like to point out, that this idea is without support in Suttas. So perhaps it is not as simple as you suggest.
- "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]
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
Nirodhasamāpatti is above all the jhānas and all the arūpa attainments: well beyond what is necessary for arahattā which only requires the first jhāna.boris wrote:Are you sure that after cessation of perception and feeling, which all these monks could attain, was possible to make distinction between their minds? But how? When there is silence of mouth, thought, and heart, on which ground can you point out two separate minds?
To the extent that consciousness and individuality are one and the same, I think your line of thinking is correct.In the Suttas, consciousness does not cease until saññāvedayitanirodha, 'cessation of perception and feeling', which is above all the jhānas and all the arūpa attainments. Breathing, on the other hand, stops in the fourth jhāna, where there is still consciousness. (This means that, from the point of view of the individual concerned—which is the only point of view that matters—the body ceases in fourth jhāna and above. One cannot take one's body with one into the arūpa or 'immaterial' attainments. Ñāṇavīra [L. 76 | 83] 17 December 1963
"Dhammā=Ideas. This is the clue to much of the Buddha's teaching." ~ Ven. Ñanavira, Commonplace Book
Re: Citta, Brahma, and Thai Forest interpretations
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eased.htmlThe arahant, one who is endowed with ten qualities, gains release from the nine abodes of living beings. This can be compared to writing the numerals 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. 1 to 9 are numbers that can be counted, named, added, subtracted, multiplied, and divided. As for ten — 1 and 0 (zero) — when we erase the 1, because it's a repetition, we are left with 0 (zero). If we use 0 to add, subtract, multiply, or divide with any other number, it won't increase the value of that number; and 0 by itself has no value at all — but you can't say that it doesn't exist, because there it is. The same is true with the heart: It's a nature whose attributes are like 0. When 0 is connected to any other number, it greatly increases the value of that number. For instance, 1 connected with 0 becomes 10. So it is with the heart. When connected with anything, it instantly proliferates into things elaborate and fantastic. But when trained until it is wise and discerning with regard to all knowable phenomena, it returns to its state as 0 (zero) — empty, open, and clear, beyond all counting and naming. It doesn't stay in the nine places that are abodes for living beings. Instead, it stays in a place devoid of supposing and formulation: its inherent nature as 0 (zero), or activityless-ness, as mentioned in § 14.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230