The way I analysed Sankhara.

On the cultivation of insight/wisdom
SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:00 am

For example, (the probably late Abhidhamma sutta) SN 12.51 says the only sankhara that end are meritorious volitional formation, demeritorious volitional formation & imperturbable volitional formation.
According to Abhidhamma there are 50 Sankharas.
In your opinion which Sankhras are not ceased?

https://accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors ... el322.html
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6398
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by DooDoot » Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:06 am

SarathW wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:00 am
In your opinion which Sankhras are not ceased?
I already posted, twice. Don't you read my answers to your questions? No wonder I appear to be the only person with enough patience & metta to reply to you :mrgreen: . I said obviously an arahant continues to breath, think, feel & perceive therefore these kaya, vaci & citta sankhara are obviously not eradicated. They are only calmed (samatho). With metta :)
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

auto
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by auto » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:06 pm

hmm, nice.
SarathW wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:46 am
There are many Bodily Sankahara varied from most gross to most subtle.
- The grossest form of verbal Sankhara is the breaking of the first three precepts.
how vaci(speech) is body sankhara?
speech is technically a breath therefore vaci could be a kayasankhara.
SarathW wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:46 am
There are two main types of mental Sankhara. Citta Sankhara (perception and feeling) and Mano Sankhara (other 50 Cetacika as per Abhidhamma)
Please refer to the following link for further details.
cetasika seem to be cetana's constituent. Perception and feeling is forerunner for cetana and it results in craving. Whereas feeling originates from contact and the perception is with the cetana.
SarathW wrote:
Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:46 am
Verbal...
- wholesome Vitakka and Vicara. (ie first Jhana)
https://suttacentral.net/an10.175/en/sujato
Avoiding harsh speech bypasses harsh speech. Pharusavācassa, bhikkhave, pharusāya vācāya veramaṇī parikkamanaṃ hoti.
it is not talking at all when you have inclination to do so. At that time talking harsh speech feels rewarding, the pleasure will arise and stop talking harshly feels bad, not rewarding, endurance needed.

vitakka vicara, thoughts on renounciation till cetana becomes inclined to renounciation then no more vitakkavicara needed.

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:43 pm

how vaci(speech) is body sankhara?
speech is technically a breath therefore vaci could be a kayasankhara.
Agree.
Thank you for pointing it.
It is a typo as I cut and paste from the former.
So my OP should be read as bodily instead of verbal.

"The grossest form of verbal Sankhara is the breaking of the first three precepts. "
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:53 pm

cetasika seem to be cetana's constituent. Perception and feeling is forerunner for cetana and it results in craving. Whereas feeling originates from contact and the perception is with the cetana.
I had some doubts when I wrote my post.
Now I wonder whether Citta are the Citta Sankhara. (Bhava Sankara) and 52 Cetacica including perception and feeling are Mano Sankhara.
The conundrum is why a person in the Cessation of perception and feeling is not always considered as an Arahant.
Perhaps the reason is even if you are in Ceassaton of perception and feeling you still have not eliminated the Citta Sankhara.
I may be wrong as it is said that a person in the Cessation of perception has no consciousness.
Why a person who has ceased all verbal, bodily and mental Sankhara not considered an Arahant?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6398
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by DooDoot » Sat Oct 05, 2019 4:15 am

SarathW wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:53 pm
Citta Sankhara.... Mano Sankhara.
Citta Sankhara = cause of citta. Mano Sankhara = effect of mano.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Sat Oct 05, 2019 4:43 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sat Oct 05, 2019 4:15 am
SarathW wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:53 pm
Citta Sankhara.... Mano Sankhara.
Citta Sankhara = cause of citta. Mano Sankhara = effect of mano.
Can you support this with some sources?
Thanks.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6398
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by DooDoot » Sat Oct 05, 2019 5:08 am

SarathW wrote:
Sat Oct 05, 2019 4:43 am
Can you support this with some sources?
Sankhara = cause, below, where vacīsaṅkhāro (vitakka + vicara) is the cause of speech:
Placing the mind and keeping it connected are the vacīsaṅkhāro [singular]

vitakkavicārā vacīsaṅkhāro

First you place the mind (vitakketvā) and keep it connected (vicāretvā), then you break into speech. That’s why placing the mind and keeping it connected are vacīsaṅkhāro.

Pubbe kho, āvuso visākha, vitakketvā vicāretvā pacchā vācaṃ bhindati, tasmā vitakkavicārā vacīsaṅkhāro.

MN 44 https://suttacentral.net/mn44/en/sujato
Sankhara = effect, below, where vacīsaṅkhāraṃ refers to a verbal formation, i.e., speech itself rather than the cause of speech:
As long as there’s a voice, the intention that gives rise to verbal action causes pleasure and pain to arise in oneself.

Vācāya vā, bhikkhave, sati vacīsañcetanāhetu uppajjati ajjhattaṃ sukhadukkhaṃ.

By oneself one makes the choice that gives rise to verbal action, conditioned by which that pleasure and pain arise in oneself.

Sāmaṃ vā taṃ vacīsaṅkhāraṃabhisaṅkharonti, yaṃpaccayāssa taṃ uppajjati ajjhattaṃ sukhadukkhaṃ.

https://suttacentral.net/an4.171/en/sujato
The suttas about kaya-vaci-mano-sankhara appear about mundane kamma; and appear different to supramundane suttas that use kaya-vaci-citta-sankhara.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:23 am

The suttas about kaya-vaci-mano-sankhara appear about mundane kamma; and appear different to supramundane suttas that use kaya-vaci-citta-sankhara.
Oh. thanks.
Could you give me some links so I can read a bit more about it?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 6398
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by DooDoot » Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:57 am

SarathW wrote:
Sat Oct 05, 2019 9:23 am
Could you give me some links so I can read a bit more about it?
Just search for 'manosaṅkhāraṃ' at Sutta Central. You will find it is found in 7 suttas about kamma.

Remember, there are three types of kamma and the 3rd kamma is called "mano-kamma" and not "citta-kamma":
For after making a choice one acts
Cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti—

by way of body, speech, and mind.
kāyena vācāya manasā.

https://suttacentral.net/an6.63/en/sujato
DN 28 below shows 'manosaṅkhārā' is the cause of 'vitakka & vicara'.
DN 28 wrote:‘Judging by the way this person’s intentions are directed, immediately after this mind state, they’ll think this thought.’

‘yathā imassa bhoto manosaṅkhārā paṇihitā. Tathā imassa cittassa anantarā imaṃ nāma vitakkaṃ vitakkessatī’ti.

https://suttacentral.net/dn28/en/sujato

And one says: Just according to the aim of the mental activity of this good person even on such and such a thought will he next be directing his mind.

https://suttacentral.net/dn28/en/tw-caf_rhysdavids
This shows 'manosankhara' is used differently to 'cittasankhara'.

'Cittasankhara' = perception & feeling

'Manosankhara' = intention

'Manosankhara' in Dhp 1:
Manopubbaṅgamā dhammā,
manoseṭṭhā manomayā;
Manasā ce paduṭṭhena,
bhāsati vā karoti vā;
Tato naṃ dukkhamanveti,
cakkaṃva vahato padaṃ.

Mind precedes thoughts,
mind is their chief, their quality is made by mind ["made" = "sankhara"],
if with a base mind one speaks or acts,
through that suffering follows him like a wheel follows the ox’s foot.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Sat Oct 05, 2019 10:57 am

Is Manosankhara and Manasikara the same?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

auto
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by auto » Sat Oct 05, 2019 3:30 pm

SarathW wrote:
Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:43 pm
how vaci(speech) is body sankhara?
speech is technically a breath therefore vaci could be a kayasankhara.
Agree.
Thank you for pointing it.
It is a typo as I cut and paste from the former.
So my OP should be read as bodily instead of verbal.

"The grossest form of verbal Sankhara is the breaking of the first three precepts. "
Kāya in kāyasankhara could be sense organ consciousness kāya, so it is any of the six. And kayasankhara is the in and outbreath, 2 things.
In case of eye organ the in and out are the eyes, they alternate in intervals one time one is dominant other recessive and vice versa.

Other words you can be mindful of the breath in the eyes, of how the intervals happen etc.

that what runs in the in- and out- breath is vaci, a stream. There is kamavacana.. So what you do is avoid consciousness slipping into the kamavacana by not harming living beings..

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:32 am

Other words you can be mindful of the breath in the eyes
I can't recall reading like this anywhere in sutta.
Do you have some Sutta support?
I understand the physical eye is the body (Kaya)
The subtle eye has the perception and feeling, not in an out-breath.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 12762
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by SarathW » Sun Oct 06, 2019 11:33 am

Why Abhidhamma does not classify perception and feeling as Sankhara (fabrications)?

The Abhidhamma lists 52 kinds of cetasikas. One is feeling (vedanaa), another is perception (saññaa). The remaining 50 are grouped together under the term sa"nkhaaraa.

https://accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors ... el322.html

"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

auto
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The way I analysed Sankhara.

Post by auto » Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:02 pm

SarathW wrote:
Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:32 am
Other words you can be mindful of the breath in the eyes
I can't recall reading like this anywhere in sutta.
Do you have some Sutta support?
I understand the physical eye is the body (Kaya)
The subtle eye has the perception and feeling, not in an out-breath.
Assāsapassāsā is in- and outbreathing. It is not the air you cultivate or feel how it touches the skin. It is the inbreath and outbreath, 2 things which are within the organ as of behind the receptors knowing changes before contact happen.

Other words you won't even know the internal breath(what is regulated by ordinary breathing functions) unless you have gotten from head to the body, that is by ceasing the eye consciousness, the nama there, contact ceases namarupa ceases.

then what next is you need get the contact with the rupa that is you start fabricate without contact you won't recognize fabrication and if you don't recognize fabrication you won't able to break the defilement(asava, asava too is sankhara what is to be ceased)
--
It is interpretation of a Sutta mostly on what possible assāsapassāsā could mean, so by that i believe i don't need put disclaimers on in every post that "i think".

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests