Buddha never defined " Citta "...but defined each term of 5 aggregates..did you notice?

I have searching keyword " citta "…in Pali on all Suttas… and found no explanation of this term.

While Buddha given every term of 5 aggregates… what is rūpa(form)… to … viññān(Conciseness)

Buddha given every term of "Paṭiccasamuppād "(dependent of origination)… and other.

BUT when come to " Citta "…there is no definition.

My understanding is, in that era, " Citta “…shall be a common term which everyone known… therefore, Buddha no need to define this term. Same like " sweet, sour, bitter…” no need to define.

It can be seen in " assutavāta sutta "…that

  1. Ordinary person (assutavā puthujjano) section –
    Buddha mentioned…
    body vs Citta(mind) or Mano(thought) or Vinna(sensing)

  2. Ariya person (sutavā ariyasāvako) section –
    Buddha mentioned…
    rūpa(body) vs vedanā(feeling) & saññā &
    & saṅkhāra & viññān

For me, " citta " ~ " { vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, viññān } "

Do you think so?

No. Refer to MN 10 or MN 118.

Assutavāta Sutta is saying citta, mano & vinnana is all arising & passing. Is not saying they are the same mental function. :saluting_face:

1 Like

This is because their concept of consciousness was different to the western. In Buddhism there are six forms of consciousness according with each of the senses (including mind).

“Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them.”—Majhima Nikaya 43

The Buddhist view is helpful because an unwholesome mind state for example, can be identified as a consciousness complete with feeling and perception. Mental formations are then able to challenge that consciousness, preferably by understanding its origin, and investigating the wrong perception which caused it to arise, or blocking it by one of the tactics in Majhima Nikaya 20.


" { vedanā, saññā, saṅkhāra, viññān } " are arising & passing, as well

Therefore Buddha likely mentioned that this is word which Ordinary person (assutavā puthujjano) understand as its.

If you have a friendly heart, this is ‘citta’. It is not ‘friendly consciousness’ or ‘friendly intellect’. If you have intelligent mind, it is intelligent intellect (mano) rather than ‘intelligent heart’ (‘citta’). If you have clear discerning consciousness, it is not ‘discerning heart’ (‘citta’).

1 Like