With the cessation of viññāṇa (divided-knowing) all this is brought to an end

[Jasudho]

From Ven. Sujato in a prior post: " While there have been many attempts to show that these are either the same or different, in my view that is missing the point somewhat. The terms are, generally speaking, synonyms, and their usage overlaps to some degree, but they tend to be used in different contexts:

1. Viṇṇāṇa is part of the khandhas and āyatanas, and hence pertains to the first noble truth: it is suffering.
2. Mano is typically used in an active sense of will or volition, closely related to kamma, and hence pertains to the second noble truth, the cause of suffering.
3. Citta is to be developed and thus pertains to the fourth noble truth.
4. The cessation of all these is, of course, the third noble truth.

Citta, Mano, Viññana - Definitions and distinctions

What can be said to be - acording to EBTs - the definitions and distinctions between the terms citta, mano and viññana? What are key the practical implications and doctrinal contexts of use of these terms in the EBTs? How does the progressive abandoning of the 5 lower and higher fetters (saṃyojana) affect (or not) these things?

Each of these terms point to, and imply, particular aspects of mind in certain contexts, such as manos in Dhp1, as well as more generally pointing to “mind” in other contexts. Restricting viññāna to the particular meaning quoted in the OP does not align with how it is used in many of the suttas.