Primordial citta etc and Thai meditation masters

[Ajahn-K]

Distinguishing Originating and Genuine Citta

(Back to WM)
Page 89 of WM: Unfortunately, the term Originating Citta and Genuine Citta are sometimes interchanged and I think this is what some westerners find confusing. Clearly, when the Originating Citta is cleansed of ignorance and defilement at the time of Arahant’s Maggasamangi moment, it becomes the Genuine Citta, pure knowingness, the true nature of the Citta. This is why the terms may be interchanged.
Some critics of the Thai Forest tradition argue that the terms Genuine Citta and Originating Citta imply some sort of “self” or “atta” that gets reborn and is thus heresy. Neither of these terms implies any such notion. The pure Citta belongs to no one. It is not under the control of anyone. It is beyond conventional reality and therefore cannot be reborn. The Thai Forest tradition is therefore not heretical.

the questions of king milinda - commentary

“There is this element of Nibbāna, sire, peaceful, happy, excellent. It is that which he who is practising rightly, comprehending the formations in accordance with the instruction of the Conquerors, realizes by means of wisdom. (p143) … …

“Or, sire, as if a man were on a filthy heap of corpses of snakes, dogs and men, and he were entangled in the matted hair of the corpses, but on getting free from there with an effort and entering a place where there were no corpses he would obtain the highest happiness there—even so, sire, does he who is practising rightly realize by means of proper attention the highest happiness, Nibbāna, the corpses of the defilements
departed. As the corpses, sire, so are the five strands of sense pleasures to be understood. As the man among the corpses, so is he who is practising rightly to be understood. As the place where there are no corpses, so is Nibbāna to be understood. (p144)

So while the language may be slightly different, I will think those who really look will find they are talking about the same thing. The cleansing of defilement, and the realisation of the end of suffering.

[RobertK]

@Ajahn-K

The pure Citta belongs to no one. It is not under the control of anyone. It is beyond conventional reality and therefore cannot be reborn.

@**Ajahn Paññāvaddho**

However, the superficial citta is always grounded in something we call the “original citta,” or the “primordial citta. ” Unlike the ordinary citta, the original citta is something which is vast and unfathomable. It is like the depth and breadth of the ocean, as opposed to wave-like sensations rippling on the surface.

This sounds more like vedanta than Theravada. It should be understood that Nibbana is not in any sense a type of citta. There is no eternal citta.

[Nikolay_Gnatyuk]

@Ajahn-K

The Nibbana-datu is known by the mind of an Arhant, it is the end of suffering, the final birth, no more coming into any state of being. But what is that? We won’t know until we realise it ourselves.

Lord Buddha says an Arhant is vast like the great ocean hard to describe.

The point is that what we call personality, being, and existence are a set of conditioned material and mental dharmas (which are empty and suffering by nature). So let me ask you a question. Do you suppose that there is something else besides these dharmas? Some essence, pure, unaffected by suffering and change, the basis of supreme being? Or perhaps this essence appears at the moment of enlightenment or is achieved? Let’s call this essence “nibbana-dhatu” - does this essence then imply some transcendent existence? Where there is existence, there is self-awareness. Therefore, there must also be some transcendent, eternal, non-suffering self-awareness. Thus, we gradually came back to the idea of ​​Atman. Roughly speaking, the Buddha replaced the idea of ​​Atman and materialism with the concept of paticca-samuppada: a stream of mental and material conditioned dharmas that are empty, that is, devoid of anything other than themselves. If you imagine a certain essence of Arahant, which is deep and wide like the ocean, not in a metaphorical, but in a literal, substantial sense, then you imagine precisely this very Atman that was so strictly denied by the Buddha.

[RobertK]

@Nikolay_Gnatyuk

f you imagine a certain essence of Arahant, which is deep and wide like the ocean, not in a metaphorical, but in a literal, substantial sense, then you imagine precisely this very Atman that was so strictly denied by the Buddha.

Right.
Samsara-vata is nothing other than the continual arising and ceasing of the pañca khandhā. Upon khandha parinibbana, the final death of the arahat, there is no more arising of the khandhas. All that is left are the bodily remains.

The Dispeller of Delusion (pali text society) trans. Bhikku Nanamoli:
page 121, volume1:

"this division too should be known, namely momentary death (khanika-
marana), conventional death (samutti marana) and death as cutting
off (samuccheda-marana)

also Vism. xliii

There are three kinds of death: death as
cutting off, momentary death, and conventional death. Death as cutting off belongs
to those whose cankers are exhausted (and are Arahants). Momentary death is
that of each consciousness of the cognitive series beginning with life-continuum
consciousness, which arise each immediately on the cessation of the one preceding.
Conventional death is that of all (so-called) living beings

Samuccheda-marana is the final death of the arahat.