Saṅkhārā is a plural word. It is not singular. The Suttanta method says that it is merely cetanā (intention). The Suttanta method cannot account for its plurality against the other mental aggregates. For instance, if you say it is plural because of the cetanā of the six sense doors (Suttanta Method):
‘‘rūpasañcetanā loke… saddasañcetanā loke… gandhasañcetanā loke… rasasañcetanā loke… phoṭṭhabbasañcetanā loke… dhammasañcetanā loke piyarūpaṃ sātarūpaṃ, etthesā taṇhā uppajjamānā uppajjati, ettha nivisamānā nivisati.
Volition for forms in the world… volition for sounds in the world… volition for odors in the world… volition for flavors in the world… volition for tactile objects in the world… volition for mental phenomena in the world is delightful and agreeable; there this craving arises and settles.
You cannot say that because there is the same for the perception aggregate (in the same sutta quote):
‘‘rūpasaññā loke… saddasaññā loke… gandhasaññā loke… rasasaññā loke… phoṭṭhabbasaññā loke… dhammasaññā loke piyarūpaṃ sātarūpaṃ, etthesā taṇhā uppajjamānā uppajjati, ettha nivisamānā nivisati.
Perception of forms in the world… perception of sounds in the world… perception of odors in the world… perception of flavors in the world… perception of tactile objects in the world… perception of mental phenomena in the world is delightful and agreeable; there this craving arises and settles.
So there is a need for the plural to mean the remaining cetasikas excluding the mental factors of the remaining mental aggregates (feeling, perception). This is proof of the Suttas reinforcing the existence and validity of the Abhidhamma.
They are defined as intentions, but there are at least 2 ways to understand intention, and sankhara are also defined as that which fabricates.
And how does fabrication happen in our experience? First, we experience a new desire in our consciousness. Then, a new material phenomenon (that can be perceived with modern tools) forms (this is how sankhara can fabricate matter) in our head and does some work for a time. Then, providing everything goes well, we get to experience what we wanted to experience in our consciousness.
And this fabrication keeps going even when we no longer feel, in our consciousness, that we intend, or when we aren’t conscious of anything at all, or even when we feel that we intend the opposite.
So, I think that, based solely on the suttas, sankhara should be understood as countless streams of energy born from a lengthy series of long-forgotten wishes that make up our mind (the same energy is also used to fabricate matter), not as sensations of knowing that we want something?
@jbgrim We are a classical Theravāda group supportive of Abhidhamma. We are biased towards Abhidhamma.
When I made my original post, I did not include a sample of saṅkhāra which changes from citta to citta. So if the two of you (@Dhamma001 and @jbgrim ) didn’t understand what plural was and what it meant and the purpose of the post, here it is blelow.
61. katamo tasmiṃ samaye saññākkhandho hoti?
What is the aggregate of mental formations at that time? phasso cetanā vitakko vicāro pīti cittassekaggatā saddhindriyaṃ vīriyindriyaṃ satindriyaṃ samādhindriyaṃ paññindriyaṃ jīvitindriyaṃ sammādiṭṭhi sammāsaṅkappo sammāvāyāmo sammāsati sammāsamādhi saddhābalaṃ vīriyabalaṃ satibalaṃ samādhibalaṃ paññābalaṃ hiribalaṃ ottappabalaṃ alobho adoso amoho anabhijjhā abyāpādo sammādiṭṭhi hirī ottappaṃ kāyapassaddhi cittapassaddhi kāyalahutā cittalahutā kāyamudutā cittamudutā kāyakammaññatā cittakammaññatā kāyapāguññatā cittapāguññatā kāyujukatā cittujukatā sati sampajaññaṃ samatho vipassanā paggāho avikkhepo; ye vā pana tasmiṃ samaye aññepi atthi paṭiccasamuppannā arūpino dhammā ṭhapetvā vedanākkhandhaṃ ṭhapetvā saññākkhandhaṃ ṭhapetvā viññāṇakkhandhaṃ – ayaṃ tasmiṃ samaye saṅkhārakkhandho hoti.
Contact, volition, initial application, sustained application, joy, one-pointedness of mind, faculty of faith, faculty of energy, faculty of mindfulness, faculty of concentration, faculty of wisdom, faculty of life, right view, right intention, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration, power of faith, power of energy, power of mindfulness, power of concentration, power of wisdom, power of shame, power of moral dread, non-greed, non-hatred, non-delusion, non-covetousness, non-ill will, right view, shame, moral dread, tranquility of body, tranquility of mind, lightness of body, lightness of mind, pliancy of body, pliancy of mind, adaptability of body, adaptability of mind, proficiency of body, proficiency of mind, uprightness of body, uprightness of mind, mindfulness, clear comprehension, serenity, insight, exertion, non-distraction; and whatever other formless phenomena exist at that time, arisen dependently, apart from the aggregate of feeling, apart from the aggregate of perception, apart from the aggregate of consciousness—this is the aggregate of mental formations at that time.
Well, ok, I just wanted to show that learning from the suttas doesn’t come with any such problems since, while they do define sankhara as ‘intentions’, they use a meaning that allows for such ‘intentions’ to stay active even outside of consciousness. So, not exactly ‘mere.’
Note that the suttas also have bodily, mental and verbal sankhara that need calming (meaning they can stay active against your current ‘mere’ intentions) and life sankhara, which you need to stay alive (it can’t be even sensed directly?).