Saṅkhārā Is A Plural Word Proving Abhidhamma

Abhidhamma
1

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.

1 Like
2

  • Verse 277: Sabbe Sankhara Anicca Ti “All conditioned phenomena are impermanent”;

  • Sankhara can be kamma.

  • Sankhara is just any activity.

Sankhara is singular in these contexts. See the definitions of sankhāra.

Sankhara-loka —

Sankhata (all sankhara made of rupa and nama) and Asankhata (Nibbana).

Sankhara is sankhata (the conditioned). Sankhara is a collective noun in that context.

3

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?

4

@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.

Here is a quote from the Dhammasaṅgaṇī p.27:

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.

5

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?).

6

That is citta/mano sankhara, the group of mental formations (saṅkhārakkhandha)

That is one of the three types of sankhara:

  1. kāya-saṅkhāra (m.) substratum of the body.
  2. vacī-saṅkhāra* - verbal functions
  3. citta-saṅkhāra* or cetasika-saṅkhāra (as you have written)

Another way of classifying sankhara: (from Sankhāra in Theravada Buddhism):

  1. Sankhata sankhāra
  2. Abhisankhata sankhāra
  3. Abhisankharanaka sankhāra
  4. Payoga sankhāra

In general, sankhara is ‘activity’ or ‘restive’ and Nibbana is nonactivity or resting.

Sankhara is an aggregate of dukkha (sabbe sankhara dukkha).

Avijjāpaccayā sankhārā

Sasaṅkhāraparinibbāyī, ‘one who reaches Nibbāna with exertion’; is a name of one of the 5 kinds of Non-returners (anāgāmī; q.v.).

7

Sankhara is kamma (volition) in certain context.

See Sankhāra in Theravada Buddhism – drarisworld

Sankhāra is also known as volitional or kamma formation, as volition or intention is a significant aspect of any action taken in response to sense objects received through the sense doors. The word kamma in Pali means action, but only intentional, volitional and wilful actions will lead to consequences sooner or later. The mind (citta) on its own cannot perform or direct any mental, verbal or physical action, but it is the intention, the will, the mental effort or the volition (cetanā) that directs all mental, verbal or physical action. Thus, the Buddha has declared,

“Cetanāhaṁ bhikkhave kammam vadāmi
Cetayitvā kammaṁ karoti kāyena, vācyāa, manasā”

8

And what do you think the mind is? The mind is that which fabricates all our sensations, which is the function of sankhara, which makes the mind a bundle of sankhara. It has no other function.

And what is kamma? All our decisions are decided by our perception, and our perception is decided by our past experience, and past experience is what all our deeds leave behind. Our past experience is what is called our kamma.

And you are right that the vehicle of kamma is sankhara, for whenever we intend something and a new sankhara forms and starts working on realizing our wish, as long as a little craving is involved, it will often try to do its job more than once.

9

Anything you can say is plural by mental formations by suttanta, you can also say is plural by feeling, perception, or consciousness by suttanta too. That was my point. The context used was the statement I quoted. It is plural in grammar, yet the others are singular. The mental formations are plural because they have multiple mental factors, rather than just one.

Try again. Explain using my quote not others.

10

The Suttanta method says that it is merely cetanā (intention).

Again, ‘merely intentions’ are mental objects that can exist only in our consciousness and can be experienced in it.

While sankhara, according to the suttas, are what fabricates consciousness and, at least in some cases, are impossible to feel.

Meaning, they aren’t ‘merely intentions’, but are intentions-in-action, energy, something that keeps existing outside of our consciousness.

…

Now that I think about it, the meaning of the sutta you quote doesn’t change regardless of whether the plural or singular form of sankhara is used. And I don’t know how I found this forum or why I’m arguing here with you… Oh well.

11

Yes… that was my whole point. With the Abhidhamma, we can clearly see why the Sutta specifically has saṅkhārā as plural but not the other mental aggregates. We can see through the Abhidhamma, with the second general quote I gave, why it is plural and the others are singular. When we evaluate saññā and vedanā as single cetasikas and we see that saṅkhārā is many, then it makes sense.

12

Oh? But whenever I experience consciousness, 3 things are always present: a sensation, the pleasantness of said sensation, and understanding of the nature of said sensation. And when I say 3 things, I mean only these 3 things, nothing else.

13

That is because you do not know Abhidhamma and you come from a Suttanta-only education. You interpret based solely on suttas and what you experience based on your own interpretation(s). They will change. We can see these types of people a mile away. I hope you can learn about Abhidhamma and benefit from this group that is much different than what you are used to. However, try to learn the classical Theravāda way rather than teaching the Suttanta interpretation way. We separated for a reason, and we do things differently. Try to read the FAQ.

14

Vinnana is that knows. That is a function of citta/mind. Depending on what the mind knows, it is given different names, so there are 121 types of citta. But that does not make citta different. Citta is just citta, regardless of the names. So, when the mind is not associated with akusala-cetasika(s), it is pure. When citta knows magga and nibbana, it is lokuttara-citta.

I have given you a Pali text previously:

“Cetanāhaṁ bhikkhave kammam vadāmi
Cetayitvā kammaṁ karoti kāyena, vācyāa, manasā”

A rough translation: Cetana is kamma, so there are three types of kamma: kaya-kamma, vaci-kamma, mano-kamma.

Sankhara (activity) with intention is kamma (volition) - as explained in Sankhāra in Theravada Buddhism.

Craving (tanha) is an akusala-cetasika. When it is active (associated with the mind), it is a mano-sankhara (or mano-kamma).

15

You are mixing words and interchanging them…
Also, saṅkhārakkhandha exists in all cittas including vipāka cittas. Saṅkhārakkhandha exists in an Arahant. An Arahant does not make kamma.

16

Vinnana is the 6th element, the element that’s neither matter nor space, that’s normally based on/emulates some matter. The element that forms whenever we experience some sensation. The element all mental objects are made of.

The function of the mind is to think, and thinking is the process of fabricating ideas for us to experience, to experience them in our consciousness that forms whenever we have something to experience.

And craving is the fuel for existence, the only way to create more energy. Remember when Buddha, after achieving his goal, released his life energy and said that creating more would have been improper for an arahant? Because, indeed, they don’t make kamma. And must rely on what they have.

17

Would you let me know what these elements are?

Vinnana is vinnanakkhandha - the consciousness aggregate - one of the five aggregates, which every living being comprises.

Space is physical/rupa - which is counted among the other four elements (mahabhuta ).

Vinnana is the mind/citta - one of the four mental aggregates, which are collectively known as ‘nama’.

Vinnana knows.

Thinking is sankhara, (sankharakkhandha) as a mental activity.

Existence of Nibbana is for our freedom. Existence of nama and rupa is for our fetters.

Craving is a cetasika. Whe one craves, this is sankhara (mental activity). When a cetasika arises, it is mental formation/activity/fabrication (sankhara).

18

Sankharakhandha (mental activity) is one of the five aggregates, which every living being is made of. Every living being consists of citta, cetasika and rupa, except the arupa-brahma.

The five khandas [Chapter 2]

The fifty-two kinds of cetasika are classified as three khandhas: a cetasika which is feeling (vedana) is classified as one khandha, the vedanakkhandha; a cetasika which is perception (sanna) is classified as one khandha, the sannakkhandha; as regards the other tiny cetasikas, they are classified all together as one khandha, the sankharakkhandha. For example, in sankharakkhandha are included the following cetasikas: ‘intention’ (cetana), attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa), ignorance (moha), lovingkindness (metta), generosity (alobha) and wisdom (panna). Sankharakkhandha is sometimes translated as ‘activities’ or ‘mental formations’.

19

Would you let me know what these elements are?

The elements of earth, water, fire, air, space, and consciousness?

Vinnana is the mind/citta - one of the four mental aggregates, which are collectively known as ‘nama’.

But the separation is clean and obvious?

Vinnana is our consciousness in which we experience 6 types of experience.

While the mind is a system existing outside of our consciousness, a system that keeps working when we aren’t conscious, a system that is mostly invisible to us.

Like how when we discover a difficult problem and wish to know the solution, something invisible to our consciousness forms and begins working on finding it. And, sometimes, this process can be instantaneous. Other times, it takes hours or days, and we no longer even remember we wanted to know the solution by the time our mind finishes its calculations.

Which is why Buddha said that that which fabricates sensations is 1 skandha, and that which experiences is a different skandha. And the 5 include everything that exists, everything that can be experienced.

And the suttas teach that sankhara, unlike nama, keep functioning outside of our consciousness, which should be why they aren’t listed among nama like the mental aggregates.

Existence of Nibbana is for our freedom. Existence of nama and rupa is for our fetters.

Here, to exist is to experience. How does experiencing work? You can wish to sense your leg, and you will experience it… Until your ‘intention’ runs out of energy. The stronger, the longer you wish - the longer you will keep experiencing it. This is a basic example of continued existence. And to achieve it, we have to either steal energy from some other past experience, or to generate it by craving.

21

hi Jbgrim

This is somewhat nonsensical.

Vinnana (citta, mano) is consciousness. And it arises and ceases instantly, then a new consciousness arises to take an object.