Reply To: Kiriya Citta


Let me explain what I understand, I’ll ask questions in the middle of writing it.

The discussion of citta vithi deals with very subtle context, so we should beware of making correspond to events of everyday life in haste. There is an infinite gap of the unit of time between citta vithi level analogy and phenomena that we observe in our daily life. We should remember that citta vithi is an extremely microscopic event.

According to the new figure, the given form of citta vithi can present the flow from Avyakata PS to Akusala mula PS. There is a new system of explanation, which is deep and detailed, that gives me a new analytic method and other insights. Based on votthapana citta, before cittas are related to purana kamma, and after are related to nava kamma. Purana kamma is the initial kamma without javana citta so it can not have more than a certain level of kammic energy. Therefore, it can not make any extension of samsara. On the other hand, nava kamma has javana citta so it makes kammic energy which can make an extension of samsara. It also can reinforce existing sangati further, and make kamma bhava which can bring vipaka back in the future.

Q1. Could purana kamma have some minor kammic energy because of existing sangati?

Q2. What is the citta vithi only a purana kamma arises? Does it fall under one of the two below? Or does neither?

(a). AB BC BU PD CV Sam San V B B B B B B B T T -> Q3

(b). AB BC BU PD CV Sam San V K K K K K K K T T -> Q4

Q3. If purana kamma is only related to Avyakata PS, then the citta vithi (a) progresses by only Avyakata PS without Akusala mula PS?

But I think that the purana kamma arises by (a) is nonsense. Because seven cittas(AB BC BU PD CV Sam San) are all mano sankhara. None of those can have vitakka or vicara. So they can not be vaci sankhara. But thinking about changing the subway doesn’t seem like nava kamma. Thus, if the answer to Q2 is (a), there are two main possible cases that I see. The first is that there is a third type of kamma, which is neither the nava kamma nor the puruna kamma, which can explain it. The second is there is some error in the way of description currently given.

Q4. If purana kamma is only related to Avyakata PS, then the citta vithi (b) progresses by only Avyakata PS without Akusala mula PS?

In this case, I am curious about whether non-Arahant can make kiriya citta. I heard the current interpretation of Abhidhamma in traditional Theravada teaches that only Arahant can make kiriya citta. Is it also contamination of the late commentary?

Let me rearrange what I understand. This may be an error because it involves my own reasoning without reading Lal’s explanation of the upcoming post yet. If there is an error here, please point it out.

(a). AB BC BU PD CV Sam San V B B B B B B B T T 

(b). AB BC BU PD CV Sam San V K K K K K K K T T

(c). AB BC BU PD CV Sam San V J J J J J J J T T

All citta vithi describes an event in mind on a very detailed level.

The case of (a) describes the process in daily life that we just pass by many visual objects as soon as we experience them. We don’t really respond to them.

The case of (b) describes when we look at a visual object and do something, but it only acts in a neutral way. Like cleaning a blackboard or turning off a light. (purana kamma)

The case of (c) describes when we look at a visual object, attach it and generate kamma that can bring vipaka in the future. This case applies to apunna and punna abhisankhara. (nava kamma)

About #3, Lal said that a kusala kamma cannot be described by the above picture. In my opinion, it seems reasonable because javana citta can only be abhisankhara. So kusala kamma can never be done by javana citta. I guess that there is a different type of citta vithi unlike above, which can present kusala kamma properly.

And I have something to tell you about this topic. Mr. Hojan asked me to write the following in English. He expressed concern about deleting posts of kusala PS. He thinks there is no problem with the current explanations of Kusala PS.

He understands as follows.

The six root causes(lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha) can be distinguished into two groups: lokiya and lokuttara. Of course, the lobha, dosa, and moha are only lokiya. Those cause the papa kamma. 

The lokiya alobha, adosa, and amoha cause punna kamma and akusala kamma(in the meaning of NOT kusala kamma in kusala PS).

Therefore, lokiya alobha, adosa, and amoha is just a low level of lobha, dosa, and moha actually.

So lokiya alobha, adosa, and amoha can correspond to raga, patigha, and avijja.

In the same way, the lokuttara alobha can be considered as lokuttara raga. Of course, the lokuttara alobha, adosa, and amoha cause kusala kamma.

So he thinks that the javana citta can present making kusala kamma because it’s consistent with the definition of that concept. (arising with raga, dosa, or moha)

I would like to approach Hojan’s thoughts carefully. I am reviewing whether the above interpretation of root causes is a somewhat too expansive understanding of the context of the concept. I’d like you to explain how should I understand it.