[cubibobi]

This is about the most recent post:

Arising of the Five Aggregates With an Ārammaṇa

Thank you for another wonderful post, and it clears up the meaning of one word for me: ārammaṇa.

I had been thinking of ārammaṇa as “thought object” in the sense of “object of our thought”, something that is “out there”. But it’s actually mental and unique to the perceiver.

Elsewhere in the site you’ve written about a saṅkhata, and that may be considered something “out there”?

Take the example in #2 of person X and his co-worker (let’s call the co-worker A). A himself “in reality” is a saṅkhata. However, X never perceives “A the saṅkhata” (that is “out there”), but he perceives only “A the ārammaṇa” in his own mind.

Let’s say further that X shares an office with Y, who is friendly with A. Then from “A the saṅkhata” comes 2 different “A the ārammaṇa“, one for X and one for Y. Is that right?

In #6 you explain how saññā works with the aid of the manasikāra cetasika, and that saññā is loosely translated to “perception”. It looks to me like the English word “perception” is equivalent to saññā + manasikāra.

In #8, you explain the making of a “cittaja rupa” or the “mental picture”. Is “cittaja rupa” another way of saying “ārammaṇa“? Or does a cittaja rupa arise because of an ārammaṇa?

Thank you!
Lang

[Lal]

Hello Lang,

Another way to think about ārammaṇa is “whatever the mind is focusing on”.
– If you are looking at a picture, that picture is the ārammaṇa.
– If you are thinking about a mathematical problem, that is the ārammaṇa at that time, etc.
– So, an ārammaṇa can be anything that comes through any one of the six senses.

A saṅkhata means “some entity that came to existence”.
– Normally a saṅkhata comes into existence due to saṅkhara. That is a very deep meaning.
– Think about it this way. “sankhara paccaya vinnana” eventually leads to jati. The “arising of ANYTHING” is due to sankhara. That may not be obvious right away.
– But, you see, vinnana is also a sankhata, “an entity prepared via sankhara”.

As we know sankhara (mano, vaci, and kaya sankhara) are our thoughts. Read the most recent posts again and you will see that.

We are getting into deep fundamentals. But it is not hard if you can make the connections to real life.

You wrote: “In #6 you explain how saññā works with the aid of the manasikāra cetasika, and that saññā is loosely translated to “perception”. It looks to me like the English word “perception” is equivalent to saññā + manasikāra.’
– That is true. In fact, all 7 universal cetasika that arise with ANY citta work in collaboration. Vedana arises because one has recognized the arammana. As you pointed out that recognition (sanna) cannot happen without the manasikara cetasika. A citta cannot arise if the life is not there, i.e., jivitindriya. A coherent citta would not form unless the ekaggata cetasika is there, etc.

You asked: “In #8, you explain the making of a “cittaja rupa” or the “mental picture”. Is “cittaja rupa” another way of saying “ārammaṇa“? Or does a cittaja rupa arise because of an ārammaṇa?”
– A cittaja rupa arises DUE TO an ārammaṇa.
– Cittaja rupa is the mind’s own version (replica) of the external rupa. For example, person X’s enemy will form a “bad replica of X” in his mind. On the other hand, person X’s wife or a child will form a “good replica of X” in their minds.
– Another important fact is that what we “see” is really that cittaja rupa formed in the mind. At the beginning of the post, “How Do We See? – Role of the Gandhabba” the question was asked: “How does the brain “see” the tree using that chemical/electrical signal?” What we “see” is that cittaja rupa, the replica created by the mind! If you read that post now, it will become clear.

[Author]

Posts