Hello Nina,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I have been trying to work
out the difference between "sense contact" and "contact." It seems to
me that you are saying (please correct me if I'm wrong) that the main
reason this would be a bad translation is due to :
"jhaanacitta and lokuttara citta that have
nothing to do with the sense objects."
However, would it be correct to say, that if we do take the mind to be a "sixth" sense base so to speak, that even these cittas could be seen as sense objects? If I understand things correctly, where there is contact, there must be a sense base,a sense object, and the consciousness that arises in relation to the base and object. In the case of jhaanacitta then, the base must be the mind and therefore can't we call it the "sixth" sense-base. If this is true, does it just boil down to you preferring to not call the mind a "sixth" sense? I am really just trying to understand your position here before I make any decision. I admit I still don't understand your position. Thank you for any further clarification.
Metta,
Alan
Nina van Gorkom wrote:
>Hello Alan,
>op 19-09-2005 03:38 schreef Alan McClure op alanmcclure3@...:
> Perhaps you could explain to me a bit
>
>
>>more about the difference between "contact" and "sense contact." The
>>sutta speaks of the six sense-bases (including the mind) and then the
>>contact related to those six senses.
>>
>>
>N: I know that some translators count the mind as a sense and speak of six
>senses.
>The aayatanas, translated as sensebases: the inner aayatanas are the five
>sense organs and manaayatana or mind-base, including all cittas, and then
>the outer aayatanas: the sense objects and dhammaayatana, mind objects.
>I would like to distinguish between the five sense organs which are bases
>and doorways for the relevant cittas arising in a sense-door process and the
>mind-door which is the last bhavangacitta arising before the mind-door
>process begins. Thus, the mind-door is mental.
>There are sense-door processes of cittas which experience visible object and
>the other sense objects and there are mind-door processes of cittas which
>experience: the sense objects, further the ruupas which can be experienced
>only through the mind-door, mental phenomena (cittas and cetasikas),
>nibbaana and concepts. Thus, any object can be experienced through the
>mind-door.
>--------
>
>A: To me this allows us to call it
>
>
>>sense-contact. Since the mind is a sense, then thought (a very general
>>term) would also be sensed by the mind, or as you say, "contact arises
>>with thinking."
>>
>>
>------
>N: When we speak about thinking, cittas arising in a mind-door process can
>think of concepts such as persons, events, things.
>Contact, phassa cetasika, is a universal, sabbacitta-saadhaaranaa, it
>accompanies each citta and performs its fucntion of touching (phusana) the
>object, whatever it may be.
>If one translates phassa as contact it is more general and it can serve for
>all cittas. We have to think of jhaanacitta and lokuttara citta that have
>nothing to do with the sense objects.
>If you compare with Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka, he translates phassa
>as: sensorial or mental impression. He refers to M.9.
>Nina.
>
>
>
>
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>[Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
>[Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
>[Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
>Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
>Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>