Thanks again, Nina.

I discovered that the phrase in question (saa pana cittassa, na attano) is
found, besides
at DhsA 372, but also at Nm (Mahaniddesa) 1:212. At VbhA it appears as saa
pana
cittassa, na sattassaati. As you say this is a matter of language levels.

Metta,

Piya Tan

On 7/2/07, Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Piya,
> I am glad you bring this up.
> Moha is different from wrong view, di.t.thi.
> As you say, the root moha is present with every akusala citta. It is
> the same as avijjaa. It is the opposite of vijjaa, understanding.
> Moha conceals the danger of akusala. It is darkness, concealing what
> is akusala and what is kusala.
> Lobha, dosa and moha are the three unwholesome roots for the
> different types of akusala cittas.
>
> Wrong view, di.t.thi is a wrong interpretation of realities. It takes
> them for permanent and self. Di.t.thi is different from moha and it
> is not a root, muula. Moha conditions wrong view and accompanies it,
> but moha and di.t.thi are different realities. Moha is ignorant of
> the true nature of realities but it has no view about them, whereas
> di.t.thi has wrong view about them, it is a twisted view. Di.t.thi
> arises only with lobha-muulacitta, with four types of the eight
> types. There is also clinging when there is wrong view.
> Conceit, maana, is clinging to the importance of 'oneself'. This may
> arise when one compares oneself with others, but also when there is
> no comparing.
> There is moha, ignorance, with maana, but there is no di.t.thi at the
> same time. Maana, when it arises, does so with the types of lobha-
> muulacittas that are without wrong view.
>
> When the word 'self' is used in self-advertisement this is expressed
> in common language (vohaara). That is why it was said: <saa pana
> cittassa na attano>.This was added so that people would not be misled
> by the word self. Conceit pertains to the citta, one clings to the
> importance of 'one's' citta. There is no wrong view of self. The
> Sotaapanna has eradicated wrong view, but he still has conceit. Only
> the arahat has eradicated conceit.
> Thanks for asking about the summer here: rainy, but behind the clouds
> is always the sun.
> Nina.
> Op 1-jul-2007, om 11:45 heeft Piya Tan het volgende geschreven:
>
> > Or, is moha only an aspect of avijjaa, then? I don't think the Suttas
> > distinguish them.
> >
> > SECONDLY, concerning "Wrong vew and conceit have different objects,
> > they
> > never go toigether."
> >
> > Please give a few examples. Isn't conceit rooted in wrong view, one
> > of the
> > three
> > primary unwholesome roots.
> >
> > Thanks again for your time. I hope you are having a good summer in the
> > Nederland.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
The Minding Centre
Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr)
Singapore 650644
Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]