Hi Nina,

>
> > Like a bird first has to exert
> > itself and later has not to exert itself. In the same way is the
> > exertion
> > vitakko and the spreading of wings is vicaro (Petakopadesa,
> > Khuddaka Nikaya,
> > PTS p. 142)
> --------
> N: Usually vitakka and vicaara arise together. Except in the case of
> the second jhana of the fivefold system. Then vitakka (which is more
> coarse) is abandoned, but vicaara still accompoanies the jhaanacitta.
> Some meditators can abandon vitakka and vicaara at the second stage
> of jhaana, and for them there are four stages of jhaana. That is the
> meaning of the fourfold system or the fivefold system of jhaana.

Nina, I am aware of your abhidhamma approach - still, I do believe
that the answer to the meaning of vitakka and vicara is not mysterious
nor was it necessary for a farmer at the time of the Buddha listening
to his suttas to understand the meaning of these words. Why should
vitakka not stand for "a thought". Agreed, "vitakka" does not stand
for "wild" or "discursive" thinking...but then the Buddha would have
used different pali words (for instance 'papanca') if he meant that.

Having said that, anyone can experience the effect of a repeated,
concentrated thought like

"in, out" ... "in, out" ... "in, out"

or

"buddho" ... "buddho"

IMHO there seems to be no need for scholastic interpretation to try to
explain vitakka/vicara as something which sounds more like a mental
object (dhamma) and the experiencing consciousness (mano-vinnyana) as
I understand it from your description below.

To me the terms "vitakka" and "vicara" had originally (in the suttas,
in the jhana descriptions) no "metaphysical" or "paramattha" meaning
whatsoever. They are just practical conventional terms explaining your
down-to-earth experience when the jhanas set in.

If you picture in your mind (or actually watch) how an eagle soars in
the sky... it comes pretty close to the experience of jhanas!

First there is exertion and vitakka/vicara (the thought keeping the
mind on its object and vicara its ability to stay/glide with the
meditation topic) and eventually there is no exertion only gliding.

>
> The dictionaries give many translations of vitakka and vicaara and it
> depends on the individual which word he prefers. Most important is to
> understand their different characteristics and functions.
> We should not be misled by the word 'thinking' as we use it in
> conventional language.

this is where I disagree, see above. Not every term ever used by the
Buddha is non-conventional. In fact, except for dependent origination
/ six senses / five groups of grasping which denote and describe a
very deep fundamental level of understanding moment to moment
experience - most of the terms the Buddha uses are "conventional".
After all, his intention was to be understood by as many people as
possible without having to resort to some kind of "secret" message
(involving years of theoretical studies). Even terms describing the
dependent origination are as "conventional" as possible (think:
name-and-form, upadana>'fuel') so that people can get a very good
understanding of these characteristics as easy as possible.

> Different similes are used to show the characteristics and functions
> of these two cetasikas. They accompany citta and perform their
> functions just for the exteremely short duration of one citta.

Yes, but isn't this true for every moment of life. This is such a
fundamental aspect of experience that it is not limited to vitakka and
vicara. If you will, its like looking at two leaves and saying that
they are made out of carbon. True, but the same is true for all other
dhammas. It does not describe what these two leaves are *used for* -
which is establishing a jhanic concentration.

> arise and fall away together with the citta they accompany. When we
> read the similes it seems that first vitakka arises and then vicaara,
> but this is not so.

I have never seen a bird who does not combine flapping his wings with
using that forward thrust to glide on the air....well, granted,
hummingbirds have a harder time concentrating than eagles (with regard
to this simile) ;-) ... but the same is true for us
meditators...sometimes just a few times recollecting the Buddha with a
determined thought like "buddho" is enough and suddenly vicara widens
and the jhana-experience unfolds...sometimes our mind feels like a
hummingbird...vicara is weak and the other jhana factors (...which are
descriptions of a concentrated mind, not describing any "ultimate
reality") are not established.



The similes merely show their differences.

> Each citta experiences an object. Vitakka hits or touches the object
> and vicaara keeps the citta anchored on that object, but only for one
> short moment. They assist the citta in knowing its object, just for
> that moment.

I guess it boils down to this: Every of these so-called "cetasikas" or
other abhidhamma elements could be boiled down to the 5 groups of
graspings (or six sense experience or dependent origination)

In your above statement it seems you talk about vinyana-and nama rupa.
Isn't the language the Buddha uses a very pragmatic one? So when
trying to describe what happens to us when we embark on an insight
journey the Buddha would use these terms but when talking about jhana
he would use other (not that subtle) terms.

To make a long story short, when trying to show the method of
establishing a concentrated mind, vitakka and vicara make sense. In
ultimate reality - even his
vitakka/vicara/piti/sukha/upekkha/soka/parideva/etc etc.
are all fundamentally either
mental,visual,sound,taste,smell,touch-experiences...worth letting go
off.

lots of metta,

Lennart