Re: sutta 7: the vaggas

> 'Citta' is turning out to be quite complicated word! Maybe it would
be
> easier to think of 'citta' in the meaning of 'it knows (distinctly)'
as the
> main one and to think of the other two meanings as supplementary
ones to
> think about. If it were all in Sanskrit, this would not work so well
as we
> would have to use the spelling 'citra' for the last two meanings.
But Pali
> homonymy makes it possible to speak of all three cittas as if they
were the
> same word when in fact they're derived from 3 separate roots.
>
> I'm really unclear about 'citta' in the third meaning relating to
> picture/painting. The problem is with the other meanings such as
> 'variegated' and Amara's 'intricate'. Which comes earlier? Did the
notion of
> picture come out of the idea of intricateness or was it the other
way
> around? I should point out that 'creating/painting a picture' is
only one
> interpretation of 'cittakara.na'. Another one is 'make/render
> variegated/intricate/elaborate'.
>
> Is it citta because of its intricateness or because of its
picture-nature?
> Is is citta because of its nature of making intricate or because of
its
> nature of creating a picture?
> <snip (for Amara)>

Dear Jim

I am almost certain the first motivations to paint or create any art
was man's attachment to his experiences: ie through the intricacy of
his citta he first perceives and then becomes attached to all the
arammana. Then in his attachment to the self, and therefore all that
the self experiences as something pertaining to the self, as 'this is
what I see,' etc. there probably comes the idea of 'keeping this for
later, too' and therefore attempt at duplication.  Without first
seeing an object, would one even know what it is like, much less
become attached to it enough to make a souvenir of it, not trusting
one's memory?  Or perhaps to show others what one had seen?  In any
case the seeing comes first, the noting of all the different details
to be captured to keep, or to share, or even to show off.  (Although
in its creating other arts as well as itself as anantara paccaya it
might increase its creative accumulations as well.  The first quality
doesn't exclude the second, though not vice-versa)  As in an ancient
quote, 'citta leads the world…'

Am I being graded, sir?

Amara



> >Jim, thanks also for enclosing the good article from
> >the other pali list... well, we both clocked up many
> >years of latin at school and I'm wondering how, apart
> >from understanding the noun declensions more easily,
> >it helps and what Latin and Pali/Sanskrit originally
> >had in common? (v.brief is fine...) This is the sort
> >of info I hear and forget and ask again 5 or 10yrs
> >later!
>
> I took three years of Latin in high-school and that was over 35
years ago!
> I've long thought of Greek and Latin as being the Western
counterparts of
> Sanskrit and Pali. I have studied a bit of classical Greek and
notice that
> it is more elaborate than Latin with similarities to Sanskrit. One
thing
> they all have in common is that they are quite old languages not
normally
> spoken nowadays. How else a knowledge of Latin can help one in
learning
> Pali is something I haven't thought about before and too a hard one
for me
> to answer in a short time.
>
> These languages including English all belong to the same family of
> Indo-European languages and it is thought that they originally come
from one
> common ancestral language now extinct (at least on the terrestrial
plane).
>
> Best wishes,
> Jim