1. What is the vinnana (consciousness)?
     One cannot find the mind (citta) within the objectified consciousness (vinnana) nor could one find a consciousness which has become ‘unestablished’, for the very meaning of consciousness itself in Buddhism is that it resides within and is codependent upon other for its very existence and definition. [SN 2.104] “The consciousness turns and processions back, it goes no further than namo-rupa (name and form).” Citta (mind) imbued with avijja (nescience) is inchoate by means of the causeless condition (initially) of avijja, wherein the citta manifests itself as a mutable phenomena which is corporeally consubstantial, that being vinnana (consciousness) therein name and form (namo-rupa, psycho-physicality) are contacted. Reflective, agnosis, a-vijja, and inchoate are all terms which define the very meaning of vinnana (as it is by its own definition [Vi (re-‘flective’) nana (gnosis]). The immutable nonphenomenal citta is that mind which is Self-same (samma’) or inherently cohate with itself given wisdom’s fruition and perfection of the jhanic method.  Technically, according to sutta, it is the citta which transmigrates (sandhavati). [DN 1.81; Saggathavagga-Att. 1.184]; but the vinnana as the reflective and consubstantial citta which re-incarnates or re-invigorates the psycho-physical therein denoting an entity [MN 1.296, Dhp. #41]. Inchoate mind (citta + nescience) inevitably leads  manifestation as vinnana within and upon name and form, thereby manifesting and identifying with a new entity bound to samsara and conjoined within a closed loop of composite flux whose nature is change and suffering by definition. Just as both the light of the sun and the light of the moon are one and the same (one subjective [citta] and one objective and reflective [vinnana]) one is immutable while the other is mutable, therein ignorant beings are unable to differentiate a subject from its attributers and still designate ‘sunlight’ as differentiated from ‘moonlight’. The wave (vinnana) has both shape and form (namo-rupa) and is a ‘defilement’ of water (citta) such that it arises, in addition to being dependent upon water, as its attributes, for its very existence. Water however, as a first without a second, in this analogy, is inherently both the subject and unattributed “ground” of being. Ultimately there are only three things which are at the same time one actuosity alone, that being the mutable phenomenal (namo-rupa or reflective mind (vinnana) or attributes bourn of avijja, or conventional ‘self’), the mutable nonphenomenal (inchoate mind leading to vinnana, mind imbued with the condition of avijja), and the immutable nonphenomenal (choate or coherent mind imbued with gnosis bourn of insight and wisdom’s fruition, which is Soulhood, Sammavimutta, ‘Selfhood’, or True-nature [svabhava]). When examined, all things as well as perfection and transmigration (samsara) are bourne by the sheer actuosity of mind’s productivity alone which is either driven by possession with the conditionless attribute of nescience imbued upon the unmanifest citta to one degree or another or its absence altogether (Selfhood).
      So, firstly, how does suttta define the vinnana? [SN 3.45] “Vinnana is impermanent. What is impermanent is suffering.” [SN 3.61] “The Aryan Eightfold Path is for making cessation of Vinnana,…that being sammaditthi….sammasamadhi.” [SN 3.195] “Vinnana is Mara (evil), and at [SN 3.196 among thousands of other occurrences] vinnana is anatta (not the Soul).” [SN 2.249] “What do you think Rahula, is form, feelings perception, impulses, experience, and consciousness permanent or impermanent? Impermanent venerable Lord! Seeing thusly Rahula, the Aryan disciple has but disgust towards form, feelings, perfections, impulses and consciousness.” [SN 2.66] “When one does not incline to, nor mentates (ceteti), nor decides upon, and is without a tendency towards (phenomena); therein there is no basis (arammanam) establishment for consciousness (to exist).” This passage shows the active mind (ceteti) is prior to and the basis (arammanam) for consciousness to find a foothold in namo-rupa.” [SN 2.91] “Consciousness is compared to the sap of a tree (sava, or oozing, i.e. taints) which goes upwards into the tree which leads to fruit (transmigration).” [SN 2.104] “When name and form is manifest so too is consciousness; consciousness has name and form for its condition.” [MN 1.292] “Consciousness, consciousness it is said friend. Relative to what is the word consciousness spoken? It discerns, it discerns friend. This is what consciousness is said to be. What does it discriminate? It discriminates pleasures, suffering, and neither suffering nor pleasure.” [SN 3.87] “And why is it called consciousness? It discerns, hence it is called consciousness. It discerns sourness, bitterness, pungentness, sweetness, sharpness, etc.” [Patisambhidamagga-Att. 1.98] “Mind is to be reflected upon by gnosis. Consciousness (merely) discerns.” [MN 1.293] “What is the difference, friend, between wisdom and consciousness; in these two that are presently conjoined, not disconjoined? The difference, friend, between wisdom and consciousness; in these two that are presently conjoined, not disconjoined is that wisdom is to be made to grow whereas consciousness is only to be fully comprehended.” [MN 1.293] “Feelings, perceptions and consciousness are conjoined not disconjoined. It is impossible to discern any one of them from another to describe the difference between them since what one feels one perceives, and what one perceives one discriminates.” [DN 3.228] “For places for consciousness to become fixed. 1. in form 2. in feelings 3. in perceptions 4. and in experiences.” [DN 3. 243] “Six types of consciousness. 1. eye-consciousness 2. ear 3. nose 4. tongue 5. body 6. and mental-consciousness (manovinnana).” [SN 2.104] “The consciousness turns and processions back, it goes no further than namo-rupa (name and form).” [SN 2.104 footnote #177 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p.777] “It is possible the bodhisatta had been seeking a self of the Upanishadic type, a self-subsistent subject consisting of pure consciousness (mine: which would be a visuddhiya-vinnnana which is a philosophical impossibility) that requires nothing but itself in order to exist. His discovery that consciousness is invariably dependent on name and form would have disclosed to him the futility of such a quest and thereby shown that even consciousness, the subtlest basis for a sense of self (incorrect, grand error), is conditioned and thus marked by anicca, dukkha, and anatta.” Once again the Theravada fail to realize the codependent nature of consciousness and that its negation in sutta as a perdurable and autonomous entity in no way negates the incorporeal mind which is freed (vimutta) from the five attributes of corporeal and aggregated existence within samsara. [MN 1.141] “What do you suppose, followers, if people were carrying off into the Jeta grove bunches of sticks, grasses, branches, and leaves and did with them as they wished or burned them up, would it occur to you: These people are carrying us off, are doing as they please with us, and are burning us? No, indeed not Lord. And how so? Because Lord, none of that is our Soul, nor what our Soul subsists upon! Just so followers, what is not who you are, do away with it, when you have made done with that, it will lead to your bliss and welfare for as long as time lasts. What is that which is not who you are? Form, followers, is not who you are, neither are sensations, perceptions, experiences, nor consciousness.”

2. The Vinnana or the citta as transmigrant.
     Now to examine the citta and the vinnana and discern which one is the true transmigrant, if any, and why there is so much confusion. [SN 4.400]  “At that time, Vaccha, when a being has laid down this body, and that being (satto) has not yet taken up another (annataram) body (kayam) in rebirth (anupapanno); therein I declare [that beings] fuel to be thirstfulness (tanhupadanam). At that time, Vaccha, I declare [the being’s] fuel to be thirstfulness.” Bhikkhu Bodhi’s footnote to this passage says: [SN 4.00 footnote #382 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p.382] “The Buddha’s statement seems to imply a temporal gap can intervene between the death moment and reconception. Since this contradicts Theravada orthodoxy (hilarious note of being crestfallen)…Atthakatha contends that at the death moment itself the being is said to be ‘not yet reborn’ because the rebirth-consciousness has not yet arisen.” In actuality here, Bhikkhu Bodhi is lying in saying that the Atthakatha mentions a “rebirth-consciousness (vinnana)”, but in fact the Atthakatha in question says: [SN 4.400-Att. (3.114)] “pat.isandhicittassa” or “the reestablished i.e. transmigrant mind (citta)”. Theravada attempts to reinvent Buddhism to accord with its own anti-foundational and materialistic views within the Milindapanha (non-Buddhistic work) at: [Milinda #40] “Just so O’ king, is the continuity of a person or thing maintained. One comes into being, another passes away; and the rebirth is simultaneous.” This simile of Samsaric ‘rebirth’ is explained as ‘one flame to another’ without gap or interim which is not the view of Nikayan (presectarian) Buddhism. The admission by Theravada of an autonomous entity which, after death, is in between khandic psycho-physical (corporeal) involvement is altogether too much for Theravada to admit to since this would be a full rejection of Theravada itself i.e. Abhidhammic dogmatic nihilism which runs contrary to and opposite that of the Nikayas themselves. Any philosopher worth a nickel might presume to ask the materialistic Theravada if “the fire lights itself, like unto a spontaneous and causeless combustion.” The supreme-man who is immeasurable in sutta, which would signify him who is cittavimutta (emancipated in mind) is signified in the following passage as the unseen, or unmanifest consciousness: [DN 1.223] “You ask where phenomena cease without remainder. On the contrary one should ask the question as such: Where do the elements find no establishment? How is it that name and form are wholly destroyed? With a consciousness that is unmanifest (anidassanam), one is incalculable (anantam, without end) and from every angle (sabbato) unobjectified (pabhavo). This is where the elements find no establishment. That is where name and form are wholly destroyed.”
     The one passage everyone seems to quote, in opposition and hatred to the notion durable and incorporeal transmigrant is the Majjhima Nikaya passage often referred to as “Sati’s heresy”; but in closer philosophical examination its well evident why Sati commits an error in presuming that the consubstantial aggregate of vinnana (consciousness) is the transmigrant. This is the often quoted “Sati’s heresy” passage: [MN 1.258] “As I understand the Lord’s Dhamma as he has instructed it, it is this very consciousness that transmigrates (sandhavati) through samsara and not another. What is this consciousness that you speak of Sati? Lord, it is that which talks, interacts, and feels here and there the results of good or bad Karma (sassatavada heresy, or codependent perpetualism devoid of positing a nexus of impetus and origination). Ignorant fool, who are you to say I have ever instructed the Dhamma in such a fashion as which you say? You ignorant fool, have I not said many times that contingently manifested is consciousness, since without a contingent factor consciousness cannot come to be?” The suttic explanations for the notion of consciousness an “inter-aggregate” transmigrant is as follows: [Nida’navagga-Att. 2.55] “The reestablished consciousness is contingent; the reestablished consciousness is dependent upon name and form.” [Pat.isambhida’magga-Att. 1.111] “The impressed and fixed (thita) consciousness is reestablished consciousness (pat.isandhiviñña’n.assa).” [Suttanipata-Att. 1.277] “Karma is the field, consciousness is the seed [also at: AN 3.77, AN 1.223]; this is meant that the reestablished consciousness devoid of karma is no longer a seed.” The seed planted is the seed impressed within the field of the world. That which impresses is itself apart from the impression which is composite and contingent upon that which it is impressed upon, namely namo-rupa. [Nida’navagga-Att. 2.115] “How is it that one discerns how consciousness has come out, how it comes to be? By antecedent-insight of the consciousness is how the reestablished consciousness is discerned. Hence the reestablished consciousness as contingent is seen as to how it comes out, how it comes to be (established), that by antecedent-insight is seen the foundation of consciousness.” [Nida’navagga-Att. 2.26] “Consciousness is the basis for the reestablishment of namo-rupa, thus is said ‘reestablished consciousnesses.” The error Sati makes is in presuming that the vinnana transmigrates (sandhavati), rather than understanding the Buddha’s position [SN 3.53] which is that the vinnana either becomes established or it does not, dependent upon a preset order of conditions originating with avijja (nescience) which is inherent and causeless. Being codependent upon namo-rupa, it is impossible for the aggregate of vinnana to transmigrate (sandhavati) but it is not a heresy to claim that vinnana itself is that which gives animation, shape and form to the inanimate matter we deem to be “ourselves” which is merely ‘self’ (psycho-physical), but confused with The Self (attan, Soul) by the ignorant and layfolk whom Gotama often encounters and rebukes.
     The heresy of vinnana, which is both actor and acted upon is a perpetualism duality which Sati proclaims as well as most others whom Gotama encounters: [SN 2.113] “Consciousness is not created by oneself (sayam), nor is it created by another, nor has it arisen by chance, being created neither by oneself or another, but rather with name and form as the contingency, consciousness has come to be (the reciprocal is also true in sutta).” [SN 2.17] “This world is carried on by a duality (dvayanissito); which are: #1. ‘Being (sat, atthiti [views of either sabbamatthi ‘the all is entirety’, and sabbamekattan ‘the all is one’s Soul’ [SN 2.77] both are heresies of perpetualism])’ and #2. ‘Nonbeing (asat, natthiti [views of either sabbamnatthi ‘the all is ultimately not’ (atomism), and sabbam puthuttan ‘the all is merely composite (atoms)’ [SN 2.77] both are heresies of Annihilationism])’”.
     It is clear enough that the citta which is impressed upon the womb of the being to be “reestablished” in this world is none other than the vinnana. Errors made by C.A.F. Rhys Davids, G.C. Pande and others have mistaken the following passages with an older ‘pre-khandhic’ or ‘proto-buddhism’ which runs contrary to the “five aggregates as anicca, dukkha, and anatta” standard in sutta, however, just like the “unestablished vinnana” passages, nothing more intricate is posited in [DN .263] and [MN 1.296] and others passages like it than  the codependent and reflective citta, as vinnana, is the point of animation as well as the point of its departure marking the time of death. [DN 2.63] “If consciousness did not come (established) into the mother’s womb, would namo-rupa come to be? No Lord. If consciousness had come into the womb of the mother and then divert away from it, would then namo-rupa come to renewed reincarnation? No Lord, it would not.” [MN 1.261] “Followers, there are four nourishments for those beings who have come to be as they are and for those who are about to emerge. Material food, either course or fine firstly, contact as second, mentation by the mind as third, and consciousness as fourth.” [SN 2.11] “What four things are the basis for the maintenance of beings here or about to be established? Food and nutriment, contact, mentation, and lastly consciousness.” The ‘stream of consciousness’ passage so often referred to means nothing other, according to atthakatha, than the vinnana which is perpetually reestablished by the fool in samsara, and is likened to a “stream”, but not that consciousness itself is an unbroken stream in the absolute sense that vinnana itself is the transmigrant which is so often denied in the Nidanavagga and Khandhavagga of the Samyutta. [DN 3.105] “He comes to know the unbroken stream of consciousness which is established in this world and the next…he comes to know the unbroken stream of consciousness which is unestablished in this world and the next.” [Pa’thikavagga-Att. 3.888] “Stream of consciousness means only consciousness itself.” [MN 1.296] “Friend, when this body is left of how many things does it lie there like an unconscious piece of wood? When it is bereft of three things, this body lies there like an unconscious piece of wood: vigor (a’yu), heat (usma), and consciousness (vinnana).” [MN 1.296 footnote #447 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p.1237] “The departure of consciousness from the body is not sufficient to constitute death; vitality and vital heat must also perish.” What Bhikkhu Bodhi here fails to realize in his great ignorance, is that just as warmth, illumination, and light leave a form; all that actually left was the light alone which both warmed and illuminated a form upon striking it. Vigor (a’yu), heat (usma), and consciousness (vinnana) represent one thing alone, that being vinnana, whose attributes are vigor (a’yu), and heat (usma) when vinnana makes contact with form. [Dhammapada #41] states succinctly, in contradiction to Bhikkhu Bodhi, that: [Dhp. #41] “The body is “dead wood” when “deprived of vinnana (consciousness)”. At [DN 2.335] the vigor (a’yu), heat (usma), and consciousness (vinnana) is analogous to “blazing, burning, and glowing (consciousness)”, and at [DN 2.338] is analogous to “man, effort, and wind (consciousness)”.
     So the question remains, if in fact the suttas themselves point out that the citta is the transmigrant: [Nida’navagga-Att. 2.28] “The transmigrating mind (reestablished) connected with contact (with phenomena) therein becomes the consciousness.”, also: [Patisambhidamagga-Att. 3.572] “The transmigrant (reestablished) mind (citta) becomes (at corporeal contact) the aggregate of Vinnana (point: reflectively and consubstantially so).” The mind is said to be the “maker” (cittakara) in analogy at [SN 2.102, SN 3.152], and literally as “mind-made puppet” at [Dhp. #147]; all of which are synonymous with attakara (Soul-mover) at [AN 3.337, DN 1.53]. Sati’s error in presuming that the vinnana transmigrates (sandhavati) rather than simply become reestablished (pat.isandhiviñña’n.a’) is replaced by the true transmigrant in the following passage which shows that it is the citta that passes in and out of becoming, in samsara: [Sal.a’yatanavagga-Att. 3.35] “The mind (citta) is that by which the being transmigrates (sandhavati) through samsara.” [Itivuttaka-Att. 1.57] “It is the mind (citta) which transmigrates (sandhavati); the very mind which goes round, such said that, imbued with karma [it goes through] samsara.” [SN 1.37] “What is it that gives rise to the purisha (person), what is it that goes round about (samsara)? What is it that treads within samsara, what is ones greatest fear?” Gotama replies: “It’s craving that gives rise to the purisha, and the mind (citta) that goes round (transmigrant). The being is him who treads within samsara, and suffering which is ones greatest fear.” Most certainly the greatest proof is that: [DN 1.81] “With the purified mind (citta) he recollects his former lives.” The following passages sharply contrasts the perfect mind of the Tathagata which is ‘vimuttacitta’, as being the grounds for the gods on high being unable to discern the establishment of his vinnana, since with such a mind, taintless, without grasping, and without sign, there is no grounds for being able to make any declaration about the vinnana of such a one so perfectly coherent in mind: [MN 1.140] With the emancipated mind of a follower, followers, neither the god Indra, nor Brahma’ devas, nor Pajapati can discern him, [bemusing themselves that] “This is the basis for the Tathagata’s consciousness.” How is this so? Within this Dhamma, followers, the Tathagata is without any mark by which to make a claim about him.” [Udana #46] “The follower with quelled mind has cut off rebirth. For such a one there is no more rebecoming.” [AN 4.448] “Liberation of mind is unshakable, this is my last birth, there is no more rebecoming.”

3. The ‘unestablished consciousness’.
     Now we come to the “unestablished mind” versus the “unestablished consciousness” and their relationship in scripture and meaning. [SN 1.122, SN 3.124] “With an unestablished (appatitthitena) consciousness (vinnana), the son of our clan, Godhika, has obtained Parinibbana”; the commentary to this passage is as follows: [Saggathavagga-Att. 1.184] “(Mara was) looking for the reestablished mind (pat.isandhicittam.).” [SN 1.122 footnote #314 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p. 421] “When the monk is said to attain final Nibbana (parinibbana) with consciousness unestablished, this should not be understood to mean that after death consciousness survives in an ‘unestablished’ condition; for enough texts make it plain that with the passing away of the arahant consciousness too ceases and no longer exists.” In fact the following refutes Bhikkhu Bodhi as per his claim: [SN 2.102-104] “Suppose there was a house or a hall with a roof and widows on the north, east, and south sides. When the sun rose and a beam of light entered through the window, where would it become established? On the western well venerable. And if there were no western wall, where then would it become established? On the ground venerable. And if there were no ground there, where would it become established? On the waters venerable. And if there were no waters either, where then would it become established? In that case, venerable, it would become established nowhere (no topographically or phenomenally discernable location). So too, followers, if there is no lust after food, lust after nutriment, lust after contact, lust after mentation, and lastly lust after consciousness, then consciousness itself is without establishment (appatit.t.hitam. tattha viñña’n.am. aviru’l.ham.); (there are ten occurrences of ‘established’, and ‘unestablished’ consciousness in this sutta as per mind [the light ray] being unestablished on namo-rupa, therein being vinnana).” Bhikkhu Bodhi’s commentary to this passage is: [SN 2.104 footnote #174 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p.775] “The sunbeam does exist, but because there is no place for it settle it is said to be unestablished. The present passage is clearly speaking of the arahants consciousness while he is alive. Its purport is not that an ‘unestablished consciousness’ remains after the arahants parinibbana.” Amazingly enough, Bhikkhi Bodhi is incoherent with himself within the very same footnote, but most importantly he fails to realize that the ‘unestablished vinnana’ is none other than the mind (citta) itself. Also: [Nettippakaran.apa’l.i  #154] “When there is no establishment of consciousness present, this is meant ‘the unestablished consciousness’ wherein there is no more transmigration, of coming again to be.” [Nettippakaran.apa’l.i #57] “No longer food to sustain, no more taints, nor thirsts, this is the meaning of ‘unestablished consciousness’.”
     This rare set of passages proves beyond any doubt that the mind which has become free is none other than the “unestablished consciousness”: [SN 3.54, SN 3.55, SN 3.58] “Tad appatitthitam vinnana” is identical to: [SN 3.45] “The mind (citta) being so liberated and arisen from defilements, one is fixed in the Soul as liberation, one is quelled in fixation upon the Soul. Quelled in the Soul one is unshakable. So being unshakable, the very Soul is parinibbana.” This passage, is where the mind (citta) is given the same equation as: ‘appatitthitena vinnana’ of [SN 3.54] (unestablished consciousness); hence the “emancipated mind (citta)” of [SN 3.45] is interchangeable and equal to that of ‘appatitthitena vinnana’ by certain scriptural definition, not to mention being philosophically coherent. The very heart of the matter that the materialistic and philosophically ignorant Theravada have yet to grasp, is that the unobjectified and “unestablished” consciousness is no longer the phenomenal consciousness but the very subject of liberation itself, that of the dynamic mind purified by Samadhi and wisdom fulfilled; just as light which has not become established upon any thing (phenomena) is both “unestablished (incorporeal, incomposite) light (appatitthitena vinnana)”, as well as “emancipated light (mind)” simultaneously.  There is no such existence of the vinnana apart from that which is illumined (invigorated, with life): [SN 3.53] “If some (fool) were so proclaim ‘Apart from form, feelings, perceptions, and experiences, I shall make know the coming and going of consciousness (vinnana), its passing and its rebirth, its growth and increase in magnitude.’ This I say is an impossibility.”
     The equation for the mind and consciousness in sutta therefore, is as follows: unestablished (appatitthitena) consciousness (vinnana) = cittavimutta (liberated mind) = Parinibbana.  [SN 5.74] “Unestablished-mind (appatit.t.hitacitto) the mind is supremely emancipated and well fixed upon the very Soul.” [SN 5.74] “appatitthitacitto”, is the compound which Bhikkhu Bodhi purposefully mistranslates as “without ill will. [SN 5.74 footnote #69 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p.1904]  “(sutra) misreads the second term as appatitthitacitto whose meaning “an unestablished mind” is exactly the opposite of what is required.” Passages in refutation to Bhikkhu Bodhi’s footnote #69 are: #1. [Theraga’tha’-Att. 2.260] appatitthitacitto is = na t.hapitacitto (a non-established mind), #2. [Maha’vagga-Att. 3.146, being the Atthakatha to the (SN 5.74) passage] “Unestablished-mind (appatit.t.hitacitto) means a mind unfixed upon defilements.”, #3. [Cu’l.aniddesapa’l.i  #58] “Unestablished-mind (appatit.t.hitacitto) the mind is supremely emancipated and well fixed upon the very Soul.”, and #4. [Maha’niddesapa’l.i 1.242]; hence assuredly Bhikkhu Bodhi’s notion that ‘appatitthitacitto’ is a ‘misprint or an anomaly of the B.E. SN’, is absurd at best given the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The Sinhalese edition of the Pali Nikayas is a later edition which has many Theravada redactions found within it, this term being one of them, as compared to the Burmese edition which is the older of the two wherein ‘appatitthitacitto’ has numerous occurrences; therein Bhikkhu Bodhi is proven entirely wrong as to his #69 footnote in reference to [SN 5.74]. The Sinhalese edition of the Pali Nikayas is literally filthy with Theravada redactions where such words as Mahatta’ (great-Soul), and attan (Soul) have been re-written to imply an entirely different meaning; the same holds true for ‘appatitthitacitto’ whose philosophical implication was far more than the Theravada could stomach in light of their materialistic and anti-foundational dogma.

4. Citta is not an aggregate.
     The main point of differentiation in Buddhism, in contradiction to Theravada heresy, is that the citta is wholly a separate entity from the five khandhas as the following passages prove: [DN 1.76] “This is the quelled and thoroughly purified mind (citta) cleansed, unblemished, devoid of impurities, pliable, manageable, steadfast, adamantine, so he directs his mind towards gnosis and vision; such that he knows: ‘This is my body made up of materiality, and the four great elements, come from mother and father, kept going on rice and gruel, without permanence, liable to be broken and destroyed, and here also is my consciousness (vinnana) which is entirely dependent upon it. (Immediately following this the purified mind is compared to an exquisitely pure beryl gemstone).” [DN 1.78] The mind (citta) is compared to a sword drawn from the body as sheath as well as likened to the subject or medium, being the clay from which the objective is created, namely the attributes of the five aggregates. [DN 1.76] Explicitly states that the consciousness is bound to the body whereas immediately following at [DN 1.77] the mind (citta) is analogous to the reed which is drawn from the body, being the sheath. [MN 1.436, AN 4.422] “Whatever form there is, feelings, perceptions, experiences, or consciousness (the five aggregates), these he sees to be without permanence, as suffering, as ill, as a plague, a boil, a sting, a pain, an affliction, as foreign, as otherness, as empty (suññato), as Selfless (anattato). So he turns (pativapeti) his mind (citta, Non-aggregate) away from these (aggregates); therein he gathers (upasamharati) his mind within the realm of Immortality. This is tranquility; this is that which is most excellent!” [MN 1.436  footnote #656 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p. 1266] “First he ‘directs his mind to it’ with the insight consciousness…by making it an object and penetrating it.” Bhikkhu Bodhi’s footnote makes the error in presuming that the mind is both subject and object at the same time creating a duality. [SN 3.234] The Aggregate Sutra. At Savatthi “Followers, the desire and lust for formations is a defilement of the citta, the desire and lust for feelings is a defilement of the citta, the desire and lust for cognition is a defilement of the citta, the desire and lust for experiences is a defilement of the citta, the desire and lust for vinnana is a defilement of the citta. But, followers, when one abandons the defilements of the citta regarding these five stations (aggregates), then ones citta inclines towards renunciation. Ones citta is made pliable and firm in renunciation by direct gnosis.” [MN 1.511] “For a long time I have been cheated, tricked and hoodwinked by my citta. For when grasping, I have been grasping onto form, for when grasping, I have been grasping onto feelings, , for when grasping, I have been grasping onto perceptions, for when grasping, I have been grasping onto experiences, for when grasping, I have been grasping onto consciousness.” [Nidanavagga-Att. 2.112] “Contact (is the basis for) the sankhara-khandha, feeling (is the basis for) feeling-khandha, perception is the perception-khandha, citta (is the basis for) the vinnana-khandha, form is the basis for the rupa-khandha.”
     [SN 2.94] (cittam.  itipi,  mano itipi, viñña’n.am. itipi) “herein being the mind, herein mentation, and here being consciousness.” This passage is often quoted by the uneducated who presume that citta, mano, and vinnana are interchangeable and hence equal in meaning; nothing could be further from the truth. The mind (citta) mentates (mano), and when inherently incoherent with the attribute as condition of nescience (avijja), (leading to causation) is established consubstantially upon name and form as consciousness (vinnana); the three being respectively subject (citta), action (mano), and phenomenal-attribute (vinnana). All three are indeed one in the same in the absolute sense of mind (citta), however further and far more acute philosophical comprehension is required to see that the mind (citta) as subject, objectifies (manosañcetana’, cetasa) itself, or mentates (mano, its active engagement), and as hence becomes consubstantial upon its adventitious and composite attributes of phenomena wherein it has become impressed, or established (thita). Mind (citta) being the signet ring, mentation (mano) the pressing, or inclination to press (identify with), and vinnana (consciousness) being the impression upon the wax (psycho-physicality, i.e. namo-rupa); this is the designation for a human-being composed of consciousness and namo-rupa. Just as clay and pot, when speaking of pottery, are entirely inseparable from one another without the others destruction as well [SN 2.104], or waves without water or a heap without that which is heaped; this is meant consciousness is inseparable from that which it has become impressed, or has brought shape to shapelessness and form to formlessness. Matter itself has neither shape nor form, its forming factor is the very mind itself which impresses itself (manosañcetana’) upon it due to its agnosis which perceives and conceives with this (corporality) as “me, who I am, my Soul”. The Atthakatha to this passage is as follows: [SN2-Att. of 2.94] mind is the triple-jewel, mind is the pasture (foundation), and mind is that which the Dharma itself is based upon; this is mind (citta). Mentation (mano) means ‘on account that it mentates’, consciousness (vinnana) means ‘on account that it discerns”. This sutta at SN 2.94 starts out with an exposition on the puthujjana (fool) and the mind in context with that very same fool is to be understood when it is read that: [SN 2.94] “it would be better for the fool (key point in reference to the fool, and not the wise who possesses an ‘emancipated citta’) to take this body for his Soul than the mind which is one thing by day and another by night since it (body) lasts for X number of years…whereas the mind (of the fool which is inchoate) is just like an ape swinging from tree to tree (i.e. mind going from one thing to another in every millisecond). Bhikkhu Bodhi’s commentary to this passage is”: [SN 2.94 footnote #154 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p. 769] “Citta signifies mind as the center of personal experience, as the subject of thought, volition, and emotion. It is the citta that needs to be understood, trained and liberated.” This footnote of course is in complete contradiction to a following one on the same sutta passage: [SN 2.95 footnote #157 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p. 770] “But one citta is not able to endure for a whole day or a whole night. Even in the time of a finger snap many hundred of thousands of cittas arise and cease. The point rather, is that the mind is always dependent upon an object” Firstly there is no such thing in sutta as “many cittas” and lastly the notion that “citta is always dependent upon an object” is completely groundless and contradicted in sutta at: [DN 1.76, MN 1.436] and other passages. Since Gotama’s parinibbana [DN 2.157] is as regards the citta, the view the materialistic Theravada are making is that the Absolute is mere absence alone, which is not only a heresy but is without any discernable coherence to anyone but an atheist or a reductionist crypto-nihilist.
     Now let us contrast the mind and the consciousness in two identical passages and see that citta, under the same rule is disappeared (atthangamo) whereas the consciousness is subjugated (nirodha); in fact there is no such thing in Buddhism as the “subjugation (nirodha) of citta”, only of the khandhas (aggregates). [SN 3.61] “With the arising of name and form is the arising of consciousness, with the subjugation of name and form is the subjugation of consciousness. This Aryan eightfold path is tread for the subjugation (nirodha) of consciousness.” [SN 5.184] “With the appearance of name and form is the appearance of citta, with the subjugation of name and form is the disappearance (atthangamo) of citta.” [SN 5.184 footnote #181 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p. 1928] “In this passage citta is taken to be synonymous with vinnana; namarupa, being the condition for the later, is the condition for the former as well. For citta always arises based on the physical organism (rupa) and in conjunction with contact, feeling, perception, volition, and attention, the constituents of nama (name)” Bhikkhu Bodhi is in grand error in his footnote to so ignorantly presume that “citta = vinnana”. Its even amazing that such a “renown” Pali “scholar” such as Bodhi would presume such a statement in contradiction to sutta, much less his other footnotes wherein he contradicts himself boldfaced such as: [SN 5.370] “His mind goes heaven-bound to auspiciousness.” Bhikkhu Bodhi’s self contradictory statement to his earlier [SN 5.184] footnote is: [SN 5.370 footnote #339 by Bhikkhu Bodhi; wisdom publ. p. 1957] “This passage shows citta as the principle of personal continuity which survives the death of the body and reaps the fruits of kamma…and by evolving onwards to Nibbana.” One surely should also point out such passages as [DN 1.76, SN 3.234, MN 1.436, AN 4.422] and others, which prove that the citta is not a aggregate itself.

5. Citta as parinibbana and the basis of the Aryan path.
     Most importantly, is that the citta is the very axis of making a claim of Parinibbana as well as being the entire consummation of the Aryan path itself: [DN 2.157] “No longer with (subsists by) in-breath nor out-breath, so is him (Gotama) who is steadfast in mind (citta), inherently quelled from all desires the mighty sage has passed beyond. With mind (citta) limitless (Brahma) he no longer bears sensations; illumined and unbound (nibbana), his mind (citta) is definitely (ahu) liberated.” [SN 3.45] “The mind (citta) being so liberated and arisen from defilements, one is fixed in the Soul as liberation, one is quelled in fixation upon the Soul. Quelled in the Soul one is unshakable. So being unshakable, the very Soul is thoroughly unbound (parinibbana).” [SN 5.8] “The Aryan Eightfold Path is the path leading to immortality” [MN 2.265] “This is immortality, that being the liberated mind (citta) which does not cling (after anything).” [MN2-Att. 4.68]  “This said: ‘the liberated mind (citta) which does not cling (after anything)’ means Nibbana.” [MN 1.296] “Friend, how many contingencies are there for the perfection of making unmanifest the emancipation of mind? Two contingencies: turning away from determinately manifest phenomena and turning towards the unmanifest realm (=nibbanadhatuya “realm of Nibbana” [MN1-Att. 2.352]).” The entire Aryan path itself is of the equation of emancipation of mind as follows: [AN 4.40] “These are the seven prerequisites of Samadhi. Sammaditthi…sammasati. These are the seven requisites for making the mind (citta) sovereign which is the Aryan sammasamadhi, those causes, those prerequisites.” [MN 1.301] “What is samadhi for? Samadhi, friend, is for making the mind (citta) soveriegn. (cittassa ekaggata’).” [SN 5.269] “If one develops a mind (citta) which is based within Samadhi, then is mind is acquires sovereignty. This is known as “Cittasamadhi’.”
     [At.t.hakanipa’ta-Att. 4.196] “This Mind-path (maggacitta) is that which Nibbana is based upon and subsists, “this is tranquility, verily that which is most excellent!” This is directly contrasted with vinnana when it comes to the Aryan path: [SN 3.61] “The Aryan Eightfold Path is for making cessation of consciousness (vinnana)…that being sammaditthi….sammasamadhi.” The only thing within sutta which is said to be “taintless” and “without clinging” is the mind (citta). The following is said “to be without clinging”: [DN 2.35, MN 1.501, MN 3.20, SN 3.45, SN 4.48, SN 5.24, AN 1.240, AN 2.155, AN 3.354, AN 4.126, SN 5.233, etc.]. [AN 1.198] “Samma’ emancipation (culmination of the tenfold Aryan Path)…is the unclinging mind (citta) which is liberated.” [MN 3.72] “And what is the Aryan taintless supranormal path? The Aryan-mind (citta), the Aryan path endowed with the taintless mind (citta).” [SN 3.83] “Attained the steadfast Soul, their mind (citta) is calm; they’re cleansed of the entire world, taintless they have become Brahma.” [AN 2.29] “Within the sovereign mind one is established in the supreme Soul.” [AN 4.299] “When mind is fixed upon the Supreme-Soul it is exquisitely steadfast; therein when evil and unwholesome things arise upon mind they find there nothing to attach to.” Even more hilarious than could be imagined is the Theravada notion of ‘clinging’ and ‘non-clinging aggregates’, as mentioned by Bhikkhu Bodhi in his Khandhavagga footnote to the SN3 on page. 1060 were he mentions the possibility of “pure aggregates” which of themselves are “non-clinging”. Theravada failed to read the suttas of Buddhism instead of their Abhidhamma, for if they did so they would quickly discern that the aggregates are “mara, death, foul, a plague, a boil, suffering”, whereas the citta, the very mind made become through the elimination of nescience is the immanent and universal inherent within us all, our Soul, which is the radiant divinity which is to be sought after.

6. Citta is the Absolute.
     The mind is the absolute as illuminated in scripture time and again: [MN 1.197] “Followers, the Brahma life is not lived for sake of gains, honors, or acclaim; nor is it lived for virtuousness, nor for absorptions, nor for gnosis and insight. This Brahma life is lived for the sole preeminent purpose of emancipation of the mind alone, which is the quintessential final core.” [DN 2.81] “Through perfection of wisdom’s fulfillment the mind is emancipated from all defilements. That is-desire defilements, becomings defilements, and ignorance defilements.” [DN 2.233] “The light of ones mind.” [SN 5.158] “Maha’puriso, Maha’puriso I hear said venerable. What pray tell does Mahapuriso mean? A mind emancipated having assimilated the Soul (vimuttacittatta’), I say Shariputra, this is a Mahapuriso. Without mind emancipated having assimilated the Soul Shariputra, one is not a Maha’puriso.” [AN 1.282] “He gathers the mind inside the immortal realm.” [MN 1.36] The mind is originally pure. [MN 1.213] “Friend Shariputra, a follower delights in solitariness, and in delighting in solitariness he tranquilizes the mind in yoking it to the very Soul, he does not neglect his jhanas, he is endowed with insights, and perfectly devoid of the profane.” [MN 1.235] “A follower who has an emancipated mind possesses three transcendental qualities: transcendental illumination, transcendental mastery of the light, transcendental liberation.” [MN 1.239] “When suffering and feelings arise upon him, it does not penetrate into his mind since his mind is Soul become.” [MN 1.249] “When my steadfast mind was perfectly purified, perfectly illumined, stainless, utterly perfect, pliable, sturdy, fixed, and everlastingly determinate then I directed my mind towards the gnosis of the destruction of defilements. I knew thusly as it truly was such that: This is suffering, this is the source of suffering, this is the subjugation of suffering and this is the path of illumination leading away from all suffering.” [MN 1.249] “When my discourse is completed, Aggivessana, I make absorbed my mind upon the sign of my very Soul wherein I remain fixed, am subdued, and make it as unto this singleness. This is the bliss I perpetually reside within.” [MN 1.279] “When his steadfast mind was perfectly purified, perfectly illumined, stainless, utterly perfect, pliable, sturdy, fixed, and everlastingly determinate then he directes his mind towards the gnosis of the destruction of defilements. Knowing thus and seeing thus his mind is emancipated from sensual desires, his mind is emancipated from becoming, his mind is emancipated from ignorance.” [MN 1.296] “Friend, how many contingencies are there for the perfection of making unmanifest the emancipation of mind? Two contingencies: turning away from determinately manifest phenomena and turning towards the unmanifest realm.” [MN 1.297] “What friend is emancipation of the mind by means of devoidness (shunyata)? Herein a follower has gone to a clearing in the forest and the root of a tree and investigates thusly: ‘This is devoid (sunna) of the Soul and what the Soul subsists upon.” This is called emancipation of the mind by means of devoidness.” [MN 1.298] “Emancipation of the mind is the highest absolute.” [MN 1.298] “Of all types of unmanifest emancipations of mind, the fixed unshakable emancipation of the mind is the highest supernal.” [MN 1.301] “When the mind is made to become, one gains Suchness of Soul.” [Pat.isambhida’magga-Att. 1.236] “To bring to unification the mind is to be fixed upon the Soul.” [Suttanipata Att. 2.410]  “Mind inter-sighted is the Soul.” [Theragatha Att. 2.151] “The mind is the Soul.” [Itivuttaka Att. 1.168]  “The Supreme Soul is the mind yoked to steadfastness; the steadfast mind is dedicated to the Soul.” [Itivuttaka Att. 1.168]  “The Supreme Soul is the Soul.” [Sagathavagga Att. 1.237]  “The Soul is the mind.” [Sagathavagga Att. 1.112] “The mind is the Soul.” [SN 3.152] “On account of the mind being defiled, sattas are defiled; on account of mind being pure, so too are sattas purified.” [AN 1.147] “How is one Lord of the Soul? He has made mind (citta) sovereign and quelled, so is he Lord of the Soul, for he dwells in the purity of the Soul. This, followers, is how one is deemed ‘Lord of the Soul’.” [AN 1.207] “The Aryan disciple keeps the Brahma-sabbath. He dwells in Brahma. Owing to Brahma is he mind (citta) is calmed, that blissfulness arises and his mind is wiped clean of defilements.” [AN 2.6] “Him who is Lord of the mind (citta) possessed with supernormal faculties and quelled, that One is called ‘fixed-in-the-Soul.’” [AN 4.402] “When, followers, when ones mind is thoroughly ripe with wisdom, he can say that birth is destroyed, the Brahma-faring has been fulfilled, what must be done has been done, for there is naught but this very Soul.” [Udana #47] “The entirety of everything is encompassed by the mind, there is nothing which exists higher or more beloved than ones Soul. Since there is not other dearer than ones Soul, him who holds love of the Soul is without harm.” [Itivuttaka #115] “One is supremely liberated of mind (citta) who has Samma’ gnosis. Emancipated he is That, verily That (Brahma).” [SN 5.410] “I proclaim there is absolutely no difference between a layperson with a mind (citta) which is liberated and that mind of a bhikkhu which has been liberated for a century. [Saggathavagga-Att. 1.272] “Develop (mind upon) signlessness means: the sign of permanence is made known of the Soul, is the meaning of Vipassana signlessness.” [SN 1.188] “I’m burning alive with sensual lusts! My mind (citta) is engulfed by this inferno; pray tell me how I might unbind it, of out pity for me Gotama.” It is through an inversion of perception that your mind (citta) is engulfed. Inflexure (your mind [invert, revert upon itself]) away from the signs of the pleasing which are connected with taints. Envision experiences (phenomena) as otherness, as suffering, as not the Soul. Unbind (quench) the mighty fire of lusts such that you are not consumed again and again (transmigration). Develop the mind (citta) upon (gnosis) of the foul (the body), for this is sovereignty wherein one is supremely quelled; recollect (hinder to, recollection of beforeness) that which is before the body, being disgusted with it (body). Develop this signlessness…and you shall be on who fares within equanimity.” [MN 3.280] “Rahula’s mind (citta), by not clinging (after phenomena) was liberated from all taints. On the spot arose the eye of Dhamma that: “the all (phenomena) which is of the nature to arise, is also of the nature to fall prey to subjugation.”
     [Tikanipa’ta-Att. 3.4] “Steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti) means steadfast in ones True-nature (thitasabha'vo).” [KN 4.82]  “Whether he walks, stands, sits, or lays on his side; so long as his mind (citta) is sovereign upon his very Soul, he is thoroughly quelled.” [Theragatha-Att. 1.51] “Parinirvana is to be steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti).” [Silakkhandhavagga-Att. 1.168] “Steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti) means one is supremely-fixed within the mind (suppatitthitacitto)” [SN 1.26] “Those followers absorbed, their minds (citta) flawless having assimilated the Soul; a charioteer (Soul) in control of the reigns, sages like them guard this supranormal-power!” [Jataka-2-1341] “The Soul is Charioteer.” [AN 2.6] “Him who is Lord of the mind (citta) possessed with supernormal faculties and quelled, that One is called 'fixed-in-the-Soul' (thitattoti).” [AN 1.196] “With mind (citta) emancipated from ignorance…this designates the Soul has become Brahma.” [AN 1.124] “What, followers, is a being who has a diamond-mind (vajiru’pamacitto)? That one who has destroyed the taints (asavas) and has both a liberated mind (citta) and is liberated by wisdom. Just as there is nothing which a diamond cannot cut, be it stone or gem; so to is one with a diamond-mind who has destroyed the taints and has both a liberated mind (citta) and is liberated by wisdom. This is one who possesses a diamond-mind.” [AN 1.124] “What, followers, is a being who has a mind of Light (vijjupamacitto)? He comprehends things as they are or have become; that being suffering and the path leading to the subjugation of suffering. Just as a flash of light in pitch of night illuminates things; so to is him who possesses holy vision into the nature of things are they are or have become such that he comprehends suffering and the path leading to the subjugation of suffering. This is one who possesses a mind of Light (vijjupamacitto).” [AN 1.6] “I do not have, followers, insight into anything or any dharma which, when made to become and made to expand that brings greater bliss than the mind (citta). The mind, followers, when made to become and made to expand, brings the greatest bliss.” [AN1.10] “The mind (citta) is primordially luminous, but due to defilements which come from without, it is defiled.  The mind (citta) is primordially luminous once again, when defilements which come from without are cleansed from it.” [MN 1.197] “Followers, this Brahma-faring is lived for the sole preeminent purpose of emancipation of the mind (citta) alone, which is the quintessential final core.” [MN 1.213] “The collected and quelled mind is the Supreme Soul.” [MN 1.301] “What is samadhi (the culmination of the entire Aryan path) for? Samadhi, friend, is for making the mind (citta) sovereign.” [SN 5.73] “What is the one benefit, Master Gotama, which you exist for? The one thing that the Tathagata exists for is the fruit and emancipation by gnosis, illumination (vijja).” [MN 2.265] “This is immortality, that being the liberated mind (citta) which does not cling (after anything).” [MN2-Att. 4.68] “This said: ‘the liberated mind (citta) which does not cling’ means Nibbana.” [Silakkhandhavagga-Att. 1.168] “Steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti) means one is supremely-fixed within the mind.” [SN 1.233] “Your mind is supremely emancipated, like the full moon on the fifteenth day in dark of night!” [SN 3.83] “Attained the steadfast Soul, their mind (citta) is calm; they’re cleansed of the entire world, taintless they have become Brahma.” [DN2-Att. 2.479] “'The purification of one’s own mind', this means the light (joti) within one’s mind (citta) is the very Soul (attano).” [DN 2.49] “The purification of one’s own mind (citta); this is the Doctrine of the Buddha.” [MN 2.144] “How is it that one is called a ‘Buddha’?...gnosis that the mind (citta) is purified (visuddham)…such is how one is deemed a ‘Buddha’.” [SN 5.154, DN 2.100, SN 3.42, DN 3.58, SN 5.163] “The Tathagata is without the mark of all things, he dwells upwards within the signless inflexured (mind upon itself) mind (citta). There within, Ananda, dwell with the Soul as your Light, with the Soul as your refuge, with none other as refuge.”
 
 

 Copyright 2003 by Shakya Aryanatta