Here’s a kinda weird question for Mahāyāna Abhidharma people: how wrong/right is it to say that manasikāra and cetanā are both forms of attention, which work by bending the stream of mental events in a particular direction. (1/2)
-
-
This is what I’m sticking on. Sthiramati kinda comes close to suggesting this in his commentary on Vasubandhu’s Pañcaskandhaprakaraṇa, but the passive/active bit is not quite as clear as I’d like, and in a sense, nothing is ever passive (which is probably part of your worry)
-
Yes, exactly. The active/passive distinction would seem to require a notion of agency that is analyzed away in the Abhidharma; there's just habitual and motivated event causality
- 13 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I feel like I ought to read up on this. Guys, is there a good intro to Mahāyāna abhidharma out there?
-
Plenty of good translations of classic texts. Do you want a big project or a small one?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.