[Buddha-l] liturgical languages

[Bill Kish]

Mike Austin:
> Oh! Form in the general sense is observable by means 
> of the eye, but are 'actions' observable without mental 
> constructs? 

Richard Hayes:
> Yes. I can observe my own mental actions. And I can 
> hear a word deliberately spoken by another. These 
> are observations of actions that can be done without 
> superimposing any mental constructs at all.
> [ ... ]
> I say actions are observed through the senses without any 
> superimposition of concept, while 'mind' is not observed at 
> all and exists only as a name superimposed on what is
> acquired through the internal sense faculty.

S1: I can observe my own mental actions.
S2: I can observe my own mind as it functions.

The meaning of S1 and S2 seem the same to me.  I take it
you would disagree; if so, what have I missed ?  If S1 and
S2 have the same meaning, then mind can also be observable
without superimposing any mental constructs.

Also, when you say mind, do you mean citta, or perhaps a 
more modern view of mind ?

---------
Bill Kish





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com