Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting
- Hello Howard & Sarah
Reading this post has just prompted my memory about something. I
don't think it's too far off-topic here, so I will interject with it,
if I may. I mentioned in another thread that I am ploughing through
a book on Abhidhamma by a Sri Lankan doctor, Jaya... [help, the book
is not to hand and I can't spell his name from memory!] In one part,
he made a throwaway comment that made me ponder. The throwaway was
essentially this - that the anatta doctrine only makes sense in
combination with a 'momentary citta' theory. He didn't develop the
argument (at least, not so far - I'm still reading) but I assume he
is thinking that non-momentary citta is de facto atta. Have you
heard this argument before? What do you think of it?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, upasaka@... wrote:
> Hi, Sarah (and James) -
> In a message dated 1/31/07 1:50:46 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> sarahprocterabbott@... writes:
> > Hi James (& Howard),
> > --- buddhatrue <buddhatrue@...> wrote:
> > >The citta theory, however, does hold some problems for me
> > >the zero duration of the cittas and the `unaccounted for' gap
> > >them which must exist for them to be separate.
> > ....
> > S: Why must there be any gap?