Understanding Paticcasamuppada

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby SamKR » Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:14 pm

There are moment-to-moment, one-life, two-life and three-life models of Paticcasamuppada. Not satisfied, I have tried to merge them and have created a flow-chart.
Of course, this is not my final understanding; I am learning and trying to make sense of this doctrine. I would appreciate your comments and insights.
Last edited by SamKR on Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
SamKR
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby ground » Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:24 am

Whereas one model appears to be different from the other P. experience covers all. :sage:
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby pegembara » Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:47 am

Where else can awakening happen other than in the "present" moment and at the "present" place or in other words, wherever and whenever one happens to be?

sanditthiko [sandi.t.thiko]: Self-evident; immediately apparent; visible here and now. An epithet for the Dhamma. The Dhamma is testable by practice and known by direct experience.

Svakkhato Bhagavata dhammo sanditthiko akaliko ehipassiko opanayiko paccattam vedittabbo vinnuhiti.
"Svakkhato"

The Dhamma taught by the Blessed One is Excellent in the beginning, Excellent in the middle and Excellent in the end - all of Buddha's Discourses are consistent and teach the same truth. "Sanditthika" Dhamma is self-evident and can be understood in this life itself. "Akaliko" Dhamma, Noble Truths, can not be changed nor can they be altered over time. "Ehipassiko" "come and see"; Buddha's Dhamma is to be investigated. "Opanayika" Dhamma can only be understood by oneself. "Paccattam vedittabbo vinnuhiti" Dhamma is for the wise to understand and realize.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
pegembara
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby Spiny Norman » Sun Feb 17, 2013 12:29 pm

SamKR wrote: I would appreciate your comments and insights.


I think it's worth looking at how the nidanas of paticcasamuppada are defined in the suttas - see MN9, SN12.2 and DN15.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
User avatar
Spiny Norman
 
Posts: 2933
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Spam, wonderful spam

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby nowheat » Sun Feb 24, 2013 3:20 am

SamKR wrote:There are moment-to-moment, one-life, two-life and three-life models of Paticcasamuppada. Not satisfied, I have tried to merge them and have created a flow-chart.
Of course, this is not my final understanding; I am learning and trying to make sense of this doctrine. I would appreciate your comments and insights.


There is a new theory that doesn't fit any of the above categories. As it is something I saw, and I'm unsure how tolerant this board is of promoting one's own stuff (though I've been here for yonks -- it's folks here pointing me to MN 117 as evidence of "the Buddha taught rebirth as necessary" that got me started on this road) so I'll just say that if you want more info you should please contact me. There's a jury-refereed paper involved so no need to worry that I'm a *complete* nutcase. And (1) it really helps clarify many problematic suttas and (2) is useful in practice, too.

:namaste:
nowheat
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Feb 24, 2013 4:39 am

Hi NoWheat,

Everyone promotes their own ideas here. It's promoting products that we frown on... :sage:

Do you mean the article you referred to here?
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=10569&start=180#p189285

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10663
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby ground » Sun Feb 24, 2013 6:07 am

mikenz66 wrote:Everyone promotes their own ideas here.

How could it be otherwise? When eye or ear meet meaningless forms and sounds qua words ideas arise dependent on conditions which then may entail further ideas. Only ideas can express themselves by means of forms and sounds.

However one may refer to the words caused by the ideas of others by quoting and refraining from comment.

:sage:
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby nowheat » Sun Feb 24, 2013 12:46 pm

mikenz66 wrote:Everyone promotes their own ideas here. It's promoting products that we frown on... :sage:

Do you mean the article you referred to here?
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=10569&start=180#p189285


Yes, I do. But then, as now, I feel as though the full article is needed to convince. The reason I express reluctance is because I put the paper into a little self-published book to make it more readily available, which takes it into the "promoting products" category.

Aside from the book, and the Journal the paper was originally published in, the only other copy to be found seems to be on one of those illegal sites which I have mixed feelings about and prefer not to widely promote.

:namaste:
nowheat
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby Sylvester » Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:35 am

I'm pretty intrigued by the equation of anatta with "sense of self". I thought this "sense of self" is probably better equated with MN 44's sakkāya (self-identification/personality). Given MN 44's treatment of the 5 Clinging Aggregates (pañcupādānakkhandhā) as an alternative to the standard equation to dukkha, anatta seems to be an inference to be drawn from dukkha, rather than being equivalent to dukkha itself. Perhaps I'm splitting hairs here...
Sylvester
 
Posts: 1583
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby ground » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:33 am

Sylvester wrote:I'm pretty intrigued by the equation of anatta with "sense of self". I thought this "sense of self" is probably better equated with MN 44's sakkāya (self-identification/personality). ...

From experiential perspective I would equate "sense of self" with the subtle pre-conceptual momentary impulsive intuition of self or "I" which - lacking mindfulness - transforms into conceit and/or self-identification or appropriation of aggregates.

sense of self - if lack of mindfulness of its conditioned arising and subsiding then -> taking it as self or I (felt as permanent) -> A and/or B
A: ... -> full-flegded conceit
B: ... -> full-flegded self-identification with or appropriation of aggregates

:sage:
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby nowheat » Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:47 pm

Sylvester wrote:I'm pretty intrigued by the equation of anatta with "sense of self". I thought this "sense of self" is probably better equated with MN 44's sakkāya (self-identification/personality). Given MN 44's treatment of the 5 Clinging Aggregates (pañcupādānakkhandhā) as an alternative to the standard equation to dukkha, anatta seems to be an inference to be drawn from dukkha, rather than being equivalent to dukkha itself. Perhaps I'm splitting hairs here...

If you're picking this up from my usage, you'd need to recognize that it's, well, my usage. I'm not in any way suggesting that the Buddha used anatta to mean sense-of-self. It seems to me he was very careful to give anatta only a negative and not a positive meaning, and that he had good reasons for doing so, reasons tied to his time.

But I find it quite useful to think of anatta as the not-self, as what we are pointing out when we say "I have a self". In our day, we don't necessarily say "I have a self and it is eternal" or "...changeless" or "....separate" or "...the captain of the ship of my life" (i.e. "has mastery"). But we nonetheless do make assumptions about what that self is that can get us in trouble. There is something there -- even if it is only a process, or a concept -- that we are talking about when we say we have a self.

:namaste:
nowheat
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby daverupa » Mon Feb 25, 2013 12:55 pm

I agree that tying English "self" to sakkayaditthi and asmimana is best.

Atta is probably worth discussing in terms of English "soul", since paticcasamuppada-12 is already pedagogically structured to counter a theistic model which relies on such a thing.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4356
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby nowheat » Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:21 pm

daverupa wrote:I agree that tying English "self" to sakkayaditthi and asmimana is best.

Atta is probably worth discussing in terms of English "soul", since paticcasamuppada-12 is already pedagogically structured to counter a theistic model which relies on such a thing.

You're saying that dependent arising in its 12 step formula denies a god-created soul?

:namaste:
nowheat
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby daverupa » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:20 pm

nowheat wrote:
daverupa wrote:I agree that tying English "self" to sakkayaditthi and asmimana is best.

Atta is probably worth discussing in terms of English "soul", since paticcasamuppada-12 is already pedagogically structured to counter a theistic model which relies on such a thing.

You're saying that dependent arising in its 12 step formula denies a god-created soul?

:namaste:


I'm saying it lampoons an Upanisadic understanding of the creation of the cosmos and the soul, and therefore denies that claim. It's an instance of idapaccayata being held against a prevailing metaphysics in order to accomplish Dhamma instruction, which means it's possible that it can serve this purpose against modern understandings of a soul as well.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4356
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby kirk5a » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:57 pm

Ven. Channa apparently had his confusion about self cleared up by Ven. Ananda's exposition of Paticcasamuppada (which consists of him quoting the Kaccānagotta Sutta SN 12.15).
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Then the thought occurred to Ven. Channa, "I, too, think that form is inconstant, feeling is inconstant, perception is inconstant, fabrications are inconstant, consciousness is inconstant; form is not-self, feeling is not-self, perception is not-self, fabrications are not-self, consciousness is not-self; all fabrications are inconstant; all phenomena are not-self. But still my mind does not leap up, grow confident, steadfast, & released[1] in the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the ending of craving, dispassion, cessation, Unbinding. Instead, agitation & clinging arise, and my intellect pulls back, thinking, 'But who, then, is my self?'

Bhikkhu Bodhi says in a footnote to his translation:
Ānanda's choice of the Kaccānagotta Sutta is especially apt, as this sutta teaches how dependent origination counters the two extreme views of eternalism and annihilationism and replaces the view of self with the realization that it is only dukkha that arises and ceases.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
kirk5a
 
Posts: 1794
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby nowheat » Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:26 am

daverupa wrote:I'm saying it lampoons an Upanisadic understanding of the creation of the cosmos and the soul, and therefore denies that claim. It's an instance of idapaccayata being held against a prevailing metaphysics in order to accomplish Dhamma instruction, which means it's possible that it can serve this purpose against modern understandings of a soul as well.


"Lampoon" is a pretty strong word. What is it that indicates to you that it is ridiculing an "Upanisadic understanding of the creation of the cosmos and the soul"?

:namaste:
nowheat
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby SDC » Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:07 am

nowheat wrote:You're saying that dependent arising in its 12 step formula denies a god-created soul?


My understanding is that the PS is explaining how experience is mistaken for an existence, and how this mistake leads to suffering. So it is saying that the idea of a "god-created soul that exists in a world" is a delusion. I suppose that is a denial.
User avatar
SDC
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm
Location: North Jersey

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby daverupa » Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:23 am

nowheat wrote:What is it that indicates to you that it is ridiculing an "Upanisadic understanding of the creation of the cosmos and the soul"?


Well, I'm certainly far too forgetful to recall correctly. This is probably something I read, perhaps Gombrich somewhere.
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4356
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Feb 28, 2013 2:42 am

Greetings,

daverupa wrote:
nowheat wrote:What is it that indicates to you that it is ridiculing an "Upanisadic understanding of the creation of the cosmos and the soul"?


Well, I'm certainly far too forgetful to recall correctly. This is probably something I read, perhaps Gombrich somewhere.

It does sound Gombrich-esque.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14778
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Understanding Paticcasamuppada

Postby mikenz66 » Thu Feb 28, 2013 3:17 am

Yes, see here:
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=7464

Gombrich wrote: " My conclusion is that Frauwallner and Hwang are right, and the Buddha's chain originally went back only five links, to thirst. (It could also go back six, seven, or eight links - nothing hangs on the difference.) Then, at another point, the Buddha produced a different causal chain to ironize and criticise Vedic cosmogony, and noticed that it led very nicely into the earlier chain - perhaps because it is natural for the creation of the individual to lead straight on to the six senses, and these, via 'contact' and 'feeling', to thirst. It is quite plausible, however, that someone failed to notice that once the first four links become part of the chain, it's negative version meant that in order to abolish ignorance one first had to abolish consciousness!"


:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10663
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Next

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 14 guests