Page 1 of 3

Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:22 am
by vinasp
Hi everyone,

What does dependent origination describe?

What is the relationship between one item and the next?

Here I present a new interpretation of Dependent Origination (DO).

As presented in the nikaya's DO seems to be a chain of items, each of which
arises in dependence on the previous one. For example, it is said that: 'with
contact as condition, feeling.'

This is true. But was contact the only condition or cause which was required for
"feeling" to have arisen?

The Connected discourses on defilements [SN 27.1 to 27.10] speak of:'desire
and lust for ...'. many things - including "contact", and "feeling".

It even speaks of "desire and lust for craving ..."

Do we have here a second condition or cause contributing to the arising of each
item in the chain?

This would be "dependent co-origination", or "co-dependent origination".

Once "contact" has arisen it makes possible the arising of "feeling", but it
is not a necessary and sufficient condition in itself. Contact is a necessary
but not sufficient condition for feeling.

Desire and lust (chandaraga) is the other necessary but not sufficient condition.
The two together comprise a necessary and sufficient condition.

In this interpretation "feeling" is not actual feeling, but "feeling" as an
object of desire - objectified feeling.

And, of course, it arises in dependence on objectified contact, and is itelf one
condition for the arising of objectified craving.

Dependent Origination thus becomes a chain of "objects of desire".

I think that these objects of desire are called "dhamma's" in the Nikaya's.

Regards, Vincent.

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:41 am
by cooran
Hello Vincent, all,

A few articles may have something of interest:

The emptiness of codependent origination - Maggie Grey
http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/vi ... context=cm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dependent Co-origination: The Buddhist Approach to Reality
http://www.beyondthenet.net/slabs/artic ... endent.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanissaro Bhikkhu: A STUDY OF DEPENDENT CO-ARISING
http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries.co ... CO-ARISING" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:26 am
by Dinsdale
vinasp wrote: Dependent Origination thus becomes a chain of "objects of desire".
I think DO is basically describing how desire keeps us "in the loop" of suffering.

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:44 am
by mikenz66
porpoise wrote:
vinasp wrote: Dependent Origination thus becomes a chain of "objects of desire".
I think DO is basically describing how desire keeps us "in the loop" of suffering.
Yes, I like Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments that I quoted in a few places in more detail:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 93#p193291" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 69#p170881" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Dependent origination offers a radically different perspective that transcends the two extremes. It shows that individual existence is constituted by a current of conditioned phenomena devoid of metaphysical self yet continuing on from birth to birth as long as the causes that sustain it remain effective. Dependent origination thereby offers a cogent explanation of the problem of suffering that on the one hand avoids the philosophical dilemmas posed by the hypothesis of a permanent self, and on the other avoids the dangers of ethical anarchy to which annihilationism eventually leads. As long as ignorance and craving remain, the process of rebirth continues; kamma yields its pleasant and painful fruit, and the great mass of suffering accumulates. When ignorance and craving are destroyed, the inner mechanism of karmic causation is deactivated, and one reaches the end of suffering in samsara. Perhaps the most elegant exposition of dependent origination as the "middle teaching" is the famous Kaccanogotta sutta.
:anjali:
Mike

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:06 am
by vinasp
Hi everyone,

"If, through revulsion towards the eye, through its fading away and cessation,
one is liberated by nonclinging, one can be called a bhikkhu who has attained
Nibbana in this very life." [Part of SN 35.155]

Passages such as this one compel us to rethink our understanding of Dependent
Origination. Revulsion towards the eye causes its fading away and cessation,
independently of any preceding items in the chain. Following items, which depend
on the eye will, of course, also fade away and cease.

With Dependent Origination there are only two possibilities:

1. Each item in the chain is caused by the preceding item and can only cease
when that preceding item ceases.

In consequence: The items in the chain can only cease if the first item,
ignorance, ceases.

2. Each item in the chain arises due to one (or more) additional causes while
remaining dependent on the preceding item.

In consequence: Any item in the chain can be made to cease, independently of
preceding items, subsequent items will also cease. However, if ignorance
should cease, then all the items in the chain will also cease.

Regards, Vincent.

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:30 am
by DarwidHalim
Three poisons or afflictions in Buddhism are ignorant, attachment, and aversion.

What is the difference between aversion and repulsion?

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 9:20 am
by Dinsdale
DarwidHalim wrote:What is the difference between aversion and repulsion?
Aversion results from repulsion? Likewise craving results from attraction?

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:00 pm
by Sam Vara
Hi Vincent,

Sorry, I got rather lost with this bit:

In this interpretation "feeling" is not actual feeling, but "feeling" as an
object of desire - objectified feeling.

And, of course, it arises in dependence on objectified contact, and is itelf one
condition for the arising of objectified craving.

Dependent Origination thus becomes a chain of "objects of desire".
You seem to be saying that feeling is something that is desired; that one desires to feel some feeling or other - is that the case?

And does this mean that the other links in the chain are also things that one could or does desire?

Many thanks.

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:52 am
by DarwidHalim
Vinasp:
"If, through revulsion towards the eye, through its fading away and cessation,
one is liberated by nonclinging, one can be called a bhikkhu who has attained
Nibbana in this very life." [Part of SN 35.155]
I just have a doubt with this translated Sutta.

"through revulsion towards the eye".

Ignorant, attachment and aversion are the three poisons in Buddhism.

Attachment should not be entertained, because it causes suffering.

Aversion should also not be entertained, because it causes suffering.

So, why this act of "revulsion through the eyes" can be the correct act and is also promoted in that Sutta? (since it is the act of three poisons - aversion)

(unless aversion has a different meaning with revulsion - then we have a totally different story).

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:12 am
by Dinsdale
DarwidHalim wrote:
(unless aversion has a different meaning with revulsion - then we have a totally different story).
I think here "revulsion" has the meaning of dispassion and disenchantment, seeing the danger in craving and aversion via the 6 sense media.

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:20 am
by vinasp
Hi Darwidhalim,

Quote: "Three poisons or afflictions in Buddhism are ignorant, attachment, and aversion."

Yes. In Theravada Buddhism these are usually called the Three Unwholesome Roots.

"And what is the root of the unwholesome? Greed is a root of the unwholesome; hate is a root of the unwholesome; delusion is a root of the unwholesome. This is called the root of the unwholesome."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .ntbb.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lobho akusalamūlaṃ, doso akusalamūlaṃ, moho akusalamūlaṃ — idaṃ vuccatāvuso, akusalamūlaṃ.

lobha is greed. Dosa is hatred, anger, aversion. Moha is delusion.

Sometimes raga (lust) or chanda (desire) are used in place of lobha.

Quote:"What is the difference between aversion and repulsion?"

Aversion is a mental reaction. Repulsion can be mental or physical, as when one
magnet repels another one. Revulsion is mental and is the same as hatred or aversion.

Regards, Vincent.

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:59 am
by Dinsdale
vinasp wrote: Revulsion is mental and is the same as hatred or aversion.
But in the passage you provided below, how can liberation by non-clinging result from "revulsion" towards the eye if "revulsion" here means "aversion"?

"If, through revulsion towards the eye, through its fading away and cessation,
one is liberated by nonclinging, one can be called a bhikkhu who has attained
Nibbana in this very life." [Part of SN 35.155]

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:10 am
by mikenz66
The Pali term would be nibbida:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index-su ... ml#nibbida" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Nibbida (disenchantment, aversion, and weariness with regard to conditioned phenomena). See also Asubha.
Not aversion in the sense of the pali term dosa. http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... d.htm#dosa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index-su ... tml#kilesa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Kilesa (defilements — passion (lobha), aversion (dosa), and delusion (moha)
See:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
For a monk practicing the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma, what accords with the Dhamma is this: that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to form, ...
:anjali:
Mike

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:15 am
by reflection
Aversion is a light form of anger/ill will. It's trying to push things away.

Revulsion (or dispassion) is a natural result of seeing things as they are. Seeing that all is dukkha, gives rise to dispassion towards it all. It's this dispassion that drives one away from sense desires, towards a simplified life and eventually nibbana. This is not really a voluntary action. It's like having to pee, you can't help it, you just have to go. (bad example, but you get the idea :lol: ) You can't hold it forever, just like a sotapanna can't stay in samsara forever.

So the two are fundamentally different. But when one doesn't see how things are, it's easy to mix the two up. But of course some contemplation on the difference can help in understanding.

Apart from that, I don't think dependent origination needs yet another interpretation. ;)

:anjali:

Re: Co-dependent Origination?

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:38 am
by mikenz66
And see SN 12.23 Upanisa Sutta: Discourse on Supporting Conditions
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=11701" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
for a discussion where nibbida fits in the process of liberation:
"Regarding this knowledge of destruction, I declare that there is a supporting condition without which it does not arise...What is this supporting condition? Liberation... Liberation has a supporting condition...: Dispassion... Dispassion has a supporting condition...: Disenchantment [nibbida]... Disenchantment has a supporting condition...: Knowledge-and-vision-of-things-as-they-are... Knowledge-and-vision-of-things-as-they-are has a supporting condition...: Concentration... Concentration has a supporting condition...: Happiness... Happiness has a supporting condition...: Tranquillity... Tranquillity has a supporting condition...: Rapture... Rapture has a supporting condition...: Joy... Joy has a supporting condition...: Faith... Faith has a supporting condition...: Suffering...Suffering has a supporting condition...: Birth...Becoming... Grasping... Craving... Feeling... Contact... the Six Sense-Bases... Name-and-Form... Consciousness... the (kamma-) formations... Ignorance...
:anjali:
Mike