Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
SarathW
Posts: 9998
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by SarathW » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:16 am

Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?
If DO has Rupa (four great elements) at which point they come to the formula?
Are all limbs include Nama only?
Are all limbs include Rupa only?
Are all limbs include Nama-Rupa only?
Are some limbs include Nama, Rupa, and Nama-Rupa only?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 9998
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by SarathW » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:38 am

Is this a difficult question?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20090
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by retrofuturist » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:50 am

Greetings Sarath,
SarathW wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:38 am
Is this a difficult question?
More ill-directed than difficult, IMO.

Maybe it might make more sense to someone engaged with the incredibly complex rendering of paticcasamuppada as found in Visuddhimagga, so I'll steer clear until such time.

What I will say though in the meantime, is that in DN15 the Buddha warned Ananda not to under-estimate the depth of paticcasamuppada... he never said anything about it being inordinately complicated and complex. Be mindful not to conflate the two notions...

Good luck in finding an answer that meets your satisfaction.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2762
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by DooDoot » Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:03 am

I think Dependent Origination about the arising of sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, despair & the whole mass of suffering.

I think nama-rupa is affected by all conditions. For example, I think nama-rupa is beguiled by ignorance; trapped by sankharas it is conscious of; enslaved to sense spheres, contact, feeling and craving and is subjected to the suffering of attachment, becoming, birth, aging-death and sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, despair.
When one abides inflamed by lust, fettered, infatuated, contemplating gratification, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are built up for oneself in the future; and one’s craving—which brings renewal of being, is accompanied by delight and lust, and delights in this and that—increases. One’s bodily and mental troubles increase, one’s bodily and mental torments increase, one’s bodily and mental fevers increase, and one experiences bodily and mental suffering.

MN 149
I think if suffering is to be escaped, it is nama-rupa that must do the work to escape by engaging wise perception, wise intention, wise contact & wise attention; together with control of the physical body.
Feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention—these are called mentality. The four great elements and the material form derived from the four great elements—these are called materiality.

SN 12.2
He abides with mindfulness of the body established, with an immeasurable mind, and he understands as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder.

MN 38
Its seems obvious the only condition capable of doing the work to end suffering is nama-rupa; particularly nama; because intention & attention faculties of nama; as well as mindfulness, energy, faith, zeal, etc.

It seems all the highlighed dhammas below are 'nama-dhamma':
contact, feeling, perception, intention... zeal, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity & attention...

MN 111

SarathW
Posts: 9998
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by SarathW » Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:39 am

Thank you DD
I am in line with what you are thinking
However I will give my answer to my own question.
Please feel free to comment. (all of you)
=========
Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?
DO about is Nama-Rupa

If DO has Rupa (four great elements) at which point they come to the formula?
Rupa is the out growth of Nama-Rupa with the aide of nutriments.

Are all limbs include Nama only?
No

Are all limbs include Rupa only?
No

Are all limbs include Nama-Rupa only?
Yes

Are some limbs include Nama, Rupa, and Nama-Rupa only?
All limbs on DO not separable from each other. They all one just like we are now.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

James Tan
Posts: 850
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by James Tan » Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:53 am

One can't talk about namarupa in dependent origination until you are able to define correctly what it means .
:reading:

Dinsdale
Posts: 5930
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:23 am

James Tan wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:53 am
One can't talk about namarupa in dependent origination until you are able to define correctly what it means .
Here is the nidana "definition" of nama-rupa from SN12.2:

"And what is name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

I think that "mentality-materiality" is a reasonable translation for nama-rupa. I think it is roughly equivalent to the aggregates.
Note that phassa ( contact ) in nama does involve consciousness ( vinnana ).

Given the physical descriptions of birth, aging and death in DO, it looks like a psycho-physical process involving both mind and body.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Dinsdale
Posts: 5930
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:26 am

SarathW wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 3:39 am
All limbs on DO not separable from each other. They all one just like we are now.
They are all part of a process or state, in the same way that the aggregates are all part of a process or state. However we can look at them as individual aspects of the whole.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16453
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by mikenz66 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:22 am

This diagram, which was created by one of the participants in Ven Analayo's course on the Nibbana Sermons last year may be helpful.
You can find it in the PDF of the fourth lecture here: https://www.buddhistinquiry.org/resourc ... -lectures/
DependentOrigination.jpg
The idea is to enumerate the overlap between name-and-form and the other links, and it might be helpful to have that laid out. There are, obviously, different interpretations of dependent origination, but this diagram perhaps suggests that we should not think of it a step-by-step process.

That issue is discussed by Ven Analayo in conjunction with diagram at the start of lecture 4 and expanded with the aid of a cup and a ruler a few minutes into the video. See:
viewtopic.php?t=30940

:heart:
Mike

Dinsdale
Posts: 5930
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by Dinsdale » Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:31 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:22 am
There are, obviously, different interpretations of dependent origination, but this diagram perhaps suggests that we should not think of it a step-by-step process.
There are various ways of understanding the conditionality involved in DO, but I think the two most important ones are those described in the suttas, ie snychronous ( "While this nidana is present, then that nidana is present..." ) and sequential ( "When this nidana arises, then that nidana arises..." ).

Note that the first mode allows for such statements as: "While ignorance persists, suffering persists". In the suttas the second mode does look step-like, involving successive nidanas.

Some suggest feed-back loops in DO, though I don't see support for this idea in the suttas. Some interpretations are heavily focussed on the mutual dependence of consciousness and name+form, but the problem I see here is that most DO suttas don't actually describe this, rather they describe name+form arising in dependence upon consciousness.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16453
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:03 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:31 am
There are various ways of understanding the conditionality involved in DO, but I think the two most important ones are those described in the suttas, ie snychronous ( "While this nidana is present, then that nidana is present..." ) and sequential ( "When this nidana arises, then that nidana arises..." ).
Could you remind us of where these two cases appear?

We have, of course, in SN 12.1, etc https://suttacentral.net/sn12.1/
Consciousness is a condition for name and form.
viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṃ;
[consciousness-cause name-and-form]
When consciousness ceases, name and form cease.
viññāṇanirodhā nāmarūpanirodho;
[consciousness-cessation name-and-form-cessation]
Which I believe are both saying that consciousness is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for name-and-form.

But I'm not sure how one would tell whether these statements are synchronous or sequential. However, there may well be some indication in the Pali idioms that an expert could discern.

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16453
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:24 am

OK, here's another construct:

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.49
When consciousness exists name and form come to be.
viññāṇe sati nāmarūpaṃ hoti;
[consciousness (exists?) name-and-form exists/to be
When consciousness doesn’t exist name and form don’t come to be.
viññāṇe asati nāmarūpaṃ na hoti;
[consciousness (not-exists?) name-and-form not exists/to be
Synchronous or not?

See Sylvester's post here: viewtopic.php?t=23443&start=140#p337233

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2762
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:15 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:23 am
I think that "mentality-materiality" is a reasonable translation for nama-rupa. I think it is roughly equivalent to the aggregates.
I think the above idea is not relevant; as though the aggregates are something static. In other words, I personally doubt 'nama-rupa' is intended to refer to the 'five aggregates'.

'Nama' appears to be referring to mentality or mental faculties that can be engaged for the path; or otherwise drowned & enslaved by ignorance. For example, there can be wise feeling, wise perception, wise intention, wise contact & wise attention and there can be ignorant feeling, ignorant perception, ignorant intention, ignorant contact & ignorant attention. Yoniso and ayoniso manasikara (wise & unwise attention) are mentioned many times in the suttas, such as:
Lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for lack of mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said: careless attention.

AN 10.61
:candle:
Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:23 am
Given the physical descriptions of birth, aging and death in DO...
This has been posted many times but I think it remains unsubstantiated & unproven. I think the suttas might support the view of mental descriptions of birth, aging and death in DO; given the core notion in these descriptions is "satta"; which per SN 23.2 and SN 5.10 appears to be described as a "view". I continue to struggle to comprehend why folks view the descriptions of birth, aging and death in DO as "physical". When the mind imputes "self" or "satta" upon rupa (physicality); this does not make the imputing something physical. If aging & death were physical, why would the following discussion occur in SN 12.67?
On one occasion Ven. Sariputta and Ven. MahaKotthita were staying near Varanasi in the Deer Park at Isipatana. Then in the evening, arising from his seclusion, Ven. MahaKotthita went to Ven. Sariputta and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Sariputta: "Now tell me, Sariputta my friend: Are aging & death self-made or other-made or both self-made & other-made, or — without self-making or other-making — do they arise spontaneously?"

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ati/tip ... .than.html
:candle:
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:31 am
Some suggest feed-back loops in DO, though I don't see support for this idea in the suttas. Some interpretations are heavily focussed on the mutual dependence of consciousness and name+form, but the problem I see here is that most DO suttas don't actually describe this, rather they describe name+form arising in dependence upon consciousness.
This seems to be inferring there is a contradiction in the suttas. My impression is the mutual dependence of consciousness and nama+rupa is only mentioned in suttas (such as SN 12.67; DN 15) that don't trace back the causality to ignorance (although I have not read every sutta). In other words, these suttas target the primary cause as craving.

Dinsdale
Posts: 5930
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by Dinsdale » Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:35 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:03 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:31 am
There are various ways of understanding the conditionality involved in DO, but I think the two most important ones are those described in the suttas, ie snychronous ( "While this nidana is present, then that nidana is present..." ) and sequential ( "When this nidana arises, then that nidana arises..." ).
Could you remind us of where these two cases appear?

We have, of course, in SN 12.1, etc https://suttacentral.net/sn12.1/
Consciousness is a condition for name and form.
viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṃ;
[consciousness-cause name-and-form]
When consciousness ceases, name and form cease.
viññāṇanirodhā nāmarūpanirodho;
[consciousness-cessation name-and-form-cessation]
Which I believe are both saying that consciousness is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for name-and-form.

But I'm not sure how one would tell whether these statements are synchronous or sequential. However, there may well be some indication in the Pali idioms that an expert could discern.

:heart:
Mike
I'm referring to the general formula for conditionality in the DO suttas, which describe two modes of conditionality, I have described them as synchronous and sequential. Here for example in SN12.61:

"'When this is, that is.
"'From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
"'When this isn't, that isn't.
"'From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Both modes can apply, depending on whether you view the nidanas as events ( sequential ) or as states/processes ( synchronous ). So with your example, does it make sense to say that when an instance of consciousness arises, there is an instance of name+form? Or does it make more sense to say that while the state/process of consciousness is present, then the state/process of name+form is also present? It depends of course how exactly one interprets these two nidanas, and the relationship between them.

IMO this is an example of sufficient conditionality, but it depends on interpretation.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Dinsdale
Posts: 5930
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Is Dependent Origination about Nama,Rupa or Nama-Rupa?

Post by Dinsdale » Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:51 am

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:15 am
I continue to struggle to comprehend why folks view the descriptions of birth, aging and death in DO as "physical".
Simply because they are described in physical terms in the suttas, specifically in SN12.2 and MN9. Perhaps you don't want to accept this because it undermines your personal interpretation of DO? :shrug:
DooDoot wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:15 am
When the mind imputes "self" or "satta" upon rupa (physicality); this does not make the imputing something physical.
Irrelevant, since we are discussing physicality here, not imputing.
DooDoot wrote:
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:15 am
If aging & death were physical, why would the following discussion occur in SN 12.67?
On one occasion Ven. Sariputta and Ven. MahaKotthita were staying near Varanasi in the Deer Park at Isipatana. Then in the evening, arising from his seclusion, Ven. MahaKotthita went to Ven. Sariputta and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Sariputta: "Now tell me, Sariputta my friend: Are aging & death self-made or other-made or both self-made & other-made, or — without self-making or other-making — do they arise spontaneously?"
I think you have completely missed the point of this sutta, which is simply explaining that one nidana arises in dependence upon another, and not for any other reason:

"It's not the case, Kotthita my friend, that aging & death are self-made, that they are other-made, that they are both self-made & other-made, or that — without self-making or other-making — they arise spontaneously. However, from birth as a requisite condition comes aging & death."
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: denise, Faelig, Google [Bot], lostitude, robertk, Sam Vara and 37 guests