Thanks! See I think we agree in spirit, but not in direct wording here.Bundokji wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 4:28 pmWhen you begin with a wrong assumption, everything you build on it would be equally wrong.
Where did the Buddha ever mentioned that "everything is dependently originated"? he seemed to introduce the teachings on DO as a response to such generalized statements:
So, things (as opposite to the nonsensical notion of everything) arise due to conditions, and cease when the conditions necessary for their arising ceases. Where is the nihilism in that?"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.
The "things" vs "everything" idea doesn't work for me. If all things are such and such, then everything is such and such. "Things" can actually be used in the same way as "everything", albeit with a bit more ambiguity.
That said, what I see in the sutta you provided is exactly what I believe: The Buddha saw such discussions about everything existing or not as unhelpful. So he instead would redirect whoever was asking to DO, which seems to speak about a being, not about literally all things.
That said, some would argue that DO applies to absolutely everything. We end up in a weird area because the Buddha declared that the all was the six senses and their bases. The six senses are part of DO, however their bases are not mentioned. So perhaps this is the key? The six senses, of course, are dependently originated, but not necessarily their bases?
I don't know the suttas well enough to say for sure.