Hi retroretrofuturist wrote:Greetings Piotr,OK.piotr wrote:Hi Retrofuturist,
Could you rephrase it? I can't understand your point here.retrofuturist wrote:Even if one could take the leap and say it was inferred, one could also take the leap and say that it was inferred that this example pertains to nama-rupa, salayatana, phassa and vedana... therefore still being a representation of the dependent origination relationship.
I don't see SN 35.237 as a complete form of the idappaccayata principle, because these crucial elements are omitted: "From the arising of this, that arises... From the ceasing of this, that ceases."
Despite that, I do think that SN 35.237 actually is about dependent origination, and that it covers the nidanas from nama-rupa through to vedana.
Because of a combination of both of those factors, it doesn't adequately satisfy the challenge I laid out for Tilt.
Does that make sense?
Hmm, it looks to my untrained eye that -
is formulated in the standard -Hatthesu, sati ādānanikkhepanaṃ hoti; (...) Hatthesu, asati ādānanikkhepanaṃ na hoti
.imasmim sati, idam hoti ... Imasmim asati, idam na hoti
The "this/that" formulation is general and the appropriate dhammas can be used to populate the "this/that".