Much obliged for your explanation, ancientbuddhism.
I would be the last to disagree with your thoughts about maññati
of a self, since that features so prominently in DN 15, even if the terminology used there is slightly different (attānaṃ paññapento paññapeti
). This attapaññatti
, I suspect, should be synonymous with the attamaññati
that you allude to, or perhaps they are closely connected via the papañca
process in MN 18. MN 18 explains papañca
as a potential consequence of paññatti
into contact etc. MN 11 makes the express connection between papañca
and the views of existence/non-existence, which is what draws maññati
close together as culprits in Clinging.
could be a particularly unskilfull type of paññatti
, since DN 15's analysis of nāmarūpa
as furnishing paññāvacara
(a sphere of wisdom) seems to be mediated by adhivacanapatha
(a pathway for designation), niruttipatha
(a pathway for language) and paññattipatha
(a pathway for description/manifestation). Awakening, it seems, cannot dispense with paññatti
, no matter how dangerously close it appears to be the precursor of attamaññati
But, while nāmarūpa
has a prominent role in the construction of self-view as a consequence of contact, I still find it hard to ignore the other aspect of nāmarūpa
described in DN 15. That seems to be a description of rebecoming and the formation of a new being. The reference to mātukucchi
(mother's womb) is a clear indicator of this. The idea that nāmarūpa
(take shape) in the womb, also does not appear to be a reference to the cognitive process or even adhivacanasamphassa
, but looks like a throwback to the Upanishadic idea of nāmarūpa
as name and appearance/embodiment.
Unless we accept that nāmarūpa
as a term actually has 2 distinct meanings, I think we may need to parse the compound in the the same way when describing either process, ie as a dvanda
. I'm currently experimenting with a dvanda
reading of nāmarūpa
that preserves the potential for attamaññati
, but it'll be a while before I'm am even half-sure.