Author Topic: Dependent Origination  (Read 29150 times)

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #45 on: April 15, 2010, 03:44:26 am »
"With his clinging as condition, being [comes to be]; with being as condition, birth; with birth as condition, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair come to be. Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering."

 So, how do you understand the link 'birth' in DO ?
 1. Literal meaning only.
 2. Non-literal meaning only.
 3. Both literal and non-literal meanings.

 Best wishes, Vincent.

Vincent, on the extract above I understand "being" ( "becoming" ) to refer to samsara generally, the process of repeated becoming in the 3 realms, which taken literally is referring to the cycle of birth and death.  So "birth" is generic in this context, any individual birth which arises in dependence on the general process of being / becoming.  Obviously ageing and death arise in dependence on birth.

As for interpretation I incline towards both the literal and figurative meanings.   I don't see enough evidence in the suttas to abandon the literal in favour of the figurative, and I don't find psychological versions of DO all that convincing. 

Spiny

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #46 on: April 15, 2010, 03:47:13 am »
Namarupam conditions salayatanam (the 6 senses - you get pulled out into the world of the 6 senses [once you've got a body, the senses come] - as Ajahn Amaro notes, the world of sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touch come alive and become far more real)
Salayatana conditions phasso (contact)

I'm not sure I get the distinction here between sense-consciousness and contact.  For example in dependence on eye and form we get eye-consciousness, with contact being the meeting of the three - but what does "contact" actually mean here?  Is it that eye-consciousness leads to us having contact with the visual form, and if so what is "us"?
I hope you see what I'm getting at. :)

Spiny

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #47 on: April 16, 2010, 07:14:28 am »
As for interpretation I incline towards both the literal and figurative meanings.   I don't see enough evidence in the suttas to abandon the literal in favour of the figurative, and I don't find psychological versions of DO all that convincing. 

Having said that I think it can be useful to look at the section of DO which clearly was intended psychologically, ie sense bases > contact > feeling > craving > clinging.  This is really an elaboration of the second Noble Truth.

Spiny

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #48 on: April 20, 2010, 03:59:03 am »
In both MN9 and MN38 it is said that mentality-materiality ( nama-rupa ) arises in dependence on consciousness.  And that with the cessation of consciousness there is the cessation of mentality-materiality ( eg MN 38.22 ).
What are the implications of this? 

Spiny

Offline retrofuturist

  • Member
  • Posts: 388
    • View Profile
    • Dhamma Wheel (Theravada forum)
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2010, 04:11:32 am »
Greetings Spiny,

In both MN9 and MN38 it is said that mentality-materiality ( nama-rupa ) arises in dependence on consciousness.  And that with the cessation of consciousness there is the cessation of mentality-materiality ( eg MN 38.22 ).
What are the implications of this?


You'll only come to know that if you make a special effort for learn what nama-rupa is referring to. Mentality-materiality is better than mind-body, but still has scope for improvement

My recommendation would be to download Bhikkhu Nanananda's Nibbana Sermons here - http://lirs.ru/do/sutra/Nibbana_Sermons,Nanananda.pdf - and search for the word "whirlpool" or "vortex"... and you'll come across several instances of him discussing the relationship between the two.

If you're as interested in Dependent Origination as you seem, it actually wouldn't hurt to start with Nibbana Sermon 1 and go the whole way through them as I've done. It depends on if you're in a rush to get to address a particular point.

If you can get your hands on a copy of the full text, Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's "Practical Dependent Origination" is also very good.

Metta,
Retro. :)

Offline swampflower

  • Member
  • Posts: 210
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #50 on: April 20, 2010, 05:10:55 pm »
retro

Thank you for the link to Bhikkhu Nanananda's Nibbana Sermons :headbow:
Om Tare Tutare Svaha

"All that we are is the result of what we have thought.  The mind is everything.  What we think we become." Buddha Sakyamuni

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #51 on: April 21, 2010, 03:19:00 am »
Greetings Spiny,

In both MN9 and MN38 it is said that mentality-materiality ( nama-rupa ) arises in dependence on consciousness.  And that with the cessation of consciousness there is the cessation of mentality-materiality ( eg MN 38.22 ).
What are the implications of this?

You'll only come to know that if you make a special effort for learn what nama-rupa is referring to. Mentality-materiality is better than mind-body, but still has scope for improvement

Thanks, I'll have a look.  My understanding so far is that nama-rupa has a specialised meaning in the context of DO, and refers to kamma resultants.   This ties in with the DO meaning of "formations", which again relates to kammic imprints.
It's probably worth mentioning that in DO nama-rupa doesn't include consciousness, eg MN 9.54: "Feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention - these are called mentality".  This makes sense because in DO nama-rupa arises in dependence on consciousness.

Spiny

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #52 on: May 04, 2010, 04:26:06 am »
Just to broaden out the discussion, I would like to ask "Why did the Buddha teach DO?"
My reading is that DO is esentially an elaboration of the second Noble Truth, analysing the cause / origination of suffering at a number of different levels, including the psychological.
Your thoughts?

Spiny

Offline ABC

  • Member
  • Posts: 344
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #53 on: May 04, 2010, 07:48:34 pm »
"If, monk, anyone teaches a doctrine of disenchantment with decay-and-death, of dispassion [leading to] its cessation, that suffices for him to be called a monk who teaches Dhamma. SN 12.16

And what are dependently co-arisen phenomena? Aging & death are dependently co-arisen phenomena: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation. SN 12.20

"And what may be said to be subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement? Spouses & children... men & women slaves... goats & sheep... fowl & pigs... elephants, cattle, horses, & mares... gold & silver are subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement. Subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement are these acquisitions, and one who is tied to them, infatuated with them, who has totally fallen for them, being subject to birth, seeks what is likewise subject to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement. This is ignoble search. MN 26

“On seeing a form with the eye, with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. MN 38

a sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die, is unagitated, and is free from longing. He has nothing whereby he would be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die? Not dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he long? MN 140

 ;D
« Last Edit: May 04, 2010, 07:53:24 pm by ABC »
Therefore, Ananda, engage with me friends and not as opponents. That will be for your long-term well-being & happiness - MN 122

Offline Ngawang Drolma

  • Member
  • Posts: 1259
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #54 on: May 04, 2010, 07:51:58 pm »
Awesome, ABC   :anjali:

Offline TashiNyima

  • Member
  • Posts: 188
  • namo kalyanamitraya
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #55 on: May 26, 2010, 10:18:00 am »
Dear Friends

om svasti

I apologize for re-posting this from another thread, but thought it might be helpful.

Please read this brief excerpt from the Regent Maitreya on Dependent Origination in Madhyantavibhaga III.18c-d, with Ju Mipham's Commentary:

Maitreya:
Cause, effect, and effort,
Without exaggeration and denigration.


Ju Mipham:
Dependent origination refers to the fact that all outer and inner phenomena arise in dependence upon, and in relation to, causes and conditions. The entire inner realm of sentient beings comes about through the twelve links of dependent origination, which run from ignorance through old age and death. All outer phenomena as well arise through the gathering of causes and conditions, just as a sprout arises from a seed. They are not uncaused, nor do they arise from things that are not their causes, such as time or the Almighty.

[...] In this context, exaggeration refers to taking something that is not the cause of a particular result to be its cause, as is the case when sentient beings are believed to be created by time or the Almighty. Denigration, on the other hand, entails denying a cause to be so, as when, for example, it is held that the five aggregates in one's present life did not arise from the five aggregates of a previous life, or when it is believed that karma and the afflictions are not what cause sentient beings to be born. (end of excerpt)


mangalam

Offline Valtiel

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #56 on: July 21, 2010, 06:16:59 pm »
Quote
As for interpretation I incline towards both the literal and figurative meanings.   I don't see enough evidence in the suttas to abandon the literal in favour of the figurative, and I don't find psychological versions of DO all that convincing. 

Hi Spiny,

While this is fine of course, you're free to believe whatever you'd like, I do have a sincere question for anyone who denies the psychological model. Do you then view life as inherent suffering? If not, then how can one be free of suffering in this lifetime? Is suffering inherent in things, or psychological? What is suffering? Ok, that was technically a couple questions, but all of them are sincere.

Offline Caz

  • My I strive for the perfection of enlightenment.
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2192
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #57 on: July 22, 2010, 01:10:10 am »
Quote
As for interpretation I incline towards both the literal and figurative meanings.   I don't see enough evidence in the suttas to abandon the literal in favour of the figurative, and I don't find psychological versions of DO all that convincing. 

Hi Spiny,

While this is fine of course, you're free to believe whatever you'd like, I do have a sincere question for anyone who denies the psychological model. Do you then view life as inherent suffering? If not, then how can one be free of suffering in this lifetime? Is suffering inherent in things, or psychological? What is suffering? Ok, that was technically a couple questions, but all of them are sincere.

One shouldnt abandon the Psychological aspect of it either, The two views of such are very helpful.  :pray:
http://emodernbuddhism.com/

This eBook Modern Buddhism – The Path of Compassion and Wisdom, in three volumes, is being distributed freely at the request of the author Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. The author says: "Through reading and practicing the instructions given in this book, people can solve their daily problems and maintain a happy mind all the time." So that these benefits can pervade the whole world, Geshe Kelsang wishes to give this eBook freely to everyone.

We would like to request you to please respect this precious Dharma book, which functions to free living beings from suffering permanently. If you continually read and practice the advice in this book, eventually your problems caused by anger, attachment and ignorance will cease.

Please enjoy this special gift from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, who dedicates: "May everyone who reads this book experience deep peace of mind, and accomplish the real meaning of human life."

Offline Spiny Norman

  • Member
  • Posts: 5081
  • Cool baby yeah!
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #58 on: July 22, 2010, 01:45:12 am »
Quote
As for interpretation I incline towards both the literal and figurative meanings.   I don't see enough evidence in the suttas to abandon the literal in favour of the figurative, and I don't find psychological versions of DO all that convincing. 

Hi Spiny,

While this is fine of course, you're free to believe whatever you'd like, I do have a sincere question for anyone who denies the psychological model. Do you then view life as inherent suffering? If not, then how can one be free of suffering in this lifetime? Is suffering inherent in things, or psychological? What is suffering? Ok, that was technically a couple questions, but all of them are sincere.

I don't deny the psychological model of the 12 links, I just don't find it all that convincing.  Perhaps it makes more sense to focus on that contact>feeling>craving>clinging section, which clearly is psychological, and not worry about trying to squeeze the other links into a mental model?

Suffering is traditionally both physical and mental, so I'm not sure that helps us very much with this question.

Spiny

Offline Valtiel

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Dependent Origination
« Reply #59 on: July 22, 2010, 06:58:59 am »
Quote
Suffering is traditionally both physical and mental, so I'm not sure that helps us very much with this question.
 

Traditionally as in that's how most people see it, but it seems the Buddha taught otherwise. Physical pain can even be interpreted as sensory pleasure for some, in certain situations, so clearly physical pain is not in and of itself suffering. Suffering is mental no matter which way you cut it. And just as we do not need to become mentally entangled in sensory pleasures, the same is true of sensory displeasure. Has absolutely all sensory pain you've experienced been what you'd call suffering? Is a buddha not free of suffering until he dies? If he cannot be free of sensory pain in the here-and-now, why can he be free of sensory pleasure in the here-and-now? It's all the same to a buddha.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal