SN 12.20 Paccaya Sutta: Requisite Conditions

[mikenz66]

“Thus, bhikkhus, the actuality in this, the inerrancy, the nototherwiseness, specific conditionality: this is called dependent origination.

BB: At 56:20, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html and
56:27 the Four Noble Truths are said to be tatha, avitatha , anaññatha—the adjectives corresponding to the first three abstract nouns here. Spk gives a very specific interpretation (translated just below), though we might suspect the original sense was simply that the teaching of dependent origination is true, not false, and not other than real.

Spk: Actuality (tathatā) is said to indicate the occurrence of each particular phenomenon when its assemblage of appropriate conditions is present. Inerrancy (avitathatā) means that once its conditions have reached completeness there is no nonoccurrence, even for a moment, of the phenomenon due to be produced from those conditions. Nototherwiseness (anaññathatā) means that there is no production of one phenomenon by another’s conditions. The phrase specific conditionality is used to refer to the (individual) conditions for aging-and-death, etc., or to the conditions taken as a group (paccayasamūhato).

[Spiny O'Norman]

Sometimes some are left out, and there are suttas such as the Honeyball Sutta, which use a part of the sequence to head off in a slightly different direction (but still ultimately dukkha...):
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one objectifies. Based on what a person objectifies, the perceptions & categories of objectification assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye.

Mike

Yes, I appreciate that there are variations in the way DO is presented, but I still don't understand why you're suggesting DO is non-linear - presumably you're not suggesting that the order in which the nidanas appear is arbitrary? Or do you mean that each nidana arises in dependence on the preceding "set" of nidanas?

It may partly depends on whether one views the nidanas as events or processes - from reading the suttas they look to me more like processes.

Spiny

[Cittasanto]

Hi Spiney
Try reading my posts from this one hereit and the link maybe of assistance for your query.

[mikenz66]

“When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple has clearly seen with correct wisdom[55] as it really is this dependent origination and these dependently arisen phenomena, it is impossible that he will run back into the past, thinking: ‘Did I exist in the past? Did I not exist in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what did I become in the past?’ Or that he will run forward into the future, thinking: ‘Will I exist in the future? Will I not exist in the future? What will I be in the future? How will I be in the future? Having been what, what will I become in the future?’ Or that he will now be inwardly confused about the present thus: ‘Do I exist? Do I not exist? What am I? How am I? This being—where has it come from, and where will it go?’[56]

[55] Sammappaññāya. Spk: With path wisdom together with insight (savipassanāya maggapaññāya).

[56] BB: The sixteen cases of doubt are also mentioned at MN I 8,4-15. [MN 2 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html].

BB notes there:
According to MA, this passage is undertaken to show the taint of views (diṭṭhāsava, not expressly mentioned in the discourse) under the heading of doubt. However, it might be more correct to say that the taint of views, disclosed by [the next paragraph], emerges out of unwise attention in the form of doubt. The various types of doubt are already pregnant with the wrong views that will come to explicit expression in the next section.

For a discussion of their abandonment, see Visuddhimagga [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/index.html] 599 (Ppn 19:5-6)

5. After discerning the material body’s conditions in this way, he again discerns
the mental body in the way beginning: “Due to eye and to visible object eye-
consciousness arises” (S II 72; M I 111 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.018.than.html). When he has thus seen that the occurrence of mentality-materiality is due to conditions, then he sees that, as now, so in the
past too its occurrence was due to conditions, and in the future too its occurrence will be due to conditions.

6. When he sees it in this way, all his uncertainty is abandoned, that is to say,
the five kinds of uncertainty about the past stated thus: “Was I in the past? Was
I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been
what, what was I in the past?” (M I 8 [MN 2]), and also the five kinds of uncertainty
about the future stated thus: “Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future?
What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what,
what shall I be in the future?” (M I 8); and also the six kinds of uncertainty about
the present stated thus: “Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Whence will
this being have come? Whither will it be bound?” (M I 8).

and Visuddhimagga [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/index.html] 603-5 (Ppn 19:21-27).

21. When he has discerned the conditions of mentality-materiality in this way
by means of the round of kamma and the round of kamma-result, and has
abandoned uncertainty about the three periods of time, then all past, future and
present states are understood by him in accordance with death and rebirth-
linking. This is his full-understanding of the known (see XX.3).

22. He understands thus: “Aggregates produced in the past with kamma as
condition ceased there too. But other aggregates are produced in this becoming
with past kamma as their condition, although there is no single thing that has
come over from the past becoming to this becoming. And aggregates produced
in this becoming with kamma as their condition will cease. And in the future
becoming other aggregates will be produced, although no single thing will go
over from this becoming to the future becoming.
“Furthermore, just as, while the recitation from the teacher’s mouth does not
enter into the pupil’s mouth, yet recitation does not because of that fail to take
place in the pupil’s mouth—and while the potion drunk by the proxy does not
enter the sick man’s stomach, yet the sickness does not because of that fail to be
cured—and while the arrangement of the ornaments on the face does not pass
over to the reflection of the face in the looking glass, yet the arrangement of the
ornaments does not because of that fail to appear—and while the flame of a
lamp does not move over from one wick to another, yet the flame does not because
of that fail to be produced—so too, while nothing whatever moves over from the
past becoming to this becoming, or from this to the future becoming, [604] yet
aggregates, bases, and elements do not fail to be produced here with aggregates,
§bases, and elements in the past becoming as their condition, or in the future
becoming with aggregates, bases, and elements here as their condition.”

23.
Just as eye-consciousness comes next
Following on mind element,
Which, though it does not come from that,
Yet fails not next to be produced,
So too, in rebirth-linking, conscious
Continuity takes place:
The prior consciousness breaks up,
The subsequent is born from that.
They have no interval between,
Nor gap [that separates the two];
While naught whatever passes over,
Still rebirth-linking comes about.

24. When all states are understood by him thus in accordance with death and
rebirth-linking, his knowledge of discerning the conditions of mentality-
materiality is sound in all its aspects and the sixteen kinds of doubt are more
effectively abandoned. And not only that, but the eight kinds of doubt that occur
in the way beginning thus, “He is doubtful about the Master”
(A III 248; Dhs§1004)
http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pit ... ggo-e.html

5. Cetokhilasutta: An arrow in the mind
021.05. Bhikkhus, these five are arrows in the mind. What five?

Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu has doubts about the Teacher, he does not feel inclined towards the Teacher, is not reassured, the mind does not apply to become tranquil, to persevere, to dispel and make endeavour. The mind's lack of assurance, lack of application to become tranquil, to persevere, to dispel and make endeavour is the first arrow in the mind.

Again, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu has doubts about the Teaching, ... re ... about the Community of bhikkhus, ... re ... about the training, ... re ... and abides with an angry afflicted mind towards the co-associates in the holy life, he does not feel inclined towards them, is not reassured, the mind does not apply to become tranquil, to persevere, to dispel and make endeavour. The mind's lack of assurance, lack of application to become tranquil, to persevere, to dispel and make endeavour is the fifth arrow in the mind.

are abandoned too, and the sixty-two kinds of views are suppressed (See
DN 1 [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.01.0.bodh.html] and MN 102 [http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima3/102-pancattaya-e.html]).

25. The knowledge that has been established by the overcoming of doubt about
the three periods of time by discerning the conditions of mentality-materiality
according to the various methods should be understood as “purification by
overcoming doubt.” Other terms for it are “knowledge of the relations of states”
and “correct knowledge” and “right vision.”

26. For this is said: “Understanding of discernment of conditions thus,
‘Ignorance is a condition, formations are conditionally arisen, and both these
states are conditionally arisen,’ is knowledge of the causal relationship of states”
(Paþis I 50). And:
“When he brings to mind as impermanent, what states does he correctly
know and see? How is there right seeing? How, by inference from that, are all
formations clearly seen as impermanent? Wherein is doubt abandoned? When
he brings to mind as painful ... When he brings to mind as not-self, what states
does he correctly know and see? ... Wherein is doubt abandoned?
“When he brings to mind as impermanent, he correctly knows and sees the
sign. Hence ‘right seeing’ is said. Thus, by inference from that, all formations
are clearly seen as impermanent. Herein doubt is abandoned. When he brings
to mind as painful, he correctly knows and sees occurrence. Hence ... When he
brings to mind as not-self, he correctly knows and sees the sign and occurrence.
Hence ‘right seeing’ is said. Thus, by inference from that, all states are clearly
seen as not-self. Herein doubt is abandoned.
“Correct knowledge and right seeing and overcoming of doubt [605]—are
these things different in meaning and different in the letter or are they one in
meaning and only the letter is different? Correct knowledge and right seeing
and overcoming of doubt—these things are one in meaning and only the letter
is different” (Paþis II 62f.).

27. When a man practicing insight has become possessed of this knowledge,
he has found comfort in the Buddhas’ Dispensation, he has found a foothold, he
is certain of his destiny, he is called a “lesser stream-enterer.”

So would a bhikkhu overcome
His doubts, then ever mindfully
Let him discern conditions both
Of mind and matter thoroughly.

BB: Spk explains that the basic division expressed in the doubts—between existing and not existing in the past, etc.—reflects the antinomy of eternalism and annihilationism. The other doubts pertaining to past existence arise within an eternalist framework. Similar distinctions apply among the doubts pertaining to the future and the present.

[Spiny O'Norman]

1. The three lifetimes model - here nama-rupa can be ones actual physical
body and ones actual mind, which have arisen due to ignorance and craving
in ones previous life.

2. The "limited to this life" model - here nothing in the series can be an
actual physical thing because ignorance is mental and only other mental
things can arise from it.

Hi Vincent, I've just re-read SN 12.2 and MN9, and the way the nidanas are described seems completely inconsistent with your model 2, the exclusively mental ( "psychological"? ) interpretation. See particularly how the being, birth, aging and death nidanas are described in these suttas.

Spiny

[kirk5a]

Hi Vincent, I've just re-read SN 12.2 and MN9, and the way the nidanas are described seems completely inconsistent with your model 2, the exclusively mental ( "psychological"? ) interpretation. See particularly how the being, birth, aging and death nidanas are described in these suttas.

Spiny

I also would be interested in the explanation of how "greying, wrinkling" is mental.

[daverupa]

Hi Vincent, I've just re-read SN 12.2 and MN9, and the way the nidanas are described seems completely inconsistent with your model 2, the exclusively mental ( "psychological"? ) interpretation. See particularly how the being, birth, aging and death nidanas are described in these suttas.

Spiny

I also would be interested in the explanation of how "greying, wrinkling" is mental.

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

[vinasp]

Hi everyone,

Several posters are objecting that a "psychological model" of Dependent
Origination does not make sense. They refer to the links "being", "birth"
and "old-age-and-death", as incompatible with any such model.

I cannot give a full explanation on this thread, but I will do so elsewhere.

Briefly, the psychological model interprets these three links as representing
views about self.

Regards, Vincent.

[mikenz66]

“For what reason [is this impossible (running back to the past, etc)]? Because, bhikkhus, the noble disciple has clearly seen with correct wisdom as it really is this dependent origination and these dependently arisen phenomena.”


Mike

[Spiny O'Norman]

Hi Vincent, I've just re-read SN 12.2 and MN9, and the way the nidanas are described seems completely inconsistent with your model 2, the exclusively mental ( "psychological"? ) interpretation. See particularly how the being, birth, aging and death nidanas are described in these suttas.

Spiny

I also would be interested in the explanation of how "greying, wrinkling" is mental.

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

Good point. Paticcasamuppada describes the dependent origination of dukkha, and as I understand it dukkha represents the mental dart only - because a Buddha is still subject to aging, disease and death but does not experience them as dukkha ( Nibbana being synonymous with the cessation of dukkha ).

But does this approach work with the "birth" and "being" nidanas? Does it make since to think about a Buddha experiencing physical birth, or indeed experiencing the process of "being" in the 3 realms, assuming that a Buddha is no longer subject to DO?

Spiny

[Cittasanto]

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

it is explaining the rounds of samsara, the dart is only one aspect of this.

[Cittasanto]

Hi everyone,

Several posters are objecting that a "psychological model" of Dependent
Origination does not make sense. They refer to the links "being", "birth"
and "old-age-and-death", as incompatible with any such model.

I cannot give a full explanation on this thread, but I will do so elsewhere.

Briefly, the psychological model interprets these three links as representing
views about self.

Regards, Vincent.

Why can you not do this here?

[daverupa]

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

it is explaining the rounds of samsara, the dart is only one aspect of this.

This assumes "rounds of rebirth" is the explanatory target of paticcasamuppada, but the target is "dukkha"; "rounds of rebirth" is subsumed under the category 'dukkha' by being included in the 12th nidana.

Good point. Paticcasamuppada describes the dependent origination of dukkha, and as I understand it dukkha represents the mental dart only... But does this approach work with the "birth" and "being" nidanas?

It must; the birth nidana is not "births", but the conceiving on/in/around/from "my" birth; and similarly "my" death, encapsulating "my life" as a string of experiences happening "to me" and resulting in "my memories and values, who I am" - sakkaya-ditthi underwritten by asmimana, which is to say, avijja.

[Spiny O'Norman]

Good point. Paticcasamuppada describes the dependent origination of dukkha, and as I understand it dukkha represents the mental dart only... But does this approach work with the "birth" and "being" nidanas?

It must; the birth nidana is not "births", but the conceiving on/in/around/from "my" birth; and similarly "my" death, encapsulating "my life" as a string of experiences happening "to me" and resulting in "my memories and values, who I am" - sakkaya-ditthi underwritten by asmimana, which is to say, avijja.

So you're saying that it's not birth or being in the 3 realms which constitute dukkha, but the way we experience these things?

Spiny

[Cittasanto]

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

it is explaining the rounds of samsara, the dart is only one aspect of this.

This assumes "rounds of rebirth" is the explanatory target of paticcasamuppada, but the target is "dukkha"; "rounds of rebirth" is subsumed under the category 'dukkha' by being included in the 12th nidana.

no, it assumes samsara is a verb, something done. but as the list ends

Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.

Dukkha is a characteristic of samsara so in describing samsara Dukkha is present, as is often the case. there are other characteristics which can be seen within DO, such as anicca which can be seen represented in both its forward and backward motions, or not-self as the sequence clearly describes a universal process not a functioning of a self as better seen in SN12.35

but how does your interpretation of birth fit with any of the suttas descriptions?
how about the SN15 group as an example?

but to answer a question earlier, and hopefully cover a few other points.

But does this approach work with the "birth" and "being" nidanas? Does it make since to think about a Buddha experiencing physical birth, or indeed experiencing the process of "being" in the 3 realms, assuming that a Buddha is no longer subject to DO?

The Buddha was still subject to the previously accumulated cycle which commenced at his birth, as can be seen in texts such as the Anguilimala sutta, where Angulimala still received results of his previous deeds, there is still a process happening, Kamma still plays out (there are four kinds of Kamma, with an Enlightened being now solely doing "Neither Light or Dark Kamma"). They have broken the chain so the process will end in parinibbana, the final cooling, if the process ended at enlightenment there would be no teaching as the whole process would cease then, i.e. they would die at that point. remember an Arahant is still an individual even though all Arahants are of the same mind, which shows to some degree that there is a process still at work from there previous unenlightened state, otherwise they would all be one and the same in every way.

[Spiny O'Norman]

This assumes "rounds of rebirth" is the explanatory target of paticcasamuppada, but the target is "dukkha"; "rounds of rebirth" is subsumed under the category 'dukkha' by being included in the 12th nidana.

I would have thought that "being/becoming" is descriptive of "rounds of rebirth", with individual births arising in dependence - see the extract below.

Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta: Analysis of Dependent Co-arising translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu"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.

[kirk5a]

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

Both.

Ven. Sariputta:

"And what is stress? Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; not getting what one wants is stressful.[2] In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful. This is called stress.
...
Whatever birth, taking birth, descent, coming-to-be, coming-forth, appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] spheres of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth.
...
Whatever aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging. Whatever deceasing, passing away, breaking up, disappearance, dying, death, completion of time, break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death. This aging & this death are called aging & death.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

As to how the Buddha dealt with the stress of his aging and death, I think the answer is in the Arrow Sutta.

[daverupa]

So you're saying that it's not birth or being in the 3 realms which constitute dukkha, but the way we experience these things?

Until nibbana, any experience is via pancupadanakkhandha, and the fundamental upadana is attavada; in any event:

"Friend Visakha, neither is clinging the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates, nor is it something separate. Whatever desire & passion there is with regard to the five clinging-aggregates, that is the clinging there."

After nibbana, any experience is via pancakkhandha, until the final break-up of the aggregates - but note, that when talking about this breakup, we ought not say an arahat has died. Nibbana is without birth, without death.

but how does your interpretation of birth fit with any of the suttas descriptions?
how about the SN15 group as an example?

SN 15.* aren't discussing paticcasamuppada. It's bewildering to suggest that unimaginable lengths of time are in any way fundamental to the akalika doctrine of paticcasamuppada.

I would have thought that "being/becoming" is descriptive of "rounds of rebirth", with individual births arising in dependence

Again, no reason to make that nidana read "births". It is simply that with the thought "I was born" there is necessarily "I will die". You can't have agitation about death if you don't already buy into the delusion that "I was born". This is always past tense, because first one must think "I am" to get to "I am born of my parents" - it's a further accretion of attavada, and it always happens now if it happens at all.

Is paticcasamuppada explaining the physical dart, or the mental dart, or both? Because the Buddha's hair & body were seen to grey & wrinkle...

Both.

As to how the Buddha dealt with the stress of his aging and death, I think the answer is in the Arrow Sutta.

Well, let's have a look:

"Having been touched by that painful feeling, he does not resist (and resent) it. Hence, in him no underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness. And why not? As a well-taught noble disciple he knows of an escape from painful feelings other than by enjoying sensual happiness. Then in him who does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness, no underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He knows, according to facts, the arising and ending of those feelings, and the gratification, the danger and the escape connected with these feelings. In him who knows thus, no underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one who is not fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called a well-taught noble disciple who is not fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is not fettered to suffering, this I declare.

The bodily dart is never attenuated in life as both the putthujjana and the arahat feel that dart. Paticcasamuppada/-nirodha is not to do with that physical dart at all.

[Cittasanto]

but how does your interpretation of birth fit with any of the suttas descriptions?
how about the SN15 group as an example?

SN 15.* aren't discussing paticcasamuppada. It's bewildering to suggest that unimaginable lengths of time are in any way fundamental to the akalika doctrine of paticcasamuppada.

they are related to birth which is what the question (again put to you) was about.
the description of birth does not change whether in the paticcasamuppada sequence or the SN15 group.
Akalika means that it is true regardless of time frame, whether a Tathagata is present or not it is true, not that things are relevant or not in particular teachings.

[daverupa]

they are related to birth...

As simply as possible:

1. A sotapanna has seen paticcasamuppada for themselves, not theoretically.
2. A sotapanna need not have any psychic powers at all.
3. Therefore, seeing paticcasamuppada is necessarily unrelated to rebirth.

An understanding of paticcasamuppada cannot proceed on the basis of any notion of birth-as-rebirth.

What temporal succession is akālika? For an ariyasāvaka, paticcasamuppāda is a matter of direct reflexive certainty: the ariyasāvaka has direct, certain, reflexive knowledge of the condition upon which birth depends. He has no such knowledge about re-birth, which is quite a different matter. He knows for himself that avijjā is the condition for birth; but he does not know for himself that when there is avijjā there is re-birth. (That there is re-birth, i.e. samsāra, may remain, even for the ariyasāvaka, a matter of trust in the Buddha.)

The ariyasāvaka knows for himself that even in this very life the arahat is, actually, not to be found (cf. Khandha Samy. ix,3 <S.iii,109-15> ...), and that it is wrong to say that the arahat 'was born' or 'will die'. With sakkāyanirodha there is no longer any 'somebody' (or a person—sakkāya, q.v.) to whom the words birth and death can apply. They apply, however, to the puthujjana, who still 'is somebody'. But to endow his birth with a condition in the past—i.e. a cause—is to accept this 'somebody' at its face value as a permanent 'self'; for cessation of birth requires cessation of its condition, which, being safely past (in the preceding life), cannot now be brought to an end; and this 'somebody' cannot therefore now cease. Introduction of this idea into paticcasamuppāda infects the samudayasacca with sassataditthi and the nirodhasacca with ucchedaditthi. Not surprisingly, the result is hardly coherent. And to make matters worse, most of the terms—and notably sankhāra (q.v.)—have been misconceived by the Visuddhimagga.