Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and texts.
Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Sylvester » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:36 am


Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Sylvester » Thu May 19, 2011 5:43 am

Just a little something for the Gombrich fans on "Namarupa".

His student, Sue Hamilton, seems to be another proponent for the argument that the Buddha's usage of "Namarupa" ought to be understood in the context of the contemporary usage of that time. I've not found her "Identity and Experience" where she argues for this in detail, but a summary of her thesis is found from p.150 onwards here -

http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=pE9 ... &q&f=false

In her view, the Vedic conception of "Namarupa" is that Nama constitutes that which is "named/conceptualised/conceived", while Rupa is that which is "apperceived", phenomena which differentiate and distinguish one subject from the next. Note, that her thesis differs from Jurewicz who seems to argue that Namarupa represent "naming" and "giving form".

There's a delicious hint that Hamilton discusses the wretched vinnana anidassana riddle, but lots of it are excluded from the Google Book preview. But, better yet, she develops a really good reading for DN 15's adhivacanasamphassa and patighasamphassa and ties that to her conception of Namarupa (or she could have been totally influenced by Ven Nanavira's interpretation of the same...)

Still, there is something quite useful in Hamilton's thesis which she may not herself have noticed. If Namarupa is how a "subject" is delineated by others, and such delineation of a person vide its khandhas is possible only because of that "person's" clinging, perhaps it will not be impossible to dovetail the Vedic idea of Namarupa with the unique Buddhist spin of Namarupa being the khandhas, plus some.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby mikenz66 » Thu May 19, 2011 6:21 am

Thanks Sylvester, I'll check that book out when we get back access to our library...

I'm not sure I'm a Gombrich fan, but it is interesting how, as you say, some of the academics come to these conclusions that sound similar to Vens. Nanavira and/or Nanananda, but from a quite different path.

Actually, that reminds me that a few posts above Kenshou was promising to summarise relevant parts of Jurewicz's paper in the PTS journal... :reading:



:anjali:
Mike

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Sylvester » Thu May 19, 2011 7:36 am

What I like about Hamilton's thesis of Namarupa is that it avoids Gombrich's proposition that the full DO presentation was the accidental hobbling together of "true Buddhist" DO and the Buddha's parody of Vedic cosmogeny.

What will be really interesting is how Jurewicz and Hamilton arrived at very different readings of Namarupa, Jurewicz' being a perspective of that which names, while Hamilton views it as that which is named.

I don't have the Upanishad handy for now, but I think there's one which attempts to explain Namarupa by the river simile - the rivers lose their nama and rupa, once they join the sea. This seems more in line with Hamilton's explanation, but I'm not sure if that Upanishad was one that pre- or post-dated the Buddha.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby mikenz66 » Thu May 19, 2011 8:19 am


Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Sylvester » Thu May 19, 2011 9:51 am

I suspect that what Gombrich calls "individuation" is on the part of Namarupa, what in grammar would be called the agent or the subject. I read Hamilton as proposing Namarupa to be that which is the "object" or patient of individuation. What makes for nama and rupa, in Hamilton's presentation, is the subjective relation by the "other" to the namarupa. But, that's just how Hamilton seems to me; perhaps my reading would change once I get my hands on her "Identity and Experience".

Therein lies the differences between Ven Nanananda's/Gombrich's functionalist nama (as naming) and Hamilton's object (as named).

I hope the differences between Hamilton and Jurewicz are not going to turn on how a Vedic word was inflected. If memory does not fail me, Gombrich mentioned a new reading of the Vedas which displaces the old scholarship of "no rebirth in the Vedas", based purely on the new reading assigning a different grammatical case to a previously accepted inflection.

morning mist
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 3:31 pm

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby morning mist » Thu May 19, 2011 6:36 pm

with metta,

Gena1480
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:36 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Gena1480 » Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:29 am

the vedic discribe the Jhana of nothing
the buddha discribes cessation of feeling and perception
the difference between two
is the Jhana of nothing can be remembered even if does not have Consciousness
the cessation of feeling and percetion can not be remembered.
metta

User avatar
manas
Posts: 2251
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby manas » Tue May 29, 2012 12:44 pm

Then the Blessed One, picking up a tiny bit of dust with the tip of his fingernail, said to the monk, "There isn't even this much form...feeling...
perception...fabrications...consciousness that is constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change, that will stay just as it is as long as eternity."

User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby ancientbuddhism » Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:05 pm

Last edited by ancientbuddhism on Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854

Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)


nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby nowheat » Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:32 pm


nowheat
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby nowheat » Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:51 pm


User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby ancientbuddhism » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:41 pm

Nāmarūpa is one of the most misunderstood of pāḷi idioms, of which ‘name & form’ is a poor gloss. Its context is its arising with consciousness of sense-objects, and it functions as the thoughts and intentions (saṅkappavittakkā) of these as a ‘recognition (nāma) of sense-objects (rūpa)’. The puthujjana is not dividing up nāmarūpa to concoct a self, but rather is taking the ephemera of nāmarūpa as real.
I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854

Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)


suttametta
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 2:55 pm

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby suttametta » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:51 pm

Hi Folks, Take a look at Punnaji's charts

http://www.bhantepunnaji.com/ongoing.htm

According to him, namarupa is name and image, and four great elements are the mental data of hardness, etc. I also want to stress that his explanations of how to put paticcasamuppada into practice provide a working model. Meaning, you can use his model and method to achieve the results he describes. In my opinion, this lends credence to his claims. Then, the claims of a parody, while possible, are just perhaps an inside joke, but not the main point. It would also render the alternative models cited in the suttas Dmytro posted as ancillary, explanatory of or subordinate to the 12-link model.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:22 am

"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Dmytro
Posts: 1449
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Dmytro » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:00 am



User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby ancientbuddhism » Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:37 pm

I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854

Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)


Truth_Seeker1989
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 9:08 am
Location: New York State, USA
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Truth_Seeker1989 » Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:17 pm

Everything that makes you, you, is the result of your Environment (Society, Culture, Family, Friends, Etc), Genetics/Biology (Your brain which makes the mind possible, Inborn diseases such as Down Syndrome, or even Psociopathy, etc), Thoughts (Everything you think affects your mind, and the person you are), Speech (Same as thoughts, but words affect your environment as well), Actions (Same as Speech), and the Elements (Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Space, and Time).

User avatar
ancientbuddhism
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
Location: Cyberia

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby ancientbuddhism » Wed Jun 13, 2012 10:46 pm

Last edited by ancientbuddhism on Tue Feb 18, 2014 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854

Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)


Truth_Seeker1989
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 9:08 am
Location: New York State, USA
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination and the Vedas

Postby Truth_Seeker1989 » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:07 am

Is there a reason why we must keep referring to contemporary Western scholars about Dependent Origination? Was there something deficient in the Buddha as a teacher that prompts us to do this?


With Metta :namaste:
Everything that makes you, you, is the result of your Environment (Society, Culture, Family, Friends, Etc), Genetics/Biology (Your brain which makes the mind possible, Inborn diseases such as Down Syndrome, or even Psociopathy, etc), Thoughts (Everything you think affects your mind, and the person you are), Speech (Same as thoughts, but words affect your environment as well), Actions (Same as Speech), and the Elements (Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Space, and Time).


Return to “Early Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine