tiltbillings wrote:jāti: birth or rebirth; it does not matter. Once you take time out of a process, the process is no longer a process.
One may dismiss the three life interpretation of conditioned co-production, but the moment-to-moment interpretation also ceases to have any meaning if one denies time/process. If something conditions something, there is a movement in time from not being conditioned to being conditioned, or from not being arisen to being arisen. Time.
Guess we have to clarify things a bit so that we are not talking at cross-purposes.
It is clear that time is involved from not being arisen to being arisen. The process of arising of jāti for example takes time naturally. But this has nothing to do with the dependence of jāti on bhava.
What I'm talking about is that D.O. tells us nothing about time. It just makes clear the dependence of things. It doesn't tell us "when this is then comes that, when this arises after some time that arises", it tells us "when this is that is, with the arising of this that arises". When there is one link of the 12 link formula, there are all links together. Whith the arising of one link, all links arise. When one link of the 12 link formula ceases, all links cease together. One thing is the origin of another thing. This doesn't mean for example when there is birth in the same moment one dies. It means that birth is the origin of death.
When things arise, time pases by. When things exist and change, time pases by. When things cease, time pases by.
But because of the dependence there can't be one link of the 12 link formula without the others. Inside of the dependence of the 12 links of D.O. time doesn't play any role.
acinteyyo wrote:It is the same thing like sankhārā-paccayā viññānam
Then how does viññāna function in the khandhas?
I don't know exactly what you mean with "how does it function in
viññāna is the presence of a phenomenon. a phenomenon consist of nāma+rūpa. viññāna and nāma+rūpa together constitute an experience. the presence of a phenomenon can only be "detected" through the six-sense bases. when there is an object which can be "detected" with the corresponding sense and the corresponding sense works properly (e.g. sight and and object which can be seen) then there is eye-consciousness which means the phenomenon is present. the arising of consciousness takes time naturally but the dependence again has nothing to do with time.
when there is avijjā there is not only the presence of the phenomenon there is also the presence of the (illusory) subject for whom the phenomenon is present (pañc'upādānakkhandhā), because of upādāna. when there is no avijjā there is only the phenomenon present (pañcakkhandhā).
maybe it's better you explain to me in other words (if possible) what you meant with your question.
best wishes, acinteyyo