Are cloths I am wearing, a part of my Nama-Rupa?

[Ontheway]

How can we apply Nama-Rupa in Dependent Origination for being in Arupavacara realms?
ie: Vinnana paccya Nama-rupa.

You can read Paṭhamabhavasutta (AN 3.76), it answers your question.

"Arūpadhātuvepakkañca, ānanda, kammaṁ nābhavissa, api nu kho arūpabhavo paññāyethā”ti?"

“No hetaṁ, bhante”.

“Iti kho, ānanda, kammaṁ khettaṁ, viññāṇaṁ bījaṁ, taṇhā sneho. Avijjānīvaraṇānaṁ sattānaṁ taṇhāsaṁyojanānaṁ paṇītāya dhātuyā viññāṇaṁ patiṭṭhitaṁ evaṁ āyatiṁ punabbhavābhinibbatti hoti. Evaṁ kho, ānanda, bhavo hotī”ti."

So what is the answer in your language?

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Here the Suttanta said Vinnana conditions the origination of beings. But Arupabrahma is a special place (or should I say it is a trap?) for beings where no physical bodies present (in contrast, asannisatta realm with beings that have physical bodies but no mind). So it is a special case, but still the general principle of Paticca Samuppada applies. The birth to those Arupabrahma loka is due to the development of high Jhanas (arūpa-āyatanas) with aspiration.

[Spiny Norman]

Are cloths I am wearing, a part of my Nama-Rupa?
What about my finger nails and hair etc?

I would say these are examples of rupa. Nama is about how you experience and relate to these "material" rupa elements.
MN140 makes the distinction between internal and external rupa, which seems to mean inside v. outside the body.

[SarathW]

Dependent origination without Nama-Rupa! What is this?
Also not there is another DO without the six sense spheres,

With ignorance as condition there is a (volitional) process, with a (volitional) process as condition: consciousness, with consciousness as condition: mind, with mind as condition: the sixth sense sphere, with the sixth sense sphere as condition: contact, with contact as condition: feeling, with feeling as condition: craving, with craving as condition: attachment, with attachment as condition: continuation, with continuation as condition: birth, with birth as condition: ageing, death, and so there is an origination of this whole mass of suffering.

https://suttacentral.net/vb6/en/anandajoti

[asahi]

Firstly , namarupa doesnt necessarily means your namarupa or my namarupa . It doesnt restricted to mean body-mind .

It is incorrect to say :

Are cloths I am wearing,
a part of my Nama-Rupa?

Accurate way of saying is :

Are cloths I am wearing,
a part of the Nama-Rupa?

[samseva]

I would say these are examples of rupa. Nama is about how you experience and relate to these "material" rupa elements.
MN140 makes the distinction between internal and external rupa, which seems to mean inside v. outside the body.

I looked over MN 140. It deals with dhātu, not rūpa (and also not nāma-rūpa).

The only few mentions of rūpa describe perceiving objects with the senses, which is the definition of rūpa, but not rūpa as in nāma-rūpa, all in this sentence (all the others are part of a simile of a goldsmith forging jewellery):

Seeing a sight with the eye, one is preoccupied with a sight that’s a basis for happiness or sadness or equanimity.
Cakkhunā rūpaṁ disvā somanassaṭṭhāniyaṁ rūpaṁ upavicarati, domanassaṭṭhāniyaṁ rūpaṁ upavicarati, upekkhāṭṭhāniyaṁ rūpaṁ upavicarati

[Coëmgenu]

SN 12.19 breaks down internal-external with "this body" and "external name and form."

Iti ayañceva kāyo bahiddhā ca nāmarūpaṁ

It has a parallel where bahiddhā nāmarūpa is instead "all external signs," but I have to find it.

[Bundokji]

Clothes might be relevant to the perception of internal and external, not what Nama-Rupa means.

In terms of the elements, form can refer to earth element as it has to do with the perception of solidity. In everyday language, cloths can be also used to convey form as in the case of "wearing a uniform".

[Spiny Norman]

I would say these are examples of rupa. Nama is about how you experience and relate to these "material" rupa elements.
MN140 makes the distinction between internal and external rupa, which seems to mean inside v. outside the body.

I looked over MN 140. It deals with dhātu, not rūpa (and also not nāma-rūpa).

The only few mentions of rūpa describe perceiving objects with the senses, which is the definition of rūpa, but not rūpa as in nāma-rūpa, all in this sentence (all the others are part of a simile of a goldsmith forging jewellery):

Seeing a sight with the eye, one is preoccupied with a sight that’s a basis for happiness or sadness or equanimity.
Cakkhunā rūpaṁ disvā somanassaṭṭhāniyaṁ rūpaṁ upavicarati, domanassaṭṭhāniyaṁ rūpaṁ upavicarati, upekkhāṭṭhāniyaṁ rūpaṁ upavicarati

MN140 describes the four great elements (mahabhuta) which are the basis of rupa. What we actually experience are sense-objects derived from these four great elements.
See SN12.2 for the description of rupa as a component of nama-rupa : the four great elements, and the form derived from them.

Based on the SN12.2 description of nama-rupa, I think the nama component represents how we react to sense-objects derived from rupa.

In SN12.2 vinnana is the requisite condition for nama-rupa. One way of understanding this is to say that nama-rupa represents everything we can be conscious of, both mentally and materially.

But why is the distinction between nama and rupa introduced in DO? What purpose does this serve?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Since when dream is Rupa? Any Sutta reference?

PTS Dictionary:

Rūpa (nt.) [cp. Vedic rūpa, connected etymologically with varpa (Grassmann). — The nom. pl. is rūpā & rūpāni] form, figure, appearance, principle of form, etc.

Near Sāvatthī. “Monks, any desire-passion with regard to forms is a defilement of the mind. Any desire-passion with regard to sounds… aromas… flavors… tactile sensations… ideas is a defilement of the mind. When, with regard to these six bases, the defilements of awareness are abandoned, then the mind is inclined to renunciation. The mind fostered by renunciation feels malleable for the direct knowing of those qualities worth realizing.”

Metta,
Paul.