Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Jan 22, 2022 7:54 pm
Stop spreading misinformation immediately. Dependent origination is about arising and ceasing. "With the arising of this, that arises. With the cessation of this, that ceases." It's a basic part of the description of DO in the Pāli Canon, let alone the Āgamas. What you say about the parallel is incorrect nonsense you made up. I contend that it is lying precisely because you made it up out of your own head and maintain its truth despite being corrected and refuted.
What misinformation?
:::::::::::::
First:
:::::::::::::
Concerning the SN 47.42 parallel, namely SA 609, I have already said that I took the general meanings from the Chinese dictionary.
You added that there were some Sanskrit words that were additionally referred in that dictionary — samudaya for 集 — and astaṃ-gama for 沒.
2. Does that make a difference anyway? — Paṭiccasamuppāda is not samudaya/nirodha.
See below.
::::::::::::::::::::
Second:
::::::::::::::::::::
In accordance with custom, and conforming with (wrongly) accepted standards, "dependent origination" is the usually erroneous translation of paṭiccasamuppāda.
Paṭiccasamuppāda has to do with the twelve links (nidānā) — in which citta appears in the second one; and nāmarūpa as the fourth one.
There is a DIRECT causal relationship between these links, in their strict chronology — (and a correlation otherwise).
Paṭiccasamuppāda is about the chronological process.
When referring to paṭiccasamuppāda, you are quoting part of the most referred sutta.
In this case, a learned noble disciple carefully and properly attends to dependent origination itself:
Tatra, bhikkhave, sutavā ariyasāvako paṭiccasamuppādaṁyeva sādhukaṁ yoniso manasi karoti:
‘When this exists, that is; due to the arising of this, that arises.
‘iti imasmiṁ sati idaṁ hoti, imassuppādā idaṁ uppajjati;
When this doesn’t exist, that is not; due to the cessation of this, that ceases. That is:
imasmiṁ asati idaṁ na hoti, imassa nirodhā idaṁ nirujjhati
You have forgetten the crucial links' part:
avijjā is a condition for saṅkhārā.
yadidaṁ avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā;
saṅkhārā are a condition for viññāṇa. …
saṅkhārapaccayā viññāṇaṁ …pe…
Which shows that there is nothing of the sort, like "nāmarūpa is a condition for citta / nāmarūpapaccayā citta !?!?!?).
Note that I still don't agree with this grammatically wrong translation of the relationship between the links — which should properly read:" avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā" = "saṅkhārā are the feedback of avijjā"; etc.
And I know that you call my translation heresy — which I take as a compliment, coming from you.
Also, I still have to check that other suttas like SN 12.61, have a perfect parallel. Does SN 12.61 have one? — Is the following set of rules formulated the same way in the parallels:
- attend to paṭiccasamuppāda.
- when this exists, that is, etc.
- avijjāpaccayā saṅkhārā; etc.
One more time, samuppāda is not samudaya.
Samuppāda implies a direct cause.
I have already covered the particularity of samutpād (samuppāda), as the ***causative*** of samutpad.
The direct cause of citta is avijjā.
And the direct cause of saḷāyatana is nāmarūpa.
Samudaya has, in the very "Buddhistic" Maitrayaniya Upanishad, the meaning of "assemblage" (cf. 集 above in SA 609), or "aggregation".
Nāmarūpa is not the direct cause of citta. It is just that citta aggregates (with nāmarūpa) , when nāmarūpa aggregates.
The same way that there is aggregation of the nutriments with the body. Or that there is aggregation of "turning the mano towards the origin", and the phenomena (that is itself aggregating).
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Conclusion:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The formulation of your title is wrong. The proper translation of paṭiccasamuppāda is not "dependent origination" - (nor should it be the translation of samudaya).
On top of using this wrong translation of paṭiccasamuppāda, you don't even respect the chronology of the links, as you even forgot to mention them — Therefore leading you to you consent to Ceisiwr's "citta is dependent on nāmarūpa".
It's just a mess - (and you seem to indulge with that).
One thing I know, is that citta is the result of the flow that falls down (utpād) from avijjā. And that it is called cittasaṅkhāra.
This cittasaṅkhāra will ultimately feed-back vijjā to avijjā — which is what paṭicca is all about.
_____