Greetings Jack,
Jack wrote:I agree with the others that you need the category of mental formations to account for all the other mental constituents.
In compiling this, I've wanted to keep the scope of development restricted to the suttas, and by doing so leaving out anything that could be considered a later-development.
Why do you call it a non-time-delineated model?
This is because it isn't pegged across three lifetimes as it is in the commentaries (and thus, any sutta translations that depend on the commentaries). A good explanation of the differences between the commentarial interpretation and a non-time-delineated model can be found at
Dependent Origination - The Buddhist Law of Conditionality
by Ven. Prayudh Payutto
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... nation.htm
Jack wrote:
What interests me is how one takes the conceptual model of Dependent Origination into their real life. Care to comment?
I'm a firm believer that the Buddha taught only that which was related to the cessation of suffering, as per the precedent he outlined in SN 56.31 Simsapa Sutta (
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html) so it must be relevant in some way. Personally I find it very useful whenever I notice even a slightest moment of discontent, I can try to be mindful firstly of 'what just happened?' and see that it maps to the model and then I can actually try to actively observe discontent and see the model as being true. To me, dependent origination is like a more detailed version of the 2nd and 3rd Noble Truths.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
