[Arximedus]

When I first came into "Buddhism" it was thorugh the popular Buddhist bestsellers -Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hanh- where, and mostly the last one, likes to give a different approach to DO, widen it into poetic and pseudo scientific constraints... the flowering of the cherry trees are about those; I thought that was what Buddhism was about. In such a way, DO resulted a kind of exotic view of the world but it did not work for what it is taught... Some time later, reading the Pali Dhamma, the teachings of the historical Buddha, DO took a radical shift, from poetry and world views into being a teaching about ignorance and how it arises with its entire mass of stress and suffering in dependence of elements that can result interdependent. This approach works better, IMO.

Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, I will describe & analyze dependent co-arising for you.

"And what is dependent co-arising? From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.

[...]

Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta (SN 12.2)