[loyalgagora]

one of the most interesting teachings of the buddha that really inspires my admiration is the teaching of dependent origination and emptiness. it really gives reality a completely unrigid and new perspective. i can appreciate the fact that since everything dependently exists on a multitude of other factors, an inherently existing essence or self is nowhere to be found.

however, my dilemma arises on account of the following: when we say everything exists dependent on other factors, are we not implying the existence of other factors as somewhat inherently existing, otherwise the same fact will have to hold true for the factors themselves and they too will be lacking an essence in themselves being dependent on other factors themselves but as i make this latter statement, it gets kind of cyclical and it feels as if emptiness cannot be truely expressed in such language (dependent on factors etc) as it gets caught up in cyclical reasoning without a proper reference point(factors). i am not quite sure if i made
myself clear. i am sure this dilemma has come about due to a lack of proper understanding of emptiness.

would be happy to build a better understanding. your replies are highly welcome.

with metta.

[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)

[SHpuntik]

I agree with Kaarine. While the innterpretation of D.O. as an ontology tends to be rather popular, it is and always has been a wrong turn from the Buddha's path.

D.O. Is an expansion of the 4NT, and as such it describes how the influence of ignorance causes mental suffering and misery to arise. It is rather simple, actually.

[xIuvyAuT]

when we say everything exists dependent on other factors, are we not implying the existence of other factors as somewhat inherently existing, otherwise the same fact will have to hold true for the factors themselves and they too will be lacking an essence in themselves being dependent on other factors themselves but as i make this latter statement, it gets kind of cyclical and it feels as if emptiness cannot be truely expressed in such language (dependent on factors etc) as it gets caught up in cyclical reasoning without a proper reference point(factors).

welcome phoenix

my opinion may be similar to yours, in that this kind of explanation of emptiness can go a little too far

you are certainly correct when you say the causal factors themselves lack an essence to themselves. but there is a limit here. for example, the Buddha spoke of the basic elements/causal factors of life (earth, wind, fire, water, space & consciousness) but did not really go beyond that

the dhamma of emptiness (Suññatā/Śūnyatā) has the sole purpose of being an antidote or remedy for suffering. when the Buddha taught emptiness, he primary explained it as the mind 'empty of self' because ending self-views is what is necessary for the ending of suffering

for example, to assert the emptiness of a "tree" is not so necessary for the ending of suffering. all that is necessary is to comprehend the impermanence of the tree and to not take possession (claim ownership) of the tree

further, as you seem to say, one will get stuck attempting to reason the infinite emptiness of a "tree". it can be reasoned:

1. there is no tree because it is composed bark, roots, leaves, etc,

2. there are no bark, roots, leaves, etc, because they are composed of the earth, water, fire elements, etc;

3. there is no earth, water, fire elements because they is composed of various atoms;

But then one gets stuck because these causal factors cannot be broken down any further

so the Buddha regarded it sufficient the body is broken down into earth, wind (breath), fire (warmth) & water so the mind can see directly this physical body is not permanent, not something 'solid' and not a 'self'

this is sufficient for liberation

to assert all things (apart from Nirvana) arise from a cause goes a little too far, imo

kind regards



Ye dhamma hetuppabhava
tesam hetum tathagato aha
tesañca yo nirodho
evamvadi mahasamano 'ti

Of all those things that from a cause arise,
Tathagata the cause thereof has told;
And how they cease to be, that too he tells,
This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse.

[Kvkcgktl]

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.

Hi Kaarine, it is interesting to hear how your understanding of DO developed early on .... my own experience has been very different; the sutta you quote above was one of the first readings I was given to investigate.

[DurryVony]

the sutta you quote above was one of the first readings I was given to investigate.

Great Andy, I'm happy about that... I was never been given into investigate about DO. Being here is where I started to look at the Pali Dhamma.

[VeniHemealm]

Yes, I agree ... not all my experience with teachers has been succesful and I have had to leave two.

[Espacamlisa]

Yes, I agree ...

Thanks. This is a country where Buddhism is not well developed or not developed at all. To find a good tradition so to be well guided is quite difficult. I found a small Theravada place but it is far from where I live. It takes a whole day to reach it. But anyway I will see how it works...

Some of the main insights have come from very good and helpful members here. And it has been OK.

[cwgwowcom]

Remember we have a PM system for personal chit-chat... and returning again to the OP #1 if we can, please ladies ....

i am sure this dilemma has come about due to a lack of proper understanding of emptiness.

Welcome, phoenix, the short section on emptiness at this link might be helpful to you :

http://www.abhayagiri.org/main/article/2148/

[Gskdmidd]

please ladies ....

Yes...

[griddle]

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.

Hi Kaarine,

I gather you're referring to "interbeing". But why do you say this is an interpretation of DO?

Since TNH typically discusses interbeing in the context of prajnaparamita (for instance, in his commentary on the Heart Sutra), it would seem more likely that it's another term for sunyata.

[Eagevawax]

For one of the best online explanations of the 12 links of dependant origination, I suggest the following
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/a...fsuffering.pdf

[blogwado]

Hi Kaarine,

I gather you're referring to "interbeing". But why do you say this is an interpretation of DO?

Since TNH typically discusses interbeing in the context of prajnaparamita (for instance, in his commentary on the Heart Sutra), it would seem more likely that it's another term for sunyata.

It has become already late here but I will try to open the Thich's books to explore and be more accurate later on... that will take me some time because I left in an old shelf those books because in IMO, while being poetic and inspiring, they result quit useless for practice purpose. I can guess that there are some misleading assumptions and believes that I will bring here to analyse them in open contrast with the Pali teachings.

For example, the book you mention, to say, the best intent of all his series, in a honest intent to be loyal to the teachings of the historical Buddha unable always to set aside the cultural perspective and cultural "add-ons" of a religious believe set in a poetic way, speaks about the Fifth Khandha in a quiet imprecise way mixing the Khandha doctrine of the Fifth Agregate with a kind of Alaya Vijñana with consciousness as a root or permanent kind of Khandha; I will later bring the Pali Dhamma versus the Thich personal view quotes.

This examples illustrate that, along the lines and between the lines, the general argumentative expositions of all Thich's books where he brings the Mahayana religion into a kind of "everythingness" as a derivative of his interbeingness what is his particular world view and main doctrine known as "interbeing" which is a very personal outcome of his understanding as a melting pot between some Zen core issues and the Mahayana religious thought. Along his reading, the treatment he gives to DO is under this approach. He finally permeates what are the main teachings of the historical Buddha with his interbeing very personal elaboration with endless poetic adornments that can lead away people out of the central aspect of what the teachings are asking us to practice in the Pali and endangering its proper practice asked by the historical Buddha into the entangled views and wide world processes.

I say pseudoscientific and sometimes fallacious too so to fit all the teachings in a singularity of a very elegant, inspiring and convincing? world view encompassing all the teaching in this melting pot called interbeing.

The way it was asked the OP by phoenix I could feel he was asking about all this entanglements that are found in popular best sellers books. In my experience they can be good so to become enthusiastic about Buddhism and hook into it. But just that.

[rbVmVlQ2]

There's an excellent booklet on Dependent Origination by P.A. Payutto available to read at the Buddhanet link below:

http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/coarise.htm

Trying to understand a three lifetimes version has never worked for me personally, so I greatly appreciate Section 5 -'Other Interpretations' -and "An example of Dependent Origination in everyday life " which is given at the end of section 5....

http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/coarise5.htm

[LesLattis]

I can guess that there are some misleading assumptions and believes that I will bring here to analyse them in open contrast with the Pali teachings.

For example, the book you mention, to say, the best intent of all his series, in a honest intent to be loyal to the teachings of the historical Buddha unable always to set aside the cultural perspective and cultural "add-ons" of a religious believe set in a poetic way, speaks about the Fifth Khandha in a quiet imprecise way mixing the Khandha doctrine of the Fifth Agregate with a kind of Alaya Vijñana with consciousness as a root or permanent kind of Khandha; I will later bring the Pali Dhamma versus the Thich personal view quotes.

This examples illustrate that, along the lines and between the lines, the general argumentative expositions of all Thich's books where he brings the Mahayana religion into a kind of "everythingness" as a derivative of his interbeingness what is his particular world view and main doctrine known as "interbeing" which is a very personal outcome of his understanding as a melting pot between some Zen core issues and the Mahayana religious thought. Along his reading, the treatment he gives to DO is under this approach. He finally permeates what are the main teachings of the historical Buddha with his interbeing very personal elaboration with endless poetic adornments that can lead away people out of the central aspect of what the teachings are asking us to practice in the Pali and endangering its proper practice asked by the historical Buddha into the entangled views and wide world processes.

I'd agree that you are not going to find "interbeing" in the Pali suttas, because it's a Mahayana teaching -- another name for sunyata. The sources are Nagarjuna and the prajnaparamita texts.

As we know from the Heart Sutra, Mahayana regards sunyata as transcending dependent origination, in the sense that it includes D.O. and has a broader (universal) scope.

Therefore, Sariputra, in emptiness there is no form, no sensation, no perception, no volition, no consciousness, no eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; no sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, thought. There is no realm of sight, through to no realm of cognition. There is no ignorance or ending of ignorance, through to no aging and death or ending of aging and death. ...which means that sunyata applies to the twelve links also, as it does to all dharmas -- according to Mahayana. From the Theravada perspective this at best an unnecessary add-on, and at worst an ontological monster. To understand why Nagarjuna developed this doctrine, we would need to know something about the debates that were going on among various Buddhist schools at the time (first couple centuries C.E.), and the logical problems they were seeking to address.

Because people tend to associate the word "emptiness" with nihilism, Mahayana teachers have tried to present it in a way that does not have nihilistic connotations. That's a likely reason for Thich Nhat Hanh's use of the term "interbeing".

[highattainlet]

Hi Lazy Eye,
There's an excellent series of dhamma talks by Ajaan Geoff (Thanissaro Bhikkhu) called Scouting the Terrain: Exploring Dependent Co-arising as a Guide to the Path available at http://www.audiodharma.org/series/16/talk/1846/. From the site: "It stands to reason that a knowledge of the Buddha's map of the causes of suffering would give practical guidance in how to follow the path to the end of suffering. Among his most important teachings providing such guidance is that of Dependent Co-arising. By describing the conditions which give rise to suffering, Dependent Co-arising shows the way to the end of suffering. Through teachings, readings, discussion and meditation this day-long course focused on the important connections highlighted in Dependent Co-arising and their role in shaping the path of virtue, concentration, and discernment."

[Daruhuw]

The sources are Nagarjuna and the prajnaparamita texts.

I thought we were into Thich Nhat Hanh's "The Heart of the Teachings of the Buddha". There he insists in a kind of "storage" where seeds of consciousness are given... trying to depict the fifth Khandha as the stuff that goes from one life to another.

I have to confess that I am neither into Nagarjuna nor the Prajnaparamita suttas. They are not about the historical Buddha teachings but even that, we all know, that Mahayana become a religion and in its becoming into that, this traditon managed the not self doctrine so to set something that [needs to] endures so to bring some sense to life after death (the rebirth of them).

[HexcewlyRette]

I thought we were into Thich Nhat Hanh's "The Heart of the Teachings of the Buddha". There he insists in a kind of "storage" where seeds of consciousness are given... trying to depict the fifth Khandha as the stuff that goes from one life to another.

Yes, but I don't think this was invented by Thich Nhat Hanh. My understanding is that it's a standard Mahayana teaching, originating in Yogacara. Sunyata (emptiness) is from the other important Mahayana tradition, Madhyamaka.

If I remember correctly, there was a logical conundrum concerning the way in which one thought moment (citta) can "condition" another. For example, in certain meditative states where consciousness is suspended, it's unclear what causes the meditator to emerge from that state. Alaya-vijnana emerged out of the debates among Indian scholastics over this problem. Vasubandhu would be the key figure here.

However we see his relationship to Theravada and the Pali Canon, I doubt that Thich Nhat Hanh deviates to any significant degree from his own tradition. His teachings, as far as I can see, are mainstream East Asian "humanistic Buddhism" (人間佛教) with some of the terminology and presentation adapted for a global audience.

[anconueys]

Just a gentle reminder that this thread is for the benefit of a new member's request for help.

If you want to debate with each other about different interpretations of teachings, don't forget you can always start a new topic, thanks.

[ResistNewWorldOrder]

Yes, but this isn't something invented by Thich Nhat Hanh. It's a standard Mahayana teaching, originating in Yogacara. Sunyata (emptiness) is from the other important Mahayana tradition, Madhyamaka.

In his book, he never quotes such sources, so it gives the impression that such is what the Buddha taught. And that is not right. He is teaching from a tradition that developed out from the Pali Dhamma.

Alaya-vijnana emerged out of the debates among Indian scholastics over this problem. Vasubandhu would be the key figure here.

Surpirsingly Thich's Alaya is the same as the one of the orthodox Theosophy; a doctrine strongly supported in Hinduism and Tibetan Mahayanism where rebirth is at the core of all this doctrines.

His teachings, as far as I can see, are mainstream East Asian "humanistic Buddhism" (人間佛教) with some of the terminology and presentation adapted for a global audience. He presents himself as a Zen master (at least in his best-sellers); so I went into Zen, with the Soto tradition. There they do not feel comfortable with Thich calling himself "Zenner". Zen, and Soto Zen, have an outstanding corpus of literature that do not leads you into anything about Tibetan Mahayanism. Also for "Zenners" rebirth is hold with extreme caution and as in some Theravada, we are taught never to rely in it for our practice. To drop all sort of "views". Maybe this is why I feel at home with the Pali Dhamma.