[VFOVkZBj]

Dear BWB

I received a personal email this morning from a certain bhikkhu, who asked me to compose an essay on my views of Dependent Origination.

Here it is. All comments are welcome.

With metta.




At the request of Bhikkhu H, I am presenting my personal view on Dependent Origination, to an audience I assume has a basic exposure to the twelve link Dependent Origination formula.

In summary, the basic understanding of Dependent Origination I wish to offer for consideration is one saliently connected to impermanence, as follows:

1. the first link is ignorance of impermanence (and other right understandings)

2. the last link is the manifestation of suffering together with the experience of impermanence.

To define the last link accurately is of vital importance.

Many discourses and commentaries give the impression the last link is exclusively ‘aging and death’. This (false) impression Bhikkhu Bodhi has described as “concrete” and “biological”, namely, “aging, decrepitude, brokenness, graying, wrinkling, decline of life-force, weakening of the faculties” (SN 12.2). However, other discourses, notably, the Upanisa Sutta (SN 12.23), simply define the last link as 'suffering'.

In correctness, the last link should be defined in its fullness, namely, “aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair” (SN 12.2). Here, as I have already mentioned, suffering manifests together or in association with the experience of impermanence. That is, not brokenness, graying, wrinkling, etc, in themselves but, instead, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair due to experiencing brokenness, graying, wrinkling, etc.

The last link, in its completeness, is well described in the Nakulapita Sutta (SN 22.1), as follows:

Now, how is one afflicted in body & afflicted in mind?

He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

He is seized with the idea that 'I am feeling' or 'Feeling is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his feeling changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

He is seized with the idea that 'I am perception' or 'Perception is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his perception changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration.

He is seized with the idea that 'I am fabrications' or 'Fabrications are mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his fabrications change & alter, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over their change & alteration.

He is seized with the idea that 'I am consciousness' or 'Consciousness is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his consciousness changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration. Regarding the eleventh link ‘birth’ or “jati”, a search of the internet will find the following definition:

jati - (Hinduism) a Hindu caste or distinctive social group of which there are thousands throughout India; a special characteristic is often the exclusive occupation of its male members (such as barber or potter) Such a definition is not exclusive to Hinduism or foreign to Buddhism. I would speculate this meaning of ‘jati’ was the common meaning of the term in the culture of the Buddha and the meaning he intended to impart.

In his Vissuddhimagga, the Venerable Buddhaghosa explains:

Now this word jati has many meanings. For in the passage 'he recollects one birth, two births, etc', it is becoming. In the passage 'Visakha, there is a kind (jati) of ascetics called Niganthas (Jains)', it is monastic order. In the passage 'birth is includes in two aggregates', it is whatever is formed. In the passage 'his birth is due to the first consciousness in the mother's womb' (Vin.i,93), it is rebirth-linking. In the passage 'as soon as he was born (sampatijata), the Bodhisattva' (M.iii,123) it is parturition [childbirth]. In the passage 'one who is not rejected and despised on the account of birth', it is clan. In the passage 'sister, since i was born with noble birth', it is the Noble One's virtue. This kind of definition of jati is most readily found in MN 98, where it is said:

Men are farmers by their acts;
And by their acts are craftsmen too.
Men are merchants by their acts;
And by their acts are servants too.

Men are robbers by their acts;
And by their acts are soldiers too.
Men are chaplains by their acts;
And by their acts are rulers too.

So that is how the truly wise
See action how it really is,

Seers in Dependent Origination
Skilled in actions and results. On an individual level, rather than on a social level, this 'jati' takes the form of the ‘self identification’ explained in MN 44 and MN 148:

These five aggregates subject to clinging are the self-identification described by the Blessed One. The craving that makes for new becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving to be, craving not to be: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One.

This, monks, is the path of practice leading to self-identification. One assumes about the eye that 'This is me, this is my self, this is what I am.' One assumes about forms... One assumes about consciousness at the eye... One assumes about contact at the eye... One assumes about feeling... One assumes about craving that 'This is me, this is my self, this is what I am.' As for the standard definition of jati found in SN 12.2, I personally have doubts as to whether this is being transmitted clearly from the Pali. Whilst having no expertise in Pali, my sense of what the Buddha spoke is as follows:

And what is birth? Whatever birth, taking birth, manifestation, coming-to-be, coming-forth, of the various beings in this or that group of beings; the acquisition of sense spheres and aggregates. By the 'various groups of beings', what is referred to here is what I have already suggested by MN 98 and by the Hinduism definition of jati found on the internet.

By the 'acquisition' of sense spheres and aggregates, what is referred to here is taking “ownership” or “possession” of the aggregates, the sense bases and the objects of the sense bases. In short, this is the manifestation of “self-identification” in relation to regarding or assuming these natural phenomena to be “I” and “mine”.

MN 149 desribes how the five aggregates are accumulated and built up (and diminished), as follows:
For him — infatuated, attached, confused, not remaining focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head toward future accumulation. The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that — grows within him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances grow. His bodily torments & mental torments grow. His bodily distresses & mental distresses grow. He is sensitive both to bodily stress & mental stress.

"For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution. The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that — is abandoned by him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances are abandoned. His bodily torments & mental torments are abandoned. His bodily distresses & mental distresses are abandoned. He is sensitive both to ease of body & ease of awareness.

[irrawnWab]

As for the other links of Dependent Origination, apart from sankhara, these are quite straightforward.

The first link is not understanding the Four Noble Truths and not understanding the Three Universal Characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not-self. Due to this ignorance, naturally, there will be ignorance at sense contact and the resultant craving, attachment, becoming, birth and suffering in relation to the experience of impermanence.

Contrary to some explanations of Dependent Origination, it must be emphasised the Buddha used the term ignorance at contact (avijjāsamphassajena) explicitly (e.g., SN 22.81) and implicitly (e.g.,MN 38) on many occasions. In other words, ignorance is not arising in another time or place, such as in a previous lifetime, separate from or unrelated to sense contact.

As for sankhara, I take these to be the breathing in and breathing out, applied and sustained thought (vitakka and vicara) and perception and feeling, as defined in MN 44.

As for nama-rupa, I take this to be ‘mind-body’ or ‘mentality-materiality’ rather than ‘name-form’ (subject-object) because SN 12.2 defines nama-rupa as various mental constituents, the physical body and the four great elements that form the physical body. If 'rupa' or ‘form’ was the object of sense consciousness, then it would arise after the sense bases rather than prior to them.

In summary, Dependent Origination manifests in the following manner. Where there is ignorance, the hindrances will continue to manifest and condition (paccaya) or “infect” the sankhara, consciousness, mind-body and the sense organs, which results in ignorant and coloured sense contact.

Please note, I use “paccaya” as a verb rather than as a noun. Ignorance conditions the sankhara; sankhara [conditioned by ignorance] conditions consciousness; consciousness [conditioned by ignorance] conditions the mind-body; the mind-body [conditioned by ignorance] conditions the sense bases; the sense bases [conditioned by ignorance] condition ignorant contact, etc.

Regarding sankhara, the kaya, vaci and citta sankhara, as defined in SN 12.2 and MN 44 are also mentioned in the Anapanasati Sutta. Through practising meditation, we can realise the nature and role of the sankhara in Dependent Origination through experience their calming and/or cessation. For example, when the kaya sankhara (breathing in and out) is tranquilised (step 4 of Anapanasati), consciousness becomes clear and the mind-body and sense organs become calm. In short, the sankhara, consciousness, mind-body and the sense bases experience some degree of nirodha from ignorance & defilement. The same clarity and calm occurs when the other (mental) sankhara are calmed. The same nirodha (quenching) is experienced.

The breathing in and out is the ‘body conditioner’ or ‘body fabricator’ because it conditions the state of the physical body. Where the kaya sankhara is tranquil, the physical body will be at ease. Where the kaya sankhara is agitated, the physical body will be stressed. Similarly, perception and feeling are the citta (mental) "conditioner" for they condition the various kinds of craving, namely, greed, hatred, delusion and the like.

It follows this “clarifying” and “liberating” (nirodha) of the sankhara, consciousness, mind-body and sense bases from ignorance, hindrance and defilement, is well described in the suttas as follows:

If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off and there is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed, not increasing, not concocted, is released. Owing to its release, it is steady. Owing to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally liberated right within. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" (SN 22.53)

"For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining focused on their drawbacks — the five aggregates subject to clinging head toward future diminution. The craving that makes for new becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that — is abandoned by him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances are abandoned. His bodily torments & mental torments are abandoned. His bodily distresses & mental distresses are abandoned. He is sensitive both to ease of body & ease of mind. (MN 149)

So if a monk should wish: 'May neither my body be fatigued nor my eyes, and may my mind, through lack of clinging/sustenance, be released from fermentations,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness with in-&-out breathing. (SN 54.8 )

There are these six calmings. When one has attained the first jhana, speech has been calmed. When one has attained the second jhana, directed thought & evaluation [vaci sankhara] have been calmed. When one has attained the third jhana, rapture [citta sankhara] has been calmed. When one has attained the fourth jhana, in-and-out breathing [kaya sankhara] has been calmed. When one has attained the cessation of perception & feeling, perception & feeling [citta sankhara] have been calmed. When a monk's effluents have ended, passion has been calmed, aversion has been calmed, delusion [ignorance] has been calmed. (SN 36.11) Calming the sankhara of Dependent Origination at the 2nd link is the role of samatha. Ending the ignorance of Dependent Origination at the 1st link is role of vipassana.

A simple, although graphic, illustration of the arising of Dependent Origination is a man who sees a beautiful woman. Due to ignorance, he does not understand impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not-self and the ramifications of craving and attachment. Due to ignorance, feeling, craving and attachment (fixation, obsession), his mind proliferates thoughts (becoming) of marrying the woman. When the woman accepts his proposal, the man is born (jati) as a ‘husband’. When they have a child, the man takes birth (jati) as a ‘father’. When they acquire a home, the man takes birth (jati) as a ‘householder’. Due to his education (becoming), the man takes birth (jati) as a ‘lawyer’.

One day, the man is fired from his job for malpractice and stripped of his license to practise law. As such, his self-identification (jati) as a lawyer experiences aging and death, despair and the whole mass of suffering. In short his heart sinks into despair and the feeling of death.

The man returns home to find a policeman waiting, who tells him his wife and children have been murdered by a thief in their home. This aging and death of his wife and child simultaneously gives rise to aging and death in the man’s heart. The man no longer knows who or what he is. His self-identity has died. The poor man is completely lost. Here, dependent on birth, has arisen the last link of Dependent Origination in its fullness, namely, aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair and the whole mass of suffering.

To conclude, dependent origination simply describes the arising or origination of suffering in the human mind. Suffering is a psychological phenomenon. Suffering is not an existential phenomenon.

The root cause of suffering is ignorance of impermanence. The final result of this ignorance of impermanence is suffering due to experiencing impermanence in an ignorant way.

May all beings be liberated from all suffering through right understanding.

[lammaredder]

Aloka-D mentioned this to me through Facebook. Thanks to you both. Perfectly clear and concise.

[enrisaabsotte]

Well done, Element! I wish I could type well enough to add more of my own comments, but the splint on my left arm is now a full-blown cast. I'll have to settle for a :golfclap: and a c&p from here. Cheers...

How Buddhism Began [New Edition]
The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION TO THE
SECOND EDITION

The main purpose of this book is to present the Buddha’s ideas in their historical context. Since it was first published, others have been pursuing some of the same lines of inquiry, and I believe their results to be at least as important and convincing as my own. My most prominent theme, pursued in chapters II and HI, is the relationship of the Buddha’s ideas to the brahminical ideas of his day. This theme seems to have inspired two particularly impressive contributions. In her article ‘Playing with Fire: The pratityasamutpada from the Perspective of Vedic Thought” Joanna Jurewicz has, to my mind, found a convincing answer to an ancient question. While the general purport of the Buddha’s teaching of dependent origination (pratuya-samutpada) has always been understood, there has been almost infinite disagreement among interpreters both ancient and modem about how to understand the details of the chain, and why the links are in that order. Jurewicz has demonstrated that the teaching is formulated (presumably by the Buddha) as a response to Vedic cosmogony not merely in general but also in detail. As is his wont, the Buddha accepts the tenets of his brahmin predecessors only to reinterpret them — one might say, to ironise them. Here the main irony comes from his denial of the fundamental postulate of the Vedic cosmogony, the existence of the ãtman (self). This denial ‘deprives the Vedic cosmogony of its positive meaning as the successful activity of the Absolute and presents it as a chain of absurd, meaningless changes which could only result in the repeated death of anyone who would reproduce this cosmogonic process in ritual activity and everyday life’.

Secondly, in his recent Oxford D.Phil. thesis Alexander Wynne has shown how fruitful a similar approach can be for our understanding of the origins of the Buddha’s teachings on meditation. These too, it would appear, arose as a conscious development from but also a reaction against brahminical teachings.

Another line of inquiry here followed, partially interwoven with the first, is to trace doctrinal change within the Pali Canon itself. Stratification of the Canon into earlier and later texts has acquired a bad name, because the scholars who attempt such stratification have often made quite arbitrary and hence unconvincing decisions that certain features of form or content are early or late. I do not think I ever do this. I try, by contrast, to show how one thing leads to another. For example, metaphorical expressions may come to be taken literally, or two expressions which originally had the same referent may come to be interpreted as expressing a more profound difference. If the Canon, a vast body of material, was produced over many years — and to suppose otherwise seems to fly in the face of common sense — it is not surprising if misunderstandings or diverse interpretations arose in the process. This line of inquiry has been fruitfully pursued by Hwang Soon-il in his doctoral thesis Metaphor and Literalism: a study of doctrinal development of nirvana in the Pali Nikava and subsequent tradition compared with the Chinese Agama and its traditional interpretation (Oxford, 2002).

It is important to grasp that in most cases I am not claiming to have discovered the chronological sequence of the precise texts, i.e., of the wording which has come down to us; the developments I am tracing concern ideas, the contents of those texts. Nor do I subscribe, as has been alleged, to any kind of conspiracy theory, that changes have been introduced by ‘mischievous’ or ‘meddlesome’ monks.

To some it seems a kind of heresy or lèse-majesté to offer new interpretations of sayings ascribed to the Buddha, or to suggest that the commentarial tradition could be mistaken. Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote in a review: ‘To my mind, the texts of the four Nikayas form a strikingly consist and harmonious edifice, and I am confident that the apparent inconsistencies are not indicative of internal fissuring but of subtle variations of method that would be clear to those of sufficient insight’. Having offered so much evidence of inconsistency in those texts, I do wonder what be means by ‘insight’. My bafflement has deepened since the same learned scholar has published a full length article which claims to rebut my interpretation of a famous sutta (pp. 128—29 below). He writes: ‘For Gombrich Musila represents the view that arahantship can be achieved by intellection’ (p. 51). This is not my view. I simply say that Narada has correctly denied that ‘intellection without a deeper, experiential realization is an adequate method for attaining Enlightenment.’ I nowhere claim that Musila disagrees. Thus, so far as I can see, Bhikkhu Bodhi and I totally agree in our interpretation of the sutta. (Of course, we could still both be wrong.)

What my critics have generally failed to address is that when I propose a new interpretation I also offer an explanation of how it has come about that this interpretation has escaped the ancient commentators. The most general such explanation is their ignorance of the brahminism of the Buddha’s day; but I also show how commentators are trying to smooth out inconsistencies in the text they have inherited. On occasion I suggest that we need to emend the text. As when I offer a new interpretation, I make such a suggestion only because I feel that what has come down to us makes poor sense. I show in chapter V that the legend of Angulimala, the brigand with the garland of human fingers, is incoherent in its traditional form. Very small changes in the text transform Angulimala into a worshipper of Siva and thus make sense of his behaviour. The commentators probably knew as little of Saivism several centuries before their time as they did of brahminism.

There has been notable progress in following yet another line of inquiry suggested in this book. Chapter III ends with my discussion of a passage which, I say, seems to leave it ambiguous whether the Buddha was a realist or an idealist. Building on her earlier work (which I mention on p. 4 below) Dr. Sue Hamilton has taken this a crucial stage further. In her book Earl Buddhism: a new approach she argues that the Buddha is not talking, as most interpreters have assumed, about what exists, or whether there is really a world out there or not, but deliberately restricting himself to lived experience and how it works. Thus it is normal experience that is unsatisfactory — the first Noble Truth — and requires radical amelioration; nirvana is the experience which must be our goal if we see the world aright: and the self is denied not in the sense of claiming that it is a non-existent entity, but in the sense that whether or not it exists cannot be known and is therefore irrelevant to what matters, our salvation. I think that Dr. Hamilton has made a powerful case for her interpretation, and that it not only makes excellent sense of the Buddha’s teaching but also helps to explain how its diverse interpretations came about. The fruitfulness of her approach has already been shown by Noa Gal in her book A Metaphysics of Experience: from the Buddha ‘s teaching to the Abhidhamma. which takes the story further by tracing how the Buddha’s metaphysics lead to a quite different metaphysical stance in the Abhidhamma.

In chapter IV I discuss the problem of monks who are said to be ‘released by insight’ (paññã-vimutto) and yet to lack the supernormal powers which result from accomplishment in meditation, specifically in the four jhana; this then calls into question whether one can become Enlightened without practising those jhãna (see especially p. 126, footnote 21). I have since found relevant material in a narrative context.

This is in the story of Puma in the Divvavadãna, a Buddhist Sanskrit text generally dated to about the third century A.D.. The Buddha and his monks are invited to a meal the next day in a distant city. A certain monk indicates that he wants to go. However, ‘He had been released by insight, so he had not developed supernormal powers (rddhi)’. In this context, that means he cannot fly. But since he badly wants to go, he exerts himself, and acquires the necessary ability, which — as he points out himself— is based on meditative powers (dhvana-bala); so he takes a meal-ticket. The text makes it clear that he does this within a matter of seconds. If the story has any coherence. this can only mean that he had previously practised the jhãna but never bothered to exploit their potential either for special powers or for attaining Enlightenment by their means.

A little later in the same text, the Buddha’s great disciple MaudgalyAyana tells the Buddha that he regrets that he did not aspire to become a Buddha himself. Now he is an arahant and it is too late: ‘I have burnt up my fuel.’ This is the sentiment of a Mahayanist. Some scholars have called the Divvãvadäna a SarvastivAdin text, i.e., non-Mahayanist. But these episodes suggest to me that sectarian orthodoxy was not so cut and dried, and soteriology could be adapted to make a good story. This in turn reinforces my hunch that the Susima Sutta may have been ‘a kind of narrative accident’.

The text below has been reprinted with only two changes. I have corrected a wrong statement about a metrical matter (not affecting my argument) on p. 144. More importantly, I have changed my translation of the word nibbãna from ‘blowing out to ‘going out’, to make it clear that the term is intransitive: the fires (of passion, hate and delusion) must go out but the term does not imply an agent who extinguishes them.

[86GlSqSK]

Thanks Element. Thanks Aloka for referring me to this. Good essay

[rowneigerie]

Hi Element,

Thanks again for sharing this, I hope it was well received by the person who requested it.

Looking forward to hearing from you again,

With metta,

Aloka

[i32I7qyH]

thanks element, for doing alot of heavy lifting. i wish i could understand all this in my bones.

[Clielldub]

Regarding the eleventh link ‘birth’ or “jati”, a search of the internet will find the following definition:

Quote
jati - (Hinduism) a Hindu caste or distinctive social group of which there are thousands throughout India; a special characteristic is often the exclusive occupation of its male members (such as barber or potter)

Such a definition is not exclusive to Hinduism or foreign to Buddhism. I would speculate this meaning of ‘jati’ was the common meaning of the term in the culture of the Buddha and the meaning he intended to impart.

To add:

The Bhara Sutta provides this meaning:

"And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden.

[masterso]

Just read this. Thank you its a good read, very informative and helpful

[pongeystrhjst]

I often find people oppose the teaching that Jati in D.O. relates to birth of "I am". However In relation to birth of "I", there is this sutta


"Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worlding ... Reguards form as Self. That regarding, bhikkhus, is a formation. That formation - what is its source, what is its origin, from what is it born and produced? When ther uninstructed wordling .. is contacted by feeling born of ignorance contact, craving arises. Thence that formation is born."
Bodhi translation page 922


There is also another one. Also I would say it makes the most sense, instead of having jati mean birth of the aggregates


just my two cents

[apodildNoli]

A simple, although graphic, illustration of the arising of Dependent Origination is a man who sees a beautiful woman. Due to ignorance, he....[fastforward]...The man no longer knows who or what he is. His self-identity has died. The poor man is completely lost.

I think this guy's day would make a good movie. Crappiest day ever!
Thanks E.