Questions for scholars of dependent origination - Discussion
Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Not two, not one, modified 5 Years ago at 1/31/20 6:08 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 1/31/20 6:03 PM
Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 1053 Join Date: 7/13/17 Recent Posts
I have been thinking about dependent origination - as I tend to do most days
- and I have some questions that I thought might get a useful critique from the DhO. First, here is my transliteration of the traditional account of dependent origination, to accord with my own understanding as well as modern psychology.
First hexapod (description of the mind)
Aviija - Ignorance
Sankhara - Subconscious mental conditioning
Vijnana - Dualistic perception
Namarupa - Semantic (conceptual) memory
Salavatana - Sensory Input
Phassa - Recogition through application of semantic memory to sensory input
Second Hexapod (response of the mind)
Vedana - Affect
Tanha - Desire
Upadana - Arousal
Bhava - Urges
Jati - Burning in new mental conditioning
Dukka - Suffering
First question - does this transliteration seems appropriate? I am particularly interested in whether Vedana - Tanha - Upadana is properly represented by Affect / Desire / Arousal (compared traditional translations of Feeling Tone / Thirst / Inflaming)
Second question, do Tanha and Upadana correspond exactly to the second noble truth? Most of the work I've seen concentrates on Tanha. But the suttas refer to the craving that leads to re-becoming, accompanied by delight and lust. This very much sounds like desire accompanied by arousal, leading to absorption in urges and thus new mental conditioning. But I can't find the original pali suttas to see whether they use both Tanha and Upadana, or at least synonyms for Upadana. Does anybody know? I'm thinking that we have understimated Upadana, for which the direct cure is partly tranquility and equinimity, but also clearly seeing its role in the second noble truth.
Third question. There seem to me to me to be two major types of dukka that arise from this. One is the misery of our ongoing unskilful cravings arising from the second hexapod. The second is the nagging unsatisfactoriness of our conceptual errors about self and reality, arising from the first hexapod. If so, these may have different cures - following the path steadily reduces the first type of dukkha, whereas the second type of dukkha requires insight, and eventually complete insight, to be extinguished. Thoughts?
Thanks for reading. Any comments very welcome.
Malcolm

First hexapod (description of the mind)
Aviija - Ignorance
Sankhara - Subconscious mental conditioning
Vijnana - Dualistic perception
Namarupa - Semantic (conceptual) memory
Salavatana - Sensory Input
Phassa - Recogition through application of semantic memory to sensory input
Second Hexapod (response of the mind)
Vedana - Affect
Tanha - Desire
Upadana - Arousal
Bhava - Urges
Jati - Burning in new mental conditioning
Dukka - Suffering
First question - does this transliteration seems appropriate? I am particularly interested in whether Vedana - Tanha - Upadana is properly represented by Affect / Desire / Arousal (compared traditional translations of Feeling Tone / Thirst / Inflaming)
Second question, do Tanha and Upadana correspond exactly to the second noble truth? Most of the work I've seen concentrates on Tanha. But the suttas refer to the craving that leads to re-becoming, accompanied by delight and lust. This very much sounds like desire accompanied by arousal, leading to absorption in urges and thus new mental conditioning. But I can't find the original pali suttas to see whether they use both Tanha and Upadana, or at least synonyms for Upadana. Does anybody know? I'm thinking that we have understimated Upadana, for which the direct cure is partly tranquility and equinimity, but also clearly seeing its role in the second noble truth.
Third question. There seem to me to me to be two major types of dukka that arise from this. One is the misery of our ongoing unskilful cravings arising from the second hexapod. The second is the nagging unsatisfactoriness of our conceptual errors about self and reality, arising from the first hexapod. If so, these may have different cures - following the path steadily reduces the first type of dukkha, whereas the second type of dukkha requires insight, and eventually complete insight, to be extinguished. Thoughts?
Thanks for reading. Any comments very welcome.
Malcolm
Nicky, modified 5 Years ago at 2/1/20 4:38 AM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/1/20 3:04 AM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 484 Join Date: 8/2/14 Recent PostsSankhara - Subconscious mental conditioning
Vijnana - Dualistic perception
Namarupa - Semantic (conceptual) memory
What this means is the ignorant sankharas cause the body ("rupa") to become aroused and cause the mental faculties ("nama") to give inappropriate/unwise attention & intention towards the sankharas.
Salayatana - Sensory Input
Phassa - Recogition through application of semantic memory to sensory input
Upadana - Arousal
Bhava
Jati - Burning in new mental conditioning
First question - does this transliteration seems appropriate?
I am particularly interested in whether Vedana - Tanha - Upadana is properly represented by Affect / Desire / Arousal (compared traditional translations of Feeling Tone / Thirst / Inflaming)
"Desire" sounds too neutral for "tanha", which refers to a passionate desire.
"Upadana" does not literally mean "arousal" even thought the scriptures do contain the phrase: "Delight in feelings is upadana". "Upadana" means to "take up" or "pick up" although the word "delight" ("nandi") is sometimes used synonymously. .
Second question, do Tanha and Upadana correspond exactly to the second noble truth? Most of the work I've seen concentrates on Tanha.
But the suttas refer to the craving that leads to re-becoming, accompanied by delight and lust. This very much sounds like desire accompanied by arousal, leading to absorption in urges and thus new mental conditioning.
But I can't find the original pali suttas to see whether they use both Tanha and Upadana, or at least synonyms for Upadana.
In the long version, all twelve conditions are the 2nd noble truth, per AN 3.61, here: https://suttacentral.net/an3.61/en/bodhi
Does anybody know? I'm thinking that we have understimated Upadana, for which the direct cure is partly tranquility and equinimity, but also clearly seeing its role in the second noble truth
In the 1st noble truth, the Buddha summarised all suffering as "upadana". When the mind attaches to a sense object, this in itself is enslavement, constrictedness & stressful. Then when that attached-to sense object is lost via aging-&-death, there is even more suffering, called sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief & despair.
In the 2nd noble truth, the word "nandi" ("delight") represents upadana. In the 2nd noble truth, there are two conditions required for the arising of suffering: (i) craving; and (ii) ego-becoming. Craving alone is not the arising of suffering. There must be attachment and egoism/identity for suffering to occur/arise.
Regards

Not two, not one, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 2:44 AM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 2:44 AM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 1053 Join Date: 7/13/17 Recent PostsChris M, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 8:18 AM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 8:18 AM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 5610 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Poststerry, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 11:46 AM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 11:46 AM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 2846 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Postscurious:
I have been thinking about dependent origination - as I tend to do most days
-
Third question. There seem to me to me to be two major types of dukka that arise from this. One is the misery of our ongoing unskilful cravings arising from the second hexapod. The second is the nagging unsatisfactoriness of our conceptual errors about self and reality, arising from the first hexapod. If so, these may have different cures - following the path steadily reduces the first type of dukkha, whereas the second type of dukkha requires insight, and eventually complete insight, to be extinguished. Thoughts?
Thanks for reading. Any comments very welcome.
Malcolm

Third question. There seem to me to me to be two major types of dukka that arise from this. One is the misery of our ongoing unskilful cravings arising from the second hexapod. The second is the nagging unsatisfactoriness of our conceptual errors about self and reality, arising from the first hexapod. If so, these may have different cures - following the path steadily reduces the first type of dukkha, whereas the second type of dukkha requires insight, and eventually complete insight, to be extinguished. Thoughts?
Thanks for reading. Any comments very welcome.
Malcolm
aloha malcolm,
I'm not a scholar and can't address the first two questions. To say something arises from a hexapod sort of spaces me out. But I have to wonder whether dukkha is ever extinguished. Things are nonself, they are impermanent, and they are inherently unsatisfactory. Things will always be so.
Maybe we could extinguish things altogether, but we will never make them satisfactory. It is a fundamentally dualistic notion.
may all beings feel that things are satisfactory?
terry
Chris M, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 11:51 AM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 11:51 AM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 5610 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I agree with terry. Dukka is always with us, and the only way to extinguish it is to extinguish.
terry, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 12:27 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 12:27 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 2846 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent PostsNicky:
aloha nicky,
Great post.
I have been looking for a sutta site like this for a very long time, thank you so much!
terry
terry, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 12:30 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 12:30 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 2846 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Poststerry:
Nicky:
aloha nicky,
Great post.
I have been looking for a sutta site like this for a very long time, thank you so much!
terry
ya'll are probably going to get sick of me quoting suttas now...
t
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 1:18 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 1:18 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 7135 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Poststerry:
But I have to wonder whether dukkha is ever extinguished. Things are nonself, they are impermanent, and they are inherently unsatisfactory. Things will always be so.
Maybe we could extinguish things altogether, but we will never make them satisfactory. It is a fundamentally dualistic notion.
”It is often thought that the Buddha’s doctrine teaches us that suffering will disappear if one has meditated long enough, or if one sees everything differently. It is not that at all.
Suffering isn’t going to go away; the one who suffers is going to go away.”
—Ayya Khema
Not two, not one, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:08 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:07 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 1053 Join Date: 7/13/17 Recent Posts
To bastardise John Donne: Oh dukkha, where is thy sting?
Great discussion from everyone. My motivation is to try to find ways to make dependent origination more accessible. I think there is a translation issue, but also an issue of the conceptual frameworks being employed. Some of our conceptual frameworks have advanced over the last 2500 years, so there may be better ways to describe what we all perceive than the descriptions we find in the suttas. Even the original doctrine is a bit incomplete, or inconsistent, or represents a slice through certain concepts from a certain perspective. So I ask myself, can we make the dharma more accessible? Nicky's comments are a great spur for me to reflect on what could be better, and what is just worse.
Meanwhile, for you hexapod fans ...
Great discussion from everyone. My motivation is to try to find ways to make dependent origination more accessible. I think there is a translation issue, but also an issue of the conceptual frameworks being employed. Some of our conceptual frameworks have advanced over the last 2500 years, so there may be better ways to describe what we all perceive than the descriptions we find in the suttas. Even the original doctrine is a bit incomplete, or inconsistent, or represents a slice through certain concepts from a certain perspective. So I ask myself, can we make the dharma more accessible? Nicky's comments are a great spur for me to reflect on what could be better, and what is just worse.
Meanwhile, for you hexapod fans ...

Chris M, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:18 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:18 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 5610 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent PostsMy motivation is to try to find ways to make dependent origination more accessible.
My personal version of this would be (is!) to tell everyone to meditate on the arising a passing away of phenomena and see the process at work in real-time. That engenders a fully grokked, deeply held and unshakable knowledge of dependent origination. The intellectual understanding of it pales in comparison.
Chris M, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:23 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:23 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 5610 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent PostsNot two, not one, modified 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:25 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/4/20 3:25 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 1053 Join Date: 7/13/17 Recent PostsChris Marti:
terry, modified 5 Years ago at 2/7/20 9:33 PM
Created 5 Years ago at 2/7/20 9:33 PM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 2846 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent PostsLinda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
terry:
But I have to wonder whether dukkha is ever extinguished. Things are nonself, they are impermanent, and they are inherently unsatisfactory. Things will always be so.
Maybe we could extinguish things altogether, but we will never make them satisfactory. It is a fundamentally dualistic notion.
”It is often thought that the Buddha’s doctrine teaches us that suffering will disappear if one has meditated long enough, or if one sees everything differently. It is not that at all.
Suffering isn’t going to go away; the one who suffers is going to go away.”
—Ayya Khema
nice!
Matthew, modified 4 Years ago at 2/12/20 11:27 AM
Created 4 Years ago at 2/12/20 10:24 AM
RE: Questions for scholars of dependent origination
Posts: 92 Join Date: 10/31/19 Recent Posts
Based on curious's great initial effort and Nicky's excellent comments, maybe we could revise the list to the following to be more comprehensible in natural English?
First hexapod (description of the mind)
Aviija - Ignorance, or unawareness
Sankhara - Rumination
Vijnana - Conscious awareness
Namarupa - Mind-&-body, or bodymind
Salayatana - Sense organs
Phassa - Sensory cognition
Second Hexapod (response of the mind)
Vedana - Valence
Tanha - Craving
Upadana - Grasping, or seeking
Bhava - Fixating, enacting, or becoming
Jati - Identifying-with, or birth
Dukka - Suffering
First hexapod (description of the mind)
Aviija - Ignorance, or unawareness
Sankhara - Rumination
Vijnana - Conscious awareness
Namarupa - Mind-&-body, or bodymind
Salayatana - Sense organs
Phassa - Sensory cognition
Second Hexapod (response of the mind)
Vedana - Valence
Tanha - Craving
Upadana - Grasping, or seeking
Bhava - Fixating, enacting, or becoming
Jati - Identifying-with, or birth
Dukka - Suffering