[Buddha-l] Dependent arising variants

[Vicente Gonzalez]

Stephen wrote:

SH> No, they are in the Nikayas. My whole point is that the commentators do not
SH> pick up on these because they were wedded to the idea of the 12 nidana
SH> series.

then please, Can you give the cite?. I think it is important

>> I agree with the repetition. Neither I talk about a circular
>> mechanism. However, I understand that there is only one process, not
>> two.
SH> They are two ways of describing the arising of du.hkha.  In that sense, they
SH> comprise two processes.

if in the nikayas there are is an explanation of two processes then
probably you are right in the need of using two processes.


>> It is a problem of the nature of our knowledge. When we are checking
>> any dependence, it is the consequence of our knowledge knowing a
>> causal relation between elements.
SH> Well, take two nidanas at random.  Old age and death are said to arise in
SH> dependence upon birth.  Obviously, one will not get old and die without
SH> having been born, but for me it sounds rather odd to say that birth causes
SH> old age and death.  There is no causality here in the scientific, or even
SH> everyday, sense.

well, no if you are thinking in something like "birth provokes death"
in a direct and immediate way.

Or maybe we can say that it is not scientific but empirical.
In our knowledge the causality is of two types: necessary and
sufficient. 

When we say that A is a necessary cause of B, we are knowing a
causal relation in which the existence of B only is possible when
preceded by A.
- birth causes death

When we say that A is a sufficient cause of B, we are knowing a
causal relation in which the existence of B is not a guarantee for the
existence of A.
- old-age causes death


Although also I think that causality never is a final description of
the world but the nature of our intellectual knowledge for the arising
of some certainty.



best regards,