--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Lars" <khandha5@...> wrote:

> --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" <rjkjp1@...> wrote:
> > ---
> > In the Paramattha-manjusa (744) -see note 1 of Visudhhi. XV111
>
> See, that is just the ongoing argument in dsg. All the references
> that you quoted saying that vi~n~nana is included in nama don't

come

> from the suttas.

________
Dear Lars,
I think the most important point is to know the meaning when we read
it. If we are studying the Paticcasamuppada then it is obvious that
vinnana is given a separate category. If we are studying the
commentaries they make it clear that sometimes when they use 'nama'
it includes vinnana and sometimes not.
In the suttas the phrase namarupa doesn't occur often except when
discussing paticasamuppada . Mostly the suttas use the pancakhanda or
ayatana or dhatu to group mentality and materiality. These include
all mentality (feeling, sankhara, sanna, vinanna ) and rupa. The
commentaries also use these terms and sometimes separate out
mentality and materiality as simply as nama and rupa only. It is not
confusing if we understand the context.
Nama and rupa are names used to designate certain dhammas - if we
don't like those names we can use others.
RobertK