Re: NamaRupa (Siebold)

Hi Samahita,
Interesting interpretation. Some questions for you.
1) is nama rupa the pali expression used for "the all"
from S35.23?
2) Given that your current IMHO is correct, what do
you believe is the reason for the canon using nama
rupa in some cases and 5 khandas in others if they are
expressing the same thing?

-fk

--- Samahita <monomuni@...> wrote:

>
> Hi Lars Siebold, you wrote:
> >beware however that nama specifically excludes
> vi~n~nana.
>
> So it is often explained since NamaRupa
> (Name&form) & vi~n~nana (Consciousness)
> arises Mutually Dependent in (Co)dependent-arising.
>
> However, beware, that this codependence
> consequentially means that:
>
> 1: NamaRupa (Name&form) is an undivisible continuum.
> One cannot isolate 'naming' nor 'forming' for
> itself.
>
> " It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand
> leaning against
> one another. If one were to pull away one of those
> sheaves of
> reeds, the other would fall; if one were to pull
> away the other,
> the first one would fall."
>
> Samyutta Nikaya XII.67, Nalakalapiyo Sutta,
> Sheaves of Reeds
>
>
> 2: NamaRupa (Name&form) is an exhaustive
> classification of ALL,
> whether internal or external. (except Nibbana).
> Name-&-form therefore neccessarily also includes
> consciousness
> (vi~n~nana)!
>
> Name&form includes the same ALL phenomena
> as the 5 clusters-of-clinging (khandha),
> as the six senses (salayatana)
> as the 12 sources (ayatana)
> as the 18 elements (dhatu).
>
> The same all including object pointed to, is just
> formulated at
> different levels of differentiation, since the
> individuals,
> who here is targetted, is of different abilities,
> preferences
> & tendencies.
>
> "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear &
> sounds, nose
> & smells, tongue & tastes, body & touches, mind &
> mental objects.
> This, monks, is termed the All. Anyone who would
> say, 'Repudiating
> this All, I will describe another,' if questioned
> on what exactly
> might be the grounds for his statement, would be
> unable to explain,
> and furthermore, would be put to grief.
> Why? Because it lies beyond any range."
> S XXXV.23
>
>
> 3: What is nama = mentality ?
> "Feeling, perception, volition, Contact and
> attention --
> these are called mentality."
> MN 9. Sammaditthi Sutta, The Discourse on Right
> View.
>
> What is phassa = contact ?
> "Dependent on the eye & forms there arises
> consciousness at the
> eye. The meeting of the three is contact."
> Majjhima Nikaya 148, Chachakka Sutta, The Six
> Sextets.
>
>
>
> In Conclusion:
>
> So since consciousness (vinnana) is included in
> contact (phassa) &
> contact is included in mentality (nama),
> consciousness is thereby
> also inherently included in mentality (nama) as
> space is in all
> forms (rupa).
>
>
> IMHO currently.
>
> : - ]
>
>
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com