English
Not from condition, becoming. From becoming, birth. From birth, old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair arise. Thus is the origin of this entire mass of suffering. This, monks, is called Dependent Origination. Old age and death, and so forth, are to be understood as dependently arisen phenomena. For this was said by the Blessed One – "And what, monks, are dependently arisen phenomena? Old age and death, monks, are impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to decay, subject to vanishing, subject to dispassion, subject to cessation. Birth, monks... (and so on)... becoming... clinging... craving... feeling... contact... six sense bases... name-and-form... consciousness... volitional formations... ignorance, monks, are impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to decay, subject to vanishing, subject to dispassion, subject to cessation. These, monks, are called dependently arisen phenomena." 571. Herein is a summary. Dependent Origination means the conditioning phenomena are to be understood. Dependently arisen phenomena means the phenomena produced by those various conditions. If it is asked, "How is this to be known?" By the word of the Blessed One. For the Blessed One, in the discourse teaching Dependent Origination and dependently arisen phenomena, said – "And what, monks, is Dependent Origination? From birth, monks, old age and death. Whether Tathāgatas arise or do not arise, that element remains, the stability of the Dhamma, the fixedness of the Dhamma, the conditionality of this. That the Tathāgata fully awakens to, fully comprehends. Having fully awakened to it, having fully comprehended it, he declares it, teaches it, makes it known, establishes it, reveals it, explains it, makes it plain, and says, 'See!' From birth, monks, old age and death. From becoming, monks, birth... (and so on)... From ignorance, monks, volitional formations, whether Tathāgatas arise... (and so on)... makes it plain, and says, 'See!' From ignorance, monks, volitional formations. Thus, monks, that reality therein, that unalterable reality, a not otherwise, this-conditionality. This is called, monks, dependent origination. 572. Thus, by teaching dependent origination with synonyms like 'suchness', it is said that the condition-states themselves are dependent origination. Therefore, dependent origination has the characteristic of being a condition for states like aging and death, its function is to bind suffering, and its manifestation is the wrong path. And this is called 'suchness' because of the arising of that state from those conditions, neither deficient nor excessive; 'not otherwise' because when the conditions are assembled, there is no non-arising of the states produced from them even for a moment; 'not otherwise' because from the conditions of other states, other states do not arise; and 'this-conditionality' because of the condition or the collection of conditions for these aforementioned states of aging and death. 573. Herein, the meaning of the word is this: the conditions of these are 'this-conditions'. 'This-conditions' themselves are 'this-conditionality'. Or, the collection of 'this-conditions' is 'this-conditionality'. Its characteristic here should be sought from grammar. 574. Some, however, say that dependent origination is the arising that is independent of causes like nature or a person conceived by sectarians, which is 'dependent and right'. Thus, they say that mere arising is dependent origination. That is not appropriate. Why? Because of the absence of a Sutta, because of contradiction with the Sutta, because of the impossibility of a profound method, and because of the difference in words. Indeed, there is no Sutta that says "mere arising is dependent origination." And for one who calls it "dependent origination," there arises a contradiction with the Sutta on partial abiding. How? For the Blessed One, the contemplation of dependent origination in forward and reverse order in the first watch of the night is the first abiding of full enlightenment, as stated in the words "Then the Blessed One, in the first watch of the night, contemplated dependent origination in forward and reverse order." And a partial abiding is an abiding in a part of that. As it is said: "By the abiding, monks, with which I first became fully enlightened, by a part of that, I abided." And there, he abided by seeing the mode of conditions, not by mere arising. By its inherent nature. As it is said: "I thus understand: feeling arises also from wrong view as a condition, feeling arises also from right view as a condition, feeling arises also from wrong intention as a condition." All this should be elaborated. Thus, for one who says that 'dependent origination' is merely arising, a contradiction with the Padesavihāra Sutta arises. Likewise, a contradiction with the Kaccāna Sutta. Indeed, in the Kaccāna Sutta, it is declared: "Kaccāna, for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with right wisdom, the non-existence in the world does not exist." The forward dependent origination, "the origin of the world" from the condition of the world, is revealed for the purpose of uprooting the annihilationist view, not merely as arising. For the annihilationist view is not uprooted by merely seeing arising. But it is by seeing the non-cessation of conditions. When conditions do not cease, results do not cease. Thus, for one who says that 'dependent origination' is merely arising, a contradiction with the Kaccāna Sutta also arises. Because of the impossibility of a profound method. Indeed, it was said by the Blessed One: "Profound, Ananda, is this dependent origination, and profound in its appearance." And profundity is of four kinds; we shall describe that later. That is not present in mere arising. And they describe this dependent origination as adorned with four kinds of methods; that fourfold method is also not present in mere arising. Therefore, because of the impossibility of a profound method, dependent origination is not mere arising. 575. Because of the difference in meaning of the word. And this word 'paṭicca', when used with the same agent in a prior time, is meaningful. For example: "Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises." But here, when used with the word 'uppāda' (arising) which is a noun of action, due to the absence of a common agent, it leads to a difference in meaning of the word, and does not accomplish any meaning. Therefore, because of the difference in meaning of the word, dependent origination is not mere arising. In that regard, it might be said: "We will combine it with the word 'hoti' (is/arises), [saying] 'dependent origination is/arises.'" that is not suitable. Why? Because of the absence of connection, and because of the fault of the arising of arising. "I will teach you, monks, dependent origination. And what, monks, is dependent origination?... This, monks, is called dependent origination." In these passages, the word "hoti" (is) does not connect with any one of them, nor is there an arising. If there were, the arising of arising would follow. 576. And those who think, "The state of the conditions is conditionality; and 'state' is that mode which is the cause for the manifestation of formations, etc., from ignorance, etc. And the designation 'dependent origination' refers to that modification of formations," for them, that is not appropriate. Why? Because ignorance, etc., are stated to be the causes. For the Blessed One said, "Therefore, Ananda, this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origin, this is the condition for old age and death, namely birth... for formations, namely ignorance." Thus, only ignorance, etc., are stated as causes, not their modification. Therefore, what was said, "Dependent origination should be understood as the conditioned phenomena," that should be understood as rightly said. 577. If, in this context, the notion arises that "dependent origination" by this verbal expression means only "arising," that notion should be pacified by taking the meaning of this term as follows: For the Blessed One, From which this word is in the two-fold stream of phenomena, that is called "dependent" by way of result, because of that condition. Indeed, this collection of phenomena that proceeds by way of conditionality, there this word "dependent origination" is desired in two ways. For since it, being understood, conduces to welfare and happiness, therefore the wise are worthy to understand it, thus "dependent." And arising, it arises together and rightly, not individually, nor without cause, thus "origination." Thus, it is dependent and it is origination, so "dependent origination." Moreover, it arises together, thus "origination"; but it arises by depending on the collection of conditions, not rejecting them, thus "dependent." non-arising. And this collection of causes is the condition for it, and because it is dependent on that, this too, just as in the world, molasses is called the condition for phlegm, molasses is phlegm, and just as in the Teaching, the arising of Buddhas is the condition for happiness, it is called "the arising of Buddhas is happiness," so too, dependent origination is to be understood as spoken by way of the fruit. 578. Or else, It is called "facing," this collection of causes is "dependent"; And it produces together, so it is called "origination." For this collection of causes, which is indicated by each head of cause like ignorance for the manifestation of formations and so on, is called "dependent" because the components of the aggregate, by producing a common result and by being complete, have gone facing each other. And this is called "origination" because it produces phenomena that exist inseparably together. Thus, it is dependent and it is origination, so it is dependent origination. 579. Another method –