The universe is a dependent origination

Surendranath Dasgupta was correct when he said "The term paticcasamuppada or pratifyasamutpada has been differently interpreted in later Buddhist literature."  How true!  I would only add to this and say the term is almost protean.  Today, we recognize this term as "dependent origination" or "conditioned origination" just to mention two forms.

Looking over the Sanskrit, samutpada generally means an appearance, an arising or origin, in the sense of making visible or manifest (prâdurbhâva).  Pratitya is not so easy to define.  I tend to go with Franklin Edgerton's definition (Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary, p. 373).  He defines pratitya accordingly: dependent on, based on.  One example I especially like which he offers is, on the basis [pratitya] of muñja or valvaja (grass), a rope is produced.

In Mahayana Buddhism, from the Avatamsaka Sutra, we find pratitya-samutpada used this way: "The twelve links of dependent origination (praitityasamutpada) are all dependent on the One Mind (ekacitta)."  This means that the twelve links or nidânas beginning with ignorance (i.e., Mind's ignorance of itself) and ending with old age and death (jarâmârana) are Mind phenomena or the same, illusory and empty (shunya).  In fact, we might say that every arising or samutpada is based on Mind in the same way, as earlier mentioned, rope, the product or arising, is based on muñja or valvaja grass.

We would not be wrong to believe that Siddhartha, upon becoming a Buddha (i.e., the awakened), awakened to Mind and by this awakening, saw the former phenomenal world of birth and death to be now like a fantastic illusion in which nothing actually exists (apart from Mind, that is).  

The world Siddhartha saw before he became a Buddha was the world of samsara; a world of misery in which all suffered to one degree.  After Siddhartha awakened, the world he saw, as a Buddha, was a dependent origination (pratityasamutpada) of absolute Mind!  In this regard, it really did not exist—and all sentient beings were saved. 

Comments

[Ted Bagley]

seems like 'protos' would have to do with symptom or coming before implying an imaginary foundation and a connection with the infinite as opposed to 'first'.

[Vaccha]

Regardless of what I think of the majority of Mr. Wheeler's "rebuttals" and "refutations" here (in most of them it is clear he hasn't even finished reading the blog post before dashing off his rant), I would observe that Solon's position regarding proodos is rather weak, resorting as it is to a fallacious argument from definition. Thus arguing solely from definition, Solon maintains that since the word proodos literally means "progress" (procession, going on, going before) and not "emanationism" that the word cannot be taken to refer in the philosophy of Plotinus (and Plato?) to the priniciple of emanation.

That's not much of an argument and very much less an ass-kicking, and it's furthermore embarrassing form for one taking a position of academic superiority over Wheeler, whom he calls illiterate while himself habitually mangling easy words such as "instantaneous" and "rebut" (by misusing the form "rebuttal" and humorously mispelling it to boot).

[Solon]

Kwheeler (aka girl name removed) wrote:

"There is an ENTIRE BOOK written about the two greek words TOLMA and PROODOS by Professor Torchia. I would forward he knows more about these terms than you do, and your position doesnt "jive" with his research and evidences (of which you have NONE). "

Hmmm..this is what I think (and probably most whom ever encounter your ridiculous attempts to appear intelligent and well versed in metaphysics and similar subjects)

DISCIPLE
Not long ago a lizard caused him (Socrates) the loss of a sublime thought.
STREPSIADES
In what way, please?
DISCIPLE
One night, when he was studying the course of the moon and its revolutions and was gazing open-mouthed at the heavens, a lizard crapped upon him from the top of the roof.
STREPSIADES
A lizard crapping on Socrates! That's rich!

The Clouds By Aristophanes

That´s what I think of your boy buggering greek philosophers boy!

Now go home to your mommy and tell her the big boys on the play ground kicked your fat behind on the sole premise of your illiterate disposition and despodent future!

[Solon]

Between wild snortings of some unmentionable substance this gun loving, red meat feasting all proud redneck saturated klesa-mara wrote:

"Solon, you are refuted, reference "GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TERMS"* page 165

PROODOS refers BOTH in Plato and Plotinus (ancient greek, not modern greek) to Emanationism."

Now, as I speak 5 languages and read/understand seven of which one is ancient greek. I know you cannot teach a flee scratching, hill billy gene pool originated, right wing neo-con worshipping simpleton the normal way. You have to throw the book at him. So here is a link to the only valid lexicon in ancient greek moron;

http://www.lexilogos.com/english/greek_ancient_dictionary.htm

and if you enter the word proodos you get this

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/resolveform?type=start&lookup=proodos&lang=greek

Yawn...have to see something civilized now..like something european...hmmm the soccer game is on.

[Captain Crunch]

Solon says I suppose you meant Protos which means and meant," first", "that which is first/above everything else".

FIRST in ancient greek is Arche, or Hen

And, my unintelligent little boy, there is no "FIRST cause" in Monism, there is nothing ab-extra to the Absolute, there is no "original sin". Avijja is a privation, and cannot be a "first" or otherwise.

A privation by definition has no locus.

There is an ENTIRE BOOK written about the two greek words TOLMA and PROODOS by Professor Torchia. I would forward he knows more about these terms than you do, and your position doesnt "jive" with his research and evidences (of which you have NONE).

It is extremely obvious that you have no intellectual capacity whatsoever. GO study then come back when you have something intelligent to contribute.