Identity and Experience_Hamilton_1996

I 26
Identity and Experience
either in the context of representing a human being as a whole, or in the
context of the paticcasamuppida formula. In chapter IV I suggested that the
pa.Eiccasamup~iida formula should be understood as referring specifically to the
'how' of human existence within sams5ra. It follows, therefore, that the term
riipa in the compound niimariipa also refers to the human being. In this
respect I disagree with Reat, who suggests that nimariipa has a wider application
because the human body is more usually referred to as b ~a.~* The
human body is indeed often referred to as Eya. It is also referred to as sagra.
But in every analysis of the human being according to the five Ahandhas the
term used to refer to the body is Spa. We have already seen that the same
term also refers to that which is external to the human body; but we have
also seen descriptions of the nipafiandha in which riipa unequivocally refers
to the human body. Perhaps Reat overlooks the fact that in connection with
the human body rips has a wider meaning than that which is visible; it
includes processes and functions which are definitely not physical, for example.
It may well be the case, as I will suggest below, that in principle niimarzipa
might apply to that which is external to the human being. But when it is
found in the context of the paficcasamuppiida formula it applies to the human
being; and thus riipa refers to the human body in the same way riipakWlandha
does. In making this statement I am not, however, suggesting that niima
corresponds to the four ariipakkhandha-s. On the contrary.
I mentioned above that in the MilindapaKha, a post-canonical text, nima
and riipa are stated to be inseparable. In the Mahiinidina Suttanta of the
Nikga,39 which is the Sutta in which nZmariipa and vifiEZna are stated to be
mutually conditioning, we find another passage referring to the inseparability
of niima and rzipa. The passage also gives us insight into a meaning of
niimargpa which does not present logical problems when attempting to
understand the paficcasamuppida formula. Here the Buddha is explaining
the paficcasamuppiida formula to Ananda. He points out that he has stated
that niimariipa is the condition for the arising of sensory contact (phassa). He
explains by asking Ananda whether, if those various characteristics by
which n5ma is conceived of were absent, there would be any corresponding
discernment of verbal impression with regard to rcpa. Ananda correctly
replies that there would Similarly, he asks if those various characteristics
by which riipa is conceived of were absent, would there be any corresponding
discernment of sensory impression with regard to niima, and
again Ananda replies that there would not." Next the Buddha establishes
the inseparability of nima and riipa by asking if the various characteristics of
both kinds were absent, would there be any discernment of either verbal or
sensory impression, and the answer is that there would And finally,
he establishes that without the various characteristics by which niimariipa is
identified there would be no discernment of sensory contact.43
This passage tells us two things about nimaepa. First, it confirms the
mutual dependency of nrZnaa and riipa: without one, there would not be the