Identity and Experience_Hamilton_1996

130 Identity and Experience
interpret is that it is not given as an alternative to the usual version of the
paticcasamuppiida formula: the common twelvefold version immediately
follows it in the text. It is also not clear how the six dhiitus are the condition
for conception. The dhiitus are defined earlier in the passage as the four
mahdbhita', viiiiidna and a'kdsa. The relationship between these and
conception is nowhere explained. Even if one were to understand the
mahdbhitd' and viiiiiiipa to represent the bodily and mental aspects of the
individual, this would not explain why &a is separate; and it is difficult to
see how these could gbe rise to conception. In view of its uniqueness and
since it is immediately followed by the twelvefold version of the
paticcasamuppdda formula, it may be that the 'conception' formula was
interpolated into the text here. Or alternatively it may be that the
'conception' formula was considered incomprehensible and the twelvefold
formula was interpolated. In any event, the formula does not help us in
ascertaining the relationship, if any, between conception and ndmariipa.55
I have suggested that niimanipa is not being defined in terms of the five
khandhas; but there are metaphorical parallels between the two: they both
represent the identity of the individual. We have seen that it is only in later
Pali material that ndmanipa is defined as representing the khandhas. Maybe
this definition was the only way the exegetes of the formula knew how to
convey individuality. The definition of na'ma given in the Sutta @aka, that it
is vedanci, saiiiiii, cetand, phassa and manasikiira, is an odd one for several
reasons. First and most obviously, uedanii and phassa are both subsequent
links in the paticcasamuppiida formula, and cetanci is represented by samkhiira
(and ta*4. Second, it is surprising that manasihra, which is usually interpreted
as meaning mental attention or concentration, finds a place at a
time when the individual is as yet undeveloped. Even if one understands it
more generally, as 'activity of the mind', it seems premature to put this
before other more basic psychological faculties. Third, and similarly, it is
unlikely that san"n"a as we have defined it could have a place prior to the
senses, sensory contact and vedana': apperception is directly involved with
sensory input, and conception (the cognitive, not the physiological, kind) is
a relatively sophisticated psychological process. Perhaps this is another
occasion when the author(s) of these passages did not really know how
adequately to define the term, a suggestion which is borne out by the fact
that the commentary on such passages does not explain why this sequence
of five terms is used in the definition of niima but merely transposes them
into a classification in terms of the khandhas.
That ndmariipa represents individuality is interestingly suggested in a
passage in the Sutta JViPdta which relates it to papaiica. The passage states:
Having understood ntirnarzipa as manifoldness, which is the root of both
subjective and objective disease, he is completely released from bondage to
the root of all disease.56