I said:
Although the two share some common ground, I believe they emphasize different points. In “namarupa paccaya salayatana,” the emphasis is on the contamination of the mind. This leads to samphassa, samphassa ja vedana, tanha, and upadana. On the other hand, “bhava paccaya jati” emphasizes the sequences that follow bhava. This leads to jati paccaya jara maranam soka parideva dukkha domanassam upayasa.
For example, in the case of theft, the former describes the process by which the mind is contaminated through theft, while the latter describes the suffering that theft leads to.
Therefore, I think these two discuss the same thing in different ways.
____
I have been pondering over the reasons why I thought this way.
#10
At the end of existence (bhava), a given lifestream jumps from one kind of existence to another. The easiest to visualize is in the case of a Brahma to a Deva transition. The “nāma” part changes from a Brahma to a Deva, and the “rupa” part changes from 2 pasada rupa for the Brahma to 5 for the Deva.
– That transition happens in the latter part of the last citta vīthi of the life of Brahma. At that cuti-patisandhi moment, the “Brahma nāmarupa” dies, and a “Deva nāmarupa” is created by kammic energy.
—
I thought this description overlapped with the “bhava paccaya jati” step. If “vinnana paccaya namarupa” and “bhava paccaya jati” are separate and independent stages, how are they different?